Jump to content

Stuff I found on the internet


Argus

Recommended Posts

A media which increasingly focused on racism helped bring about an increasing sense of racism being everywhere in the United States.

In 2011, the terms racist/racists/racism accounted for 0.0027% and 0.0029% of all words in The New York Times and The Washington Post, respectively. What we see over the past decade is a continual dramatic increase in usages of “racism” and its variations. Moreover, the graph shows that this increase occurred a half decade before the arrival of Donald Trump. By 2019, they would constitute 0.02% and just under 0.03% of all words published in the Times and Post—an increase of over 700% and just under 1,000%, respectively, from 2011. While increases in usage frequency are also observed for the more center-right Wall Street Journal, they are comparatively more gradual and modest. Notably, the shifts in the Times and Post trends precede those of the Journal by about a year, suggesting that the center-right Journal appears to react to the rhetorical and ideological trends on race advanced by the two biggest left-leaning newspapers. Over the period in question, starting in the mid ’90s, the Times and Post had always featured these terms more frequently than the Journal but, until recently, the difference was minor. Today, the gap is enormous, which suggests that the explosion in the usage of racialized terminology and ideological constructs isn’t simply a neutral reflection of an increase in racial incidents.

In 2016, The New York Times published a news article detailing efforts on college campuses to train new students on how to avoid and deal with microaggressions—one of the novel categories of racism popularized over the past decade that has contributed to the perception of pervasive racial injustice. As an example of a microaggression, the article cites the following comment: “Everyone can succeed in this society if they work hard enough.” This is supposedly racist because it emphasizes individual agency and implies “that race plays a minor role in life’s outcomes.” In the absence of legal discrimination, in the post-affirmative-action era, and in light of the immense absolute improvements in the quality of life of the average Black person over the past half century, concepts like “microaggression” and “implicit bias” have been critical in cultivating the perception, amplified by the media, that America still practices a form of insidious racial apartheid. This occurs by a process of concept creep—a stretching of the terminological and normative boundaries of what constitutes racism and racist behavior. In other words: The racialization of things that weren’t previously viewed or understood through the lens of race. The upshot is that the more aspects of social life the media racializes, the more “racism” there is for the media to report on.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/media-great-racial-awakening

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How racial politics and a media fixated by identity politics makes racism worse.

America may have its first mixed-race Vice President, its first African-American Secretary of Defense and its first Latino and immigrant as Secretary of Homeland Security, but the country has never been so racist. That, at least, is one of the disturbing conclusions being drawn from a new Gallup poll, which found that the share of Americans reporting that race relations are bad or “somewhat” bad has reached 57% — the highest it’s been in two decades.

But are its findings really evidence of widespread racism in the US? Hardly. In fact, you need only look at the behaviour of Americans — at the number of interracial marriages or police shootings of minorities, for example — to see that racism has almost never been so absent.

So why is there such a misunderstanding between the American public and the reality of US race relations? The answer, I suspect, reflects a media-driven moral panic — one that is rooted in the racialisation of identity-obsessed progressive politics.

Indeed, the “rise” of racism in America since 2014 is a social construct that reflects perception rather than daily life. This is largely a result of what Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman described in 1973 as the “availability heuristic” — the idea that vivid images rather than statistical reality tends to shape people’s perceptions. For instance, people routinely overestimate vivid phenomena, from crime to the share of Muslims in their country, because these stories make the news. Crime in America may have fallen every year before 2019 — but when asked about it by Gallup, most people in all but two years said crime had risen over the past year.

 

https://unherd.com/2021/07/what-liberals-get-wrong-about-race/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How the "bobos" broke America is an interesting piece in the Atlantic regarding the rise of America's new technocrat class, its influence, it's rabid intolerance, and how that intolerance has caused backlash from rural and blue collar workers.

It used to be straightforward: You had the rich, who joined country clubs and voted Republican; the working class, who toiled in the factories and voted Democratic; and, in between, the mass suburban middle class. We had a clear idea of what class conflict, when it came, would look like—members of the working classes would align with progressive intellectuals to take on the capitalist elite.

But somehow when the class conflict came, in 2015 and 2016, it didn’t look anything like that. Suddenly, conservative parties across the West—the former champions of the landed aristocracy—portrayed themselves as the warriors for the working class. And left-wing parties—once vehicles for proletarian revolt—were attacked as captives of the super-educated urban elite. These days, your education level and political values are as important in defining your class status as your income is. Because of this, the U.S. has polarized into two separate class hierarchies—one red and one blue. Classes struggle not only up and down, against the richer and poorer groups on their own ladder, but against their partisan opposite across the ideological divide.

