Paula Dean poses with her son while he is in brown face

[Mirror]

http://ak-hdl.buzzfed.com/static/2015-07/7/12/enhanced/webdr01/enhanced-10184-1436285172-1.png

http://www.buzzfeed.com/regajha/why#.toYbx3v2n

That family really has no idea what is offensive, even when they are trying to walk on egg shells. :facepalm

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbXDpKbhg2s

[Nanners]

this woman should run for the republican presidential nomination.

[DeuceWallaces]

It's amazing how out of touch some people can be. I mean, even if you ignore her past and all the shit going down recently, this is such a bad idea.

[nathanjizzle]

i almost feel sorry for these folks.

[NumberSix]

"brown face" isn't a thing. PC-tards desperately grasping for something to be offended by.

[UK2K]

It is a joke?

I don't get it.

Quick, I want to be offended too! Someone tell me what the offensive part is.

[Done_And_Done]

F*uck this butter gaffing tub of pancake batterered shit.

No remorse for stupid people.

[Patrick Chewing]

As a Latino, I don't see how darkening your skin to look more like Ricky is offensive. Various Latinos have a darker complexion than whites. Simple as that. It would be stupid to have some ginger play that role, or any role of a distinct ethnic background.

This trend of being offended is quite gay.

[NumberSix]

It is a joke?

I don't get it.

Quick, I want to be offended too! Someone tell me what the offensive part is.
Paula Deen is doing "red head". Very offensive to gingers.


Although, I might be being a bigot. She might be legit trans-ginger.

[Akrazotile]

"brown face" isn't a thing. PC-tards desperately grasping for something to be offended by.

Exactly. Most people dont even understand what blackface is. Simply darkening your skin to look like a black person a la Downey in Tropic Thunder is not blackface. And there is no such thing as whiteface, even when Chappelle does it, and no such thing as brownface, even when Paula Deen's kid does it.

But look at deucewallace in full blown "That is OFFENSIVE, everyone look at me being sensitive and indignant, this is how I get attention as the most effeminate man in every room I ever stand in" mode. Dude is like friggin clockwork. When a non-existent controversy gets blown up by the media for a bunch of idiots and suckers to take the bait, Deuce is always the first one in line. Trying to look cool, but actually always looking like the biggest loser :facepalm

[TripleA]

the war is coming between liberals and conservatives on ISH.:lol

[NumberSix]

Exactly. Most people dont even understand what blackface is. Simply darkening your skin to look like a black person a la Downey in Tropic Thunder is not blackface. And there is no such thing as whiteface, even when Chappelle does it, and no such thing as brownface, even when Paula Deen's kid does it.

But look at deucewallace in full blown "That is OFFENSIVE, everyone look at me being sensitive and indignant, this is how I get attention as the most effeminate man in every room I ever stand in" mode. Dude is like friggin clockwork. When a non-existent controversy gets blown up by the media for a bunch of idiots and suckers to take the bait, Deuce is always the first one in line. Trying to look cool, but actually always looking like the biggest loser :facepalm
White people who obsessively try to prove how not-racist they are, are pretty sketchy.

[DeuceWallaces]

It's not too hard to understand why black face is pretty offensive. Nice long history with it.

It's also not too hard to understand why Paula Deen should not be partaking.

Downey was in black face, the whole joke was how out of touch and self-centered he was to not realize it. Same reason why Deen is being ridiculed.

[Velocirap31]

Isn't brown face essentially a spray tan?

[dude77]

they're dressing up as lucy and ricardo ..

op is the epitome of the modern day fggt liberal .. SEARCHING AND SEARCHING for anything that MIGHT seem offensive and then go around posting it looking for brownie pts to show how cool of a sjw he/she is .. I'm done with even arguing about this retarded bullshit .. from now on I'm just gonna mock and laugh at ******* like op

[Patrick Chewing]

I'd be offended if I looked as pale as Douchewallaces.


A little color never hurt nobody.

[Mirror]

they're dressing up as lucy and ricardo ..

op is the epitome of the modern day fggt liberal .. SEARCHING AND SEARCHING for anything that MIGHT seem offensive and then go around posting it looking for brownie pts to show how cool of a sjw he/she is .. I'm done with even arguing about this retarded bullshit .. from now on I'm just gonna mock and laugh at ******* like op

Why you mad though?

[oh the horror]

Desi Arnaz wasn't even that dark though.

[NumberSix]

It's not too hard to understand why black face is pretty offensive. Nice long history with it.

It's also not too hard to understand why Paula Deen should not be partaking.

Downey was in black face, the whole joke was how out of touch and self-centered he was to not realize it. Same reason why Deen is being ridiculed.
:facepalm

He was not in black face.

[Mirror]

:facepalm

He was not in black face.

He was in modern black face. He just wasn't in the traditional black face.

[Patrick Chewing]

So he didn't go full black face?

[DeuceWallaces]

:facepalm

He was not in black face.

God, you are thick.

[NumberSix]

He was in modern black face. He just wasn't in the traditional black face.
There's no modern black face. Black face is a specific thing with the purpose of mocking and dehumanize black people. Simply dressing up as a black person is not black face.

[Patrick Chewing]

God, you are thick.


No homo?



It's ok though.

[UK2K]

I have never heard of black face, nor do I see any blacks in the picture...

I am still waiting for someone to tell me what to be outraged over.

[DeuceWallaces]

There's no modern black face. Black face is a specific thing with the purpose of mocking and dehumanize black people. Simply dressing up as a black person is not black face.

Yes, there is modern blackface. There are several examples listed in this thread. Obviously no one is indicating that Tropic Thunder or Paula Deen is mimicking vaudeville blackface. It's a similar concept. I refuse to think you're that ****ing stupid to not understand this nor why Paula Deen should not be putting out pics like this.

[oh the horror]

While I think Paula Dean is a bit clueless as to what people will find offensive coming from her or anything associated with her at this point given her particular history I think we really need to sit back and relax on the things that are "racist" and offensive because we are getting a bit out of control.


Problem is, it's her reputation now that is killing her. Frankly I wish one of these celebs would tell everyone to go fu*k themselves and be done with it.

[UK2K]

As a Latino, I don't see how darkening your skin to look more like Ricky is offensive. Various Latinos have a darker complexion than whites. Simple as that. It would be stupid to have some ginger play that role, or any role of a distinct ethnic background.

This trend of being offended is quite gay.

WHAT THE ****???

Is that the offensive part?

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Tell me you're joking.

[Mirror]

There's no modern black face. Black face is a specific thing with the purpose of mocking and dehumanize black people. Simply dressing up as a black person is not black face.
:facepalm

[NumberSix]

Yes, there is modern blackface. There are several examples listed in this thread. Obviously no one is indicating that Tropic Thunder or Paula Deen is mimicking vaudeville blackface. It's a similar concept. I refuse to think you're that ****ing stupid to not understand this nor why Paula Deen should not be putting out pics like this.
No it isn't. Tropic Thunder is in no way an attempt to insult black people. If anything, the joke is that the white who is pretending to be black is a fool.

And dressing up as Desi Arnaz is in no way an attempt to disrespect Latinos. It's just dressing up as iconic TV characters. Although, you noticeably don't have a problem with Paula pretending to be a redhead. I guess there's no redhead slot of the victimhood pyramid.

[NumberSix]

It's to the point where there's pretty much no point is rational discussion with the PC lunatics. Just stop caring about them faking offense.

[Mirror]

No it isn't. Tropic Thunder is in no way an attempt to insult black people. If anything, the joke is that the white who is pretending to be black is a fool.

And dressing up as Desi Arnaz is in no way an attempt to disrespect Latinos. It's just dressing up as iconic TV characters. Although, you noticeably don't have a problem with Paula pretending to be a redhead. I guess there's no redhead slot of the victimhood pyramid.

We all get that it was satire, and that Desi may not have been smart enough to know it is a bad idea to do brown face, but that doesn't mean it isn't black (or brown) face. Next you'll tell me that they didn't use black face in the movie Bamboozled because the movie was meant to educate, not offend. The action is what makes it black face, not the intent, but the intent can change how we perceive the given use of black face.

[Akrazotile]

Yes, there is modern blackface. There are several examples listed in this thread. Obviously no one is indicating that Tropic Thunder or Paula Deen is mimicking vaudeville blackface. It's a similar concept. I refuse to think you're that ****ing stupid to not understand this nor why Paula Deen should not be putting out pics like this.


No, there isnt. No matter HOW DESPERATE you are to show the whole world how progressive you are for being the "guilty white guy" and loudly and tirelessly show everyone you're completely different than the out-of-style traditional imperialist white guy. No matter how hard you try and push, there still is no "modern blackface."

"Blackface" refers to a specific type of costuming. Painting your face black is not automatically blackface. Just like ancient greek men wearing masks when they performed female roles were not doing "womanface." Just like Bruce Jenner is not doing "womanface" bc he puts on makeup. There is no womanface, despite people frequently costuming as women. People costuming as a black or hispanic or asian or white person does not equal the equivalent or "blackface" costuming .

You dont understand what blackface is, and now youre just pathetically attempting to saveface. Give it up already you fukking poser. You are the most pathetic excuse for a human male anyone else has ever seen. Bruce Jenner looks alpha next to you. In fact he runs laps around you in the masculinity department, pun intended.

[Patrick Chewing]

WHAT THE ****???

Is that the offensive part?

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Tell me you're joking.


That's what it has come to. The only way you can mimic someone nowadays is if you are of the same color and race.

[Akrazotile]

No it isn't. Tropic Thunder is in no way an attempt to insult black people. If anything, the joke is that the white who is pretending to be black is a fool.

And dressing up as Desi Arnaz is in no way an attempt to disrespect Latinos. It's just dressing up as iconic TV characters. Although, you noticeably don't have a problem with Paula pretending to be a redhead. I guess there's no redhead slot of the victimhood pyramid.


I'm pretty sure the main thing about the joke was that hollywood hired a white actor to undergo surgery for a black role instead of just hiring a black guy. In the same vein as Mooney's "Last Nikka On Earth" bit.

[Mirror]

No, there isnt. No matter HOW DESPERATE you are to show the whole world how progressive you are for being the "guilty white guy" and loudly and tirelessly show everyone you're completely different than the out-of-style traditional imperialist white guy. No matter how hard you try and push, there still is no "modern blackface."

"Blackface" refers to a specific type of costuming. Painting your face black is not automatically blackface. Just like ancient greek men wearing masks when they performed female roles were not doing "womanface." Just like Bruce Jenner is not doing "womanface" bc he puts on makeup.

You dont understand what blackface is, and now youre just pathetically attempting to saveface. Give it up already you fukking poser. You are the most pathetic excuse for a human male anyone else has ever seen. Bruce Jenner looks alpha next to you. In fact he runs laps around you in the masculinity department, pun intended.

:facepalm What a stretch.

[UK2K]

That's what it has come to. The only way you can mimic someone nowadays is if you are of the same color and race.

I mean, I really don't get it?

