Play
Multi-Player
Coins
Community
Settings
Help
Community   Maps   Forum   Mail   Tournaments   Ladders   Clans   Recent Games
Sign In | Sign Up
<< Back to Off-topic Forum   

Posts 1 - 30 of 66   1  2  3  Next >>   
Intersectionality is dead: 7/19/2017 23:01:03


The Cruelest
Level 56
Report
Public Policy polling recently released one of the first polls for the 2020 election. Results below:

Former VP Joe Biden defeats Trump 54% to 39%

Sen. Bernie Sanders defeats Trump 52% to 39%

Sen. Elizabeth Warren defeats Trump 49% to 42%

Sen. Cory Booker defeats Trump 45% to 40%

Sen. Kamala Harris defeats Trump 41% to 40%

Before I get into why the poll is 7.4% skewed towards Democrats, notice the race/ethnicity of the Dem candidates.

The straight white men (Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders) do far better than Elizabeth Warren (white woman) who does far better than Cory Booker (black man) and Kamal Harris (minority woman).

The more intersectional a candidate the worse they do. If the Democrats continue pushing intersectionality they will lose.

Now the poll. 2% of the democratic vote is wasted on the electoral college. The people polled are 2% more left than those who actually voted in 2016. And because polling failed us in the 2016 election we can assume that the margin of error (3.4%) will entirely go to Trump. 2%+2%+3.4%=7.4% bias.

Now the poll looks like this.

Former VP Joe Biden defeats Trump 54% to 46.4%

Sen. Bernie Sanders defeats Trump 52% to 46.4%

Trump defeats Sen. Warren 49% to 49.4%

Trump defeats Sen. Cory Booker 45% to 47.4%

Trump defeats Sen. Kamal Harris 41% to 47.4%

Now we see that only the straight, white, male, non-intersectional candidates can beat Trump.

Edited 7/19/2017 23:04:49
- downvoted post by (((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Intersectionality is dead: 7/19/2017 23:25:46


ıʇnpp∀ ǝɥʇ ןǝssıℲ
Level 19
Report
Why are you still posting, Tabby? I thought you said goodbye...
Intersectionality is dead: 7/19/2017 23:27:09


ıʇnpp∀ ǝɥʇ ןǝssıℲ
Level 19
Report
Tabby, your racism is equal to Hitlers racism.
Intersectionality is dead: 7/19/2017 23:30:53


Cata Cauda
Level 58
Report
^
You as well said you wanted to leave. Why are you still here?
Intersectionality is dead: 7/19/2017 23:41:22

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
^^Implying that racism can be quantified and measured.
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 02:45:08


Padraig
Level 34
Report
Tabby you refer to blacks as a "subspecies".

That is about as racist as it gets. What do you call that kind of language? Sweetness and light?
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 02:58:08

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
^This is a factual statement.

According to the definition of what a subspecies below there is nothing factually incorrect about my claim.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies

Are blacks a subspecies? Are they multiple subspecies? Regardless of what they are I'm certainly scientifically justified in calling them a subspecies.

There aren't many pure blacks producing children with non-blacks hence I'm justified in declaring blacks a subspecies of Homo sapiens due to geographic isolation but not sexual isolation.

I didn't claim that blacks are non-human animals because they are indeed human genetically. This classification is also useful. Chimpanzees and bonobos can't cook, produce palm oil or build homes while blacks can do all of them. Hence they are indeed much more similar to non-black humans compared to chimpanzees and bonobos and hence should belong to the "human" category.

Edited 7/20/2017 03:19:37
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 03:30:52


Padraig
Level 34
Report
Definition of racism

(1) a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

(2)
(a) a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles

(b) a political or social system founded on racism

(3) racial prejudice or discrimination


You subscribe to the belief that certain groups are inherently superior, as in the first definition.

You have have proposed a new social system based on considerations that are explicitly concerned with race, as in the second definition.

You promote the notion that it is proper to discriminate against certain ethnic groups which you style "subspecies", as in the third definition.

Therefore you are a racist.

QED
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 03:34:39

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
^See? You are again being overnormative here. As long as the term "subspecies" is properly defined and consistently used it is not discrimination. Instead it is just a factual statement like "Antarctica is generally cold."

I think you know that I don't care about liberal norms including this ridiculous "RACIST!" thing.

Edited 7/20/2017 03:35:23
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 03:40:28


Padraig
Level 34
Report
Tabby do you deny that there is such a thing as racism?
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 03:51:25

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
^It is a useful concept that does describe real phenomena. However libtards made it a curse word.
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 04:00:13


Padraig
Level 34
Report
^ So that I can understand you, would you give an example of what you consider racist?
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 04:08:37

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
Racism is basically sentient beings treating people differently based on race. Factual statements on anything including race can not be racist because only a sentient being is capable of racism, not facts.

Racism is a real phenomenon however it is not always evil. For example it is reasonable to believe that someone whose first name is Yonatan is very likely to be a Jewish Israeli male. Hence if Yonatan is secular and above 25 years old he is likely to be able to use firearms. It is also reasonable to believe that a random white person you can find in Charlotte, NC is unlikely to be a Russian speaker. Races have differences hence accurate predictions need to take race into account. It is a factor that matters but not the only one.

