In article <trqtl5$3399o$
1...@dont-email.me>, Ken <
K...@invalid.com>
wrote:
> >> I find it interesting that many of those complaining about the removal
> >> of some books teaching their readers that they are doomed to failure due
> >> to racism, were actively endorsing the removal of all flags and statues
> >> that reminded them of the south and the civil war.
> >
> > Since the South made explicit statements that they were starting
> > the war in order to sustain slavery and propagate into Lousiana,
> > Oregon, and Mexican territories, is your argument then that
> > slavery is not racist? What do you think about how the South
> > kidnapped free blacks in Pennsylvania and sold them into slavery?
>
> You really DO have a reading comprehension problem. I suggest you read
> my comments again very slowly. I was not defending the Civil war nor
> slavery. I was equating the left's objection to names and statues to
> the objection to books. That is the topic of this thread.
You're whining about racism of your political enemies while
making excuses for CSA racism. You're a hypocrite. I count anyone
making excuses for racism, like you, as a racist.
> > Cite who is teaching them.
>
> Do you have a TV in your tent?? Turn on MSNBC, PBS or CNN. If no TV,
> get a newspaper and read up on CRT. If you are still unable to do
Yes, do read up on CRT. It's a study of how racism in the past
affected the country's history. Since you make excuses for
racism, you feel attacked. If you did not make excuses, but
simply acknowledged the sins of the long ago dead, you would not
feel attacked.
I acknowledge the Anglo-Saxons did mean things to Brythons,
Wealh, and then the Irish, which affected the history of England
and the US. Since my ancestors included english and irish, I'll
ignore any aspersions you cast on those low german tribes.
> either of those, turn on a radio and listen to people like Rev. Al
> Sharpton or Joe Biden.
I don't listen to either. If they bother you, you can choose to
also ignore them.
> Tulsa happened early in the 20th century, if I am not mistaken. Let's
> discuss New Orleans, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, and in the present
> day context. Billions of dollars, if not Trillions, have been spent in
> an effort to improve the lives of minorities. The results have been
> less than spectacular. Those who succeeded were most often examples of
Why then? Since you refuse to acknowledge racism past, like
Tulsa, you have no way to understand what causes unequal
outcomes. So you have no way to try to engineer effective
solutions. Instead you spew trite truisms such as
> persistence and effort. (Unless of course if their career path was crime.)
Which is bullshit if you ever botherred to look closely. It
mostly depends on luck. I haven't been to lose a fortune in real
estate like Don Fatso, because by chance I wasn't born into such
a wealthy family. People like Don Fatso are ashamed they got by
on the luck of the draw make up trite truism and idiots like you
ashamed your persistence and effort hasn't made you a
billionaire, accept the trite truism as your own excuse.
I am a paper millionaire because I had the luck to inherit a
downpayment for a house in a market that has appreciated that
much through no effort of mine own.
> >> You would accomplish more if you taught your children to get an
> >> education, a job, take care of their family, and stay away from crime.
> >> That would do more for them than pissing and moaning.
> >
> > Since the 14th amendment assumes all people are created equal how
> > does equal opportunity result in unequal outcomes?
> >
> It is "Equal Opportunity," not "Equal Outcome." Where the hell do you
Unequal outcome is provable. If all people are created equal and
have equal opportunity, why is the outcome unequal? Given a large
number of people, chance, or luck, has no effect. So by modus
tollens either people are no created equally or they do not have
equal opportunity. Which one are you claiming?
> go to school, or did you go to school?? Using your theory, there could
> never be an athlete with better performance because the outcome would be
> unfair.
Actually statisical method can detect unfair athletics.
Performances should cluster in a normal curve which includes a
few outliers above and below average. The normal curves two
different populations can be compared to compute the confidence
they are the same populations.
Yes, you are invoking this argument everytime you whine how
unfair it is to let trans kids in sports with girls.
And you're still an idiot.