Citing differences in culture as a possible source of racial disparity is not the same thing as saying they are dumber or lazier.
But I’m glad you showed up. You are the final member of the three dumbest posters on the dope. I mean you don’t provide as much quantity of stupid as gigo but you make up for it in quality. You provide some high grade stupid.
“Aha,” says the Joker, “You’re the final member of the ‘crazy sadistic villain brigade’, glad to see you show up with your high quality craziness and sadistic villainy!”
So now everyone that disagrees with you is a trump voter too? You really have to connect those dots a little bit better. I realized we are in dogpile mode but it really helps some of the idiots on your side if you can make better arguments. They sort of rely on the smarter ones to say intelligent things for them to dogpile onto.
Humps with Wolves is a dumbfuck indeed.
You and I both know that’s not what that says, so what’s the point in lying like this? Whose benefit is all this bullshit for?
Just popped into the thread because it was updating so damn frequently that it caught my attention. Ready roughly the last 150 or so comments. Look - I know it’s frustrating to have people disagree with you, often vehemently, about subjects you care deeply about. I know it’s frustrating for people to call you dishonest, or to badmouth you.
But reading solely the comments in the thread: you ARE asking for it. You are absolutely dismissive, and when you lash out against people, and are attacking them when you admit to not even being able to identify the people you’re angry with, as well as not being able to provide a single specific example . . . you are proving them right. I’m not calling you a bigot, or a racist, because I haven’t read those threads and I refuse to judge you solely on the comments of the others. But reading this? I feel 100% safe in judging you to be an ass.
I have no desire to screw over white kids. I am not sure what I said that would give you the impression that i want to do that. I am pointing out that they were increasing the white population at the expense of the asian population in the name of social justice.
At this point I don’t know if you are just obstinately trying to “make yourself right” or convincing yourself you don’t have a blind spot when it comes to anti-asian discrimination.
I suppose you’re right but given the history, it is hard for me to give a fuck about playing nice in the pit.
Sometimes you can’t play nice with idiots and racists.
But I did eventually get around to providing some examples.
…eventually you got around to demonstrating, once again, your miserable reading comprehension skills, your lack of understanding of nuance, your dishonesty, and that you’re as dumb as a rock.
This begs the question of whether or not you would recognize it.
Wow–you’re right, when you put it that way, it’s a dumb fuckin argument I directed at you. Who would even make such a dumb fuckin argument in the first place?
Actually yes, I do see where iiandyiiii wrote to that effect. See post #67 from the linked topic,
I’m relieved to learn you did not mean Asian kids are collateral damage in the traditional sense. But yes, having reviewed the topic, iiandyiiii’s posts indicate that he believes lessening the prospects of Asian kids getting into this particular school is acceptable ‘collateral damage’ in the pursuit of social justice (specifically increasing Black and Hispanic admissions).
The only thing you have to do now is explain how that is racist - I do not believe the mere consequence of an action or policy adversely affecting a minority group implies that the policy or its defenders are racist.
For example a teacher may decide to change seating arrangements. Assume that for the most part, Asian students are stereotypically short and Black students stereotypically tall. Whereas before students were seated by height, now they will be seated alphabetically. I do not think the change is racist simply because Asian students lose their front row seats.
~Max
Especially when any choice is going to adversely impact one minority group or another. DA tries to hide behind “race neutral” solutions like standardized test scores, but hates on other “race neutral” solutions like lottery systems, and has absolutely no self-awareness when it comes to this discrepancy. He’s so determined that his point’s going to be right that he ignores any contradictions. And when I make fun of him for it, he hilariously criticizes my argument, although it uses almost precisely the same words as his own argument.
I don’t know about you, but I’ve been incredibly amused by the entire exchange. And tickled pink that someone actually remembers me enough to tell all their friends about how dumb I am, while accusing everyone else of hiding behind minority family members and blatantly misattributing most posters’ contributions to this and other threads.
You don’t have to read those threads. He’s been plenty racist just in this one.
As already pointed out, it’s been explained to you over and over and you handwaved it away every time. “Oh, but this time I won’t pull the football away, Charlie Brown!”.
His own. As I said, everyone’s a hero in their own story, even if they have to rewrite reality to do so.
So you are going to entirely ignore in response to the fact that when i pointed out that the biggest group to benefit from the proposal would be whites then blacks and hispanics, and all at the expense of asians, he said:
Isn’t he saying that he realizes that asians have to suffer but he is OK with that but he would prefer one that didn’t help whites out so much? Go through that thread, he doesn’t show a lot of concern for the impact of any proposals on asians. Asians are all doing fine.
In response to Demon Tree saying “Helping one minority at the expense of another is an obviously bad solution!”
He responded:
Is there some other way to interpret this willingness to trade out a bunch of asians for black kids and even MORE white kids?
What am I doing that is even remotely comparable?
It seems that by the logic of this board, designing admissions to promote merit rather than race is racist and pushing out kids of one minority in favor of kids of three more politically powerful minorities is not.
What you’re consistently ignoring is that under the current situation, it’s Black students who suffer. As long as the number of slots is fixed–as long as it’s a zero-sum game–someone is suffering. If he’s racist for being “okay” with Asian students suffering, you’re exactly as racist for being “Okay” with Black students suffering.
Or maybe that’s a stupid way to analyze racism.
Do you believe voter ID laws are racist? If there is a predictable disparate impact, and you still go ahead, isn’t that at least an indicia of racism? If there was a similar predictable racially disparate impact that hurt hispanics, how much thought do you think some of the most critical people on this thread would put into it before crying racism? Doesn’t it bother you that
I’m not accusing iiandyiiii of gap-toothed hood wearing cross burning racism. That sort of racism is very rare these days. I am accusing him of having deep seated racial biases that allows him to dismiss the relatively large negative impacts of a policy on a politically weak minority to give perceived benefits to less qualified politically powerful racial groups.
And would that still be the case if the teacher only did this after white kids stopped sitting at the front of the class despite years of black parents asking for an alphabetical seating arrangement. And this would result in more white kids sitting at the front of the class?
Wait. You think that a merit based system race neutral system is comparable to a lottery based race neutral system? That’s one of the dumbest things I have heard you say.
There are huge logical differences between what I said and your recharacterization of what I said.