Quoting Arlo Bensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [Arlo had asked] > Praytel, how would the white family that ended up with that house > know that it was their competence and not the color of their skin > that got them the house? > > [Platt] > The law and ability to carry a mortgage. > > [Arlo] > Except, of course, that that house was truly given to them based on > their white skin color. An equally (and perhaps even more so) > "competent" black family were denied the house first, based > exclusively on their black skin.
What house is "that" house? > [Arlo had asked] > How do you know a more qualified "black" was never denied a position > given to you, simply because you have white skin? > > [Platt] > Affirmative action law. > > [Arlo] > Which attempt to correct the fact that without them, you'd be > stepping to the front of the line on the basis of your "white skin". So the black is hired because of his skin color, not his competence? > When you can demonstrate to me that competence alone is the > determinent for success, and not such irrelevencies as skin color, > I'll be the first to admit we no longer need these laws. Yes, of course blacks need the help of us white folk. One of ugliest aspects of leftist thought that you express so well is a thoroughly patronizing attitude toward blacks, regarding them as eternal victims unable to fend for themselves. > [Platt] > You made the claim, you provide the evidence. > > [Arlo] > No, the original claims was yours, that "blacks" step to the front of > the line more often than they are denied opportunity. Let's see some evidence. Affirmative action laws. You just suggested above that such laws were effective. > [Platt] > Sounds like postmodern propaganda that assumes facts are social constructions. > > [Arlo] > Aren't they? Pirsig seems to think so. "As the atomic physicist, > Niels Bohr, said, "We are suspended in language." Our intellectual > description of nature is always culturally derived." Sure, languages are different in different cultures, but facts remain the same. 32 degrees Farenheit is the freezing point whether you speak about it in Eskimo or a Arab. Geez, on top of everything else you're a postmodernist who believes it's a fact there are no facts? > [Platt] > In Salter's view... > > [Arlo] > Sounds like rightwing propaganda that assumes nothing is socially-mediated. Not just Salter. Also Berghe and Wilson. Amazing how you dismiss evidence when it doesn't fit your agenda. > Moreso, its sounds like sad apologist doctrine for excusing hatred. > "Oh, its genetic, I can't help but hate you. Sorry." Of course. Qualified scientists always seek to support hatred. Yeah, right. > As I have said, many studies on infants reveal the show NO fear or > cowardice related to skin-color. Indeed, as I said, studies of > differing race adopted infants reveal they show the same love and > attachment to their caregiver as if the caregiver was their own "color". > > What you try to push as "fact" is simply right-wing fear mongering > that has as its central core dogma the need to have "scapegoat > others" for which all the worlds ills can be blamed, and of whom > "fear of encroachment" is used to set up the Nightmare Politician who > can "save our heritage" or "save our values" or "save our race". > > But if this is all genetic, then we can't really blame the Nazis for > hating the Jews. They were simply following their genetic > predisposition to preserve their heritage and their race. We can't > really blame Al-Qaeda for wanting to kill us, its genetic. > > No. Its misguided science furthering misguided political ideology, > using fear and paranoia to manipulate and control the grundies > underneath them. That you further it here is simply more of the shame > you bring on us all. Why don't you tell that to Wikipedia? If you want to bury your head in sand it's your problem, not the problem of "us all." And speaking of misguided science, how about all the fear and paranoia to control the populace engendered by global warming? Oh, you forgot to mention that did you? Shame. Shame. > [Platt] > No shame at all. > > [Arlo] > Not in calling evil "evil", no. Oh. So now Ham and I are "evil," like all who believe in and want to protect individual freedom. > [Platt] > Sarcasm and outrage never proved anything. > > [Arlo] > Highlights the vulgarity and despicable nature of your rhetoric. But > you're likely right, I probably don't need to do it, since it is > rather self-evident. So don't. ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
