Topic: Court Strikes Down Michigan’s Ban on Affirmative Action
Voice of !WisdomHsuU started this discussion 15 years ago #8,559
http://www.care2.com/causes/court-strikes-down-michigans-ban-on-affirmative-action.html
...
As if it wasn't hard enough to get a job in the Detroit area...
...
As if it wasn't hard enough to get a job in the Detroit area...
protip !!pMmAiEwOm joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #149,972
lol
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 30 seconds later, 1 minute after the original post[^] [v] #149,974
It's good to see that the white minority in Michigan will finally get a fair shake.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 seconds later, 1 minute after the original post[^] [v] #149,975
Shut the fuck up.
Nexus !jNexusRe/. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 6 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,980
Of course people who are much less qualified for college complain because their school of choice will not accept them because of their lower test scores.
People who rely on affirmative action to get ahead in the world are parasites.
Whenever I watch college sports, I wonder if all the black players are there just because of affirmative action.
People who rely on affirmative action to get ahead in the world are parasites.
Whenever I watch college sports, I wonder if all the black players are there just because of affirmative action.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,982
@149,974 (Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ)
> white minority
> Michigan
You seem to have forgotten that Detroit != Michigan in the same way that /b/ != 4chan. Michigan has the highest population of Arab-Americans AND Finnish-Americans, so stop thinking of all the filthy roach-like black scum that have taken over like a cancerous tumor.
> white minority
> Michigan
You seem to have forgotten that Detroit != Michigan in the same way that /b/ != 4chan. Michigan has the highest population of Arab-Americans AND Finnish-Americans, so stop thinking of all the filthy roach-like black scum that have taken over like a cancerous tumor.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,983
@149,980 (Nexus !jNexusRe/.)
Blacks are generally better runners, so it makes sense. There are very few White or Oriental runners in the Olympics that have won the Gold, but many blacks have.
Blacks are generally better runners, so it makes sense. There are very few White or Oriental runners in the Olympics that have won the Gold, but many blacks have.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 36 seconds later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,984
cccuuunnttt !nIGga.SL0w joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 9 seconds later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,985
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 10 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,986
@149,984 (Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ)
You said Whites are a minority in Michigan, and that is complete and utter bullshit.
You said Whites are a minority in Michigan, and that is complete and utter bullshit.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,987
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 13 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,989
@previous (Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan#Demographics
78.9% is FAR from minority status.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan#Demographics
78.9% is FAR from minority status.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 17 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,990
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 20 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,991
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota#Demographics
Oh, how I long to be in Minnesota right now.
Oh, how I long to be in Minnesota right now.
Nexus !jNexusRe/. replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,992
@149,985 (cccuuunnttt !nIGga.SL0w)
What? Because im proud to be white? So what you are saying is its perfectly ok for minorities to self preserve their heritage and customs, but when someone who is white decides too it's "racist"?
What the fuck happened to "all men are created equal"? Why does someone who is a different color or gender get preferential treatment over someone who is white or male?
People should be judged on their qualifications, not on their social status, race or gender. All affirmative action does is give establishments a method of discrimination.
What? Because im proud to be white? So what you are saying is its perfectly ok for minorities to self preserve their heritage and customs, but when someone who is white decides too it's "racist"?
What the fuck happened to "all men are created equal"? Why does someone who is a different color or gender get preferential treatment over someone who is white or male?
People should be judged on their qualifications, not on their social status, race or gender. All affirmative action does is give establishments a method of discrimination.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,993
@previous (Nexus !jNexusRe/.)
> What the fuck happened to "all men are created equal"?
That idea is bullshit.
> What the fuck happened to "all men are created equal"?
That idea is bullshit.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 7 seconds later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,994
@149,991 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
Minnesota is one of the most oppressive, white hating states in the union. They tax you for being white. They even tax milk because it is white.
Minnesota is one of the most oppressive, white hating states in the union. They tax you for being white. They even tax milk because it is white.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 26 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,995
@previous (Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ)
Nothing is worse than Michigan, where White culture is being drowned out by trashy nigger verses and cRap music.
Nothing is worse than Michigan, where White culture is being drowned out by trashy nigger verses and cRap music.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,997
lol
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 33 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #149,998
@149,995 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
> where White culture is being drowned out by trashy nigger verses and cRap music.
