We are all Slave now.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Stay tuned. I'm expecting another round of indictments before too long.

We ought to be making a bigger stink of the likes of Wilbur Ross. It's pretty clear that he's just crooked to the core.

Don, Jr will be indicted. Maybe Jared.

And, yeah, Ross is a good example of their garden variety corruption.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Klein never got to the merits of Murray. That I don’t buy Murray, that you don’t buy Murray, is irrelevant.

You can't be this dense.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Murray’s scholarship fails because he admits his ultimate point is that people should be taken individually, without consideration to race, sex, ethnicity (yes, that is his point). Then he goes on to run data on why people can be lumped together and assessed.

Well, shit, why didn't you just say this from the beginning? Because this is nonsense. Murray's "scholarship" fails becuae he uses "data" that's racially flawed to make distinctions about "racial" groups that are not genetically distinguishable to draw genetic conclusions.

His "point" is that "black" people are inferior. He uses junk "science" to demonstrate it. What you said is nonsense.

ETA: This is exactly the creeping racism problem we've been facing lately. People try to divorce race from history and decide that the issue is judging "groups" without regard to which group.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Of course Klein cannot directly advocate censoring Harris’s conversation with Murray. .

Of course he can't, because he has zero power to censor.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I detest efforts to stop any form of speech or inquiry.

Let me know if you ever really find one.

Also, let me know the next time you get upset about an effort to stop any form of left-leaning speech or inquiry. Like Colin Kaepernick -- I'm sure you're upset that he can't find a job because of his speech.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

What do you not understand about the concept of “reading between the lines”?

Of course Klein cannot directly advocate censoring Harris’s conversation with Murray. That destroys his authority and credibility. Instead, he states that Harris is trafficking in deviancy. The intended effect is the same.

Shrewd move on Klein's part, spending all that time talking to Harris and publishing the whole thing, just to shut him up. I bet Harris will never see it coming.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

It was also a pretty dumb comment.

As a result of listening to Harris’s podcast with that young writer, I wound up listening to his podcast with Murray, to hear what was so incendiary. There, Harris and Murray discussed a later book by Murray in which Murray argues that a white underclass is emerging via wealth inequality and assortative mating. He doesn’t come right out and say this white underclass is genetically disadvantaged, and I haven’t read the book and don’t intend to, but let’s say he did say that. Let’s say Murray posited that we’re developing a “redneck” line of genes. I’m fine with allowing that line of inquiry. (I think it’d be flawed, but what’s the harm in inquiring? Worst case, you acquire potentially useful data.) What would your view on that be? Would you view that as something offensive, dubious, or would your bourgeoise sensibilities and politics be fine with it?

Why are you so hell bent on finding some value in what Murray is doing?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Why are you so hell bent on finding some value in what Murray is doing?

Nice try. I’m hell bent here on showing GGG’s politics are classic doctrinaire liberal talking points. Wanna-be bourgeoise elitism. It’s not thoughtful, and it’s dangerously opposed to actual free speech.

The rules are idiot simple. Virtue signal on liberal issues of the moment. Lob accusations of bigotry and sexism reflexively at everything one can. But as to economic policies that savage the disadvantaged you otherwise champion? Shut your mouth. Do not touch any issue that could imperil your slot in the top 10%.

You know exactly the sort of bullshit progressivism I’m discussing. It’s cheap, it’s easy, and you’re doing it right here. You know goddamn well I’m not rehabilitating Murray. But you keep throwing that accusation to try to argue that I’m trafficking in deviancy. Do you seriously think your full-of-shitness there could ever be hidden?

Engage honestly and stop being sleazy.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Let me know if you ever really find one.

Also, let me know the next time you get upset about an effort to stop any form of left-leaning speech or inquiry. Like Colin Kaepernick -- I'm sure you're upset that he can't find a job because of his speech.

Oh, we can have this discussion all day...

Anyone arguing players do not have a right to take a knee is, despite no doubt thinking himself a “patriot,” deeply un-American.

But going beyond that, now we’re into serious authoritarianism, and the very worst form of tyranny against free speech: Corporate Preclusion.

I hate advocating new laws, but there should be one that states no individual may be fired for any free expression outside his employment.

ETA: Corporations should also be banned from acting in response to public panics. That an uneducated public thinks Kaepernick is “disrespectin’ thu flag” does not license corporations (teams and the league broadly) to collude against him and then hide behind, “he endangers our brand.” That some missive from a disgruntled ex gets 10,000 #metoo virtue sugnallers in a moral panic should not cost Chris Hardwick a TV gig. That James Gunn has a fucked up sense of humor should not enable progressive Puritan scolds to cause Disney to fire him.

