Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Maelstrom of Violence
(09-07-2017, 07:09 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: What does Canada forbid which one wants to see?  What does that say of the 'free speech' advocate?

How about calling men in dresses he and women wearing trousers and attempting to pretend to be guys she. In Canada one can be jailed for failure to use "proper pronouns". Of course their government also buys into the notion that there is more than three different genders: Male, Female, freak of nature.
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
(09-07-2017, 09:08 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Kinser would sing a different tune if the hate speech were "Bring back slavery" or "Kill all f@gs".

No, actually, I wouldn't. Unlike you PBR I have principles, which of course is why I'm not a "progressive". Freedom of speech means I have to allow reprehensible speech. It does not, however, require me to like that speech. It also doesn't mean that I can't react negatively to that speech either.
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
(09-07-2017, 09:53 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(09-07-2017, 09:08 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:
(09-07-2017, 07:09 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(09-06-2017, 06:34 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(09-06-2017, 02:03 PM)David Horn Wrote: If so, then why are so many other nations able to have broad freedoms and restrictive gun laws.  I mentioned Australia in my last post, but it's only one example of many.  How about Canada?

Australia has had restrictive gun laws for only a fraction of a generational cycle.  Recheck them after the crisis war, and things will have changed.

Canada does not have free speech, despite positive influence from the US.

Canada has specific laws against promoting genocide or practicing hate speech.  Thus, depending on how you define 'free speech', you can reasonably say that Canada doesn't have free speech.  It makes one wonder, however, if the guy saying there is a big deal difference in Canada is in favor of genocide or hate speech?  Me, I'm in favor of neither.  I'm in great sympathy with what Canada is doing.

Kinser would sing a different tune if the hate speech were "Bring back slavery" or "Kill all f@gs".

That isn't clear.  If one claims that any typical adult can shrug off hate speech or cries for genocide, you can live in a society full of cries for genocide mixed with hate speech.  Me, that's not the sort of society I'm looking for.  Not all of us perceive the world as Kinser does.  It seems reasonable for legislatures to feel the same as I and act on it.  Canada is quite explicit and rational in banning certain specific things.  Under the principle that negative rights do not grant an ability to harm, if you think promoting genocide and hate is harmful, you have a consistent legal position.

The awakening's Civil Rights Act is based more on commerce than free speech.  If you are running a business, you can't discriminate.  Words while not running a business hits a different legal crack.  Me, I'm in favor of free speech, but not hate speech and definitely not genocide.  I feel the 'free speech' language is often a cover for those favoring genocide and hate.  If the Alt Right weren't acting as a cover for neo Nazi and Neo Confederates, it would be far easier to sympathies with the them on other forms speech.  As is, you have to wonder.

So-called hate speech is not recognized as a different category under US law.  The SCOTUS has already ruled on the matter and it is unlikely for it to change its mind in the near future.  As such so-called hate speech is protected as all other political speech.

https://www.thefire.org/there-is-no-such...te-speech/

Oh and Bob, Federal Law and judicial rulings supersede Massachusetts law. Though I do think that there is room to sue the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on the basis of that statue if one were so inclined. But equally it could be ruled constitutional since is mentions ACTS and not speech and only applies to ACTS and not speech thereby. Suffice it to say that attempts to limit so-called hate speech has a poor record in Federal Court.
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
(09-07-2017, 04:23 PM)tg63 Wrote: As a Canadian I can't say that I have ever encountered anyone on my side of the border who feels that our rights are somehow inhibited or encumbered as a result of the "reasonable limit" clause within our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  To the contrary, I feel that it protects the rights of the majority of the citizenry.

Wait until you're jailed for calling a person in a dress with hair on his knuckles sir.
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
(09-04-2017, 03:30 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:
(09-04-2017, 01:57 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: Valid points.  Their scientists also got training from the Soviet Union way back when.
That said, Russia and China were much larger economies with much larger populations from which to draw talented people.  They didn't start from scratch, either; the Soviet Union got help from spies in the US like Klaus Fuchs and others, and China got a lot of open help from the Soviet Union.