An entire state ruins a culture because of...music? Black music, like Eminem and ICP? Also what exactly is white culture anyways? Where I live I grew up eating grits for breakfast, fried chicken for dinner (during lunch hours), and collard greens and cornbread for supper. That's very white to me.
> where White culture is being drowned out by trashy nigger verses and cRap music.
An entire state ruins a culture because of...music? Black music, like Eminem and ICP? Also what exactly is white culture anyways? Where I live I grew up eating grits for breakfast, fried chicken for dinner (during lunch hours), and collard greens and cornbread for supper. That's very white to me.
(Edited 21 seconds later.)
Nega !34Kas0OdzM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,000
> 2011> caring about race
I hope none of you guys do this.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 seconds later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,001
@149,998 (Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ)
White culture is a melting pot of many European customs and traditions.
White culture is a melting pot of many European customs and traditions.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 36 seconds later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,002
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 57 seconds later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,003
@150,001 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
So South Africans and people from once mighty Rhodesia are not white then?
So South Africans and people from once mighty Rhodesia are not white then?
Nega !34Kas0OdzM replied with this 15 years ago, 1 second later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,004
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 28 seconds later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,005
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 39 seconds later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,008
@150,003 (Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ)
South Africans are Dutch ancestry and Rhodesians are European ancestry.
South Africans are Dutch ancestry and Rhodesians are European ancestry.
Nega !34Kas0OdzM replied with this 15 years ago, 40 seconds later, 38 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,009
@149,997 (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)PREPARE YOUR POPCORN CHIEF, THIS IS GONNA BE A LOOOOOOOOOOOONG THREAD. :'D
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 39 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,011
@150,008 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
So then African culture is the same as white culture. We are all one. I can agree with you on this point.
So then African culture is the same as white culture. We are all one. I can agree with you on this point.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 41 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,015
@previous (Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ)
> We are all one
Nope. We have far more in common with Arabs than Native Africans, both genetically AND culturally.
> We are all one
Nope. We have far more in common with Arabs than Native Africans, both genetically AND culturally.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,018
@previous (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
But you earlier said that white culture is a melting pot of European cultures. South Africa and the once great nation of Rhodesia were, according to you from European cultures. You agreed, by your definition of white culture, that Africa is perfectly intertwined into white culture. White culture, by your own assertions, is the same as African culture.
But you earlier said that white culture is a melting pot of European cultures. South Africa and the once great nation of Rhodesia were, according to you from European cultures. You agreed, by your definition of white culture, that Africa is perfectly intertwined into white culture. White culture, by your own assertions, is the same as African culture.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,020
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,022
@previous (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
> South Africans are Dutch ancestry and Rhodesians are European ancestry.
That's not what my good friend Walter said.
> South Africans are Dutch ancestry and Rhodesians are European ancestry.
That's not what my good friend Walter said.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 55 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #150,028
lol
hamfist !!mtq555+/1 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #150,035
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 6 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,245
"Affirmative Action" is just a euphemism for racism. It is wrong for government departments or government funded institutions to be racist. In that sense the bill is justifiable.
It, is however, perfectly justifiable for private companies to be racist (even if morally wrong). The bill is wrong in that sense.
These are two separate areas, conflated by statists who wish to expand government power and influence at the expense of individual liberty.
It, is however, perfectly justifiable for private companies to be racist (even if morally wrong). The bill is wrong in that sense.
These are two separate areas, conflated by statists who wish to expand government power and influence at the expense of individual liberty.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 21 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,256
One thing you may want to note is that the proposed amendment does not specifically ban affirmative action and mentions nothing about the job market. It simply states that colleges would no longer be allowed to consider race or gender. This makes it impossible for colleges to discriminate either way, and must base admittance purely on academics and other credentials.
People in favor of affirmative action claim that minorities do deserve a leg up, because problems within our society put minorities at a disadvantage that causes lower test scores, lower academic performance and things like that, and those people are right. If a black child grows up in a poor community, doesn't have the same advantages of the rich kids and doesn't reach his full potential, that's not his fault, and he deserves a shot. However, I think society needs to focus more on working from the bottom up and do things like improve the education system in those poor communities instead of waiting until someone is 18 to give them a leg up. Also, what about the white kids who grow up in the poor communities and go to the same schools? They have some of the same disadvantages, but they don't get a leg up because they're white, while the black kid whose dad is a doctor and lives in the gated neighborhood might have affirmative action work in his favor. I guess what I'm saying here is that in most ways I am for affirmative action, but it should be based more on need and circumstances than race alone, and we should focus on fixing the root of the problem.
