Your “white privilege” won’t matter to this psychopathic cop. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n1pJe_Tcdeg
Before I get into how your more recent statement was bad logic, do you at least realize that the first statement you made was not particularly logical?
If you take my prior example and have all mainstream kids cost $100 and all special ed kids cost $200 (in both cases regardless of race), then as long as you have more black kids in special ed, the average cost for blac k kids will be higher. In fact you could spend less per mainstream black child and less per special ed black chid and as long as there were sufficiently more black special ed kids than white special ed kids (with a sufficient difference in cost), the average cost per black kid could STILL be higher. The reverse is true as well.
Mainstream kids cost $100.
Special ed kids cost $200.
10 white kids 8 mainstream and 2 special ed. Total cost $1200 (800+400) or $120/kid
10 black kids 5 mainstream and 5 special ed. Total cost $1500 (500+1000) or $150/kid
white mainstream kids cost $100 White special ed kids cost $200
black mainstream kids cost $90 black special ed kids cost $180
10 white kids 8 mainstream and 2 special ed. Total cost $1200 (800+400) or $120/kid
10 black kids 5 mainstream and 5 special ed. Total cost $1350 (450+900) or $135/kid
This is not hard math. It only requires the ability to turn words into math problems. Something that kids learn to do in about 5th grade.
Like I said, you are really bad at this. I suspect you are really a millennial barista that ironically calls himself an economist.
Meh. I’m going with law of averages.
So white racism is OK because cops don’t shoot white people?
Does that make anti-Asian and anti-Semitic racism OK as well?
Does being Asian give me the moral authority to say that anti-Asian racism is OK?
Because it appears to me that you are saying that anti-white racism is OK because someone else has it worse and that as a white person you can give everyone a pass on anti-white racism.
Try not being a tool.
Its taking longer than we thought.
Yes, this is actually what I am saying. I have more than enough advantages being white, so if someone wants to make racist comments or whatever towards white people, go for it. My advantages don’t go away, so I’m cool with it.
After correcting for income, blacks are no more likely to be shot than whites.
You will probably just ignore this study like some people ignore global warming.
You are a victim of the crit race theorists agenda.
I believe he’s saying not that it’s okay so much as it’s quite minor, as we white folks – unlike black folks – have the good fortune to be able to laugh off most instances of prejudice or racism against whites. Does that make it okay to hate white people? Nope. But someone hating me because of the color of my skin is very low on the list of things I have to worry about.
Unrelated, I believe you’re right about the math (funnily enough, although I’m not an economist, I passed all my comps and wrote half a dissertation on the path to becoming one at one point). That doesn’t make you or (shudder) SlackerInc right about anything else, mind you.
I’m not ignoring the study. I’ll use my personal experience to judge how I feel around cops.
I don’t even know what “crit race theorists agenda” means.
But if being a “victim” of whatever that is means I don’t have to worry about what others say about “white people” then sure. Makes my life easier than it already is by virtue of being white.
Exactly. Insulting white people is not a good thing, but in a historically and persistently racist society it is nowhere near as objectionable as racist insults directed at non-white people.
And of course, there’s the strategically ignored fact that Jeong, the NYT tech writer that this thread is supposedly about, was sarcastically mimicking racist insults in her #cancelwhitepeople type of tweets, not actually intending insults against white people to be taken seriously.
An interesting article about this campaign of strategic ignoring/targeting of acts taken out of context:
3/10, please try harder.
I don’t know what “liberal” has to do with it, but otherwise I cosign all of this. I too thought EE was very young! There was much tittering over this, because how could I miss the very obvious join date anyone could see right by his name…except, whoops, that actually does not appear on mobile, which is exclusively how I read the SDMB.
I would suspect him of just trying to wind us up, except that his clear embarrassment over the crime statistics thing suggests otherwise. He is just, as you say, someone who struggles with math and logic but thinks he is aces, and fails to learn his lesson in any enduring way.
BTW, I don’t think you have been following our squabbles long enough to know this directly, but although it won’t surprise you, I want to assure you that:
—It was Kimstu and EE who were wrong in making that analogy with cows. Actually, I did just link to that the other day in this thread: it was their specious attempt to not count special education dollars when tallying up the total spending on black students.
—I did not need someone else to point out that EE was wrong! LOL at that one. He makes it quite apparent all by himself.
Cosigned again, except I’ll point out for anyone who might miss it that by “strength of numbers” you mean numbers of posters willing to mob up—not strength in numeracy, which is greatly lacking in that camp. But yeah, this is a constant irritant: their glee that they think they can all shout together loud enough that they don’t have to actually have the facts or logic on their side.
In fairness, though, I should point out that your Dept. of Education cite is more than 20 years old. That is definitely interesting historical context, but can’t be said to describe the situation today.
A shudder, you say! Ouch, that’s harsh. But at least you’re honest about the math and not trying to engage in this game of “if enough of us insist 2+2=5, we can just gaslight everyone into believing it”. Props for that.
This is a textbook example of the fallacy of relative privation: Not as bad as - RationalWiki
It is this claim that I cannot take seriously.
The alt-right is already very good at recruiting young middle class white dudes who are figuring out their ideology and are totally gettable for the left if the left didn’t go out of its way to alienate them. And one of the prime weapons in their rhetorical arsenal is to point out double standards, where progressive people or institutions wave off or forgive behavior from those in their “camp” due essentially to partisan loyalty and circling the wagons (yes, the right does it too, but we need to be—and appear—better than that). So letting someone who joked about pedophilia come back and work at Disney—Disney!—because he’s liberal and those who outed him are right wing? That’s disastrous PR, completely undercuts our credibility.
So…let me get this straight. It is your contention that people who want to #MAGA, “great” meaning like they think it was pre-Brown, want to increase funding for black students over what it is now? Srsly?
