In other news
In the current news climate we see that some figures and events tend to dominate the front-pages heavily. Still, there a
people got banned regularly including on twitter when they discussed the topic until Musk bought it.
It is not a bannable offense anymore on meta platforms, or tiktok, or youtube (and twitter ofc).
It still is in many subreddits (and here apparently).
You think it's apparent that it is "taboo" to discuss something here, when you have been discussing said thing over the last few days, making many posts about the topic, and not been censored.
That is the stupidest thing I have ever seen from you.
and i mean for a little while liberals even managed to ban people if they "insisted" that gender theory was made up garbage and shouldn't be used to inform any policy consideration.
That didn't hold much but it happened! they even for some months managed to ban people if they talked about different rate crimes among different ethnicities (that was during BLM riots mostly)
That couldn't have been possible unless the left owned almost all media ofc.
You think it's apparent that it is "taboo" to discuss something here, when you have been discussing said thing over the last few days, making many posts about the topic, and not been censored.
That is the stupidest thing I have ever seen from you.
I didn't discuss it. I didn't make claims about racial IQ differences.
I discussed the fact that the topic isn't banned anymore in several social media, while it was in the past because the left owned the media in the past.
And i have been just warned that if i do discuss the topic i get banned by a mod right here, did you read that? it literally just happened.
Your original reply to chillrob did exactly that. If you meant it all to be hypothetical you did a very poor job because what you actually said was not framed that way at all. Maybe it was just a language barrier issue but that initial reply to chillrob read as though you were laying out what you thought was the expected result of it not being taboo, with a conclusion that said it was "morally horrific" to invest resources in helping blacks and other minorities.
Your original reply to chillrob did exactly that. If you meant it all to be hypothetical you did a very poor job because what you actually said was not framed that way at all. Maybe it was just a language barrier issue but that initial reply to chillrob read as though you were laying out what you thought was the expected result of it not being taboo, with a conclusion that said
I had to clarify possible effects of the discussion but i also opened to the literal opposite , ie conservatives being MORE in favor of welfare if they get convinced the gap exists and can't be fixed.
Anyway the point was to discuss the fact that media was indeed far to the left (at least the cultural left sure, given the democrats in the USA weren't particularly to the left on economics until recently) for decades.
Because one of the major tenets of liberal ideology wasn't allowed to be countered at all, discussion was verboten.
Now to give a comparison it would be like the nativist right dominating social and mainstream media SO MUCH, it becomes a taboo to even attempt to list the positives of immigration. Even trying to framework immigration as a net positive or as having positive elements being a bannable offense from platforms.
That's the extent of how much liberal ideology was protecting itself on media in the last decades.
they did the left bidding for many years and bent the knee only very recently.
And most of all, until very recently they staffed their moderation teams with ultra leftists. And lol zuck even had "fact checkers" straight out of comedy-level evil leftism for a while.
Ofc in zuck case in particular, it could be that he simply went with the power that he felt more dominant , not for personal ideological reasons. Sure. Still that one of the most cunning and scheming man around, observing the landscape, decided to do that, meant the left was actually so dominant he had to comply.
so whatever the set of reasons was, the cultural left had such a power until recently on media , it could taboo ideas that went against core liberal ideology. Not anymore. But we need decades of the opposite to break even.
they did the left bidding for many years and bent the knee only very recently. And most of all, until very recently they staffed their moderation teams with ultra leftists. And lol zuck even had "fact checkers" straight out of comedy-level evil leftism for a while.Ofc in zuck case in particular, it could be that he simply went with the power that he felt more dominant , not for
Yeah I went back and read your race science post from yesterday and you aren’t talking in hypotheticals or talking about taboo. You are saying “this is what will happen” definitively. You just repeated it
I had to clarify possible effects of the discussion but i also opened to the literal opposite , ie conservatives being MORE in favor of welfare if they get convinced the gap exists and can't be fixed.Anyway the point was to discuss the fact that media was indeed far to the left (at least the cultural left sure, given the democrats in the USA weren't particularly to the left on
But the point is that you didn't just argue why the subject shouldn't be taboo, you laid out all the claims that make up the subject itself, which you're now claiming that you didn't do.
And I missed this at the time but
for sure some social definitions of race are an absolute joke. "asian" in particular are the worst offender as a label. Really grotesque to put them all togheter for anything (not only IQ).
There is more genetic diversity among people referred to as "black" than there is among people referred to as "asian", yet you seem perfectly happy to group the former together while considering it grotesque to do so for the latter. Hell it's almost certainly the case that there is more genetic diversity within the race referred to as "black" than there is between all other races combined. It's a large part of the reason the whole racial IQ thing is considered pseudoscience by most within the field.
uh? in my mind people are only responsible for their own actions and the concept of "societal debt" by groups doesn't exist.
even when I talk about boomers as a group having significant advantages it doesn't mean any individual member of that groups owes anything to anyone "socially".