...

over the past two decades, the rapidly growing economic, cultural, and social power of the bobos has generated a global backlash that is growing more and more vicious, deranged, and apocalyptic. And yet this backlash is not without basis. The bobos—or X people, or the creative class, or whatever you want to call them—have coalesced into an insular, intermarrying Brahmin elite that dominates culture, media, education, and tech. Worse, those of us in this class have had a hard time admitting our power, much less using it responsibly.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/09/blame-the-bobos-creative-class/619492/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with minorities is they're too stupid to learn how to read and write, or to count. So allowances have to be made for them. Otherwise, well, expecting them to be able to function at the same level as White kids is unfair! In fact it's racist!  - Oregon's governor (I'm paraphrasing).

It’s an education headline that, even in 2021, demands a double take: “Gov. Kate Brown signed a law to allow Oregon students to graduate without proving they can write or do math.”

Brown, Oregon’s Democratic governor, had quietly signed Senate Bill 744 into law last month, discarding the requirement that high school graduates be able to demonstrate an ability to read, write, and do math at a high school level. A spokesman for Brown explained that this would benefit “Oregon’s Black, Latino, Latina, Latinx, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander, Tribal, and students of color.” For those confused about the logic, he added that the state needed “equitable graduation standards, along with expanded learning opportunities and supports.”

https://thedispatch.com/p/oregon-democrats-resurrect-the-soft

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Argus said:

The problem with minorities is they're too stupid to learn how to read and write, or to count. So allowances have to be made for them. Otherwise, well, expecting them to be able to function at the same level as White kids is unfair! In fact it's racist!  - Oregon's governor (I'm paraphrasing).

It’s an education headline that, even in 2021, demands a double take: “Gov. Kate Brown signed a law to allow Oregon students to graduate without proving they can write or do math.”

Brown, Oregon’s Democratic governor, had quietly signed Senate Bill 744 into law last month, discarding the requirement that high school graduates be able to demonstrate an ability to read, write, and do math at a high school level. A spokesman for Brown explained that this would benefit “Oregon’s Black, Latino, Latina, Latinx, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander, Tribal, and students of color.” For those confused about the logic, he added that the state needed “equitable graduation standards, along with expanded learning opportunities and supports.”

https://thedispatch.com/p/oregon-democrats-resurrect-the-soft

I do hope she never gets a statue.  It would have to be vandalised immediately!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

This one's worth archiving for the fact and common sense deprived evening news crowd. They need access to the information, at least:
 

 

I'm not sure why you or she would think this was some gotcha moment. I don't know anyone who thought the attack on the Capitol was centrally planned by some nefarious group of individuals. It was a mob of MAGA losers incited by the MAGA idiot in chief and his moronic henchmen who rolled over unprepared, poorly led police who seem to have presumed that Trump types who professed such respect for police wouldn't start pounding on them with sticks and fire extinguishers.

That doesn't mean insurrection isn't a reasonable description of what that mob was hoping to achieve. You don't need an insurrection to be centrally organized to qualify as an insurrection.

Edited by Argus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Argus said:

I'm not sure why you or she would think this was some gotcha moment. I don't know anyone who thought the attack on the Capitol was centrally planned by some nefarious group of individuals. It was a mob of MAGA losers incited by the MAGA idiot in chief and his moronic henchmen who rolled over unprepared, poorly led police who seem to have presumed that Trump types who professed such respect for police wouldn't start pounding on them with sticks and fire extinguishers.

That doesn't mean insurrection isn't a reasonable description of what that mob was hoping to achieve. You don't need an insurrection to be centrally organized to qualify as an insurrection.

"Meaning of insurrection in English

insurrection: an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence:"
 
Even if your description of what happened January 6 was correct, or even useful, it contradicts your claim in your second paragraph once you know the definition of the term you used.
 
Oh...and there was no incitement.
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/22/2021 at 9:08 PM, Infidel Dog said:

"Meaning of insurrection in English

insurrection: an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence:"
 
Even if your description of what happened January 6 was correct, or even useful, it contradicts your claim in your second paragraph once you know the definition of the term you used.
 
Oh...and there was no incitement.
 

I saw enough video of them breaking in and attacking police to know there was some organization on the ground. If they'd been Black and they'd been trying to stop the certification of a Republican win you'd have been screaming about how they should all have been shot down on the spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually the idea was they would rally outside the Capitol building to express their dissatisfaction with the irregularities in the 2020 election. Their 1st amendment doesn't just allow it. It demands it.