People in favor of affirmative action claim that minorities do deserve a leg up, because problems within our society put minorities at a disadvantage that causes lower test scores, lower academic performance and things like that, and those people are right. If a black child grows up in a poor community, doesn't have the same advantages of the rich kids and doesn't reach his full potential, that's not his fault, and he deserves a shot. However, I think society needs to focus more on working from the bottom up and do things like improve the education system in those poor communities instead of waiting until someone is 18 to give them a leg up. Also, what about the white kids who grow up in the poor communities and go to the same schools? They have some of the same disadvantages, but they don't get a leg up because they're white, while the black kid whose dad is a doctor and lives in the gated neighborhood might have affirmative action work in his favor. I guess what I'm saying here is that in most ways I am for affirmative action, but it should be based more on need and circumstances than race alone, and we should focus on fixing the root of the problem.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,257
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
How can you say that? Universities are not made for giving people a fair go. They are made to educate the best and brightest.
How can you say that? Universities are not made for giving people a fair go. They are made to educate the best and brightest.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,260
'White culture', eh?Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 11 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,271
@150,257 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
I think that's an elitist way of thinking. The best and brightest are going to do best in college and contribute the most to society (hopefully) but that doesn't mean that colleges are built just for them. College is not just an academic circle jerk. Even the worst college student is going to be better of in life, and contribute more to society (probably) than if they hadn't gone to college. Which brings me to my next point, which is that education benefits society as a whole and not just the individual receiving the education. Racists always spout black crime statistics as evidence of genetic inferiority, without considering how culture affects those things. Think about how much less black crime there would be if black people were given more opportunities to go to college. That can apply to everyone, not just blacks. Better education leads to a better economy and lower crime rates.
Another thing to consider is that most of black students getting admitted are not dumbasses who get admitted just because they are black. Most of them are bright students who worked just as hard as, if not harder than, the others who get accepted, but have slightly lower grades or test scores because of their circumstances and that's what affirmative action is meant to fix. As I pointed out above, there are black students who don't have the same hardships as other black students and there are white students who grow up in the same rough neighborhoods as the black kids affirmative action is meant to help, and that is where it can become even more controversial.
I think that's an elitist way of thinking. The best and brightest are going to do best in college and contribute the most to society (hopefully) but that doesn't mean that colleges are built just for them. College is not just an academic circle jerk. Even the worst college student is going to be better of in life, and contribute more to society (probably) than if they hadn't gone to college. Which brings me to my next point, which is that education benefits society as a whole and not just the individual receiving the education. Racists always spout black crime statistics as evidence of genetic inferiority, without considering how culture affects those things. Think about how much less black crime there would be if black people were given more opportunities to go to college. That can apply to everyone, not just blacks. Better education leads to a better economy and lower crime rates.
Another thing to consider is that most of black students getting admitted are not dumbasses who get admitted just because they are black. Most of them are bright students who worked just as hard as, if not harder than, the others who get accepted, but have slightly lower grades or test scores because of their circumstances and that's what affirmative action is meant to fix. As I pointed out above, there are black students who don't have the same hardships as other black students and there are white students who grow up in the same rough neighborhoods as the black kids affirmative action is meant to help, and that is where it can become even more controversial.
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,280
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
No, education benefits brighter students more that stupid students. Affirmative action lowers societies benefit gained from education.
You are such a joke. People don't get lower grades or test scores because of "circumstances". They get lower grades by not studying as much or by being less naturally intelligent.
No, education benefits brighter students more that stupid students. Affirmative action lowers societies benefit gained from education.
You are such a joke. People don't get lower grades or test scores because of "circumstances". They get lower grades by not studying as much or by being less naturally intelligent.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,283
lol
!penisGseqs joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 47 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,286
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 28 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,288
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,293
@150,280 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
> People don't get lower grades or test scores because of "circumstances". They get lower grades by not studying as much or by being less naturally intelligent.
That's not always the case.
> No, education benefits brighter students more that stupid students. Affirmative action lowers societies benefit gained from education.
First of all [citation needed]. Second of all, lower grades/test scores don't always mean they're stupid. Third, college might benefit the brighter students more, but that doesn't mean that the less scholarly students won't also benefit and improve society.
