Can you point to where I said something about race in that quote, or "baited" anyone?
That's right, you can't.
Can you point to where I said something about race in that quote, or "baited" anyone?
So basically, no response to it, yet you still claim it doesn’t exist. Welcome to internet discourse everybody, where people just put their fingers in their ears and shout away. Lovely.
Not at all. The whole point is that it's something that basically happens behind the scenes, unintentional. In no way does it suggest white people or anybody is "obsessed" with race, or that people are actively trying to be racist. Again, you just keep choosing to mis-interpret everything.
That's not what the given example is pointing out. The example is stating that stores and products were, for a very a long time, almost exclusively marketed with the idea of a white person being the normal or default audience. Same thing with television shows, movies, books, stuff like that.
In an ideal world, sure. That doesn't mean it's how the real world plays out.
Just because something is difficult to prove on a case by case individual level doesn't mean you can't take the data as a whole and draw reasonable conclusions from it based on deviations from expected outcomes. It's about probabilities.
You instantly explained for/to me that I am a "Marxist" without even asking for my opinion yet. You actually don't do what you say.
Big up to my fellow socialists (apparently). Fucking LOL.
So what would you say is the difference between the "classical" liberal and the regular liberal? Because I definitely feel like I have more in common with the older generations than the younger ones as far as how I realistically view the world.
White privilege definitely exists, but this isn't an example of it. Isiah Thomas, Derek Fisher, Jason Kidd, Magic Johnson, Doc Rivers, Mark Jackson, and Lenny Wilkins are examples of former black players who became a head coach without any prior experience.That feeling when even non-minority members of the NBA staff admit that this exists:
Steve Nash admits to benefiting from White privilege, saying he skipped the line to get head coaching job | CNN
Steve Nash admitted to benefiting from White privilege, saying he did "skip the line" to become an NBA head coach and acknowledged criticisms from analysts in that process.www.cnn.com
Yeah. It's kind of hard to categorically deny it when the very people who are involved are saying otherwise.
Steve Nash has always been -- pardon the pun -- a straight shooter; so there's little reason for him to be disingenuous here.
You'll have to argue that one with Steve Nash, rather than with me. He's not someone who's prone to making a ton of social or political statements, and he's always spoken his mind. So if he says he feels it was involved, I'd take him at his word.
For the Classical Liberal, rights are “negative” (based on the inaction of others, like the right to consume raw milk. I have the liberty/freedom to do what I want to do). For the modern or social liberal, rights are “positive” (extended to others through action, like the right to medical coverage as extended by programs like Medicaid and Medicare .
From my perspective, Neo-liberals attribute every inequity in society to racism and discrimination instead of placing emphasis on personal responsibility and decision making, insist on disintegrating certain aspects of the system instead of reforming them, promote identify politics and collectivism instead of individualism, and engage in foreign interventionism instead of diplomacy and isolation when appropriate. Classic liberals prefer less government involvement but understand that government must intervene in certain circumstances in order to protect liberties and safety of the individual.
You're just talking about Liberals in general. Neo-liberals or Neoliberalism is different. Neo-liberals would be more akin to being in favor of Free Markets and De-regulation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism#United_States
Maybe you should take some reading classes because I said “I refuse to believe in it” I didn’t claim it didn’t exist. I said it may be a thing to y’all. If you’re gonna quote me don’t twist my words.
I have done both in this thread. I take issue with your definition of racism because you seem to imply that any inequity in the system is the result of racism and discrimination. In other words, unless blacks, or any other minority group, are represented proportionately in all aspects of life, the system is racist and discriminatory. You talk about the fact that 75% of NBA players are black, yet only a few are owners. What changes, if any, would you make to equalize the field?
This post increases my faith in humanity. thank you, sir or madam.
George Soros is a wealthy Jewish billionaire. He's the target of a lot of antisemitism from far right wing nationalistic groups, who float insane conspiracy theories about how George Soros is trying to fund a takeover of America. Those same criticisms then also get picked up and repeated by conservatives who don't like that he donates to liberal leaning causes. So now conservatives use Geroge Soros as this boogeyman where they can just invoke his name, as if he's some kind of controversial figure, and use that to disparage any group he donates to. I'm not saying that anyone who criticizes George Soros is an anti-Semite, but they're basically just recycling anti-semite talking points, or at the least talking points that were born out of antisemitism.
Yeah, outside of our differences about systemic racism in America, I do literally none of that.
Wow, this is one of those posts that made me think. I never saw it that way, but you are propably right! Is this distinction common knowledge in the US? - Thank you very much for your post!
I agree. I fucking love when the nuances of conceptual meanings are questioned.