If you consider sending a few scientists to "not be starting from scratch" then not even the US did that.  The British essentially sent over their entire "Tube Alloys" program to the US in 1942ish.

It's not the scientists that are relevant; it's the results from the Manhattan Project that Fuchs gave the Soviets that are relevant.


Quote:
Quote:North Korea has kindly provided photographs of the warhead, just like they did with last September's test.  It took the better part of a year for the US government to admit what Kim had last time around, but it should have been obvious from the beginning.  Because of the classified nature of the Teller-Ulam geometry, it's not as obvious this time, but those of us who have independently figured out the Teller-Ulam geometry can figure it out.

What North Korea has is a two stage thermonuclear device.  It does not have the proper Teller-Ulam geometry, which is why the yield was only about 100kt rather than closer to the 1Mt range.  That said, most of its energy does come from fusion.

I'm not sure what this means, but I do have a very generic idea of what a two stage thermonuclear device is.  Are you saying that the test yielded a 100kt result because they got their maths wrong or because their design is not maximally efficient?

Because their design is not maximally efficient, and quite far from maximally efficient.

Quote:
Quote:How do you think the path to war will proceed?

I would imagine that Kim would likely launch an attack on ROK and/or Japan first.  Both having a formal treaty of alliance with the US would drag us in--unless of course an alliance with the US isn't worth the paper it is written on.  Remember this is someone who threatens the world with nukes at least once a week.

Quote:My concern is that war with North Korea isn't inevitable, and the McMasters of the world manage to convince Trump to accept North Korea as a nuclear power.

North Korea doesn't act like any other nuclear power so there is no reason to delay.  Russia doesn't threaten to nuke its neighbors once a week.  Neither does China, India, Pakistan, Israel, or for that matter Iran or Saudi Arabia (as it is assumed that both have some nukes already).  They would be a nuclear power of a completely different sort.  Also you can call McMaster many things but pacifist isn't one of them.

Quote:and Turkey,

Is a NATO power so they already have our arsenal to protect them, they don't need to waste money on their own.  Unless of course you're saying that an alliance with the US isn't worth the paper it is written on.

Quote:and Myanmar

Would be invaded by India PDQ.  Burma (because I refuse to call that country by that ridiculous and unpronounceable name) is not as advanced as India or Pakistan and India can take them out as there is little reason to accept a nuclear power at their back door.  Also there is no indication that the Burmese government is even interested as that would almost certainly get the attention of India.

Quote:and a bunch of others, and sooner or later someone uses one, and then people start using them regularly.  Eventually some regional nuclear war escalates into a global one, and whoever has the last nuke wins.  And I'm far from certain that will be us, since we have too many interests that will require our using them earlier than, say, Russia will have to.

That sounds like an argument for nipping a problem in the bud if I ever heard one.

Agreed with your bottom line.

I actually wrote "Burma" at first.  I think India's ruling BJP would have trouble invading Burma because both governments are aligned against Islam.
Reply
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...ing-white/

I think I'll leave this here for those who think I'm exaggerating about the whole "acting white" issue among blacks
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
If one is black and one wants to 'act white', then that is a right. Just don't expect bigoted white people to recognize your effort.

Of course there are white people to imitate and white people to avoid imitating at all costs. But you should know that. White people do not form a monolith, which may explain why I hate being called "The Man"!
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
(09-08-2017, 08:15 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: If one is black and one wants to 'act white', then that is a right. Just don't expect bigoted white people to recognize your effort.

Of course there are white people to imitate and white people to avoid imitating at all costs. But you should know that. White people do not form a monolith, which may explain why I hate being called "The Man"!

I don't think you understand what "acting white" means.  "Acting white" means things like studying and speaking with correct grammar and getting good grades.  I think it's seen as caving in to the culture that values those things, which is considered to be "white"; "acting white" is perhaps seen as making blacks who don't bother with those things look bad.