I googled black face and got this:


Blackface is a form of theatrical makeup used by performers to represent a black person.

There's not a black person in the picture though? Is it the tan dude? Is that the racist thing here?

Haha what is going on? Someone tell me the secret.

[Lakers Legend#32]

She's Southern white trash, AKA the Republican base.

[NumberSix]

We all get that it was satire, and that Desi may not have been smart enough to know it is a bad idea to do brown face, but that doesn't mean it isn't black (or brown) face. Next you'll tell me that they didn't use black face in the movie Bamboozled because the movie was meant to educate, not offend. The action is what makes it black face, not the intent, but the intent can change how we perceive the given use of black face.
Again, "brown face" is not a thing.

Black face is a specific thing. Dressing up to look like a normal black person and acting normal is not black face. Black face is dressing up in a way intended to degrade the appearance of black people and act in a buffoonish way to present black people in a negative light.

[UK2K]

She's Southern white trash, AKA the Republican base.
But I dont live in the South, and my mother is Filipino.

http://wordpandit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/backpedal-post.gif

[DonDadda59]

Who the hell is he supposed to be anyway? :confusedshrug:

Ricky Ricardo (I'm assuming that's what he was going for) was fair-skinned.

[DonDadda59]

:facepalm

He was not in black face.

Yes he was. That was the joke/satire emphasis. :confusedshrug:

[Patrick Chewing]

She's Southern white trash, AKA the Republican base.


And Paula Deen is supposed to be the bigot.


:rolleyes:

[Akrazotile]

Who the hell is he supposed to be anyway? :confusedshrug:

Ricky Ricardo (I'm assuming that's what he was going for) was fair-skinned.

That was mostly due to hollywood makeup tricks and the effects of black-and-white programming.


This is a much closer approximation of what Arnaz looked like in real life:

http://www.ehd.org/images/tobaccopic54.jpg

[Patrick Chewing]

I mean, I really don't get it?

I googled black face and got this:



There's not a black person in the picture though? Is it the tan dude? Is that the racist thing here?

Haha what is going on? Someone tell me the secret.


The secret is that Liberals are ****ing insane. They think the complete opposite of any rational thinking human being. Why? Because they can.

[Mirror]

Again, "brown face" is not a thing.

Black face is a specific thing. Dressing up to look like a normal black person and acting normal is not black face. Black face is dressing up in a way intended to degrade the appearance of black people and act in a buffoonish way to present black people in a negative light.

We get that there is a historical use of black face that you are referring to. Brown face may not have historical roots, but it is a thing now. It has a different meaning from the stuff that you are talking about, but that doesn't mean it should just be dismissed as "not a thing."

[NumberSix]

Yes he was. That was the joke/satire emphasis. :confusedshrug:
It's a historical inaccuracy. Dressing up as a black person in itself is not black face.

Here's the problem with PC idiots. They pretend that they don't understand what context is.

For example, in the Middle East, they have a thing where people dress up as stereotype Jews with giant noses and vampire fangs and present them as evil borderline monsters. That's kinda the Jewish equivalent of black face.

Now, nobody thinks that a non jew dressing up as a normal looking Jewish person and not being disrespectful in anyway is the same as that Jewish vampire thing. But when it comes to a non black person simply dressing up as a black person, PC tards suddenly pretend like they have no idea what context is.

[Akrazotile]

Yes he was. That was the joke/satire emphasis. :confusedshrug:


Painting his face black and being oblivious to the absurdity of it is not the same as blackface costuming.

Painting your face black, and "blackface" costuming are not the same thing.

They arent the same thing. This can be easily referenced with a simple Google search.


I cant believe so many people are unaware of this. Where the **** is Kizzle? We need ISH's official negro historian to get in here and rule on this.

[rufuspaul]

I don't think Paula's gay son is supposed to be Ricky Ricardo. I think the white haired dude is Ricky, Paula is Lucy and the brown kid is Little Ricky, hence the "esplainin" to do. That actually makes the "joke" even more racist and completely unfunny.

[KendrickPerkins]

So I can't ever paint my face black to portray a black person under any circumstance because it will be deemed racist?

Right Deuce? You ugly pathetic loser.

[Jailblazers7]

So I can't ever paint my face black to portray a black person under any circumstance because it will be deemed racist?

Right Deuce? You ugly pathetic loser.

I mean, yeah, that's pretty much true. :lol

Not sure what circumstance would make you want to tho.

[Dresta]

White people who obsessively try to prove how not-racist they are, are pretty sketchy.
It's called over-compensating. They certainly have something on their consciences - i wonder what it is?

:oldlol:

[NumberSix]

So I can't ever paint my face black to portray a black person under any circumstance because it will be deemed racist?

Right Deuce? You ugly pathetic loser.
Ok, I agree with your first point, but this isn't necessary. Reasonable people can disagree without personal insults/attacks.

[NumberSix]

I mean, yeah, that's pretty much true. :lol

Not sure what circumstance would make you want to tho.
Halloween costume? :confusedshrug:

[Mirror]

It's a historical inaccuracy. Dressing up as a black person in itself is not black face.

Here's the problem with PC idiots. They pretend that they don't understand what context is.

For example, in the Middle East, they have a thing where people dress up as stereotype Jews with giant noses and vampire fangs and present them as evil borderline monsters. That's kinda the Jewish equivalent of black face.

Now, nobody thinks that a non jew dressing up as a normal looking Jewish person and not being disrespectful in anyway is the same as that Jewish vampire thing. But when it comes to a non black person simply dressing up as a black person, PC tards suddenly pretend like they have no idea what context is.

No, we get the context. We have said it many times. We also understand that what is happening is not as bad. You for some reason don't seem to understand that it is still offensive to many simply because it doesn't fit the historical context of black face. You are the ultimate all-or-nothing thinker, and are too dense to look at the context you keep mentioning and understand that there is offensive levels in between.

[Patrick Chewing]

Not sure what circumstance would make you want to tho.


Free will?


I don't see how painting your face to mimic a black person constitutes as racist.


If you were racist, you would want nothing to do with the black race.

[DonDadda59]

That was mostly due to hollywood makeup tricks and the effects of black-and-white programming.


This is a much closer approximation of what Arnaz looked like in real life:

http://www.ehd.org/images/tobaccopic54.jpg

Das Racist :coleman:

http://oi47.tinypic.com/2uh8i91.jpg

Cadid^


It's a historical inaccuracy. Dressing up as a black person in itself is not black face.

Here's the problem with PC idiots. They pretend that they don't understand what context is.

For example, in the Middle East, they have a thing where people dress up as stereotype Jews with giant noses and vampire fangs and present them as evil borderline monsters. That's kinda the Jewish equivalent of black face.

Now, nobody thinks that a non jew dressing up as a normal looking Jewish person and not being disrespectful in anyway is the same as that Jewish vampire thing. But when it comes to a non black person simply dressing up as a black person, PC tards suddenly pretend like they have no idea what context is.

You're trying way too hard here :lol

It was clearly black face. That was the point. The whole point of the movie was to harpoon the Hollywood machine and show all of its absurdities including the penchant for 'method' actors to go overboard and producers hiring them instead of going for the genuine article. It just happened again with one of those Mara sisters being hired to play the Indian character Tiger Lily in a live action Peter Pan movie.

[rufuspaul]

Free will?


I don't see how painting your face to mimic a black person constitutes as racist.


If you were racist, you would want nothing to do with the black race.


Unless you wanted to make fun of them in a derogatory way.

[Akrazotile]

Ok, I agree with your first point, but this isn't necessary. Reasonable people can disagree without personal insults/attacks.


Yeah but Douche Walnuts isnt a reasonable person, hes a posturing fegget and deserves to be shamed.

[Yoda]

If green face he did, offended I would be.

[Akrazotile]

If green face he did, offended I would be.



Yoda hath spoken. Lets leave it at that and move on to more important issues. This shit isnt even worth discussing.

[Akrazotile]

So.... Yall see Lebron's c0ck?

Pretty big, right?



Dude's such an alpha :rockon:

[DeuceWallaces]

Yeah but Douche Walnuts isnt a reasonable person, hes a posturing fegget and deserves to be shamed.

If you don't think my position is reasonable then you're living in the wrong century.

[Jailblazers7]

Free will?


I don't see how painting your face to mimic a black person constitutes as racist.


If you were racist, you would want nothing to do with the black race.

You can exercise your free will and do it as a halloween costume, as a joke, or whatever reason. But you're going to be called racists which shouldn't be surprising given what black face was used for in the past. Sorry if that offends you.

[KiiiiNG]

If you don't think my position is reasonable then you're living in the wrong century.
Their intention isn't to be racist you ****ing retard. They're getting attention BECAUSE of morons like you.

[Akrazotile]

If you don't think my position is reasonable then you're living in the wrong century.


Bro, WE'RE DONE WITH THIS.

Talk about Lebron's c0ck or GTFO.

[Patrick Chewing]

Unless you wanted to make fun of them in a derogatory way.


Which brings us back to Paula Deen, someone who's in the spotlight. No one is that brazen nowadays to be openly racist.

While people certainly have a right to be racist, I don't think it's as out in the open as the media portrays it. That's why this picture is much to do about nothing. Just a bunch of slimy Liberal hands grasping at straws.

Yes, there are racist people in the world, and there always will be. Institutional racism is a thing of the past though, and I think that's where our focus as a country should be at in order to move forward. The rest is just nitpicking lunacy.

[Mirror]

Institutional racism is a thing of the past though
:coleman:

[NumberSix]

No, we get the context. We have said it many times. We also understand that what is happening is not as bad. You for some reason don't seem to understand that it is still offensive to many simply because it doesn't fit the historical context of black face. You are the ultimate all-or-nothing thinker, and are too dense to look at the context you keep mentioning and understand that there is offensive levels in between.
No, I'm the one here acknowledging context. You are the one claiming that dressing up as a black person is by definition black face with absolutely no room for context. That's all or nothing. I'm the one rationally understanding that sometimes it is black face, and sometimes it isn't.

"Sometimes" can't = "all or nothing"

[DeuceWallaces]

Their intention isn't to be racist you ****ing retard. They're getting attention BECAUSE of morons like you.

But she is a racist. There's quite a lot of evidence.

[DeuceWallaces]

No, I'm the one here acknowledging context. You are the one claiming that dressing up as a black person is by definition black face with absolutely no room for context. That's all or nothing. I'm the one rationally understanding that sometimes it is black face, and sometimes it isn't.

"Sometimes" can't = "all or nothing"

Everyone here understands it's not historical black face. You rely on semantics for your dumbass "arguments"; like always. That's not being rational, it's being stupid because you completely ignore the modern context, and although it's not as derogatory as 19th century blackface, it's still clearly offensive and much worse given her history.

[Patrick Chewing]

But she is a racist. There's quite a lot of evidence.


