This Needed To be Said

[ll74]

The left needs to be put back in that dark place where America kept them for most of our history. Where they govern, destruction follows.

Yes, the left is the all encompassing generality you use to describe people you hate.

 

[Rightguide]

Yes, the left is the all encompassing generality you use to describe people you hate.

Wherever they govern, destructive chaos follows.

 

[ll74]

Wherever they govern, destructive chaos follows.

Tell me more about liberal women.

Lmao

 

[YDB95]

Maybe they didn't want the hassle or lower profits of kosher cooking. Which is probably healthier than what most Americans eat.

Yeah, no. You know damn well that is not why those establishments barred Jews.

My point is that the Jews overcame that with hard work and high IQs. Now they are usually more prosperous than white Gentiles.

I know what your point is. And that point is at least partially wrong.

 

[Winter_Fare]

I thought you were a Virgo.


Silly me...

I am!

 

[JohnEngelman]

I know what your point is. And that point is at least partially wrong.

I am always willing to learn. Do me a favor and explain how my point is partially wrong.

 

[JohnEngelman]

What does this have to do with the subject of this thread?

Jews thrive under Democrat governments.

 

[YDB95]

I am always willing to learn. Do me a favor and explain how my point is partially wrong.

Despite their hard work and high IQs, Jews still faced institutional bigotry. Affirmative Action has helped fight against that problem, though it hasn't yet eliminated it completely.

But more fundamentally, Affirmative Action was never about giving a leg up to people who were lazy or unintelligent (and suggesting as much is a classic Southern strategy appeal to between-the-lines racism - you know who is most often stereotyped as lazy and dumb, and for that matter, you yourself have argued as much in the past). It was and is about opening doors to qualified applicants who in the past were never even considered because of their gender, skin color, or yes, their faith.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Despite their hard work and high IQs, Jews still faced institutional bigotry. Affirmative Action has helped fight against that problem, though it hasn't yet eliminated it completely.

But more fundamentally, Affirmative Action was never about giving a leg up to people who were lazy or unintelligent (and suggesting as much is a classic Southern strategy appeal to between-the-lines racism - you know who is most often stereotyped as lazy and dumb, and for that matter, you yourself have argued as much in the past). It was and is about opening doors to qualified applicants who in the past were never even considered because of their gender, skin color, or yes, their faith.

Affirmative action did not begin until 1965. By then Jews were successful in American Society. So were Orientals. Both groups succeeded against the odds because of merit.

 

[YDB95]

Affirmative action did not begin until 1965. By then Jews were successful in American Society. So were Orientals. Both groups succeeded against the odds because of merit.

Not the point. The point is, successful or not, intelligent or not, there were certain doors that were mostly if not entirely closed to them. There were Black and Latino Americans who were very successful before 1965, too. The exceptions do not disprove the rule.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Not the point. The point is, successful or not, intelligent or not, there were certain doors that were mostly if not entirely closed to them. There were Black and Latino Americans who were very successful before 1965, too. The exceptions do not disprove the rule.

It is most definitely the point. Ours is an economy of steadily reducing resources and opportunities where intelligence is becoming increasingly important to success. Affirmative action takes opportunities from those who deserve them and gives them to those who do not deserve them. Jews and Orientals rose without affirmative action for reasons aptly explained by Charles Murray and Professor J. Philippe Rushton.

 

[YDB95]

It i most definitely the point. Ours is an economy of steadily reducing resources and opportunities where intelligence is becoming increasingly important to success. Affirmative action takes opportunities from those who deserve them and gives them to those who do not deserve them. Jews and Orientals rose without affirmative action for reasons aptly explained by Charles Murray and Professor J. Philippe Rushton.

He mentioned Murray! Drink up, everyone!

And no, Affirmative Action does not "take opportunities from those who deserve them", it ensures that those who do deserve them get a fair chance at them.

 

[JohnEngelman]

He mentioned Murray! Drink up, everyone!

And no, Affirmative Action does not "take opportunities from those who deserve them", it ensures that those who do deserve them get a fair chance at them.

I admire Charles Murray. I only disagree with The Bell Curve on two minor points that are irrelevant to the main thrust of his argument.

The truth about affirmative action is that it lowers objective standards of excellence for races that tend to have difficulty with those standards.

 

[YDB95]

The truth about affirmative action is that it lowers objective standards of excellence for races that tend to have difficulty with those standards.

No, it doesn't. If that were even a little bit true, then you'd see a lot of very unqualified Black and Latino kids getting into the Ivies. I know a number of perfectly intelligent POC (and more recently the children thereof) who didn't get into the likes of Harvard, Princeton, etc. What it does do is acknowledge that a kid who grew up in an inner-city slum and still managed to make decent grades probably had to work harder to achieve that success than a kid from an affluent suburb with a similar GPA. And also that before Affirmative Action, even with excellent grades that kid still wouldn't get in.