So, if you value correct grammar enough to use it in your writing, you are validly referred to as "The Man", because you're part of the "white" culture that "imposes" those values as societal values.
Reply
(09-07-2017, 07:23 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: ...In Canada one can be jailed for failure to use "proper pronouns"...

source please?  strangely, the local media hasn't picked up on this ... I'd like to assess the veracity of this claim to determine if I have to change how I speak.
"But there's a difference between error and dishonesty, and it's not a trivial difference." - Ben Greenman
"Relax, it'll be all right, and by that I mean it will first get worse."
"How was I supposed to know that there'd be consequences for my actions?" - Gina Linetti
Reply
(09-08-2017, 11:08 AM)tg63 Wrote:
(09-07-2017, 07:23 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: ...In Canada one can be jailed for failure to use "proper pronouns"...

source please?  strangely, the local media hasn't picked up on this ... I'd like to assess the veracity of this claim to determine if I have to change how I speak.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/16/canada...-pronouns/

If you're relying on the lamestream media they likely wouldn't want to to cover it.  I strongly advise people to turn off the tee-vee and to turn on to alternative media.
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
(09-08-2017, 09:41 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(09-08-2017, 08:15 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: If one is black and one wants to 'act white', then that is a right. Just don't expect bigoted white people to recognize your effort.

Of course there are white people to imitate and white people to avoid imitating at all costs. But you should know that. White people do not form a monolith, which may explain why I hate being called "The Man"!

I don't think you understand what "acting white" means.  "Acting white" means things like studying and speaking with correct grammar and getting good grades.  I think it's seen as caving in to the culture that values those things, which is considered to be "white"; "acting white" is perhaps seen as making blacks who don't bother with those things look bad.

So, if you value correct grammar enough to use it in your writing, you are validly referred to as "The Man", because you're part of the "white" culture that "imposes" those values as societal values.

PBR is a white liberal so of course he doesn't get it.  After all he knows more about being black than I do, never mind the fact that I am black.

In general I would say that the problem is that studying, speaking with correct grammar and getting good grades results in success, success that often means leaving the ghetto and the low life's behind.  Some of this could be "caving to the man", some of it could be "them doing that makes me look bad" but to be perfectly honest I think I know the true source.

That source is that the success of those blacks who study, speak with proper grammar and get good grades in school prove that the left's victim narrative is really self-imposed.  That more than anything else agrivates those who are the first to start shouting about other blacks "acting white".
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
(09-08-2017, 09:41 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(09-08-2017, 08:15 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: If one is black and one wants to 'act white', then that is a right. Just don't expect bigoted white people to recognize your effort.

Of course there are white people to imitate and white people to avoid imitating at all costs. But you should know that. White people do not form a monolith, which may explain why I hate being called "The Man"!

I don't think you understand what "acting white" means.  "Acting white" means things like studying and speaking with correct grammar and getting good grades.  I think it's seen as caving in to the culture that values those things, which is considered to be "white"; "acting white" is perhaps seen as making blacks who don't bother with those things look bad.

Wrong. I know plenty of white people who show contempt for learning, who use atrocious grammar, and do not apply themselves to their schoolwork. Those white people would fare far better if they acted like Jamaican-Americans, who typically have less white ancestry than the typical American black descended from antebellum slaves. (By the way -- I got that data from Charles Murray in his infamous -- to liberals, at least --The Bell Curve).

I have been in a largely-black classroom in which one student complained that I was asking black kids to 'act white'. I told them what losers some white people are. For example, white people use more drugs, use worse drugs, and mess themselves up even worse than do black people. Black people just can't get away with drugs as white people can. Add to that, illegal drugs are expensive. I live in a community awash in meth. White users, as a strict rule. I told that kid that I didn't want him to act white. I told him that I wanted him to act like a Chinese-American. I have also subbed in a largely-white district with lots of Hispanic kids whose parents do cr@ppy jobs... the Hispanic kids are toward the top of the class.

Achievement does not depend upon skin color. We have Neil deGrasse Tyson. We have Colin Powell. We have Barack Obama. We had Ralph Bunche and Martin Luther King. We had Maya Angelou. Need I go further? 

Quote:So, if you value correct grammar enough to use it in your writing, you are validly referred to as "The Man", because you're part of the "white" culture that "imposes" those values as societal values.

