Elsewhere on the internet...

The League of Reason has some social media accounts! You can find us on Facebook or on Twitter for some interesting links and things.

Race

Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 9 of 12
 [ 227 posts ] 
Race
Author Message
kenandkidsUser avatarPosts: 1117Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 7:00 pm Gender: Pinecone

Post Re: Race

DepricatedZero wrote:As a Libertarian . . . get bent with your "you libertarians" nonsense. Your frothing hatred of we libertarians appears to sprout from ignorance. Then again, the term is regularly hijacked by self-serving extremists and doesn't point to any position on the left<->right scale,



When using the No True Scotsman fallacy, try not making statements that actually remove you from the group rather than remove people from the group. Your statements make you not a libertarian, as the vast majority believe differently than you.

Like this:
In other words, free public education. This is a worthy cause for tax dollars, since the purpose of government should be to protect its citizens from threats internal and external.


Likewise with public health care - I'm all for it, similarly because it promotes a healthy workforce. With minimal contribution through taxes, companies and citizens can easily protect their own livelihood.


Bad Libertarian! Bad, Bad Libertarian!
Teapublican commandment:
Thou shalt not educate or improve the lives of the lesser classes, the lesser races, or women.

Fiddler on:

http://obnoxi.us/
Fri Aug 19, 2011 6:19 pm
Anachronous RexLeague LegendUser avatarPosts: 2008Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 4:07 pmLocation: Kansas City, MO Gender: Male

Post Re: Race

impiku wrote:3) The children are so young that they are incapble of "indoctrinating".

What you are referencing is not an inherent aversion to difference in race, but an inherent aversion, as well as an inherent curiosity, regarding that which is unusual/unexpected.

Black infants have been shown to be as likely to be uncomfortable with being held by a black adult as a white infant in situations where they have been brought up by adopted white parents. And all infants, of all races, are prone to stare at an individual with unusual characteristics.
Our prefrontal lobes are too small. Much too small. That's a problem of the birth canal, I'm very sorry to say for those that like their birth canals... tight.
-C. Hitchens.
Fri Aug 19, 2011 6:25 pm
CommonEnlightenmentUser avatarPosts: 649Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 2:06 amLocation: Plato Crater Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Race

televator wrote:
Face it, the analogy is tremendously flawed. God and government aren't analogous in character and/or effectiveness between the religious and atheistic liberals.


Perhaps he thinks that the government is a supernatural entity. I personally think that this a 'conspiracy theorist' flaw.

Perhaps there is a correlation between what we don't understand and what we ascribe as supernatural?

Love?
Eternity?
Government?
There is still light in the 'Earthly' darkness. Finding light in the darkness can be more satisfying than merely seeing the glaring light of our sun. It gives us a better understanding of light and a deeper understanding of our universe.
Fri Aug 19, 2011 6:46 pm
SquawkModeratorUser avatarPosts: 2011Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:25 pm Gender: Tree

Post Re: Race

I'm presuming to speak for Dep as well as myself here since it would seem we share positions to an extent. Neither of us is advocating doing nothing to help those suffering discrimination. Quite the contrary, I think both of us wish for greater efforts. It's the deployment of those efforts, the tactics used and the structure of organisations that purport to help those suffering that we question.
Pope Rat: "Exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus a reductive vision of a person and his destiny."

Squawk response: "O Rly?"
Sat Aug 20, 2011 12:10 am
kenandkidsUser avatarPosts: 1117Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 7:00 pm Gender: Pinecone

Post Re: Race

Squawk wrote:I'm presuming to speak for Dep as well as myself here since it would seem we share positions to an extent. Neither of us is advocating doing nothing to help those suffering discrimination. Quite the contrary, I think both of us wish for greater efforts. It's the deployment of those efforts, the tactics used and the structure of organisations that purport to help those suffering that we question.



I have no doubt, both of you are generally reasonable and put effort into your worldviews. Yet, both of you must see the disconnect between your own views and that which you espouse in a label. This is why I mildly poked fun at him a few posts ago, he claimed a political stance and then spoke of personal views in direct opposition to the stance. From the (slightly) more reasonable views of Ron Paul worshippers to the outright fuckwittedness of Becks followers, the overwhelming majority of those who decide what a libertarian is disagree with both of you.