Na man, you are talking about "breaking even" while referencing racial IQs. You are so far off the reservation that I'm kind of interested to see where you can even go with this.
You do realize that Africa was the target of slaving operations for nearly 300 years, right? Reverse reparations is a hilarious thing to propose
Maybe in another 50 years, and another 50 years, and another 50, 50 more, and another couple of 50 years we can talk about things
There is more genetic diversity among people referred to as "black" than there is among people referred to as "asian", yet you seem perfectly happy to group the former together while considering it grotesque to do so for the latter. Hell it's almost certainly the case that there is more genetic diversity within the race referred to as "black" than there is between all other rac
I have written about that in this very forum more than once but it doesn't apply to American descendents of slaves, as they almost all came from very specific western african ethnicities.
the genetic diversity among DOS is much much much smaller than among people in Africa.
but ofc when black gets used to refer both to DOS and to someone who just arrived from Nigeria or Ethiopia the same it loses all meaning.
and btw that is one of many many reasons why affirmative action especially with crude labeling is insane EVEN IF people want to help DOS. because the slots go to the Obamas and the other non DOS blacks.
it also makes DEI hiring quota a joke. you hire 20 people from Ghana and "fulfill" black quotas, when the idea (at least on paper) was to make efforts to hire actual American blacks. but I digress.
I can't and won't answer about the IQ claims because the topic is banned so please don't take it up again or I risk a ban just to answer about it.
the banned topic here was banned in media for a loooong while. that was the claim, needed to support the claim that the cultural left controlled media.
Na man, you are talking about "breaking even" while referencing racial IQs. You are so far off the reservation that I'm kind of interested to see where you can even go with this.You do realize that Africa was the target of slaving operations for nearly 300 years, right? Reverse reparations is a hilarious thing to proposeMaybe in another 50 years, and another 50 years, and ano
lol? I am talking breaking even in having the experience of being censored by all major media.
I don't propose any "reverse reparations" for ethnicities and it's absurd for you to claim I do.
I am saying and I repeat that even if for the next 50 years liberals get dramatically censored in some core topic that the right decides to taboo, that's just breaking even.
with past censorship from your side.
I'd prefer for no taboos to exist on media but the way things are shaping and the way the pendulum usually swings, it's probable the right will start tabooing stuff pretty soon on the platforms it controls.
Yes and it didn’t just effect conservatives. There were many well-meaning social scientists that just wanted to understand the descriptive facts and were making no prescriptions. And in fairness in real academic settings this topic is nowhere near as taboo.
Luciom - I think you are under the mistaken impression that you are way smarter than anyone else here.
I have written about that in this very forum more than once but it doesn't apply to American descendents of slaves, as they almost all came from very specific western african ethnicities.the genetic diversity among DOS is much much much smaller than among people in Africa. but ofc when black gets used to refer both to DOS and to someone who just arrived from Nigeria or Ethiopi
No, your repeated claim was that "leftists owned" mainstream media. My claim has always been that leftism was a cultural movement and that the right is resorting to political authoritarianism as a response to a changing culture.
You don't get to claim culturalism now
No, your repeated claim was that "leftists owned" mainstream media. My claim has always been that leftism was a cultural movement and that the right is resorting to political authoritarianism as a response to a changing culture.
You don't get to claim culturalism now
ok I accept the criticism and I will rephrase " liberals controlled most media gatekeeping efforts in the last 50 years either through ownership or by other levers"
I am not claiming "culturalism" I am just differentiating between economic leftism (which the USA didn't have much of which is why is the most successful country in world history) and cultural leftism (which has been rampant in the USA since the 60s).
cultural as in "culture war".
you guys decided what could be said in the national narrative. For many decades since the civil right era.
not anymore.
Yes and it didn’t just effect conservatives. There were many well-meaning social scientists that just wanted to understand the descriptive facts and were making no prescriptions. And in fairness in real academic settings this topic is nowhere near as taboo.
Tell that to Noah Carl
First Trump term was definitely craaaazy for censorship.
I didn't discuss it. I didn't make claims about racial IQ differences.
I discussed the fact that the topic isn't banned anymore in several social media, while it was in the past because the left owned the media in the past.
And i have been just warned that if i do discuss the topic i get banned by a mod right here, did you read that? it literally just happened.
Of course you've been discussing the topic. You have given policy proscriptions and a ranking of the races has even been given.
No, I did not read that. Maybe it was in secret code?
I had to clarify possible effects of the discussion but i also opened to the literal opposite , ie conservatives being MORE in favor of welfare if they get convinced the gap exists and can't be fixed.Anyway the point was to discuss the fact that media was indeed far to the left (at least the cultural left sure, given the democrats in the USA weren't particularly to the left on
So you're saying that racial differences in intelligence is one of the major tenets of conservative ideology. Interesting.