> People don't get lower grades or test scores because of "circumstances". They get lower grades by not studying as much or by being less naturally intelligent.
That's not always the case.
> No, education benefits brighter students more that stupid students. Affirmative action lowers societies benefit gained from education.
First of all [citation needed]. Second of all, lower grades/test scores don't always mean they're stupid. Third, college might benefit the brighter students more, but that doesn't mean that the less scholarly students won't also benefit and improve society.
(Edited 47 seconds later.)
cccuuunnttt !nIGga.SL0w replied with this 15 years ago, 12 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,308
@150,256 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Oddly enough I agree.
There's a lot of good to be had from educational affirmative action alone (far from failing, the beneficiaries of such policies tend to thrive in college and bring a lot of good to their cohorts as well). But it's a bit of a hail mary pass that comes too late, at a point in most students' lives where only a few can be "saved." I have a bit of trouble with it too from a philosophical POV, none of that mountainman libertarian bullshit of course, just the idea of a white elite bestowing privileges on the few they consider "good blacks" doesn't sit quite right on some level.
As you point out, I also think an intelligent affirmative action policy must always take into account underprivileged status as a demographic of interest, though probably not to the level of race or ethnic group. (Outcomes are consistently better for underprivileged+white vs. underprivileged+minority.)
Oddly enough I agree.
There's a lot of good to be had from educational affirmative action alone (far from failing, the beneficiaries of such policies tend to thrive in college and bring a lot of good to their cohorts as well). But it's a bit of a hail mary pass that comes too late, at a point in most students' lives where only a few can be "saved." I have a bit of trouble with it too from a philosophical POV, none of that mountainman libertarian bullshit of course, just the idea of a white elite bestowing privileges on the few they consider "good blacks" doesn't sit quite right on some level.
As you point out, I also think an intelligent affirmative action policy must always take into account underprivileged status as a demographic of interest, though probably not to the level of race or ethnic group. (Outcomes are consistently better for underprivileged+white vs. underprivileged+minority.)
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,314
@150,293 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Yes, it is, troll.
herp derp limited number of places letting low grades in means excluding high grades equals a lower level of graduate bad for everyone
grades are the official standard set by unis and used by them
> less "scholarly" students
you are truly retarded.
Yes, it is, troll.
herp derp limited number of places letting low grades in means excluding high grades equals a lower level of graduate bad for everyone
grades are the official standard set by unis and used by them
> less "scholarly" students
you are truly retarded.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos double-posted this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,316
@150,308 (cccuuunnttt !nIGga.SL0w)
> libertarian bullshit
compelling argument for statism
the only step left is acceptance of my theories. You have already ignored them, ridiculed them and resisted them.
> libertarian bullshit
compelling argument for statism
the only step left is acceptance of my theories. You have already ignored them, ridiculed them and resisted them.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 21 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,317
@150,314 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
> get called a "joke", a "troll" and "retarded" by mountainman, of all people
Oh, OK.
> get called a "joke", a "troll" and "retarded" by mountainman, of all people
Oh, OK.
(Edited 20 seconds later.)
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,319
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,323
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,324
@150,319 (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)
Of course you do, because it takes away objective standards and replaces it with subjective decisions by the state.
Of course you do, because it takes away objective standards and replaces it with subjective decisions by the state.
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 39 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,325
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,327
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,328
@previous (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
How about you STFU with your relentless libertarian bullshit nonsense?
How about you STFU with your relentless libertarian bullshit nonsense?
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,329
@previous (K)
How about you stop persecuting people for their political beliefs? Protip is allowed to espouse communism, but I am forbidden to mention libertarianism?
How about you stop persecuting people for their political beliefs? Protip is allowed to espouse communism, but I am forbidden to mention libertarianism?
(Edited 9 seconds later.)
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos double-posted this 15 years ago, 47 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,330
@150,328 (K)
> libertarian bullshit nonsense
Nice. You don't even try to explain or defend your statements.
> libertarian bullshit nonsense
Nice. You don't even try to explain or defend your statements.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,336
@150,329 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
They're "prosecuting" you for your silly, elitist arguments and trolling, not your political beliefs. You can be a libertarian and not be a dipshit, but at the rate you're going I can see why they find that hard to believe.