For further reading on the idiocy of moral/cultural panics and over-reactions, this is highly recommended: https://www.amazon.com/Mobs-Messiahs.../dp/0470474807

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

Well, shit, why didn't you just say this from the beginning? Because this is nonsense. Murray's "scholarship" fails becuae he uses "data" that's racially flawed to make distinctions about "racial" groups that are not genetically distinguishable to draw genetic conclusions.

His "point" is that "black" people are inferior. He uses junk "science" to demonstrate it. What you said is nonsense.

ETA: This is exactly the creeping racism problem we've been facing lately. People try to divorce race from history and decide that the issue is judging "groups" without regard to which group.

I’m not arguing Murray with you, but based on his conversation with Harris, who asked him to set forth his point, your characterization is basically fiction.

I don’t think you or I even understand the data you profess to describe. You’ve probably read articles about it, as have I, and those have been loaded in one direction or another.

This entire discussion has been largely shibboleths. Almost all political, social, and cultural debates of the day are that. It’s painfully stupid.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Nice try. I’m hell bent here on showing GGG’s politics are classic doctrinaire liberal talking points. Wanna-be bourgeoise elitism. It’s not thoughtful, and it’s dangerously opposed to actual free speech.

The rules are idiot simple. Virtue signal on liberal issues of the moment. Lob accusations of bigotry and sexism reflexively at everything one can. But as to economic policies that savage the disadvantaged you otherwise champion? Shut your mouth. Do not touch any issue that could imperil your slot in the top 10%.

You know exactly the sort of bullshit progressivism I’m discussing. It’s cheap, it’s easy, and you’re doing it right here. You know goddamn well I’m not rehabilitating Murray. But you keep throwing that accusation to try to argue that I’m trafficking in deviancy. Do you seriously think your full-of-shitness there could ever be hidden?

Engage honestly and stop being sleazy.

Please rank in order things we should be concerned with on free speech:

(1) Liberty University explicitly censoring its student newspaper;
(2) UNC students being threatened with violence by radical right wingers if they speak out in support of removing Silent Sam;
(3) Old white dudes feeling uncomfortable advocating shit positions when given a national platform;
(4) A President calling the Press the "enemy of the people".

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

And why weren't Americans prepared to provide any meaningful support to the Arab Spring?

There was a true battle in State Dept about whether it was too much destabilization at once.

Recall, it was a vendor setting himself on fire to protest corrupt regulation one day, then a govt falling thirty days later. I think it took everyone by surprise.

And of course, Israel pressured us like crazy to avoid Egypt’s corrupt dictator’s collapse.

The concern that in a countries with such high unemployment and so many young men, radicalism fills the vacuum left by a dictator’s exit is compelling. My opinion, FWIW, is once the movement has started, we should have publicly taken that risk. But I see Obama’s shrewdness in trying to trying to have it both ways by supporting covertly and with air cover in Libya. If you can have it both ways and avoid risk, why not try?

Others would argue this is why lawyers don’t tend to make good leaders of anything. I’d counter, Bush “led” quite aggressively in Iraq. How’d that work out?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Please rank in order things we should be concerned with on free speech:

(1) Liberty University explicitly censoring its student newspaper;
(2) UNC students being threatened with violence by radical right wingers if they speak out in support of removing Silent Sam;
(3) Old white dudes feeling uncomfortable advocating shit positions when given a national platform;
(4) A President calling the Press the "enemy of the people".

4, 1, 3

2 is not a free speech issue. That’s threatened violence. That should be investigated and prosecuted.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

4, 1, 3

2 is not a free speech issue. That’s threatened violence. That should be investigated and prosecuted.

So suck it up. Focus on what matters.

The fact that I call your bros racists when they argue for white supremacy I'm sure pains you, but, frankly, fuck you, you made your "point" days ago, no one agrees with it, move on.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

So suck it up. Focus on what matters.

The fact that I call your bros racists when they argue for white supremacy I'm sure pains you, but, frankly, fuck you, you made your "point" days ago, no one agrees with it, move on.

I have sucked it up. You need to understand you’re full of shit, a prefab progressive. That’s a different point.

I don’t like having to listen to people like you, or your conservative analogues. I feel like I lose IQ points in the process.

You’re quite happy to laugh along with me when I attack Trump. But the minute I aim the pistol at your politics, I’m in bed with bigots. You even use the terms of the HuffPo class: “Bros.” You’re as deep as a bird bath.