Every language has its own standard of grammar, and one adheres closely to that standard or one is looked upon as a loser. It has nothing to do with race. Cajun French (which is not a standardized language) does not get respect in France, Quebec, Haiti, or Francophone parts of Africa. Amish dialects are substandard in Germany, so that has nothing to do with race.  Anyone who uses bad grammar might as well affix a paper sign that reads "KICK ME!" because such is practically the treatment that one will get.  For a black person, using proper grammar associated with any mainstream dialect is one of the cheapest ways to get respect. "Ebonics" does not get respect, and it won't get respect until we start seeing literary masterpieces in it. Was W.E.B. DuBois "The Man" for using standard English grammar? I think not.

Since almost all Americans have practically the same syllabus in school to K-8, we might as well have the same standards. "My great-great grandmother was a slave and my great-great grandfather was a white man who raped her" is not an excuse for bad grammar.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
(09-08-2017, 12:28 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Wrong. I know plenty of white people who show contempt for learning, who use atrocious grammar, and do not apply themselves to their schoolwork. Those white people would fare far better if they acted like Jamaican-Americans, who typically have less white ancestry than the typical American black descended from antebellum slaves. (By the way -- I got that data from Charles Murray in his infamous -- to liberals, at least --The Bell Curve).

PBR are you naturally clueless or do you have to work at it? What matters is not so much the reality but the perception. There is a meme among blacks that using good diction and caring about intellectual pursuits is a thing for white people. The reality is that these things should be a thing for anyone who wishes to advance in society regardless their color, but perception and reality are only incidentally related.

Quote:I have been in a largely-black classroom in which one student complained that I was asking black kids to 'act white'.

Congratulations, you have met a nigger. About 1/3rd of all black persons are niggers just like about 1/3rd of all white persons are white trash. As with whites there is a civil war amongst black persons, it is a war between black people and niggers and niggers have got to go.

I suggest seeing the Stand Up Philosopher Chris Rock's dissertation on the subject.

Quote:I told them what losers some white people are.

Wrong strategy to use. Niggers believe that because some white people are fucked up that they can be fucked up too. Again Chris Rock explains this in his dissertation.

Quote:Black people just can't get away with drugs as white people can.

Not quite correct. Drug use patterns among whites and blacks are quite different. I'm not proud of saying this but I've used drugs (principly marijuana but some other things too) with both blacks and whites. It is far more likely for blacks to smoke their blunts on the street corner stinking the place up with marijuana smoke smell and attracting the attention of the police, meanwhile whites will do the same exact thing at their house and not attract the attention of the police. Often where something is done is more important than what is done.

Quote:Achievement does not depend upon skin color. We have Neil deGrasse Tyson. We have Colin Powell. We have Barack Obama. We had Ralph Bunche and Martin Luther King. We had Maya Angelou. Need I go further? 

All of that is true, but I highly doubt you reached him. See he has a problem no white man could possibly address--he is a nigger and as much as he hates black people who "act white" he hates white people far more. Quite honestly I wouldn't be surprised if what you said to him went in one ear and out the other. Honestly I would love to find fault with you for that, but I can't.

Quote:Every language has its own standard of grammar, and one adheres closely to that standard or one is looked upon as a loser. It has nothing to do with race. Cajun French (which is not a standardized language) does not get respect in France, Quebec, Haiti, or Francophone parts of Africa.

Actually Arcadian French is more or less the same as Quebecois, though it isn't really recognized in metropolitan France as both Quebecois and Arcadian French are very closely related both being derived from 17th century provincial dialect. Haitian Creole should be considered its own language entirely.

Quote:For a black person, using proper grammar associated with any mainstream dialect is one of the cheapest ways to get respect.

True, but not why most black people who use proper grammar use it. To be perfectly honest I Southern Dialect, and use it with proper grammar and diction because it makes for more effective communication. As far as I'm concerned anyone who would disrespect me on the basis of dialect is not worth concerning myself with.

Quote:"Ebonics" does not get respect, and it won't get respect until we start seeing literary masterpieces in it.