I've never seen white racists feed black people before. Maybe there's poison in there. Or maybe she's giving her a little taste of white privilege.

https://ashy2classy.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/paula-deen-feeding-590x431.jpeg


In this picture, she makes physical contact with a black person. Some white racists in the 50's and 60's thought black people were subhuman. I guess she's whispering how much she owns her black ass in this picture.

http://d236bkdxj385sg.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/pauladeen.jpg

[Mirror]

No, I'm the one here acknowledging context. You are the one claiming that dressing up as a black person is by definition black face with absolutely no room for context. That's all or nothing. I'm the one rationally understanding that sometimes it is black face, and sometimes it isn't.

"Sometimes" can't = "all or nothing"

I said it is a form of black face that is offensive, and you denied that it is and indicated that it must be 1 specific thing. If it doesn't mean the historical definition of black face, you completely disregard it.

[Mirror]

Everyone here understands it's not historical black face. You rely on semantics for your dumbass "arguments"; like always. That's not being rational, it's being stupid because you completely ignore the modern context, and although it's not as derogatory as 19th century blackface, it's still clearly offensive and much worse given her history.

Precisely, but he refuses to look at the context we are talking about (which is much more relevant to this thread).

[DonDadda59]

I've never seen white racists feed black people before.

I don't have an opinion on Dean either way but this is just plain retarded 'logic'. As if Massa never fed his slaves. :facepalm

[KiiiiNG]

But she is a racist. There's quite a lot of evidence.
I don't care.

[Mirror]

I've never seen white racists feed black people before. Maybe there's poison in there. Or maybe she's giving her a little taste of white privilege.

https://ashy2classy.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/paula-deen-feeding-590x431.jpeg


In this picture, she makes physical contact with a black person. Some white racists in the 50's and 60's thought black people were subhuman. I guess she's whispering how much she owns her black ass in this picture.

http://d236bkdxj385sg.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/pauladeen.jpg

White people have fed their slaves and made physical contact with them for 100s of years. Heck, they even were sexually intimate with their slaves. This proves nothing. It is like saying, "I can't have racial bias, because I have a black friend."

[NumberSix]

Everyone here understands it's not historical black face. You rely on semantics for your dumbass "arguments"; like always. That's not being rational, it's being stupid because you completely ignore the modern context, and although it's not as derogatory as 19th century blackface, it's still clearly offensive and much worse given her history.
If you choose to be offended by something where there is clearly no offense intended, then that's your problem.

[Mirror]

If you choose to be offended by something where there is clearly no offense intended, then that's your problem.

So black people should not be offended by the confederate flag that represented a group of people fighting to own slaves because the white person with the flag may be thinking about heritage?

[NumberSix]

Precisely, but he refuses to look at the context we are talking about (which is much more relevant to this thread).
There is no context. Only a lack of context.

Your entire argument is "there is no possible scenario of a costume of a black person/character not being black face. There is no room for context".

[Droid101]

This is a retarded thing to get upset about but Chewing's "Examples" of her not being racist are ****ing stupid as hell.

[highwhey]

This is a retarded thing to get upset about but Chewing's "Examples" of her not being racist are ****ing stupid as hell.
Is he even a latino as he claims to be? Either way, he's a complete fool with flawed logic.

[NumberSix]

So black people should not be offended by the confederate flag that represented a group of people fighting to own slaves because the white person with the flag may be thinking about heritage?
This isn't your argument.

Your argument is the equivalent of... All flags with an "X" design are the confederate flag. As if African Americans should be offended by Scottish flags because it's similar to a confederate flag.

Thats a stupid opinion. There IS room for context. A Scottish flag being similar to a confederate flag doesn't make it the same. The "rebel flag" is a specific thing. As is black face.

[Mirror]

There is no context. Only a lack of context.

Your entire argument is "there is no possible scenario of a costume of a black person/character not being black face. There is no room for context".

Your entire argument is "Painting your face black to look like a black person is not black face unless it is meant to demean them."

When the context of RDJ is brought up in tropic thunder comes up, you instantly dismissed that black face could be used as satire and indicate that it must automatically mean it is not black face because it doesn't match the historical context and refuse that there has been development in the use of black face. Yes, what you refer to is the original, more offensive black face. But the use of the phrase "black face" has changed over time as many words and phrases do, but you refuse to accept that. You might as well be arguing that "f*ggot" is not offensive because it means a bundle of sticks.

[Patrick Chewing]

White people have fed their slaves and made physical contact with them for 100s of years. Heck, they even were sexually intimate with their slaves. This proves nothing. It is like saying, "I can't have racial bias, because I have a black friend."


Then you and I must have different definitions of racism.


Textbook racism is the racism I'm referring to in which one race is oppressed or discriminated against by another.

So, does Paula Deen consider herself superior to black people? Has she discriminated against black people? If there is evidence of this, then I will change my stance on her. Otherwise, this is just another retarded attempt by PC idiots to stir up the pot again for no reason.

[Patrick Chewing]

Looks like Deuce texted his friends over to this thread to back his sorry ass up. Droid and his pimple-faced friends are here for the party.

[Mirror]

This isn't your argument.

Your argument is the equivalent of... All flags with an "X" design are the confederate flag. As if African Americans should be offended by Scottish flags because it's similar to a confederate flag.

Thats a stupid opinion. There IS room for context. A Scottish flag being similar to a confederate flag doesn't make it the same. The "rebel flag" is a specific thing. As is black face.

That post was responding that that one quote. Nice straw man argument in your 2 paragraphs though.

[Mirror]

Then you and I must have different definitions of racism.


Textbook racism is the racism I'm referring to in which one race is oppressed or discriminated against by another.

So, does Paula Deen consider herself superior to black people? Has she discriminated against black people? If there is evidence of this, then I will change my stance on her. Otherwise, this is just another retarded attempt by PC idiots to stir up the pot again for no reason.

Never heard of covert vs overt racism?

[DeuceWallaces]

So, does Paula Deen consider herself superior to black people? Has she discriminated against black people? If there is evidence of this, then I will change my stance on her. Otherwise, this is just another retarded attempt by PC idiots to stir up the pot again for no reason.

:lol :lol Guess you don't read the news much.

[Patrick Chewing]

:lol :lol Guess you don't read the news much.


The burden of proof is on you. Go ahead and supply us all with this evidence you have on her that you mentioned on the previous page.

[DeuceWallaces]

If you choose to be offended by something where there is clearly no offense intended, then that's your problem.

Saying you don't mean to offend while using blackface or spouting off racist words does not make it right.

Paula Deen is a racist. She looks down upon black people, appears to demean them based on court documents, and openly wishes for the plantation days. When you combine those sentiments with that pic and no sense of self-awareness, it's not a good look.

This shouldn't be that hard to understand.

[Patrick Chewing]

Never heard of covert vs overt racism?


Yeahhhhhh......



I don't think someone like Paula Deen has the time for that. :lol



Getting back to the topic, like I said, there are racists everywhere and there will always be racists. Paula Deen and this picture = Not racist.

[DeuceWallaces]

The burden of proof is on you. Go ahead and supply us all with this evidence you have on her that you mentioned on the previous page.

Maybe you should know what the **** you're talking about before you go into a Paula Deen blackface thread firing off like a moron.

[NumberSix]

Saying you don't mean to offend while using blackface or spouting off racist words does not make it right.

Paula Deen is a racist. She looks down upon black people, appears to demean them based on court documents, and openly wishes for the plantation days. When you combine those sentiments with that pic and no sense of self-awareness, it's not a good look.

This shouldn't be that hard to understand.
I never said she isn't.

[NumberSix]

Maybe you should know what the **** you're talking about before you go into a Paula Deen blackface thread firing off like a moron.
This isn't a Paula Deen black face thread.

[Mirror]

Yeahhhhhh......



I don't think someone like Paula Deen has the time for that. :lol



Getting back to the topic, like I said, there are racists everywhere and there will always be racists. Paula Deen and this picture = Not racist.

What? Being racist covertly or overtly doesn't take anymore time than anything else somebody says. I doubt she instantly went from dropping N-bombs to completely not racist. I'm pretty sure she says covert racist things and dismisses them as not racist, just like she is likely to fail at seeing how her son painting his face brown is offensive.

[Patrick Chewing]

Maybe you should know what the **** you're talking about before you go into a Paula Deen blackface thread firing off like a moron.


Apparently you don't, shithead. The first thing you mentioned in this thread was how this picture was racist and a bad idea. Go google up some Cubans and see how dark they are.

[Mirror]

Apparently you don't, shithead. The first thing you mentioned in this thread was how this picture was racist and a bad idea. Go google up some Cubans and see how dark they are.

You don't see how this could be offensive and a bad idea?

[NumberSix]

What? Being racist covertly or overtly doesn't take anymore time than anything else somebody says. I doubt she instantly went from dropping N-bombs to completely not racist. I'm pretty sure she says covert racist things and dismisses them as not racist, just like she is likely to fail at seeing how her son painting his face brown is offensive.
Meh. Patrick Chewing IS Latino. If he says dressing up in Lucy and Ricky costumes isn't offensive to him, who are you to tell him it is?

[Mirror]

Meh. Patrick Chewing IS Latino. If he says dressing up in Lucy and Ricky costumes isn't offensive to him, who are you to tell him it is?

I never said that it should be offensive to him, but he also isn't the representative for all Latino people and I'm guessing plenty will find this offensive. If a black poster came here and said that he isn't offended by white people using the N-bomb, that doesn't mean it won't be offensive to many.

[NumberSix]

I never said that it should be offensive to him, but he also isn't the representative for all Latino people and I'm guessing plenty will find this offensive.
And, you are? :confusedshrug:


Nobody but the most ridiculous of political correctness extremists could possibly care about this.

[Mirror]

And, you are? :confusedshrug:

I didn't say that either, but it is highly likely that many will be offended by it. That is just common sense.

[Patrick Chewing]

You don't see how this could be offensive and a bad idea?


It could be offensive to people that don't know any better.

Latinos are darker-skinned. So in essence, his painting of his face is actually spot on. This is no different than someone buying an Obama mask for Halloween. It's mimicking someone.

And I don't know how many other Latinos are on this board like me, but this whole thing is quite silly.

[Mirror]

And, you are? :confusedshrug:


Nobody but the most ridiculous of political correctness extremists could possibly care about this.

Then why do you waste so much time arguing against it? Seems pretty ridiculous to waste your time fighting for the use of painting one's face.

[Mirror]

It could be offensive to people that don't know any better.

Latinos are darker-skinned. So in essence, his painting of his face is actually spot on. This is no different than someone buying an Obama mask for Halloween. It's mimicking someone.

And I don't know how many other Latinos are on this board like me, but this whole thing is quite silly.

So people who are offended simply don't know any better? Accuracy is all that should matter to everybody?

[Patrick Chewing]

I love white people. I prefer white girls over latinas. But some of you white people on this board hate yourselves so much it's pathetic. You get a hard on at any chance you can to spurn a white person at the first whiff of racial disparity.

I've seen a lot more racist latinos and blacks than whites in my 30+ years here on Earth that's for sure.