But BLM and others of the far commie left have done tons worse than that. I just shake my head when it happens and say 'Here we go again.

The problems of Jan. 6 began when instigators (and there are different conclusions as to who those were) gathered in front of the building while the Trump supporters were listening to the President speak a mile or so away, then as the two sides met the trouble-makers led a charge on one side of the building. 

It's a big building elsewhere capitol guards were opening gates and doors for well-behaved rally goers. A few hundred were dumb enough to follow the instigators who were breaking windows and entering at the front. Some tried to stop the vandals but to little avail. Others were more successful in just stopping the larger crowd from making the mistake of getting sucked in by the infiltrators.

Oh and as long as you're gurgling down the media swill of a narrative of what happened that day...and just for my amusement tell me what they're telling you if anything about why they refuse to give up the mountains of video evidence they have on the incident. Security right? Make me laugh. They'll give up the bits of video they hope might support their BS quick enough.

 

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Oh and as long as you're gurgling down the media swill of a narrative of what happened that day...and just for my amusement tell me what they're telling you if anything about why they refuse to give up the mountains of video evidence they have on the incident. Security right? Make me laugh. They'll give up the bits of video they hope might support their BS quick enough.

What exactly do you and the other Trumptard conspiracy loonies hope to see? Video of Joe Biden luring the poor innocent MAGA fuckwits into attacking the Capitol?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your shitstain of a God did his best to get all the morons who were dumb enough to go out there and listen to him to think the election had been stolen. Then he sent them to the Capitol and told them to fight. 

If you mean that he didn't organize and plan this then I agree completely. Trump isn't smart enough to organize and plan anything more than having his lackeys bribe strippers and porn stars to have sex with him. He is without question the dumbest, most ignorant fuckwit to ever occupy the White House in the entire history of the United States.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The federal government is spending about $73 billion dollars on housing, and it's doing little or no good according to the parliamentary budget officer.

Canada’s massive multi-billion dollar program to create affordable housing will only have a “limited” impact. That’s the take from the non-partisan Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO), tasked with explaining the numbers behind policies, to lawmakers. They found the federal program is billed as a “$70+ billion plan,” but failed to find a significant impact. In fact, in some cases they indicate it might be taking credit for existing supply in the pipeline. It’s actually generous to say it does nothing though. The plan creates an environment that actually attempts to drive home prices higher.

https://betterdwelling.com/canada-is-spending-73-billion-on-affordable-housing-and-it-will-push-prices-higher/#_

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An attempt to put actual history back into perspective.

https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/

I think it's fairly new.  A lot of dazzling names with Oxford and Cambridge mentioned more than once in the list of contributors.

I only read one article, but what the hell, it made sense to me!

Here's a quote from it:

“Truth is incontrovertible. Panic may resent it. Ignorance may deride it. Malice may distort it. But there it is.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get ready for waves of phony Afghanis claiming to be refugees.

In any case, it is striking that six years ago, Germany and almost every other European country reported the same phenomenon, which was that many people said they were Syrians in order to get into Europe. However, once they were inside, very few countries were able to verify this. And for much of the general public it was enough to be told that Europe was responding to a “refugee” crisis rather than a “migrant crisis”.

Which brings us back to the situation in Afghanistan today. In the coming months and years, there will invariably be a steady flow of refugees fleeing the Taliban’s Afghanistan. The hurried nature of the American departure means that there will have been people left behind who have a credible case for asylum in the West. And as the Taliban’s rule once again reasserts itself, they will attempt to flee.

The problem will lie, as it always does, in the details. No European country or border force has anything like the number of experts required to work out where exactly those entering Europe have come from. The dearth of language experts alone has remained unfixed since 2015. And as a result, no doubt many migrants who are not from Afghanistan will recognise the benefits of pretending that they are.

https://unherd.com/2021/08/will-europe-survive-another-migrant-crisis/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to Cold War Two, this time with China playing the major antagonist.

In early June, with little fanfare or press coverage, the US Senate passed a 2,400-page bill called “The United States Innovation and Competition Act (USICA).” Heralded as “the most significant government intervention in industrial policy in decades,” the bill will pump over $200 billion into a diverse spectrum of R&D initiatives over the next five years with the sole purpose of bolstering “competitiveness against China.”