I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. Anyone capable of writing such a thing would likely use standard English anyway, except of course for dialog where there is greater toleration for use of non-standard dialect.

Quote: Was W.E.B. DuBois "The Man" for using standard English grammar? I think not.

Neither was Malcolm X, but as I said reality is less important than the perception in this case.

Quote:Since almost all Americans have practically the same syllabus in school to K-8, we might as well have the same standards. "My great-great grandmother was a slave and my great-great grandfather was a white man who raped her" is not an excuse for bad grammar.

No it is not, but it is the white liberals who insist on pushing the victim narrative. If anything this narrative is most destructive amongst blacks. But then again I don't think you'll ever grasp a functional understanding of how pernicious the soft-bigotry of low expectations is.
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
(09-08-2017, 11:43 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: PBR is a white liberal so of course he doesn't get it.  After all he knows more about being black than I do, never mind the fact that I am black.

In general I would say that the problem is that studying, speaking with correct grammar and getting good grades results in success, success that often means leaving the ghetto and the low life's behind.  Some of this could be "caving to the man", some of it could be "them doing that makes me look bad" but to be perfectly honest I think I know the true source.

That source is that the success of those blacks who study, speak with proper grammar and get good grades in school prove that the left's victim narrative is really self-imposed.  That more than anything else aggravates those who are the first to start shouting about other blacks "acting white".

I can appreciate most of that while saying you can look deeper.  There are some blacks --often dancers, singers, sometimes athletes -- who can add a bit of swagger and class to what they do while the white folk stand around either resenting, admiring and sometimes imitating.  The black shtick isn't entirely negative.  

Yet, i can try to appreciate what Kinser is saying.  If you think you can get ahead by not training yourself, by standing out, by expecting special treatment, by not standing out in a constructive way, good luck, think again.  If it is a positive in some professions, if you can live up to it, it isn't a positive everywhere.  The analogy is of the nail sticking itself up a little bit drawing the hammer.

If as a software engineer I developed a stereotype of what blacks in the field are like, I figure they mostly had to try a little harder and be a little better than those around them.  Somewhere along the line they had it tough.  That is not a great thing, but it made them better people.  By the time they had graduated from college I was generally happy to have them on the team.  I'd say that most of them didn't push the traditional black shtick of being different, being hip, being better.  Yet they fit in.  Yes they gave up something in the process.  It seemed worth it for them.

Should there be a way of mixing the two approaches, drawing positives from the different options?  Probably.  There are no doubt people who have tried and succeeded to some degree.  Am I the right person to give detailed advice?  Likely not.

Kinser?  I'm still figuring that out.  There are times he seems less interested in dodging the hammer than yelling to draw attention as it as it is coming down.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Reply
(09-08-2017, 12:54 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:
(09-08-2017, 12:28 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Wrong. I know plenty of white people who show contempt for learning, who use atrocious grammar, and do not apply themselves to their schoolwork. Those white people would fare far better if they acted like Jamaican-Americans, who typically have less white ancestry than the typical American black descended from antebellum slaves. (By the way -- I got that data from Charles Murray in his infamous -- to liberals, at least --The Bell Curve).

PBR are you naturally clueless or do you have to work at it?  What matters is not so much the reality but the perception.  There is a meme among blacks that using good diction and caring about intellectual pursuits is a thing for white people.  The reality is that these things should be a thing for anyone who wishes to advance in society regardless their color, but perception and reality are only incidentally related.

Hate feeling oppressed? Then don't blame "Whitey". Just beat "Whitey" at his own game.

Lots of white people will appreciate your achievement.

Quote:
Quote:(I said) I have been in a largely-black classroom in which one student complained that I was asking black kids to 'act white'.

Congratulations, you have met a nigger.  About 1/3rd of all black persons are niggers just like about 1/3rd of all white persons are white trash.  As with whites there is a civil war amongst black persons, it is a war between black people and niggers and niggers have got to go.

I suggest seeing the Stand Up Philosopher Chris Rock's dissertation on the subject.

But as a white man I dare not use that horrible word. 