[Mirror]

I love white people. I prefer white girls over latinas. But some of you white people on this board hate yourselves so much it's pathetic. You get a hard on at any chance you can to spurn a white person at the first whiff of racial disparity.

I've seen a lot more racist latinos and blacks than whites in my 30+ years here on Earth that's for sure.

What does anything in this thread have to do with white people hating themselves?

[Patrick Chewing]

So people who are offended simply don't know any better? Accuracy is all that should matter to everybody?


Well, to be honest, the only people that have been offended thus far in this thread have been white. Seeing as I am at least half-Cuban and the only Latino to comment on this so far, yeah, I don't have a problem with it. I think my opinion matters just a tad bit more on this issue.

[NumberSix]

What does anything in this thread have to do with white people hating themselves?
Because it's a typical display lib-tard whites battling each other over who can be most offended on other people's behalf.

[Derka]

I'm not personally offended in the slightest. But seriously: who...could possibly have thought that this was a good idea? That it would draw no reaction whatsoever?

"People down here in the South are all ranting and raving on some bullshit over this stupid flag...this is clearly the ideal time to paint a white guy up in brown face and take a picture with his famous racist mom."

[atljonesbro]

It's almost as if people are trying their asses off to prove they aren't racist lmao. Very suspect

[Mirror]

Because it's a typical display lib-tard whites battling each other over who can be most offended on other people's behalf.

Even if that were the incentive, that has nothing to do with self hate.

[Mirror]

Well, to be honest, the only people that have been offended thus far in this thread have been white. Seeing as I am at least half-Cuban and the only Latino to comment on this so far, yeah, I don't have a problem with it. I think my opinion matters just a tad bit more on this issue.

You realize that this is blowing up all over the internet and people of all races are commenting on it. Your opinion matters just as everybody else's matter. Let's also not forget people who are black. This display, though directly about Latino people, is further proof of how shallow Paula Dean's apology was in the past.

[NumberSix]

You realize that this is blowing up all over the internet and people of all races are commenting on it. Your opinion matters just as everybody else's matter.
Yeah, but "blowing up all over the Internet" basically equates to like 0.00062% of people giving a shit about this.

[Dresta]

Everyone here understands it's not historical black face. You rely on semantics for your dumbass "arguments"; like always. That's not being rational, it's being stupid because you completely ignore the modern context, and although it's not as derogatory as 19th century blackface, it's still clearly offensive and much worse given her history.
People like you are incessantly distorting language and altering definitions to fit your own agenda, and then when someone calls you on it you say they are relying on semantics. Well, your arguments are basically reliant on people not knowing what things mean - so, the arbitrariness of language; the modern age suits your kind of flippant idiocy.

Calling out linguistic distortions is not semantics - in fact, the academic distortion of language throughout the 20th century is one of the major reasons why most of the population is completely clueless and so easily led by calculating politicians like the flocks of sheep they are.

If you knew anything about philosophy, language or logic then you would understand the importance of linguistic precision, but you don't, so you just contribute to the rising tide of chaotic relativism that can only be self-destructive.

I mean, Christ, you only need to have read 1984 to get something of a grasp of why the debasement and distortion of language is so dangerous. 2+2=5. Liberal or Libertarian or New Deal progressive = Conservative assholes who need to be demonised.

It is exactly the same thing.

[Mirror]

People like you are incessantly distorting language and altering definitions to fit your own agenda

Assuming you are talking about the use of black face, he isn't the one who changed the language. It has changed with society as has many words and phrases in our language. Not every word or phrase is only used in its original context.

[Mirror]

Yeah, but "blowing up all over the Internet" basically equates to like 0.00062% of people giving a shit about this.

Regardless, his opinion isn't more important than the opinions of others out there.

[NumberSix]

People like you are incessantly distorting language and altering definitions to fit your own agenda, and then when someone calls you on it you say they are relying on semantics. Well, your arguments are basically reliant on people not knowing what things mean - so, the arbitrariness of language; the modern age suits your kind of flippant idiocy.

Calling out linguistic distortions is not semantics - in fact, the academic distortion of language throughout the 20th century is one of the major reasons why most of the population is completely clueless and so easily led by calculating politicians like the flocks of sheep they are.

If you knew anything about philosophy, language or logic then you would understand the importance of linguistic precision, but you don't, so you just contribute to the rising tide of chaotic relativism that can only be self-destructive.

I mean, Christ, you only need to have read 1984 to get something of a grasp of why the debasement and distortion of language is so dangerous. 2+2=5. Liberal or Libertarian or New Deal progressive = Conservative assholes who need to be demonised.

It is exactly the same thing.
You're being too kind by assuming he doesn't understand the importance. The whole purpose of twisting language is to claim their political opponents said things they didn't actually say.

[Patrick Chewing]

Regardless, his opinion isn't more important than the opinions of others out there.


But as a non-Hispanic, how would a white guy's opinion on this picture trump my own? I've just painted a clear picture the last 3 or 4 pages or so, that Latinos are darker-skinned. Trust me, this isn't a problem within the Latino community. I think I would know.

[Patrick Chewing]

This is like White Liberals being offended by the Redskins logo.

If there are Native American tribes out there (which there are) that have no problem with it, then DROP THE F'N ISSUE.

[ArbitraryWater]

never knew what a blackface was before heavincent made a comment bout that one dude that got in trouble for it.. dont know why that shit upsets ppl.

[~primetime~]

do actual latinos give a shit about this? or is it just white people/media fussing?

[Mirror]

But as a non-Hispanic, how would a white guy's opinion on this picture trump my own? I've just painted a clear picture the last 3 or 4 pages or so, that Latinos are darker-skinned. Trust me, this isn't a problem within the Latino community. I think I would know.

Being Latino does not automatically make somebody more aware. There are people ignorant about their own race pretty often. And the concept that Latinos are darker-skinned has nothing to do with the points being made here. Nobody is denying that they tend to have darker skin than white people.

[Mirror]

This is like White Liberals being offended by the Redskins logo.

If there are Native American tribes out there (which there are) that have no problem with it, then DROP THE F'N ISSUE.

But there are also Native American tribes out there that DO have a problem with it. The approval of 1 does not equate to it being OK with all.

[Mirror]

do actual latinos give a shit about this? or is it just white people/media fussing?

It is black people too. As I already pointed out, this demonstrates how shallow Paula Dean's apology to black people was.

[HitandRun Reggie]

How is this thread 9 pages already? Usually a thread has to be African-American related to get this long.

You'll have to take your beta ass somewhere else to feel victimized.

[Akrazotile]

I'm not personally offended in the slightest. But seriously: who...could possibly have thought that this was a good idea? That it would draw no reaction whatsoever?

"People down here in the South are all ranting and raving on some bullshit over this stupid flag...this is clearly the ideal time to paint a white guy up in brown face and take a picture with his famous racist mom."


Maybe she just doesnt give a ****?

These petty bigotry witch hunts have a serious kobe-stan effect, I swear.

Like I have no attachment to the Confederate Flag or Paula Deen, just like I have no real beef with Kobe, but when I see the absolutely unreal stream of piss these trivial issues cause to flow from the pants of liberals, I actually start to root for them. It makes me glad there are still some people out there who arent caugt up in the trendy culture of sensitivity-hunts where ugly, dweeby, whiney, emasculated liberal dorks try and move up their cultural heirarchy by showing everyone how fiercely tolerant they can be (by being intolerant of anyone who disagrees with their flow chart of tolerance). Same reason so many people root against Kobe. The people behind him are just absolutely insufferable. Same thing with these beta liberal poser faks.

I hope Paula Deen puts out a book with a big confederate flag on the cover, and then comes to my town to do a book signing, Ill go buy a copy and get that shit signed.

[highwhey]

do actual latinos give a shit about this? or is it just white people/media fussing?
Not really. Tbh, depicting a latino takes more than just skin color. I know various puerto ricans in real life, some are really light skinand others are not so light. Same thing with us Mexicans, the northern part of Mexico has some folks that could pass as Caucasian while the Mexicans in D.F. are dark asf

[Mirror]

I hope Paula Deen puts out a book with a big confederate flag on the cover, and then comes to my town to do a book signing, Ill go buy a copy and get that shit signed.

I would be OK with that because then she won't be some fake. I prefer my racists to be obvious and unhidden.

[highwhey]

do actual latinos give a shit about this? or is it just white people/media fussing?
And not to be messed up with my own people, but I've met a lot of Mexicans in Mexico who are racist as fvck towards black people. They have a word for them "mayote".

[Dresta]

Assuming you are talking about the use of black face, he isn't the one who changed the language. It has changed with society as has many words and phrases in our language. Not every word or phrase is only used in its original context.
I'm talking about a hell of a lot more than black face, which is a completely trivial and unimportant issue, and something no-one would have time for if they had any actual hardship in their lives.

We live in a world of definitions and categories, and yet these definitions and categories are so arbitrary that their meanings become inverted in a few decades. It is no longer possible to accurately define what a conservative or a liberal actually is any more - they are little more than tribal groups filled with disparate people, often with completely different political opinions. This is not the natural evolution of language, rather, it is intellectuals (and the state) moulding language in such a way so as to justify an expansion of their own power. It's what happens when the state gets a stranglehold over education (basically a monopoly over the minds of the young).

[RidonKs]

Calling out linguistic distortions is not semantics - in fact, the academic distortion of language throughout the 20th century is one of the major reasons why most of the population is completely clueless and so easily led by calculating politicians like the flocks of sheep they are.
ahh

"in fact", everybody in 1377 had their own pocket websters!

you're making this up. language has always been subject to convulsions. you just hate academia, which is perfectly fine, but does nothing whatsoever to explain the dull sensibilities of modern sheep herding you so disdain. the general public appears confused because in the past they didn't have to understand issues, since they had no fking say in them. this is not rocket science.

[DonDadda59]

I love white people. I prefer white girls over latinas.

Tio Tom

[~primetime~]

And not to be messed up with my own people, but I've met a lot of Mexicans in Mexico who are racist as fvck towards black people. They have a word for them "mayote".
Yes I have grown up with and witnessed plenty of racism from Mexicans here in Texas.

remember this? (http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1997-07-11/sports/1997192037_1_mike-tyson-camacho-behavior)

[TripleA]

[QUOTE=DonDadda59]Tio Tom

[Norcaliblunt]

Didn't read whole thread so don't know if this was mentioned already, but didn't Wayne's brothers do a white girl movie where they painted there faces, dressed up like white women and basically mocked them?

[rezznor]

so...that picture is actually an old one she took before her recent troubles. apparently her media manager was the one that re-posted it and has since been fired.

[DeuceWallaces]

People like you are incessantly distorting language and altering definitions to fit your own agenda, and then when someone calls you on it you say they are relying on semantics. Well, your arguments are basically reliant on people not knowing what things mean - so, the arbitrariness of language; the modern age suits your kind of flippant idiocy.

Calling out linguistic distortions is not semantics - in fact, the academic distortion of language throughout the 20th century is one of the major reasons why most of the population is completely clueless and so easily led by calculating politicians like the flocks of sheep they are.