Edited 7/20/2017 04:15:21
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 11:29:31


OxTheAutist 
Level 58
Report
I didn't read anything past your first post but you realise Bernie does so much better than Harris and Booker because they're corporate neoliberal shills, while he's not?
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 15:01:22


Muten Rōshi
Level 58
Report
I have a little trouble with the phrase 'subspecies' also. It seems like you have some kind of agenda by using this word. You knew someone would call you up on it ;)

My issue is from an evolutionary standpoint. It seems to me that the premise of your argument is that our ancestors, originating in Africa and spreading throughout the globe, are less advanced. A subordinate genome. That we are the pinnacle and they are what came before.

Is that not an oversimplification? The deciding factor for me may be access to utilities. Although evolution continued in its slow progression for all humans, the people that had moved away from a hunter-gatherer system (to develop agriculture and 'civilisation') would undoubtedly benefit them in terms of surplus supplies, melting pot of ideas, access to basic things that can be taken for granted. Such things were not so reliable in the small, environmentally unobtrusive tribes people and much was not considered, because it did not need to be.

The 'Nature vs Nurture' argument comes in here, if only to say that it is fairly obsolete at this stage. The truth of psychological development is that it incorporates both systems in an interplay that cannot be dis-entangled easily. I feel that this excerpt of 'The Marshmallow Test' by Walter Mischel is relevant:

"Who we are and what we become reflects the interplay of both genetic and environmental influences in an enormously complex choreography. It is time to put away the 'How much?' question because it can not be answered simply.
As the Canadian psychologist Donald Hebb noted long ago, it's like asking, What the more important determinant of a rectangle's size: its length or its width?"


So what I mean by all of that is that there are many influences at play in the development of a species. (whether they be from out social structures, the personalities and traumas of our parents, the availability of resources, the aptitude and necessity to claim those resources, genes, etc.) These influences continue a fluid dance throughout our lives and activate our brains in different ways.

So they are equally evolved as other ethnicities in the same way that chimpanzees have continued evolving in their own path, while still being an ancestor of our species. The matter of interbreeding with colonising powers, etc. aside, the question on my lips is how soon is too soon to call a certain ethnicity a subspecies?

All of this considered, which species is the most advanced? Is it morally admissible to degrade someone in such a way as to say that their genes are inferior, that they are forever to be a subspecies? This is the kind of stigma that has plagued these communities when dealing with the 'civilised world' and has taken a long time to shake off. There are still some stains in the cotton that are proving troublesome.

I have never been an advocate for censorship due to offence-taking or in the hopes of preventing it, especially when it comes to religion, but one must ask whether the information being put forward is truly important enough to bring into public discourse. I say we should keep any such revelations on the down low in this particular topic. ;)

I suppose it is an accurate description, albeit rather pejorative-sounding.
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

Edited 7/20/2017 15:40:05
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 15:16:45


ıʇnpp∀ ǝɥʇ ןǝssıℲ
Level 19
Report
Who we are and what we become reflects the interplay of both genetic and environmental influences in an enormously complex choreography.


Choreography: the sequence of steps and movements in dance or figure skating, especially in a ballet or other staged dance.

>genetic and enviromental influences
>in ballet

topkek
- downvoted post by Cata Cauda
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 15:51:27


Muten Rōshi
Level 58
Report
Yes that was part of my meaning. The 'nurture' aspect. Environmental circumstances have a large effect on a race's development. These influences can be social, biological, etc.

Yes, we can discuss Capitalism in another thread ;)

P.S. But one should look at this issue only in its modern context. In the past few million years, incredible changes have occurred over relatively short periods in our species.

Edited 7/20/2017 15:55:28
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 17:43:57

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
^^Your argument completely ignores the fact that non-European non-black nations can naturally develop.
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 17:47:40


ıʇnpp∀ ǝɥʇ ןǝssıℲ
Level 19
Report
Tabby, you're ignoring the fact that a lot of African leaders are bribed.
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 18:11:29


Cata Cauda
Level 58
Report
^^Your argument completely ignores the fact that non-European non-black nations can naturally develop.

Mind to elaborate that more?
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 18:32:29

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
^Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, China, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Qatar, Iran, the Wahhabi entity, Egypt, Libya under Gaddafi, UAE, Oman, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka.......

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore#/media/File%3A027_ERP_gantry.jpg

Edited 7/20/2017 18:34:30
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 18:41:38


{rp} GeneralGror
Level 58
Report
Wow, that's all you have to say on that, tabby? haha

I thought that went without saying, considering:
So they are equally evolved as other ethnicities
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 18:42:58

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
^Define or taboo "evolved".
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 18:47:57


{rp} GeneralGror
Level 58
Report
"^^Your argument completely ignores the fact that non-European non-black nations can naturally develop."
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 18:50:08

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
@Muten Roshi Facts have no moral implications. You included the same absurd neurotypical argument "If Fact A is uncomfortable let's ignore it and pretend that it is false".
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 18:52:31

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
^^That's not the only thing I have to say.

My point is that if the "muh evil whitey" argument works Vietnam should be a 100% shithole. Since this is not true the argument has to be wrong.
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 19:24:08


OxTheAutist 
Level 58
Report
leave
Intersectionality is dead: 7/20/2017 19:27:49

(((Tabby Juggernaut)))
Level 53
Report
^Face me in a rational debate on the black subspecies if you like them that much.

I'm waiting for your PM. If you refuse to PM me your argument you will de facto concede that I'm correct.

You have 24 hours to PM me your argument.

Edited 7/20/2017 19:31:22
Posts 1 - 30 of 66   1  2  3  Next >>   

Contact | About WarLight | Play Risk Online | Multiplayer Strategy Game | Skill Game | Terms of Service