Look at it this way. Snooty University has a very prestigious grad program that only takes twenty applicants a year. Among the top twenty white Christian male applicants, on a scale of 1-10 where 10 is extremely well suited to the program, the breakdown looks like this:

Applicant A - 10
Applicant B - 10
Applicant C - 9
Applicant D - 9
Applicant E - 9
Applicant F - 8
Applicant G - 8
Applicant H - 7
Applicant I - 7
Applicant J - 7
Applicant K - 6
Applicant L - 6
Applicant M - 6
Applicant N - 6
Applicant O - 6
Applicant P - 5
Applicant Q - 5
Applicant R - 5
Applicant S - 5
Applicant T - 5

For simplicity's sake, say there are also 20 white Christian women, 20 Jews, 20 Blacks and 20 Asians with the same distribution. Before Affirmative Action, Snooty University could (and many real universities actually did) simply admit the top 20 white male applicants, even though there were plenty of others who were clearly more qualified. If it was a progressive administration for its time, they might set aside a few spots for women (Yale Law famously did that in the pre-feminist era). Admit the top two white women. Then you'd end up with four 10's admitted, but still three white guys who were only a 5 and got in while lots of 9's and 10s did not.

After Affirmative Action, you'd probably see all ten of the 10s admitted. For the remaining ten spots, there are 15 9's to choose from, and yes, that means some deserving applicants won't make the cut. But those who don't make it would not be losing out to less qualified applicants, they'd be losing out to equally or better-qualified ones. In other words, it's the white male 5's and 6's that are losing their shot at the brass ring. Too bad for them, but in a world without racism and sexism they wouldn't have been making it that far in the first place. At this point it's also worth pointing out that the loudest opponents of DEI are almost always also big on having no handouts and letting people "pull themselves up by the bootstraps" (which incidentally originated as an example of something impossible to do!). So if the white male 5's and 6's want to get back in the game, they should simply try harder to reach the 9-10 range.

 

[dolf]

I'll be honest here; I've always had an urge to destroy society. Terrorism is far too passè, and cults are dorky. I'm looking for a low cost, minimal effort method to bring on a dolftopian future.

 

[Chernosoth]

No, it doesn't. If that were even a little bit true, then you'd see a lot of very unqualified Black and Latino kids getting into the Ivies.

Prestigious college students now tend to graduate unqualified. Employers are learning to avoid those and hire from other colleges that still practice education.

 

[Lance_Castro]

There's a dying felon in the White House but liberal Karen will end America.


How the fuck do you people remember to breathe?

Behold the Mariana Trench of stupidity.
Lol

 

[YDB95]

Prestigious college students now tend to graduate unqualified. Employers are learning to avoid those and hire from other colleges that still practice education.

According to whom? Newsmax?

 

[icanhelp1]

He mentioned Murray! Drink up, everyone!

And no, Affirmative Action does not "take opportunities from those who deserve them", it ensures that those who do deserve them get a fair chance at them.

That’s one big pile of hot steamy crap. I can personally attest to that. Affirmative action in many cases was not based on meritocracy. I lost my dream job to minority individuals, scoring way above them by a long shot but they got the job while I was far more qualified. And I’ll add it wasn’t just me. Don’t tell me states didn’t have to meet quotas, they did!

 

[YDB95]

That’s one big pile of hot steamy crap. I can personally attest to that. Affirmative action in many cases was not based on meritocracy. I lost my dream job to minority individuals, scoring way above them by a long shot but they got the job while I was far more qualified. And I’ll add it wasn’t just me. Don’t tell me states didn’t have to meet quotas, they did!

Scoring way above them on what? I don't believe I have ever applied for a job where I was given a numerical score on anything - at least not that was disclosed to the applicants.

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

Tell me more about how those wominz are the most.evil creatures on the earth.....maybe bB can tell us how ugly they all are.

What are you rambling on about now? FFS Elle, are you talking to the walls?

Here ya go darl’n.

 

[DeluxAuto]

Behold the Mariana Trench of stupidity.
Lol

Hush, ankle bitter.

 

[ll74]

What are you rambling on about now? FFS Elle, are you talking to the walls?

Here ya go darl’n.

View attachment 2562433

What is your point with a cigarette ad?

 

[HisArpy]

I'll be honest here; I've always had an urge to destroy society. Terrorism is far too passè, and cults are dorky. I'm looking for a low cost, minimal effort method to bring on a dolftopian future.

Try hookers and blow. Not only will the world flock to your banner but it's self financed and has an almost 100% turnover rate on a short timeframe.

 

[Rightguide]

Jews thrive under Democrat governments.

Not really. The Democratic Party loves to preach tolerance, but its record tells a different story. Antisemitism isn’t an occasional slip within the party, it’s become embedded. From members of “The Squad” vilifying Israel while excusing terror groups, to party leaders looking the other way, Jew-hatred has been rebranded as “progressive politics.” The Biden administration made it worse. By opening the doors to tens of thousands from regions openly hostile to Israel, and funneling many of them into colleges and universities, this White House has imported Hamas sympathizers straight into America’s cultural bloodstream. The result is a campus climate where Jewish students are harassed and threatened, while administrators bend over backwards to defend the very voices calling for Israel’s destruction. What we’re seeing isn’t just political negligence, it’s complicity. The Democratic Party once counted Jewish Americans as some of its most loyal supporters. Now, through cowardice and cynical pandering, it has chosen to empower those who despise them.