If you knew anything about philosophy, language or logic then you would understand the importance of linguistic precision, but you don't, so you just contribute to the rising tide of chaotic relativism that can only be self-destructive.

I mean, Christ, you only need to have read 1984 to get something of a grasp of why the debasement and distortion of language is so dangerous. 2+2=5. Liberal or Libertarian or New Deal progressive = Conservative assholes who need to be demonised.

It is exactly the same thing.

Bunch of bullshit from you as usual; 200 words to say nothing. Still butt hurt because you don't have the slightest clue what science is.

Blackface clearly has a modern meaning. It also clearly meant something similar, yet a bit different 150 years ago. Using the word for this, Tropic Thunder, or some stupid sorority party is not completely off-base nor does it render the point moot.

The word is not exclusively for 1880s vaudeville blackface acts and can be used in a modern context. If you don't understand, well I can't help you.

[Lebron23]

Didn't read whole thread so don't know if this was mentioned already, but didn't Wayne's brothers do a white girl movie where they painted there faces, dressed up like white women and basically mocked them?


Wayan Brother's. The movie was called White Chicks. And I love it.

http://www.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/movieposters/34622/p34622_p_v7_aa.jpg

[~primetime~]

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0ljgd9oDb1qfxhab.jpg

^^^ Soul Man

how would that movie do today I wonder...

[Patrick Chewing]

Being Latino does not automatically make somebody more aware. There are people ignorant about their own race pretty often. And the concept that Latinos are darker-skinned has nothing to do with the points being made here. Nobody is denying that they tend to have darker skin than white people.


I think you're trolling now. Who's alt is this?


The point is simple. This is not a racist or demeaning picture in any way, shape, or form. End of discussion.

[Mirror]

I think you're trolling now. Who's alt is this?


The point is simple. This is not a racist or demeaning picture in any way, shape, or form. End of discussion.

Not sure why what I said you take as trolling because it is truth.

The point is simple. This is offensive to many. Just because you are not offended doesn't mean nobody is.

[NumberSix]

Not sure why what I said you take as trolling because it is truth.

The point is simple. This is offensive to many. Just because you are not offended doesn't mean nobody is.
And that matters because.....

[Patrick Chewing]

Not sure why what I said you take as trolling because it is truth.

The point is simple. This is offensive to many. Just because you are not offended doesn't mean nobody is.


And who is the many? Is the many the majority? I want to see video clips of these outraged hispanics that want to burn her house down and build a taco stand in its place.

I'll use your same logic. Just because YOU find it offensive doesn't meant that everyone finds it offensive.

I'm the best thing you've got in terms of the Latino voice on the matter, and survey says.......:sleeping

[DeuceWallaces]

Lol, you're probably like 1/8th Latino, just throw it out there because you think it's carte blanche to be a racist douche.

Anyway, I don't think anyone is really that offended. It's just stupid and shows an incredible lack of self awareness given her recent actions and accusations against her.

[CavaliersFTW]

That was mostly due to hollywood makeup tricks and the effects of black-and-white programming.


This is a much closer approximation of what Arnaz looked like in real life:

http://www.ehd.org/images/tobaccopic54.jpg

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/ilovelucyandricky/images/1/13/I_love_lucy_ricky_ricardo.jpg

[CavaliersFTW]

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0ljgd9oDb1qfxhab.jpg

^^^ Soul Man

how would that movie do today I wonder...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2zMrjBLwn8

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[KiiiiNG]

Lol, you're probably like 1/8th Latino, just throw it out there because you think it's carte blanche to be a racist douche.

Anyway, I don't think anyone is really that offended. It's just stupid and shows an incredible lack of self awareness given her recent actions and accusations against her.

True, true, true.

But she's a boss lady and doesn't care what the mexicans have to say. They mean NOTHING to her. :banana:

[Dresta]

ahh

"in fact", everybody in 1377 had their own pocket websters!

you're making this up. language has always been subject to convulsions. you just hate academia, which is perfectly fine, but does nothing whatsoever to explain the dull sensibilities of modern sheep herding you so disdain. the general public appears confused because in the past they didn't have to understand issues, since they had no fking say in them. this is not rocket science.
No, words don't invert their meaning in less than half a century without a concerted effort to do so, and a completely ahistorical populace. If what you said were true, then Victorian novelists would be unreadable, and yet with the exception of a few words that have fallen out of use, they are perfectly easy to understand. It is only political language that has changed in this way - and why do you think that is?

Your average American in the 19th century had a far better idea of what was going on than they do now (because they were actively involved in local politics), but you wouldn't know that, because you haven't read Tocqueville's Democracy in America - probably too busy reading a feel-good fantasist like Howard Zinn.


Bunch of bullshit from you as usual; 200 words to say nothing. Still butt hurt because you don't have the slightest clue what science is.

Blackface clearly has a modern meaning. It also clearly meant something similar, yet a bit different 150 years ago. Using the word for this, Tropic Thunder, or some stupid sorority party is not completely off-base nor does it render the point moot.

The word is not exclusively for 1880s vaudeville blackface acts and can be used in a modern context. If you don't understand, well I can't help you.
I said plenty; you, as usual, have said nothing. Keep whining about blackface all you like, but you do this with everything, from Supreme Court rulings, to political labels, to the words racist and sexist, and so on. Then, when people correct your inaccuracies you call it semantics; well, the US Constitution, and the legal framework and balance of powers it outlines, is not a matter of semantics, but a matter of law, and anyone with a brain knows that law should never be arbitrary. It's the typical tactic of closet-authoritarians who have no arguments of their own to distort language so as to smear their enemies. This has been a long-pursued tactic of the left, but you know nothing of your own intellectual history because you're a dumbass who specialised in plants and is now happy working away in a narrow and unambitious box.

As for science - :roll:. You are one of the least scientific people on here; almost all your opinions are driven largely by sentiment, and are remarkably averse to truth and the disinterested pursuit of knowledge; that is the opposite of being scientific.

You were worshipping covariance earlier as some kind of exact provider of truth; whereas anyone who has studied economics knows that econometrics begins with correcting (and it fails to do this) the errors induced by covariance and so forth. And economics is the trend setter when it comes to statistics. How do I know how each variable relates with each other and how this then relates to a specific individual? You don't, but your sentiments induce you to affirm what you don't know, so you can draw conclusions that fit with how you want things to be. Get off your high-horse - you're a low-level scientist working on something completely unimportant - congrats to you on that.

[Derka]

Maybe she just doesnt give a ****?

These petty bigotry witch hunts have a serious kobe-stan effect, I swear.

Like I have no attachment to the Confederate Flag or Paula Deen, just like I have no real beef with Kobe, but when I see the absolutely unreal stream of piss these trivial issues cause to flow from the pants of liberals, I actually start to root for them. It makes me glad there are still some people out there who arent caugt up in the trendy culture of sensitivity-hunts where ugly, dweeby, whiney, emasculated liberal dorks try and move up their cultural heirarchy by showing everyone how fiercely tolerant they can be (by being intolerant of anyone who disagrees with their flow chart of tolerance). Same reason so many people root against Kobe. The people behind him are just absolutely insufferable. Same thing with these beta liberal poser faks.

I hope Paula Deen puts out a book with a big confederate flag on the cover, and then comes to my town to do a book signing, Ill go buy a copy and get that shit signed.

Hey if she genuinely doesn't give a shit, I'm fine with that. But when she goes on her eventual apology tour over this, its my hope that she says exactly that. I don't want some horseshit speech about "I don't mean to offend people, I truly love y'all, now come have some grits-n-gravy with me and buy my new cookware set."

Say it and be done with it. "Hey, my grown man son who still hangs from my apron and I made fun of Mexicans because I don't think very highly of them and if that makes you not want to watch my show or buy my shit, fine."

[KiiiiNG]

Hey if she genuinely doesn't give a shit, I'm fine with that. But when she goes on her eventual apology tour over this, its my hope that she says exactly that. I don't want some horseshit speech about "I don't mean to offend people, I truly love y'all, now come have some grits-n-gravy with me and buy my new cookware set."

Say it and be done with it. "Hey, my grown man son who still hangs from my apron and I made fun of Mexicans because I don't think very highly of them and if that makes you not want to watch my show or buy my shit, fine."
Paula Dean doesn't care about brown people.

http://www.bloggingwhileblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/kanye-west-michael-myers-george-bush-dont-like-black-people-300x232.gif

[Brujesino]

not the least bit offended by this

[RidonKs]

No, words don't invert their meaning in less than half a century without a concerted effort to do so, and a completely ahistorical populace. If what you said were true, then Victorian novelists would be unreadable, and yet with the exception of a few words that have fallen out of use, they are perfectly easy to understand. It is only political language that has changed in this way - and why do you think that is?
many words have been completely perverted in the last 50 years outside of the political lexicon. the reason is mass entertainment and propaganda. i shouldn't say lazy academia doesn't contribute, but it isn't the root of the problem. lazy academics have been propagating their work for...ever. it's only recently that advertising or marketing or whatever pseudonym you want for propaganda has really taken hold. and as i said, it isn't exactly a riddle. call it good or bad, i could give two shits. it's inevitable according to this larger point.

but your answer appears to be to abolish the mass education system and keep higher learning concentrated among the elites privileged enough to warrant such a lavish education. so we can preserve the purity of the language or some shit. even if you had such a whim, how would you ever implement a system that doesn't leave millions of 'worthys' behind.


because you haven't read Tocqueville's Democracy in America - probably too busy reading a feel-good fantasist like Howard Zinn
and you haven't read whatever the fk. for what its worth, i've read more of de tocqueville than i have zinn who's writing is really dry. though you would be remiss to pretend people's history is fantasy. it's a big fking book for starters. you've got baggage though, i understand.

[highwhey]

not the least bit offended by this
Where are you from my brother?

[tomtucker]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ocxih4yL0c
.
BITCH! and get me some more watermelon while yo at it ...

.:oldlol: :pimp:

[Dresta]

many words have been completely perverted in the last 50 years outside of the political lexicon. the reason is mass entertainment and propaganda. i shouldn't say lazy academia doesn't contribute, but it isn't the root of the problem. lazy academics have been propagating their work for...ever. it's only recently that advertising or marketing or whatever pseudonym you want for propaganda has really taken hold. and as i said, it isn't exactly a riddle. call it good or bad, i could give two shits. it's inevitable according to this larger point.

but your answer appears to be to abolish the mass education system and keep higher learning concentrated among the elites privileged enough to warrant such a lavish education. so we can preserve the purity of the language or some shit. even if you had such a whim, how would you ever implement a system that doesn't leave millions of 'worthys' behind.


and you haven't read whatever the fk. for what its worth, i've read more of de tocqueville than i have zinn who's writing is really dry. though you would be remiss to pretend people's history is fantasy. it's a big fking book for starters. you've got baggage though, i understand.
If the reason is 'mass entertainment and propaganda' (though i have no doubt these things reinforce and intensify the problem), then why did Orwell write his Politics and the English Language in 1946, and why did he feel the need to single out 'intellectuals' as the prime culprits of the distortion and obfuscation of language? State-sponsered academics came first (really grew as a force in the 19th century), and the other things simply worsened the problem further; but these people were only treading down an already beaten path, they couldn't have done it without intellectuals laying the groundwork first.