I disagree also, with anyone who maintains a libertarian/anarchist view. Selfishness is character flaw, not a good building block for a political view.


My mostly tongue in cheek view is that self identified libertarian/anarchists need to be shipped over to regions that are anarchic. If selfishness works well, they can turn Somalia and other places into paradise and show everyone else wrong, sans modern conveniences and infrastructure that was developed by people who believe that society works as a group building on and with each other.
Teapublican commandment:
Thou shalt not educate or improve the lives of the lesser classes, the lesser races, or women.

Fiddler on:

http://obnoxi.us/
Sat Aug 20, 2011 12:39 am
SquawkModeratorUser avatarPosts: 2011Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:25 pm Gender: Tree

Post Re: Race

Here we see part of the reason I dislike labels. I prefer to tell people what I think, they can subsequently attach any label they wish to that position as long as the other baggage that label entails is not also attached.

I'm not entirely sure you how your post relates to me here.
Pope Rat: "Exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus a reductive vision of a person and his destiny."

Squawk response: "O Rly?"
Sat Aug 20, 2011 12:43 am
kenandkidsUser avatarPosts: 1117Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 7:00 pm Gender: Pinecone

Post Re: Race

Squawk wrote:Here we see part of the reason I dislike labels. I prefer to tell people what I think, they can subsequently attach any label they wish to that position as long as the other baggage that label entails is not also attached.

I'm not entirely sure you how your post relates to me here.



Sorry, I misread that to mean that you identify as libertarian. I now see you stopped short of that.
Teapublican commandment:
Thou shalt not educate or improve the lives of the lesser classes, the lesser races, or women.

Fiddler on:

http://obnoxi.us/
Sat Aug 20, 2011 12:51 am
televatorUser avatarPosts: 1252Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 12:02 amLocation: In hell, rocking out with Satan! Gender: Cake

Post Re: Race

Squawk wrote:I'm presuming to speak for Dep as well as myself here since it would seem we share positions to an extent. Neither of us is advocating doing nothing to help those suffering discrimination. Quite the contrary, I think both of us wish for greater efforts. It's the deployment of those efforts, the tactics used and the structure of organisations that purport to help those suffering that we question.


I was pondering more about what you said the last time and the closest analog I could come up with was perhaps the ACLU in the US. Here: http://www.aclu.org/

It's an organization that takes up the task of legally helping people facing discrimination. The problem however is that the US is a large country and there are a lot of people facing all sorts of discrimination. They are quite homogenous, but I don't think you could expect this level of organization in real time when specific people are discriminated against.
a·the·ism: The absence of belief in god(s)

There are no additional, claims, laws, commandments, rules, doctrines, presuppositions, stand alone ideologies, dogmas, and/or faith based beliefs required by or inevitably derived from atheism.
Sat Aug 20, 2011 12:54 am
SquawkModeratorUser avatarPosts: 2011Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:25 pm Gender: Tree

Post Re: Race

One thing that probably needs clarifying. I would have no issue with an organisation devoting 100% of it's resources to a particular group, if it's stated goal was equal treatment for all and the individuals identified happened to be classifiable in some common way (ie, by skin colour). Don't set out to help "black people", set out to help people who are discriminated against, and if they happen to be black, fine. At some point in time there will come along a discriminated against white bloke: lets help him out too.

I read in a newspaper sometime over the past week that here in the UK it's going to be anything up to 100 years until gender equality in the board rooms of leading companies is achieved. What is to be done about it? Should anything be done about it? Consider what a perfect society with no bias would have (other than one I'm about to give). Would it be a 50:50 split? Doubtful, with a likely bias towards men for the simple reason that women are the ones that get pregnant. Unless we consider a drastic change to maternity, women will work for approximately 6-9 months less in a job than men, and all other things equal, that puts men in a slightly better position to get promotion. If gender roles were reversed, with men staying at home for 9 months to care for a newborn while women returned to work I would expect the reverse. But gender roles in new parenthood are for another thread.