By April 2020, pollsters were already reporting a sea change in public opinion. Pew has documented nearly two decades of American public opinion on China. In 2005, more Americans held favourable views of China (43 percent) than unfavourable (35 percent). The American public see-sawed over subsequent years, although it remained generally favourable. However, between 2013 and 2016, over half of Americans polled came to view China unfavourably. Apart from a brief defrosting after Trump's election, trade tensions and the pandemic cemented American hostility, and by 2020, 73 percent of Americans held unfavourable views of China with only 22 percent feeling the opposite.

The past two years represent a watershed moment in American perceptions. If vulnerability at the hands of China’s medical industry wasn’t enough, the latter’s obscurantism over the origins of COVID-19 and manipulation of the World Health Organization (WHO) has pushed Americans to see China in a new light. The growing laundry list of American grievances now include cyberattacks, theft of intellectual property, and growing awareness of human rights abuses targeting Uyghur Muslims. Consequently, almost 90 percent of Americans now consider China’s power and influence to be a threat, and two-thirds see China as a “major threat.” 

https://quillette.com/2021/09/01/welcome-to-cold-war-ii/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How climate alarmism is hurting young people, and the truth about the nonsense often spouted by environmentalists.

In July of this year, one of Lauren Jeffrey’s science teachers made an off-hand comment about how climate change could be apocalyptic. Jeffrey is 17 years old and attends high school in Milton Keynes, a city of 230,000 people about 50 miles northwest of London.

“I did research on it and spent two months feeling quite anxious,” she told me. “I would hear young people around me talk about it and they were convinced that the world was going to end and they were going to die.”

In September, British psychologists warned of the impact on children of apocalyptic discussions of climate change. “There is no doubt in my mind that they are being emotionally impacted,” one expert said. 

“I found a lot of blogs and videos talking about how we’re going extinct at various dates, 2030, 2035, from societal collapse,” said Jeffrey. “That’s when I started to get quite nervous and worried. I tried to forget it at first but it kept popping up in my mind.”

In October, British television aired repeated claims by spokespersons for Extinction Rebellion that “billions would die” from climate change.

“In October I was hearing people my age saying things I found quite disturbing,” says Jeffrey. “‘It’s too late to do anything. ‘There is no future anymore.’ ‘We’re basically doomed.’ ‘We should give up.’”

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/12/04/why-climate-alarmism-hurts-us-all/?sh=2fe3aef036d8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Argus said:

How climate alarmism is hurting young people, and the truth about the nonsense often spouted by environmentalists.

In July of this year, one of Lauren Jeffrey’s science teachers made an off-hand comment about how climate change could be apocalyptic. Jeffrey is 17 years old and attends high school in Milton Keynes, a city of 230,000 people about 50 miles northwest of London.

“I did research on it and spent two months feeling quite anxious,” she told me. “I would hear young people around me talk about it and they were convinced that the world was going to end and they were going to die.”

In September, British psychologists warned of the impact on children of apocalyptic discussions of climate change. “There is no doubt in my mind that they are being emotionally impacted,” one expert said. 

“I found a lot of blogs and videos talking about how we’re going extinct at various dates, 2030, 2035, from societal collapse,” said Jeffrey. “That’s when I started to get quite nervous and worried. I tried to forget it at first but it kept popping up in my mind.”

In October, British television aired repeated claims by spokespersons for Extinction Rebellion that “billions would die” from climate change.

“In October I was hearing people my age saying things I found quite disturbing,” says Jeffrey. “‘It’s too late to do anything. ‘There is no future anymore.’ ‘We’re basically doomed.’ ‘We should give up.’”

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/12/04/why-climate-alarmism-hurts-us-all/?sh=2fe3aef036d8

You'd think someone would tell the poor dear that if he lives to 2100 he's going to be 436% better off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

The lies about Climate Change delayed action for years.  This is worse than the scare mongering.

What should have been a rational discussion played out in the wrong forums for thirty years

The lies have played out on both sides. Gore basically admitted he felt justified in 'exaggerating' things to provoke more reaction, and he was far from alone. That provoked a backlash and it also allowed self-interested parties to point out the lies as a justification to do nothing. But scaring kids and making them think they have no future is not going to produce beneficial long-term effects in any scenario.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Delayed action? What action? You know how to fix the weather do you, Mike? Bullshit. We could go back to buggy whips for a gas peddle in Canada and our effect on the weather would be negligible. And that's being optimistic. All you watermelon people have succeeded in doing is increasing inflation and putting a lot unnecessary controls in the hands of people who shouldn't have them.

Time for another break from the nonsense.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...