Higher learning, by its very definition, needs to be concentrated among elites, otherwise there isn't anything 'higher' about it. The dramatic fall in academic standards over the past century attests to this. The bottom has been elevated ever so slightly, but the people who we actually need to benefit from good educations, are dragged down, and many are put off schooling and education for life from the sheer boredom of having to move through topics at the pace of a snail. The majority of teenagers simply don't belong in classrooms and would be better off acquiring skills. They aren't interested in sitting and studying for hours; it bores them, and they end up dragging down those who do find these things interesting and enlightening in the process. It has also led to the stigmatisation of learning, where trying or reading other material is seen to be nerdy and uncool, putting many off.

These elites certainly don't have to be determined by wealth (though wealth will always play a role, in any system), but by ability and aptitude, or the growth of a natural aristocracy (one of merit and ability), as Jefferson put it, or an aristocracy of efficiency, as Nietzsche argued for. The government doesn't need to have a stranglehold over the education system for them to pay the tuition for more gifted individuals without the means.

It's funny really: what you're in here calling higher education, is what most who actually go envisage as a 3/4 year holiday. Not to mention the absurd surplus of mediocre academic jobholders who produce nothing of value their entire lives, and are nothing but self-important leeches.

[NumberSix]

Lol, you're probably like 1/8th Latino, just throw it out there because you think it's carte blanche to be a racist douche.

Anyway, I don't think anyone is really that offended. It's just stupid and shows an incredible lack of self awareness given her recent actions and accusations against her.
And this is the problem with people like you. You swim in the pool of identity politics, but when a person of one of the identity groups you pretend to carry a torch for (to make yourself look like a hero) disagrees with you, you invariably start telling them they aren't "real" Latinos or "real" blacks. Every time you see a black conservative, you probably call them an "Uncle Tom" or worse and think they are beneath you for not having the opinion that YOU think they "should" have.

You don't care about these people. They're mere props for your use to push your political agenda. You don't respect these people as indivual persons.

[Brujesino]

Where are you from my brother?
Born in Oakland my family is from sinaloa

[Jasi]

I mean, yeah, that's pretty much true. :lol

Not sure what circumstance would make you want to tho.

From here it is quite difficult for me to understand the implications of this picture (I don't know who they are, who they are mimicking and what this means for the US society), so I am not going to express any judgment on this.

However, let's say that I wanted to dress up as Samuel Jackson in Pulp Fiction for the next Halloween, and therefore painted my face black.
Would it be considered racist?
I know it wouldn't in Italy.
How about the US?

[Akrazotile]

From here it is quite difficult for me to understand the implications of this picture (I don't know who they are, who they are mimicking and what this means for the US society), so I am not going to express any judgment on this.

However, let's say that I wanted to dress up as Samuel Jackson in Pulp Fiction for the next Halloween, and therefore painted my face black.
Would it be considered racist?
I know it wouldn't in Italy.
How about the US?


Just depends who youre around.


The thing is, in cases like these, all youre really doing is adding another layer of description. Just like if I was saying "hey, remember that guy we met earlier, that was tellin us about that one restaurant" and youre trying to remember exactly which guy it was and youre like "oh yeah, the black dude right?" Its just simply adding a level of description. Even black guys do this all the time, when including black (or any color/race) as a description helps to narrow down who youre talking about.

If I wanted to go as Arnold for Halloween Id probably get a spray tan and fake muscles. Im not making some sweeping statement about people with big muscles, or bronze complexions. Im just tryin to look like dude. Same with a Sam Jackson costume if I darkened my face, or if I was going as some really pale celebrity and I put on whitening makeup.

What's offensive is something like blackface, where youre not trying to reflect a specific person, but rather using exagerrated stereotypical features to make a large, unflattering generalization about a whole group. Thats why context is key.

This whole thing really is a non issue, however it's easy for liberals here to get up and wax against the boogieman of bigotry than to go after real issues like poor parenting in low income areas etc. For social justice champions it's more about running around with the cape on and making "boom! pow!" noises than it is about actually fighting crime - literally and figuratively.

[Hawker]

Wgas

[TheMan]

The stupidest thing about this whole affair is that Arnaz wasn't dark skinned, he could've easily been mistaken for Italian. Yet they went brown face :lol

Ignorant idiots

[TheMan]

do actual latinos give a shit about this? or is it just white people/media fussing?
I couldn't care less, I just think it's stupid they had to paint that white idiot as if Desi was the same skin tone as George Lopez :facepalm

[Charlie Sheen]

The stupidest thing about this whole affair is that Arnaz wasn't dark skinned, he could've easily been mistaken for Italian. Yet they went brown face :lol

Ignorant idiots

Lighten up
It's a swing and a miss cuz the picture isn't black and white. I don't care about the make up. They were trying to have fun...he wasn't holding a bag of oranges or anything like that :lol

[Patrick Chewing]

he wasn't holding a bag of oranges or anything like that :lol


Hijo de puta cabron! We have to make a living somehow!

[highwhey]

Hijo de puta cabron! We have to make a living somehow!
I swear you're a fake latino

[Patrick Chewing]

I swear you're a fake latino


I'm not latino enough for ya? I have to be lazy, have 8 kids, mow grass, plaster my car with Jesus figurines, shop at hand me down stores and listen to AM radio??

That's what refs do. I ain't no ref. Pinche culero.

[Jailblazers7]

From here it is quite difficult for me to understand the implications of this picture (I don't know who they are, who they are mimicking and what this means for the US society), so I am not going to express any judgment on this.

However, let's say that I wanted to dress up as Samuel Jackson in Pulp Fiction for the next Halloween, and therefore painted my face black.
Would it be considered racist?
I know it wouldn't in Italy.
How about the US?

Honestly, it probably wouldn't be considered racist by a lot of people and you likely wouldn't get shit for it at a party. But if it went viral you'd be called a racist asshole. Especially at this moment in time with how sensitive the country is to race.

[ShackEelOKneel]

That was just stupid.

[~primetime~]

Honestly, it probably wouldn't be considered racist by a lot of people and you likely wouldn't get shit for it at a party. But if it went viral you'd be called a racist asshole. Especially at this moment in time with how sensitive the country is to race.
10 or so years ago I had a white friend that dressed up as 2-Pac for Halloween, he painted his skin black, did the "THUG LIFE" tat on his stomach. We hit bars and clubs all over Dallas, everyone thought it was funny, no one felt it was racist.

[ShackEelOKneel]

10 or so years ago I had a white friend that dressed up as 2-Pac for Halloween, he painted his skin black, did the "THUG LIFE" tat on his stomach. We hit bars and clubs all over Dallas, everyone thought it was funny, no one felt it was racist.

Not surprising he wasn't called out for it in Texas, even if it was Dallas.

[highwhey]

I'm not latino enough for ya? I have to be lazy, have 8 kids, mow grass, plaster my car with Jesus figurines, shop at hand me down stores and listen to AM radio??

That's what refs do. I ain't no ref. Pinche culero.
Masssss puto

[Patrick Chewing]

10 or so years ago I had a white friend that dressed up as 2-Pac for Halloween, he painted his skin black, did the "THUG LIFE" tat on his stomach. We hit bars and clubs all over Dallas, everyone thought it was funny, no one felt it was racist.



It's racist cause feminine nancy boys like Douchewallaces say it's racist, and his kind control social media.

[TheMan]

I'm not latino enough for ya? I have to be lazy, have 8 kids, mow grass, plaster my car with Jesus figurines, shop at hand me down stores and listen to AM radio??

That's what refs do. I ain't no ref. Pinche culero.
Latinos aren't just Mexican you Dominican POS :cheers:

[Patrick Chewing]

Latinos aren't just Mexican you Dominican POS :cheers:


Tranquilo tigre.

[~primetime~]

Not surprising he wasn't called out for it in Texas, even if it was Dallas.
we had plenty of black friends...and were at clubs with plenty of black peeps

no one expressed that they were offended...he only got laughs

[Charlie Sheen]

we had plenty of black friends...and were at clubs with plenty of black peeps

no one expressed that they were offended...he only got laughs

I don't get that guy's jab at Texas either. You said it was Halloween...people are just looking to have a good time.

[Hawker]

we had plenty of black friends...and were at clubs with plenty of black peeps

no one expressed that they were offended...he only got laughs

No black people exist in Texas...crazy that even Americans still believe those stereotypes.

[highwhey]

Tranquilo tigre.
Chupa mis huevos pinche maricon. Si vivieras en phoenix, te aggararia a putasos por ser tan pendejo.

[Dresta]

No black people exist in Texas...crazy that even Americans still believe those stereotypes.
Don't you know that all southerners are all racist redneck d-bags, by definition?

That's why black people are desperately flooding northward and escaping dem racists; oh wait:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/02/02/census-great-migration-reversal/21818127/


Oops, there goes that theory.

[Patrick Chewing]

Chupa mis huevos pinche maricon. Si vivieras en phoenix, te aggararia a putasos por ser tan pendejo.


Dame to direccion pinche pendejo. Te voy a ense

[TheMan]

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing]Dame to direccion pinche pendejo. Te voy a ense

[TheMan]

Don't you know that all southerners are all racist redneck d-bags, by definition?

That's why black people are desperately flooding northward and escaping dem racists; oh wait:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/02/02/census-great-migration-reversal/21818127/


Oops, there goes that theory.
I love how you're an expert on American culture...aren't you British?

[highwhey]

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing]Dame to direccion pinche pendejo. Te voy a ense

[Dresta]

I love how you're an expert on American culture...aren't you British?


I'm an Anglo-American Pole living in de Nederland.

[DeuceWallaces]

I'm an Anglo-American Pole living in de Nederland.

I.e. you're an idiot.

[Patrick Chewing]

Serious question, I recall you saying you have Dominican Republican ancestary, how the hell are you so anti black when DR has a huge Black community? I always thought that was weird.

Also, can you stop with the stereotypical cholo act you're failing hard at? I could easily go stereotypical banana republic on you but nah :lol


I've never been anti-black. I've defended the black race on here many, many times.

I insult all races on here for their bullshit.


Speaking of Dominicans, here's a funny Dominican right here:

https://screen.yahoo.com/dominican-lou-weather-000000505.html

[highwhey]

I love how you're an expert on American culture...aren't you British?
Dresta is one of the smartest dudes on ISH. I'm assuming he reads a lot.

[DeuceWallaces]

Dresta is one of the smartest dudes on ISH. I'm assuming he reads a lot.

:lol wanna be academic.

[highwhey]

:lol wanna be academic.
He's a bit salty with academia but he's still pretty bright.