They're "prosecuting" you for your silly, elitist arguments and trolling, not your political beliefs. You can be a libertarian and not be a dipshit, but at the rate you're going I can see why they find that hard to believe.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,342
@150,330 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
> completely missing the keyword 'relentless'.
'bullshit nonsense' in this context means the volume at which you spew your verbal diarrhea. You always talk about Ron Paul and libertarianism but you're not even American.
> completely missing the keyword 'relentless'.
'bullshit nonsense' in this context means the volume at which you spew your verbal diarrhea. You always talk about Ron Paul and libertarianism but you're not even American.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 16 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,343
@150,336 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
I see you've abandoned your faulty arguments and have given up defense of them. Admirable.
My arguments are silly? They should be easy to refute, then. Banning would be entirely unnecessary.
Elitist? I'm arguing for individual liberty, you are arguing for concetrated authority in people or institutions. YOU are the elitist.
I see you've abandoned your faulty arguments and have given up defense of them. Admirable.
My arguments are silly? They should be easy to refute, then. Banning would be entirely unnecessary.
Elitist? I'm arguing for individual liberty, you are arguing for concetrated authority in people or institutions. YOU are the elitist.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,345
@previous (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
There's a difference between giving up and not feeding the troll.
There's a difference between giving up and not feeding the troll.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 2 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,346
@150,342 (K)
> relentless
Are you saying I should be more hypocritical? Libertarianism is a political philosophy, not just a policy. So when various political issue topics come up, instead of giving irrational, emotional, contradictory answers like everyone, I have an overarching philosophy to draw from, and you attack me for that?
Ron Paul is arguably the premier advocate of libertarianism globally.
> relentless
Are you saying I should be more hypocritical? Libertarianism is a political philosophy, not just a policy. So when various political issue topics come up, instead of giving irrational, emotional, contradictory answers like everyone, I have an overarching philosophy to draw from, and you attack me for that?
Ron Paul is arguably the premier advocate of libertarianism globally.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos double-posted this 15 years ago, 43 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,347
@150,345 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
There is a difference between answering objections to your theory and not feeding the troll.
There is a difference between answering objections to your theory and not feeding the troll.
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,349
@150,346 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
> missing the point entirely.
Way to completely avoid everything I just said.
> missing the point entirely.
Way to completely avoid everything I just said.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,350
@150,329 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
I'm not espousing communism. I've been explaining how it went very wrong, but trying to explain what it had hoped to do.
I'm not espousing communism. I've been explaining how it went very wrong, but trying to explain what it had hoped to do.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,357
@previous (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)
I am deliberately conflating communism with socialism to annoy you. But please, tell me; how (to you) do the two differ?
I am deliberately conflating communism with socialism to annoy you. But please, tell me; how (to you) do the two differ?
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos double-posted this 15 years ago, 38 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,359
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 15 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,366
@150,357 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
Communism does not, generally, provide a market in which the output of labor is freely convertible to other goods. Socialism is still a form of capitalism, but with different (inherently centralized) priorities, in which the aforementioned market does exist in some capacity.
That's one of many differences, but possibly the most striking and simple to explain.
Communism does not, generally, provide a market in which the output of labor is freely convertible to other goods. Socialism is still a form of capitalism, but with different (inherently centralized) priorities, in which the aforementioned market does exist in some capacity.
That's one of many differences, but possibly the most striking and simple to explain.
!JuMPb0dbaE joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 31 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,373
@149,992 (Nexus !jNexusRe/.)
It's difficult to explain to someone who would say something like that. You aren't just confused on some points. Your entire wiring is wrong. You are defensive where you need not be.
Don't know what to tell you.
It's difficult to explain to someone who would say something like that. You aren't just confused on some points. Your entire wiring is wrong. You are defensive where you need not be.
Don't know what to tell you.
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,375
Voice of !WisdomHsuU (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 42 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,387
This monkey subhuman fucking nigger walked by me today, and said something in his unintelligible nigger-babble. I fucking lost it and called him what he was: a worthless nigger. Oh, man, I told that fucker HARD. I hate niggers so Goddamn much.
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,390
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #150,391
@150,366 (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)
> freely
really? or do you mean managed, limited to certain activities, and subject to government regulation and oversight?
> freely
really? or do you mean managed, limited to certain activities, and subject to government regulation and oversight?