The only strategy that can be sustainable is gender neutral, it means ensuring that the best person for a particular position is always promoted, regardless of gender. Any strategy that actively seeks to balance gender in the workplace by favourable recruitment for women is destined to result in companies running sub-optimally simply because the perfect candidate, if it happens to be a man, will on occasion be overlooked.

It should be noted that given the male dominance of the workplace, any gender neutral promotion plan would favour women in the short term for the simple reason that many capable women have been overlooked in the past and are currently working in roles below their potential. They would have to bubble upwards are an increased rate under any gender neutral strategy. That's a perfect example of the position I hold towards racism. I favour organisations fighting against discrimination, any group of people (if we choose to classify) that has suffered discrimination will suffer benefit in direct proportion to the discrimination it has been subject to.
Pope Rat: "Exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus a reductive vision of a person and his destiny."

Squawk response: "O Rly?"
Sat Aug 20, 2011 1:12 am
DepricatedZeroChat ModeratorUser avatarPosts: 1333Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:43 amLocation: Cincinnati, OH Gender: Pinecone

Post Re: Race

kenandkids wrote:
DepricatedZero wrote:As a Libertarian . . . get bent with your "you libertarians" nonsense. Your frothing hatred of we libertarians appears to sprout from ignorance. Then again, the term is regularly hijacked by self-serving extremists and doesn't point to any position on the left<->right scale,



When using the No True Scotsman fallacy, try not making statements that actually remove you from the group rather than remove people from the group. Your statements make you not a libertarian, as the vast majority believe differently than you.

Like this:
In other words, free public education. This is a worthy cause for tax dollars, since the purpose of government should be to protect its citizens from threats internal and external.


Likewise with public health care - I'm all for it, similarly because it promotes a healthy workforce. With minimal contribution through taxes, companies and citizens can easily protect their own livelihood.


Bad Libertarian! Bad, Bad Libertarian!

Now now it would only be a No True Scotsman if I said they aren't Libertarian. All I said was that they're not the shade I'm referring to.

Personally, I hate the label, but it's the -closest- to a political group I can identify with.

I think I made a post ranting about how useless libertarian is as a label a while back. It's pretty bad, since the spectrum it covers is ridiculously broad. It's non-polarized and you can't fit a libertarian into a convenient "this is what they believe" box like Glen Beck or Keith Olberman. Unfortunately, recent rabble-rousers in the group (who support different conclusions from similar ideals) have given the false impression that you yourself show to have influenced you, by calling me a bad libertarian.

Libertarianism is the philosophy that individuals are free above all else, simply put. The conclusions drawn from that vary enormously. I, for instance, believe your freedom extends only as far as mine. That is, you are free insofar as you do not limit my freedom, or anyone elses. It goes in different directions, but the focus is on the freedom of the individual rather than on the system.

If you consider the teabaggers and their opinions/goals/etc as "the libertarian agenda" you're doing no different than painting all Muslims with the brush of Al-Qaeda, all Christians with the brush of the Westboro Baptist Church.

The banner has been waved by some fucking idiots, but that doesn't mean we all drink their kool-aid.
Why does my life have to be so small
And death is forever
And does forever have a life to call its own?
Don't give me an answer cause you only know
As much as I know
Unless you've been there once
And I hardly think so

Green Day - One of My Lies
Sat Aug 20, 2011 6:25 pm
impikuUser avatarPosts: 211Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:58 amLocation: Hell. Gender: Cake

Post Re: Race

There are also some folks who don't even understand libertarianism but claim they are libertarians. :)
"Who needs Satan when you have a God like this?" -- Robert M. Price

"In the sphere of thought, absurdity and perversity remain the masters of the world, and their dominion is suspended only for brief periods." -- Arthur Schopenhauer
Sat Aug 20, 2011 6:33 pm
kenandkidsUser avatarPosts: 1117Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 7:00 pm Gender: Pinecone

Post Re: Race

DepricatedZero wrote:Now now it would only be a No True Scotsman if I said they aren't Libertarian. All I said was that they're not the shade I'm referring to.