[DeuceWallaces]

He's a bit salty with academia but he's still pretty bright.

Not really. He's kind of a dumbass if you have any knowledge of scientific theory, philosophy, sociology, biology, etc.

I mean it's clear when you read a post from SIlver or Booze that they're scientists, no matter what you think of their positions, but this guy is such a wannabe it's sad. He relies on verbosity as opposed to substance and it just leads to these awkward and entirely subjective posts that wreak of ignorance and desperation.

[Dresta]

I.e. you're an idiot.
You have some serious issues dude: bitterness drips from each and every one of your posts like sap from a pine tree.

If what i am, ethnically and culturally, makes me an 'idiot' in your eyes, then that makes you either a racist or a bigot, plain and simple. Sadly, this kind of cognitive dissonance is rather typical of your type: the angry, vicious and vindictive social justice warrior, desperate to use the government the wreak vengeance on those you don't like, because you're too weak and cowardly to ever challenge anyone face-to-face. It is the only way a weakling like you can feel powerful: through the mass, through the state.


He's a bit salty with academia but he's still pretty bright.
Read Joseph Schumpeter's Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy if you want to know why i despise the bulk of academics; most of them are self-righteous job-holders who produce little of value, and who work in academia because they couldn't function in the real world. A large portion of them can't even write a decent sentence of english, and they fill up whole journals with nought but waffle (i will find some of them for you if you want proof of this, but trust, it is quite shocking how bad it is; and this is not just my opinion, but also the view of plenty of academics, some of whom are close relatives of mine). Seeing the workings of academia up close and personal was enough to know i didn't want to spend my damn life in such a constricting environment.


Schumpeter's most popular book in English is probably Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. While he agrees with Karl Marx that capitalism will collapse and be replaced by socialism, Schumpeter predicts a different way this will come about. While Marx predicted that capitalism would be overthrown by a violent proletarian revolution, which actually occurred in the least capitalist countries, Schumpeter believed that capitalism would gradually weaken by itself and eventually collapse. Specifically, the success of capitalism would lead to corporatism and to values hostile to capitalism, especially among intellectuals. "Intellectuals" are a social class in a position to critique societal matters for which they are not directly responsible and to stand up for the interests of other classes. Intellectuals tend to have a negative outlook of capitalism, even while relying on it for prestige, because their professions rely on antagonism toward it. The growing number of people with higher education is a great advantage of capitalism, according to Schumpeter. Yet, unemployment and a lack of fulfilling work will cause intellectual critique, discontent and protests. Parliaments will increasingly elect social democratic parties, and democratic majorities will vote for restrictions on entrepreneurship. Increasing workers' self-management, industrial democracy and regulatory institutions would evolve non-politically into "liberal capitalism". Thus, the intellectual and social climate needed for thriving entrepreneurship will be replaced by some form of "laborism". This will restrict "creative destruction" (a borrowed phrase to denote an endogenous replacement of which old ways of doing things by new ways) and so will burden and destroy the capitalist structure.

Schumpeter emphasizes throughout this book that he is analyzing trends, not engaging in political advocacy

I think he's pretty close to spot on with this prediction: much of it has already come to pass, and he published this book in 1942.

I've also been forewarned by many people with bunches of academic experience about how restrictive and tedious academia can be. Getting a PhD position would have been pretty easy with the qualifications and experience I have, but i didn't really feel like having my labour exploited for close to a decade just to get a qualification that doesn't guarantee very much on its own (many supervisors simply exploit phds as cheap labour, intentionally delaying their progression, particularly if they're good). Especially when i can earn around $40,000 as a research assistant, and the US is overflowing with think-tanks and lobbying groups that pay good money.

Also, just about every intelligent writer i've read, has little but disdain for academia and so-called intellectuals, despite many of them being academics themselves! It is not a remotely controversial position to take; it's only people like doofus who get all offended by it, because they think working in academia makes them special, or is some kind of vindication of their intelligence :lol .

And none of this means there aren't plenty of intelligent and insightful intellectuals out there, just that they are the minority, and that they spend a lot of their time fighting a system that caters to mediocrity.

[Dresta]

Not really. He's kind of a dumbass if you have any knowledge of scientific theory, philosophy, sociology, biology, etc.

I mean it's clear when you read a post from SIlver or Booze that they're scientists, no matter what you think of their positions, but this guy is such a wannabe it's sad. He relies on verbosity as opposed to substance and it just leads to these awkward and entirely subjective posts that wreak of ignorance and desperation.
Those are smart dudes; you, on the other hand, are a tedious and embittered dumbass. You despise me because i make you feel insecure - it really couldn't be more obvious.

(i'm also pretty sure you're the guy who keeps negging me to 'kill myself' - what a grand human being you are, and to think, this is from someone so prone to juvenile moralising).

:rolleyes:

edit: And i would guess you haven't read a lick of philosophy your entire life; sociology, btw, is a joke of a discipline - they use statistical methods discarded by economists decades ago, they're really that outdated.

[DeuceWallaces]

Those are smart dudes; you, on the other hand, are a tedious and embittered dumbass. You despise me because i make you feel insecure - it really couldn't be more obvious.

(i'm also pretty sure you're the guy who keeps negging me to 'kill myself' - what a grand human being you are, and to think, this is from someone so prone to juvenile moralising).

:rolleyes:

edit: And i would guess you haven't read a lick of philosophy your entire life; sociology, btw, is a joke of a discipline - they use statistical methods discarded by economists decades ago, they're really that outdated.

I don't despise you, I pity you.

[highwhey]

Not really. He's kind of a dumbass if you have any knowledge of scientific theory, philosophy, sociology, biology, etc.

I mean it's clear when you read a post from SIlver or Booze that they're scientists, no matter what you think of their positions, but this guy is such a wannabe it's sad. He relies on verbosity as opposed to substance and it just leads to these awkward and entirely subjective posts that wreak of ignorance and desperation.
I dropped out halfway so my credentials aren't up to par with yours but I did complete cal 1 to 3 courses, calc bases physics, chem 1 &2, etc. The fundamental sciences. Dresta definitely pads his posts with a lot more verbiage rather than substance - heck, all his posts are blocks of text - but he's not a total fool like most ISH'ers.

I understand where you're coming from, somehow he manages to include how he hates academia in every single post of his, i usually skip that part :oldlol: however, if he spent less time being salty, he'd have a more clearer view of the world. He's just a bit blinded. But let's not be dishonest with ourselves, universities aren't exactly filled with progressive intellectuals. SIlver and Boozehound may be intellectuals but they don't represent the average grad.

[Dresta]

I don't despise you, I pity you.
Oh, that's a new one :applause:. Congrats on contradicting every other post you've made in regard to me on this site. Sane people don't hurl abuse at those they pity. Just another contradiction from the doofus.

[DeuceWallaces]

Not a contradiction. You're ignorance reached a peak and now I pity you. Pretty simple.

[Dresta]

Oh, ok then, that makes perfect sense.

:sleeping

Seriously though, when are you going to make any argument whatsoever aside from 'you stupid' or 'kill yoself' or 'i pity you'? I really don't think i've seen you ever post anything even slightly interesting on here, just an endless tirade of substance-less sarcastic remarks - and you have the cheek to call me verbose.

You talk about my verbosity, but as far as i can see, you've never really said anything. It's like you just post on here to feel better about yourself, which is rather sad (i mean, who 'pities' people they don't know over the internet? Usually people desperate to feel better about themselves, and everything you do on here reeks of desperate insecurity).


I dropped out halfway so my credentials aren't up to par with yours but I did complete cal 1 to 3 courses, calc bases physics, chem 1 &2, etc. The fundamental sciences. Dresta definitely pads his posts with a lot more verbiage rather than substance - heck, all his posts are blocks of text - but he's not a total fool like most ISH'ers.

I understand where you're coming from, somehow he manages to include how he hates academia in every single post of his, i usually skip that part :oldlol: however, if he spent less time being salty, he'd have a more clearer view of the world. He's just a bit blinded. But let's not be dishonest with ourselves, universities aren't exactly filled with progressive intellectuals. SIlver and Boozehound may be intellectuals but they don't represent the average grad.
Funny that, because excessive verbiage is exactly the complaint i level towards most academic journals, that, and their complete absence of style.

I have one here that says 'like the eponymous hero of Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist, the EU member states all want some more' - although facile, that is very clear compared to most of the stuff i have had to read during academic study (try Hardt and Negri's book Empire, for example, and prepare to vomit).

I aim for clarity in my writings; sorry if I don't have time to proofread and edit my posts on ISHs, but complex problems, often require detailed elucidation. And you are definitely exaggerating in regard to the academia part of your post - that is not even close to being correct.

[DeuceWallaces]

I consistently slay your "arguments" and usually post links to primary research supporting my points. Same thing I do to refute Six's right wing talking points.

[Dresta]

I've never seen you do any such thing. You're living in a pure fantasy world right now.

[DeuceWallaces]

I've never seen you do any such thing. You're living in a pure fantasy world right now.

If I were you I'd probably feel the same way.

[NumberSix]

You have some serious issues dude: bitterness drips from each and every one of your posts like sap from a pine tree.

If what i am, ethnically and culturally, makes me an 'idiot' in your eyes, then that makes you either a racist or a bigot, plain and simple. Sadly, this kind of cognitive dissonance is rather typical of your type: the angry, vicious and vindictive social justice warrior, desperate to use the government the wreak vengeance on those you don't like, because you're too weak and cowardly to ever challenge anyone face-to-face. It is the only way a weakling like you can feel powerful: through the mass, through the state.


Read Joseph Schumpeter's Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy if you want to know why i despise the bulk of academics; most of them are self-righteous job-holders who produce little of value, and who work in academia because they couldn't function in the real world. A large portion of them can't even write a decent sentence of english, and they fill up whole journals with nought but waffle (i will find some of them for you if you want proof of this, but trust, it is quite shocking how bad it is; and this is not just my opinion, but also the view of plenty of academics, some of whom are close relatives of mine). Seeing the workings of academia up close and personal was enough to know i didn't want to spend my damn life in such a constricting environment.



I think he's pretty close to spot on with this prediction: much of it has already come to pass, and he published this book in 1942.

I've also been forewarned by many people with bunches of academic experience about how restrictive and tedious academia can be. Getting a PhD position would have been pretty easy with the qualifications and experience I have, but i didn't really feel like having my labour exploited for close to a decade just to get a qualification that doesn't guarantee very much on its own (many supervisors simply exploit phds as cheap labour, intentionally delaying their progression, particularly if they're good). Especially when i can earn around $40,000 as a research assistant, and the US is overflowing with think-tanks and lobbying groups that pay good money.

Also, just about every intelligent writer i've read, has little but disdain for academia and so-called intellectuals, despite many of them being academics themselves! It is not a remotely controversial position to take; it's only people like doofus who get all offended by it, because they think working in academia makes them special, or is some kind of vindication of their intelligence :lol .