Quote:
Quote:I told them what losers some white people are.

Wrong strategy to use.  Niggers believe that because some white people are fucked up that they can be fucked up too.  Again Chris Rock explains this in his dissertation.

That white people do something stupid is no excuse for black people doing the same thing.


Quote:
Quote:Black people just can't get away with drugs as white people can.

Not quite correct.  Drug use patterns among whites and blacks are quite different.  I'm not proud of saying this but I've used drugs (principly marijuana but some other things too) with both blacks and whites.  It is far more likely for blacks to smoke their blunts on the street corner stinking the place up with marijuana smoke smell and attracting the attention of the police, meanwhile whites will do the same exact thing at their house and not attract the attention of the police.  Often where something is done is more important than what is done.

Of course. The difference is privacy, a difference between the poor and people in the classes beginning with 'semi-skilled workers'.  That could as easily be a matter of class as of ethnicity.


Quote:
Quote:Achievement does not depend upon skin color. We have Neil deGrasse Tyson. We have Colin Powell. We have Barack Obama. We had Ralph Bunche and Martin Luther King. We had Maya Angelou. Need I go further? 

All of that is true, but I highly doubt you reached him.  See he has a problem no white man could possibly address--he is a nigger and as much as he hates black people who "act white" he hates white people far more.  Quite honestly I wouldn't be surprised if what you said to him went in one ear and out the other.  Honestly I would love to find fault with you for that, but I can't.


I obviously didn't have the time. That is a parental responsibility, and really not mine. To this fellow I was a complete alien.



Quote:
Quote:Every language has its own standard of grammar, and one adheres closely to that standard or one is looked upon as a loser. It has nothing to do with race. Cajun French (which is not a standardized language) does not get respect in France, Quebec, Haiti, or Francophone parts of Africa.

Actually Arcadian French is more or less the same as Quebecois, though it isn't really recognized in metropolitan France as both Quebecois and Arcadian French are very closely related both being derived from 17th century provincial dialect.  Haitian Creole should be considered its own language entirely.

It has changed significantly in over 200 years of isolation from its source. Yes, Haitian Creole is a language in its own right.


Quote:
Quote:For a black person, using proper grammar associated with any mainstream dialect is one of the cheapest ways to get respect.

True, but not why most black people who use proper grammar use it.  To be perfectly honest I Southern Dialect, and use it with proper grammar and diction because it makes for more effective communication.  As far as I'm concerned anyone who would disrespect me on the basis of dialect is not worth concerning myself with.


I do not have any difficulty  understanding what you say. Believing what you say, especially in politics in your two ideological incarnations?
That is a different story.


Quote:
Quote:"Ebonics" does not get respect, and it won't get respect until we start seeing literary masterpieces in it.

I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.  Anyone capable of writing such a thing would likely use standard English anyway, except of course for dialog where there is greater toleration for use of non-standard dialect.


Undeniably true. Dialect is tricky, and anyone who tries it without fully understanding the nuance of the dialect can easily fall into mockery of the dialect. If you want to insert the dialogue of Italian-American mobsters, then you had better have some strong connection to the local "Little Italy" beyond visiting a trattoria every couple of weeks for the chef's specialty.


Quote:
Quote:Was W.E.B. DuBois "The Man" for using standard English grammar? I think not.

Neither was Malcolm X, but as I said reality is less important than the perception in this case.


Bingo. If you want your radical critique to have resonance with people other than 'your own', then you might as well communicate on their intellectual level, using their lingo. This said, I can probably talk better with members of the black middle class than I can with the white meth fiends that I encounter on occasion.

Quote:
Quote:Since almost all Americans have practically the same syllabus in school to K-8, we might as well have the same standards. "My great-great grandmother was a slave and my great-great grandfather was a white man who raped her" is not an excuse for bad grammar.

No it is not, but it is the white liberals who insist on pushing the victim narrative.  If anything this narrative is most destructive amongst blacks.  But then again I don't think you'll ever grasp a functional understanding of how pernicious the soft-bigotry of low expectations is.