It is my opinion that when you accuse someone else of "hijacking" a label, you are simultaneously saying that they don't belong under that label.

Unfortunately, recent rabble-rousers in the group (who support different conclusions from similar ideals) have given the false impression that you yourself show to have influenced you, by calling me a bad libertarian.


You know I was kidding I hope...

Libertarianism is the philosophy that individuals are free above all else, simply put. The conclusions drawn from that vary enormously. I, for instance, believe your freedom extends only as far as mine. That is, you are free insofar as you do not limit my freedom, or anyone elses. It goes in different directions, but the focus is on the freedom of the individual rather than on the system.


This is fine... for a theoretical philosophy. Only very primitive cultures with few members and limited technology have ever been able to achieve this. The reason that libertarianism fails is that it needs all people to be concerned simultaneously with doing the right thing. Corporations have proven, as well as the wealthy for every generation since the dawn of civilisation, have shown that the pursuit of wealth trumps any societal care or concern. Also, criminals of all stripes would do nothing but flourish in a libertarian system. With everyone trying to pay for basic services that aren't centralised, con men and predators would have a heaven on earth.

If you consider the teabaggers and their opinions/goals/etc as "the libertarian agenda" you're doing no different than painting all Muslims with the brush of Al-Qaeda, all Christians with the brush of the Westboro Baptist Church.

The banner has been waved by some fucking idiots, but that doesn't mean we all drink their kool-aid.


This doesn't follow at all. You are comparing calling a group by the labels of a violent or repugnant 1% when I'm simply saying that 70-80% of your group ARE the ones that set the agenda.
Teapublican commandment:
Thou shalt not educate or improve the lives of the lesser classes, the lesser races, or women.

Fiddler on:

http://obnoxi.us/
Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:25 pm
ArthurWilbornPosts: 964Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:46 pm

Post Re: Race

Race is, to my mind, a social construct. People like to belong to groups, and race is one of them. It overlaps with other things like ancestral origin, skin color, genetics etc. but is not solely defined by any one of them. This is generally why race in statistical studies is self-determined; the subject chooses what race to place themselves as.

In sociological study, races can be correlated to various markers in statistically meaningful ways. This is the result in part of the "group culture" of the race. When we're talking about large groups, meaningful determinations can be made and policies focused in a certain direction. Say, if you were interested in reducing child mortality, it would probably be more effective to aim a program at blacks (the highest risk group) then the general population (medium) or Hispanics (lowest).

The problem and racism comes in for two reasons. When your determinations about the group are unsupportable, or when you try to make determinations about individuals by their race. Remember, kids, statistics don't apply to individuals!

As for libertarians, I don't identify myself that way because of the crazies. I have my own set of beliefs that don't map exactly to any particular group.
Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:44 am
DepricatedZeroChat ModeratorUser avatarPosts: 1333Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:43 amLocation: Cincinnati, OH Gender: Pinecone

Post Re: Race

sorry the the lull, I generally don't get on here on weekends. Back now though. :)

kenandkids wrote:It is my opinion that when you accuse someone else of "hijacking" a label, you are simultaneously saying that they don't belong under that label.
Believing they don't belong under that label and claiming that they aren't a member of the group are two different things. I believe that the government of Texas is supremely unamerican, but I don't claim that Texas is not part of America. Make sense? I'd like to not be lumped into the same group as them, but alas I am.

You know I was kidding I hope...
Unfortunately tone doesn't translate in a text system well.

This is fine... for a theoretical philosophy. Only very primitive cultures with few members and limited technology have ever been able to achieve this. The reason that libertarianism fails is that it needs all people to be concerned simultaneously with doing the right thing. Corporations have proven, as well as the wealthy for every generation since the dawn of civilisation, have shown that the pursuit of wealth trumps any societal care or concern. Also, criminals of all stripes would do nothing but flourish in a libertarian system. With everyone trying to pay for basic services that aren't centralised, con men and predators would have a heaven on earth.
I'd be more than happy to have a discussion about the pros and cons of personal freedom, but that's for another thread, I'd rather not draw too far off the point of this one. To bring that more in-line with this thread, I'll respond as it applies to race: all ideologies must be tempered with realism and rationality should they hope to succeed, and that's why the allowances I mentioned previously are important.