And none of this means there aren't plenty of intelligent and insightful intellectuals out there, just that they are the minority, and that they spend a lot of their time fighting a system that caters to mediocrity.
The problem with most "intellectuals" is that they are bitter little narcissists who believe themselves to be the most important members of society, but the free market slaps them right in the face and tells them that they quite clearly aren't.

[DeuceWallaces]

The problem with most "intellectuals" is that they are bitter little narcissists who believe themselves to be the most important members of society, but the free market slaps them right in the face and tells them that they quite clearly aren't.

Nope. Not true at all. I know my place, but at least I have a place. I pay taxes and contribute to the greater society. Your ilk have no education, no family, no income, no career, and no prospects. You're a drain on society playing internet tough guy capitalist. Just a god damn poser like 90% of the rest of this board.

[rufuspaul]

So

[Patrick Chewing]

I don't despise you, I pity you.


What a pathetic individual you are. Some of these dudes don't even bother you, yet you go out of your miserable way to call them out and insult them.

Don't you have an important job or something? What are you doing up at 5am arguing over the internet? F'n pathetic.

[DeuceWallaces]

What a pathetic individual you are. Some of these dudes don't even bother you, yet you go out of your miserable way to call them out and insult them.

Don't you have an important job or something? What are you doing up at 5am arguing over the internet? F'n pathetic.

I got you rent free. Every thread. You're obsessed with me.

You can't get me out of your head...your whole world is gone for dead.

[Patrick Chewing]

I got you rent free. Every thread. You're obsessed with me.

You can't get me out of your head...your whole world is gone for dead.


Did you go to bed last night???? Are you having trouble sleeping?

Or are you that shook by us on ISH that you need to stay up and make sure you throw your worthless two cents in??

[CNNonceAgain]

Rhymes are as gay as his personal life...

[rufuspaul]

Rhymes are as gay as his personal life...


You're too young to get the reference. ELO is underrated

[Shade8780]

I thought this was going to be a picture of Paula Dean posing with her son brown nosing a chick.

I am not a clever man.

[brownmamba00]

White people always do this shit

[CNNonceAgain]

Black women wearing weaves is pretty much a modern day minstrel show, tbh.

[ShackEelOKneel]

Black women wearing weaves is pretty much a modern day minstrel show, tbh.
:biggums:

[ShackEelOKneel]

How did everybody forget about Whoopi Goldberg in The Associate?

http://www.themakeupgallery.info/images/disguise/male/m4/associate3.jpg

[Dresta]

The problem with most "intellectuals" is that they are bitter little narcissists who believe themselves to be the most important members of society, but the free market slaps them right in the face and tells them that they quite clearly aren't.

Orwell: “Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.”

Chomsky: “There are few genuine conservatives within the U.S. political system, and it is a sign of the intellectual corruption of the age that the honorable term 'conservatism' can be appropriated to disguise the advocacy of a powerful, lawless, aggressive and violent state, a welfare state for the rich dedicated to a lunatic form of Keynesian economic intervention that enhances state and private power while mortgaging the country's future.”

Nick Cohen: ‘half-educated academics and gutless politicians maintain that, on the contrary, it is racist to argue that human rights are universal.’

Christopher Hitchens was also rather disdainful of the bulk of academia - and these are all men of the left (so doofus can't brush it away in his usual fashion as 'right-wing talking points' or some other irrelevant inanity).

Ah, look at those crazy and uneducated right-wing bozos criticising academics; it's only because they have no careers or education or prospects :roll:.

It was mostly intellectuals who supported and justified the barbarity of the Soviet Union, even after visiting it (used by the KGB as 'useful idiots'). John Dewey (perhaps the most overvalued intellectual of all time), for example, came back from there saying how backwards the US was for not utilising government power to make the great gains he had seen - these people, are, by in large, poor and misguided fools, and so often their jobs depend on them holding a certain ideological position, so it's no surprise most of them stick to it dogmatically.


If I were you I'd probably feel the same way.
You could very easily prove it if you had, yet you don't, because you haven't.

And i like how you passed over your blatant bigotry/racism towards me, which is what started this pointless and tiresome argument. Care to tell me how my ethnic and cultural heritage makes me an 'idiot' exactly? Or are you trying to forget that little slip-up, from such a virulent anti-racist, no less :oldlol:.


Nope. Not true at all. I know my place, but at least I have a place. I pay taxes and contribute to the greater society. Your ilk have no education, no family, no income, no career, and no prospects. You're a drain on society playing internet tough guy capitalist. Just a god damn poser like 90% of the rest of this board.
Ah, so people you dislike or disagree with, because you're such an infallible genius, must consequently have no education, family, income or career now? - get a freaking grip you sad piece of shit. Talk about narcissism - you basically just proved NumberSix's point. (and who the hell doesn't pay taxes - idiot)

You remind me of this:


“For one thing is needful: that a human being should attain satisfaction with himself, whether it be by means of this or that poetry or art; only then is a human being at all tolerable to behold. Whoever is dissatisfied with himself is constantly ready for revenge, and we others will be his victims, if only by having to endure his ugly sight.”

[RidonKs]

edit: re-reading your post immediately above, i do believe you're distorting the context of 'intellectual' as it was used by the authors you quoted. nonetheless an interesting topic. have you read chomsky's short essay "responsibility of intellectuals"?

my mistake for using 'higher education' which i meant to mean post-rearing/further education. that would include motorcycle maintenance as much as it would include political philosophy. i do not think the fundamental framework has to change between disciplines. learning is learning. maybe i'm just simple minded.


If the reason is 'mass entertainment and propaganda' (though i have no doubt these things reinforce and intensify the problem), then why did Orwell write his Politics and the English Language in 1946, and why did he feel the need to single out 'intellectuals' as the prime culprits of the distortion and obfuscation of language? State-sponsered academics came first (really grew as a force in the 19th century), and the other things simply worsened the problem further; but these people were only treading down an already beaten path, they couldn't have done it without intellectuals laying the groundwork first.

Higher learning, by its very definition, needs to be concentrated among elites, otherwise there isn't anything 'higher' about it. The dramatic fall in academic standards over the past century attests to this. The bottom has been elevated ever so slightly, but the people who we actually need to benefit from good educations, are dragged down, and many are put off schooling and education for life from the sheer boredom of having to move through topics at the pace of a snail. The majority of teenagers simply don't belong in classrooms and would be better off acquiring skills. They aren't interested in sitting and studying for hours; it bores them, and they end up dragging down those who do find these things interesting and enlightening in the process. It has also led to the stigmatisation of learning, where trying or reading other material is seen to be nerdy and uncool, putting many off.

These elites certainly don't have to be determined by wealth (though wealth will always play a role, in any system), but by ability and aptitude, or the growth of a natural aristocracy (one of merit and ability), as Jefferson put it, or an aristocracy of efficiency, as Nietzsche argued for. The government doesn't need to have a stranglehold over the education system for them to pay the tuition for more gifted individuals without the means.

It's funny really: what you're in here calling higher education, is what most who actually go envisage as a 3/4 year holiday. Not to mention the absurd surplus of mediocre academic jobholders who produce nothing of value their entire lives, and are nothing but self-important leeches.
i agree with a lot of this. well the 2nd and 4th paragraphs anyway.

as for the 1st; by intellectual orwell was not restricting himself to state sponsored academia whatsoever. in fact he was most interested in journalism throughout his lifetime, which has always allied with state power (unsurprisingly, it's the most powerful institution), but at his time was very much privately controlled and dictating private interests. you quote chomsky in a similarly misconceived way.

your point that "state academia paved the road" is just another reflection of the powerful state but says nothing of elite v mass education in the absence of that institution. and it was happening way before the 19th century. my point about mass media and propaganda is not anachronistic via orwell's time. the printing press had its say way before that. recent developments in technology only exacerbated that fundamental shift in information management/dissemination.

as for the 3rd; you are not dealing with the repercussions and that is what i'm asking about. we understand and agree that the repercussions of mass education provide inadequate opportunities for people to thrive at what they like because everything is watered down to the lowest common denominator. but the repercussions of elite education will also invariably leave the children behind, so to speak. do tell me more of these 'natural' and 'efficient' aristocracies. i am unfamiliar. somehow they seem archaic.... but do enlighten me.

my fear, far from novel, is that any aristocracy with a monopoly on information and intellectual sophistication will use it primarily in their interests, which will invariably beget conflict with the masses, which will inevitably slow down general human productivity, due to vicious waves of destruction. but wasn't napoleon the greatest thing to happen to europe in 100 years according to the philosophy you're applying? i tend to see that chaos in less favourable light.

as usual, we agree on the mechanics of most of this stuff, but our fundamentally opposed value orientations spawn disagreements down the line.



also, as an aside, the venom spitting between deuce and the anti-deuce crowd is getting tedious lol

[Patrick Chewing]

edit: re-reading your post immediately above, i do believe you're distorting the context of 'intellectual' as it was used by the authors you quoted. nonetheless an interesting topic. have you read chomsky's short essay "responsibility of intellectuals"?

my mistake for using 'higher education' which i meant to mean post-rearing/further education. that would include motorcycle maintenance as much as it would include political philosophy. i do not think the fundamental framework has to change between disciplines. learning is learning. maybe i'm just simple minded.


i agree with a lot of this. well the 2nd and 4th paragraphs anyway.

as for the 1st; by intellectual orwell was not restricting himself to state sponsored academia whatsoever. in fact he was most interested in journalism throughout his lifetime, which has always allied with state power (unsurprisingly, it's the most powerful institution), but at his time was very much privately controlled and dictating private interests. you quote chomsky in a similarly misconceived way.

your point that "state academia paved the road" is just another reflection of the powerful state but says nothing of elite v mass education in the absence of that institution. and it was happening way before the 19th century. my point about mass media and propaganda is not anachronistic via orwell's time. the printing press had its say way before that. recent developments in technology only exacerbated that fundamental shift in information management/dissemination.

as for the 3rd; you are not dealing with the repercussions and that is what i'm asking about. we understand and agree that the repercussions of mass education provide inadequate opportunities for people to thrive at what they like because everything is watered down to the lowest common denominator. but the repercussions of elite education will also invariably leave the children behind, so to speak. do tell me more of these 'natural' and 'efficient' aristocracies. i am unfamiliar. somehow they seem archaic.... but do enlighten me.

my fear, far from novel, is that any aristocracy with a monopoly on information and intellectual sophistication will use it primarily in their interests, which will invariably beget conflict with the masses, which will inevitably slow down general human productivity, due to vicious waves of destruction. but wasn't napoleon the greatest thing to happen to europe in 100 years according to the philosophy you're applying? i tend to see that chaos in less favourable light.

as usual, we agree on the mechanics of most of this stuff, but our fundamentally opposed value orientations spawn disagreements down the line.



also, as an aside, the venom spitting between deuce and the anti-deuce crowd is getting tedious lol


This sentence. By God.


https://struckbyenlightning.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/head-explosion.jpg

[RidonKs]

This sentence. By God.


https://struckbyenlightning.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/head-explosion.jpg
its complicated, calm the fk down