And if you don’t think pre- (and anti-) NCLB progressives in education, particularly those who worked/work directly with black inner city students, wished/wish to protect those kids from being made to look stupid by standardized tests, you’re just out of touch. This is why the “Waiting for Superman” people hate teachers’ unions! Didn’t you read my cites from Mother Jones, or the piece on the Newark schools? The people on the ground working with these kids, by and large, don’t like these testing regimes. The “Superman” crowd will say that’s because they are covering their own incompetent asses, and I would strenously disagree; but we are talking about what they would advocate for.
I would suggest reading these (they are pretty short):
http://parentsacrossamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Test-Stress-facts-2-1-16rev.pdf
I cosign the sentiments in each.
You apparently didn’t read your own cite carefully enough:
I did not say that insulting white people is okay or should be ignored, just that it is less of a concern in a traditionally white-dominated racist society than insulting non-white people. In this case, it is accurate to say “A is not as bad as B”, and it’s not fallacious in any way to point that out.
Why not? The linked article and its cited sources document quite clearly how her tweets arose in the context of online bigots vilifying her as a “dog eating gook”, etc. What is there about that documentation that you “cannot take seriously”?
That’s what I’ve been trying to help you do, but tbh you are not very good at it.
No it is not, as I made very clear in my previous posts. My contention is that pre-Civil-Rights attitudes that black students are innately incapable of handling the same work as white students are inconsistent with pre-NCLB progressive education advocacy attitudes that black students should be given more resources, and that your quoted post comes across as inconsistently arguing for both at the same time. But since it is not unusual for your posts to be somewhat inconsistent and self-contradictory, I went with the interpretation that corresponded with what seemed to be the most salient of your two claims.
Piffle.
Like if that Last “Unite the Right” rally did not show their overall commitment or support:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/jason-kessler-alt-implosion-charlottesville-210655445.html
Of Course, they can point at the Alt-right fascists going underground and increase in numbers that way, under the radar. So they are not completely defeated, but the reality is that eventually they will have to show up, pretend that they are mainstream, but I foresee more disappointments for the ones being suckered.
Oh, please—GMAFB. Whatever picayune technical grounds for disqualification you may find with your microscope, you clearly were well within the scope of the intent of this fallacy, which comes down to “this is not nearly as bad as that other thing, so quit your bitching”.
I haven’t denied that context. There’s apparently some premise or deductive step here you’re not stating outright, which I don’t agree with. Yes, that was the context, and it caused her to lash out in anger at all white men instead of just the ones who were tormenting her. This is psychologically understandable but ultimately no more justifiable than when a white guy like Bernie Goetz starts hating all black people because some black people violently victimized him. And nothing about it suggests that it was a satire, certainly not in every case. She said it was after the fact, to cover her ass, so we should take that at face value? I bet you’re not going to buy that next time a right wing asshat makes a similar claim. :rolleyes:
Interesting BTW that you didn’t quote or comment on anything I wrote and linked to after “Srsly”. :dubious:
:dubious: Your attempt to stretch the use of “fallacy” to cover my reasonable and accurate observation, if consistently applied (for those of us who consider consistency important), would make it pretty much impossible to draw any comparisons between things of which one is not nearly as bad as the other.
I see no reason why anyone else should buy the assumptions of your personal speculations here about Jeong’s specific state of mind, where you jump from “sarcastically mimicking” to “caused to lash out in anger”. What we do actually know is that there’s no evidence that Jeong ever sincerely advocated discrimination of any kind against white people, and that she’s apologized for the offensiveness of using such language even as a rhetorical device.
Well, if a right-winger (or anybody else) can make a persuasive argument that they were using, say, racist slogans sarcastically against people who are promoting bigotry to make those people uncomfortable, I definitely think they are entitled to some benefit of the doubt there. The issue seldom arises, though, because what the right-wing asshats usually get caught doing is spouting racist etc. rhetoric to enthusiastically agreeing supporters who are just tickled pink about it.
There is also, no matter how much you try to deny it, an intrinsic difference in the rhetorical impact of anti-white rhetoric and anti-nonwhite rhetoric in a traditionally white-supremacist society. Exhortations along the lines of “destroy white people” come across as ludicrously hyperbolic and insane. White people are still running most of everything in this country; we’re not going to get destroyed. Exhortations along the lines of “destroy black people”, on the other hand, have historically been the harbinger of innumerable actual black people actually being destroyed. You just cannot make the two forms of invective weigh the same, culturally or psychologically.
Yeah, it was clearly a half-assed attempt to try to make your original argument look more consistent than it actually was. It didn’t work. Pre-NCLB progressive education advocates simply were not trying to promote the view that black students don’t have the innate ability to do as well as white students on the same tests, which is the core position that you seem to be most concerned with promoting. And throwing in a bunch of tangential rhetoric about how those progressive education advocates didn’t want black students to be unfairly (further) disadvantaged in various ways does not mean that they agreed with you on that core position.
Yeah, that was kinda my entire point. You seem to be repeating back what I said while claiming you were demonstrating an error.
I hope all that shit you were spewing about the huge error I made wasn’t just another example of you, once again, not understanding the post you were responding to?
This will be a sadly ironic statement if it turns out that this was all about you, once again, not understanding the post you were responding to.
“Lots of twittering” is basically how I would describe the SlackerInc household.
You know, I call you stupid all the time. I don’t know if I’ve managed to make it an entire post without calling you stupid, or an idiot, or a moron, or the equivalent.
But I also thought that you weren’t admitting error in the “cow thing” because of your emotional fragility.
Now it turns out that you still might not realize that you were wrong about the “cow thing”. Which means, despite the number of times I’ve called you a fucking moron, I’ve been overestimating your intelligence.
Huh.