I may be a liberal, but I am also a pragmatist. Low expectations are nobody's friend, and a bad family history is something to transcend -- if at all possible. One must fight certain ugly realities if one is to have a good life.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
(09-08-2017, 12:54 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Not quite correct.  Drug use patterns among whites and blacks are quite different.  I'm not proud of saying this but I've used drugs (principly marijuana but some other things too) with both blacks and whites.  It is far more likely for blacks to smoke their blunts on the street corner stinking the place up with marijuana smoke smell and attracting the attention of the police, meanwhile whites will do the same exact thing at their house and not attract the attention of the police.  Often where something is done is more important than what is done.

So why the difference?  Do the blacks not know that they'd be safer smoking inside their houses?  Or do they refuse to do it because they don't want to give in to the system or something?

Is this related to why blacks seem more willing to double park and do other minor parking violations that interfere with traffic but are rarely ticketed, or is that a different issue?
Reply
(09-08-2017, 05:07 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(09-08-2017, 12:54 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Not quite correct.  Drug use patterns among whites and blacks are quite different.  I'm not proud of saying this but I've used drugs (principly marijuana but some other things too) with both blacks and whites.  It is far more likely for blacks to smoke their blunts on the street corner stinking the place up with marijuana smoke smell and attracting the attention of the police, meanwhile whites will do the same exact thing at their house and not attract the attention of the police.  Often where something is done is more important than what is done.

So why the difference?  Do the blacks not know that they'd be safer smoking inside their houses?  Or do they refuse to do it because they don't want to give in to the system or something?

Is this related to why blacks seem more willing to double park and do other minor parking violations that interfere with traffic but are rarely ticketed, or is that a different issue?

1. A kid in an overcrowded tenement is likely to be told 'don't smoke that horrible thing here'. With a middle-class family, the kid might smoke it while he is the only one home or in his private room... behind a closed door and a closed curtain.

2. Double-parking is largely an urban phenomenon related to population density. Population density is highest in those parts of urban areas  with lots of poor people. I never see it in a rural area.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
(09-08-2017, 05:07 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(09-08-2017, 12:54 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Not quite correct.  Drug use patterns among whites and blacks are quite different.  I'm not proud of saying this but I've used drugs (principly marijuana but some other things too) with both blacks and whites.  It is far more likely for blacks to smoke their blunts on the street corner stinking the place up with marijuana smoke smell and attracting the attention of the police, meanwhile whites will do the same exact thing at their house and not attract the attention of the police.  Often where something is done is more important than what is done.

So why the difference?  Do the blacks not know that they'd be safer smoking inside their houses?  Or do they refuse to do it because they don't want to give in to the system or something?

Is this related to why blacks seem more willing to double park and do other minor parking violations that interfere with traffic but are rarely ticketed, or is that a different issue?

I don't have any really good answers for why these patterns of behavior exist.  In part there could be some degree of extenuating environmental factors--for example Mama don't want that stinky thing in the house.  But the far more likely answer is just plain stupidity.
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
(09-08-2017, 10:36 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Well, here in California, [...]

Commiefornia is a world unto itself and not one that I have any desire to return to, ever. Since you don't really add anything to the topic I'm going back to ignoring hurricane reports and watching a white man in leather pants eat old freeze dried food. (and that's still better than anything on the tee-vee)
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
(09-06-2017, 03:24 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(09-06-2017, 02:03 PM)David Horn Wrote: If so, then why are so many other nations able to have broad freedoms and restrictive gun laws.  I mentioned Australia in my last post, but it's only one example of many.  How about Canada?

Why are so many American states able to have broad freedoms and liberal guns laws? I assume that the American people are better, more capable and more trust worthy than the people in Canada? I'd like to know why you feel so comfortable and safe in your cozy blue home while surrounded by an armed/pro gun population.

For someone who lives so close to Canada, you seem to have limited understanding of our northern neighbors.  And fwiw, I live in a very gun friendly place.  I don't feel safe during hunting season, and more than a few dust-ups have involved firearms.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Calls by elected officials (other than Trump) for political violence pbrower2a 3 2,214 09-13-2016, 02:52 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)