This doesn't follow at all. You are comparing calling a group by the labels of a violent or repugnant 1% when I'm simply saying that 70-80% of your group ARE the ones that set the agenda.
Very very far from 70-80%


I'm operating on old data here, but:
PBS relays a report of about 67,000 members registered with various 'tea party' organizations. This is an imperfect count, may count some people multiple times and I'm sure plenty of others not at all. At any rate, it gives us a decent estimate, sans official party registration.
sauce

Contrariwise, in 2008 the Libertarian Party shows 225,529 members in only 22 states that allow registration by party. (sauce). For practical purposes lets say that the numbers run the same for the other 28 states and the size only doubles. Right there we're looking at just the Libertarian Party(not all libertarians, either) at 451,058. (I know this is imperfect as well)

Add to that the size of the Tea Party, bringing our size to 518,058. Lets completely ignore other groups that fit into the libertarian spectrum or claim to be libertarians, and just say that "the agenda" is represented by these 518,058 people.

That makes the Tea Baggers only 13% of the group. They AREN'T the ones that set the agenda. They're a loud vocal minority, nothing more. They get enough attention to make the rest of us look bad, just like extremists and fundamentalists.
Why does my life have to be so small
And death is forever
And does forever have a life to call its own?
Don't give me an answer cause you only know
As much as I know
Unless you've been there once
And I hardly think so

Green Day - One of My Lies
Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:52 am
AndiferousUser avatarPosts: 2727Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 7:00 amLocation: Laputa Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Race

Zero, you're so awesome, but

I believe that the government of Texas is supremely unamerican, but I don't claim that Texas is not part of America.

Much of us don't consider ourselves part of America, either.

If people don't mind my necrolinking, I got very involved in a thread about affirmative action quite a while ago, but I don't like to repeat myself.
"As there seemed no measure between what Watt could understand, and what he could not, so there seemed none between what he deemed certain, and what he deemed doubtful."
~ Samuel Beckett, Watt
Tue Aug 23, 2011 5:06 am
ohcacUser avatarPosts: 56Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:05 am

Post Re: Race

Aught3 wrote:Racism and anti-Semitism are not tolerated on this board. You have been banned, goodbye.


Image
Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:17 am
WelshidiotPosts: 569Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:57 pm

Post Re: Race

ohcac wrote:
Aught3 wrote:Racism and anti-Semitism are not tolerated on this board. You have been banned, goodbye.


Image

Image
Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:33 am
televatorUser avatarPosts: 1252Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 12:02 amLocation: In hell, rocking out with Satan! Gender: Cake

Post Re: Race

ohcac wrote:Image


You did read his posts right? He really was racist. We didn't call him that for the lulz. Everything was "The Jews this" and "The Negroes that" with that guy. Also, I'm pretty sure he didn't have the upper hand in this... :?
a·the·ism: The absence of belief in god(s)

There are no additional, claims, laws, commandments, rules, doctrines, presuppositions, stand alone ideologies, dogmas, and/or faith based beliefs required by or inevitably derived from atheism.
Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:39 am
Aught3ModeratorUser avatarPosts: 4290Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:36 amLocation: New Zealand Gender: Male

Post Re: Race

Ohcac, just to be clear: racism is way to get banned on this board. As clearly stated in the rules.
Wanderer, there is no path, the path is made by walking.
Mon Sep 12, 2011 5:26 am
WWW
ProlescumWebhamsterUser avatarPosts: 5009Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:41 pmLocation: Peptone-upon-Sores

Post Re: Race

Excellent, is ohcac a "race realist" too? Now impiku need suffer a delusion alone no longer!
if constructive debate is allowed to progress, better ideas will ultimately supplant worse ideas.

Comment is free, but facts are sacred
Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:38 am
PreviousNext
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 9 of 12
 [ 227 posts ] 
Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
cron