Topic: When did liberals decide truth/fact/reason/debate were all conservative ideas?
Anonymous A started this discussion 3 years ago #108,612
It seems like the most recent response to any sort of debate in the media or on Twitter is to shout "that's a bad faith argument" and refuse any sort of justification for whatever batshit idea they have that week.
Any mention of truth is immediately associated with the right, and treated as some sort of dogwhistle for hating marginalized groups.
Logic? Facts? Uh-oh! Calm down Shapiro. My professor told me those are just semantic symbols for the alt-right!
Any mention of truth is immediately associated with the right, and treated as some sort of dogwhistle for hating marginalized groups.
Logic? Facts? Uh-oh! Calm down Shapiro. My professor told me those are just semantic symbols for the alt-right!
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 7 minutes later[^] [v] #1,216,141
@OP
> It seems like the most recent response to any sort of debate in the media or on Twitter is to shout "that's a bad faith argument" and refuse any sort of justification for whatever batshit idea they have that week.
>
> Any mention of truth is immediately associated with the right, and treated as some sort of dogwhistle for hating marginalized groups.
>
> Logic? Facts? Uh-oh! Calm down Shapiro. My professor told me those are just semantic symbols for the alt-right!
Nice bad faith argument.
> It seems like the most recent response to any sort of debate in the media or on Twitter is to shout "that's a bad faith argument" and refuse any sort of justification for whatever batshit idea they have that week.
>
> Any mention of truth is immediately associated with the right, and treated as some sort of dogwhistle for hating marginalized groups.
>
> Logic? Facts? Uh-oh! Calm down Shapiro. My professor told me those are just semantic symbols for the alt-right!
Nice bad faith argument.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,147
Yesterday at 11:46 a.m. You just missed it. Sorry bud.
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 3 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,166
Google "Smithsonian whiteness infographic". That is where I'm calling it.
chester joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,171
stupid smug liberalsAnonymous F joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,172
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 18 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,282
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 8 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,367
@previous (G)
Punctuality, hard work, individualism, self-reliance and one or two others are/were (they later altered the infographic after everyone laughed at how retarded it was) "white" things apparently.
The graphic was "intended to serve as a guideline for discussing race" and I think it's actually pretty good at explaining why the immigration flow is all to predominantly white countries, not from them.
Punctuality, hard work, individualism, self-reliance and one or two others are/were (they later altered the infographic after everyone laughed at how retarded it was) "white" things apparently.
The graphic was "intended to serve as a guideline for discussing race" and I think it's actually pretty good at explaining why the immigration flow is all to predominantly white countries, not from them.
Meta !Sober//iZs double-posted this 3 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,370
Far from mocking it, I want a big ass like 36x48" poster of this posted up in every office, school, workplace, etc, so people can understand what whiteness actually means in real life.It's not perfect - there are one or two things I'd change (example - Barbie as the ideal, "ideal" size/shape of women has varied throughout white/European history so this is not necessarily permanent or inherent to whiteness). But I do ~98% agree with it as it stands and again, my disagreements with it are very minor really.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,371
@1,216,367 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
> Punctuality, hard work, individualism, self-reliance and one or two others are/were (they later altered the infographic after everyone laughed at how retarded it was) "white" things apparently.
>
> The graphic was "intended to serve as a guideline for discussing race" and I think it's actually pretty good at explaining why the immigration flow is all to predominantly white countries, not from them.
Interestingly, it may have less to do with whiteness and more to do with Anglo-ism.
USA, Canada, NZ, and AUS are all top locations for immigrants. Another rapidly growing country with a large immigrant population is Singapore which was a UK foreign territory.
Japan and S. Korea while economically strong are xenophobic. So I think it’s less to do with “whiteness” being a predictor of economic strength and more to do with something else.
Most of western and eastern Europe is native born. It’s the UK and it’s former colonies that seem to find that more people make them stronger.
> Punctuality, hard work, individualism, self-reliance and one or two others are/were (they later altered the infographic after everyone laughed at how retarded it was) "white" things apparently.
>
> The graphic was "intended to serve as a guideline for discussing race" and I think it's actually pretty good at explaining why the immigration flow is all to predominantly white countries, not from them.
Interestingly, it may have less to do with whiteness and more to do with Anglo-ism.
USA, Canada, NZ, and AUS are all top locations for immigrants. Another rapidly growing country with a large immigrant population is Singapore which was a UK foreign territory.
Japan and S. Korea while economically strong are xenophobic. So I think it’s less to do with “whiteness” being a predictor of economic strength and more to do with something else.
Most of western and eastern Europe is native born. It’s the UK and it’s former colonies that seem to find that more people make them stronger.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,372
@previous (H)
> Interestingly, it may have less to do with whiteness and more to do with Anglo-ism.
Are you one of those people that calls Italians white?
> Interestingly, it may have less to do with whiteness and more to do with Anglo-ism.
Are you one of those people that calls Italians white?
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,374
@1,216,371 (H)
Dishwashers work harder than anyone else, long hours, show up on time and stay late, yet they never get rich. Why is that?
Dishwashers work harder than anyone else, long hours, show up on time and stay late, yet they never get rich. Why is that?
Anonymous H replied with this 3 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,383
@1,216,372 (G)
Italian Americans are so mixed yes they are pretty much white in skin color and culture now. A Southern Italian is more Mediterranean than European.
@previous (I)
Because they wash dishes for a living. What’s your point? You can be a hard worker and not earn much because you are replaceable and your labor does not require any skill.
Italian Americans are so mixed yes they are pretty much white in skin color and culture now. A Southern Italian is more Mediterranean than European.
@previous (I)
Because they wash dishes for a living. What’s your point? You can be a hard worker and not earn much because you are replaceable and your labor does not require any skill.
dw !p9hU6ckyqw joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 day later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,532
Those are totally ideas close to Trump's heart.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,216,552
@previous (dw !p9hU6ckyqw)
The fact that they obviously aren't makes this so ironic.
Why shy away from a debate where the facts and data is on your side?
The fact that they obviously aren't makes this so ironic.
Why shy away from a debate where the facts and data is on your side?