DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: True Left vs Right
*****************************************************
#Post#: 26499--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rightists getting leftism wrong
By: rp Date: May 19, 2024, 7:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1792060470318473709?t=5_zoa7ypwXXqnuSWIQ76hw&s=19
[Quote]
Same logic for the last 60 years. All disparities must have been
caused by discrimination. [B]John F Kendi.[/b]
[/Quote]
#Post#: 26501--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rightists getting leftism wrong
By: 90sRetroFan Date: May 19, 2024, 8:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The implication is that if "non-whites" perform worse than
"whites" in Western civilization under conditions where no one
is cheating, it is fair because everyone is being judged by the
same standards. Yes, everyone is being judged by the same
standards. But no, that does not make it fair. The unfairness is
that the standards are those of Western civilization in the
first place.
Let's simplify it. If we take a cold-adapted person and a
warm-adapted person:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/temperature-effects/msg2459/#msg2459
[quote]
HTML https://www2.palomar.edu/anthro/adapt/images/Bergmann's_boxes_2.gif[/quote]
and put both of them naked inside a freezer to see who survives
longer, and as expected the warm-adapted person dies first,
Hanania would consider it unfair only if the cold-adapted person
was found to have been wearing a coat.
#Post#: 26733--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rightists getting leftism wrong
By: 90sRetroFan Date: June 12, 2024, 4:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://vdare.com/posts/mrs-alito-s-distaste-for-gay-pride-vs-black-students-and-the-naacp-s-hatred-of-confederate-americans
[quote]Martha-Ann (Mrs. Samuel) Alito—and she's alleged, by the
New York Times, to have committed blasphemy by not wanting to
look at a Pride Flag
...
In a related note, a Virginia school district is being attacked
by the Virginia NAACP on the basis that if black students are
forced to look at the names of dead Confederates, they'll be
victims of what they also consider blasphemy[/quote]
Firstly, LGBTs never enslaved non-LGBTs, unlike Confederates who
enslaved "blacks".
Secondly, Alito can go somewhere else if she dislikes the Pride
Flag, whereas the "black" students cannot go somewhere else if
they dislike Confederates because schooling is compulsory under
Western civilization.
No wonder our enemies also sincerely believe Trump is a
victim.....
#Post#: 27260--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rightists getting leftism wrong
By: 90sRetroFan Date: August 1, 2024, 9:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
1:00-1:38:
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JonvBFSEUH4
#Post#: 27695--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leftist vs rightist moral circles
By: antihellenistic Date: September 1, 2024, 9:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Westerners and "Whites" don't consider Hitler as part of Western
Civilization
[quote]Why hate the West?
Why do so many Westerners hate the West? The roots of their
thinking go back to classical Marxism, which aimed to incite
working class rebellion. The workers refused to rebel, however,
and sided with their national governments during World War I.
After the war, a number of Marxists decided to revise their
dogma. Prominent among them was a group living in Frankfurt,
Germany, known as the Frankfurt School, who believed that class
struggle was not enough to bring about revolution. What was
necessary was cultural Marxism that would attack the key pillars
of Western Civilization: religion, patriotism, and family life.
They called this attack on Western identity and culture
“critical theory,” and members of the Frankfurt School brought
this theory to the United States.7
Today, critical theory holds tremendous power. It endlessly
harps on the West’s colonial past without mentioning the
colonization of the West. It holds up Hitler and the Third Reich
as symbols of Europe, without conceding that most of the West
united against Hitler.
In Europe, cultural Marxists are using Muslim immigration to
destroy the West claiming, ironically, that Europeans must atone
for their sins by surrendering to those who sinned against them
for so long. In America, Latin American immigration serves the
same purpose. Cultural Marxists use Western guilt, manipulated
by critical theory, to neutralize opposition — and yet these
ideological heirs to the Cheka dungeons, the Ukrainian famine,
the Gulag camps, and the Cambodian genocide have no moral
authority to condemn the West
Today the fate of our civilization is in the balance, just as
much as it was at Tours and Vienna. If they are to have a
future, Europe and its overseas outposts must revisit their
past. They must shed their guilt and rekindle their will to
live. The spirits of Charles Martel, El Cid, Jan Sobieski, and
all their valiant company will point the way.[/quote]
Source :
Posted on December 25, 2022 What Is the West Guilty Of? Roland
Johnson, American Renaissance, October 18, 2013
HTML https://www.amren.com/news/2022/12/what-is-the-west-guilty-of/
#Post#: 27876--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rightists getting leftism wrong
By: 90sRetroFan Date: September 17, 2024, 4:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Enemy meme on desegregation:
HTML https://talk.hyvor.com/media/website/6591/XecWpYhAI1QaWbCAyMJS6FGfZpypFjWolqtcu9mf.jpg
There was never any law preventing "whites" from choosing to
leave desegregated places.
#Post#: 28116--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rightists getting leftism wrong
By: 90sRetroFan Date: October 4, 2024, 7:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Our enemies like praising Jews so much that they insist on
working such praise into articles that are not even about Jews:
HTML https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2024/10/04/fantasies-of-pharaohs-black-supremacist-nonsense-meets-deadly-black-reality/
[quote]The Jewish philosopher Nathan Cofnas is highly
intelligent. The Black politician Dawn Butler is deeply stupid.
But Butler has effortlessly demolished Cofnas’ thesis that
wokism – the ideology of woke – is “simply what follows from
taking the equality thesis of race and sex differences
seriously, given a background of Christian morality.” In fact,
wokism doesn’t take the equality thesis seriously at all. Yes,
it preaches equality, but it practises hierarchy.[/quote]
We don't even preach "equality". The False Left did, and it made
no sense, which is why the term "equity" is used now instead. We
simply look at who oppressed whom in history. This is not
"hierarchy". If A initiated violence against B while C did not,
B enacting retaliatory violence against A but not C is not B
establishing a hierarchy, but simply B practicing Ahimsa.
Our enemies have trouble understanding this because they being
natural barbarians do not understand the difference between
initiated violence and retaliatory violence. Unlike retaliatory
violence, initiated violence is indeed used by the initiators to
establish hierarchy. Thus our enemies who do not distinguish
between initiated and retaliatory violence presumes all violence
is intended by their respective enactors to establish hierarchy.
[quote]McDonagh doesn’t comment on the final shot of the video,
which shows a white folding chair sitting alone against a pink
background. This is a reference to “Black Resistance” and the
“Montgomery Brawl,” when noble Blacks in Alabama attacked evil
white racists with folding chairs in August 2023. The Black
Rebecca Stevens, who “write[s] about racism,” used the same
image of the chair in 2023 in a discussion of the Montgomery
Brawl.
In other words, Butler is celebrating Black violence against
Whites.[/quote]
See what I mean? For reference:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/true-left-breakthrough-ahimsa/msg21403/?topicseen#msg21403
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/true-left-breakthrough-ahimsa/msg21482/?topicseen#msg21482
Our enemies can look at this exact same incident and never think
about who initiated violence, but only focus on the violence
done against their own in-group and automatically view it as an
outrage. To put it another way, our enemies never think about
how "whites" deserve to be treated, but only focus on how
"whites" are being treated now compared to how they used to be
treated (during the colonial era) and interpret worsening
treatment as wrong (as opposed to nearer how they deserve to be
treated). (We see the same phenomenon in Trump complaining about
being held accountable for his crimes.)
#Post#: 28174--------------------------------------------------
Re: Counterculture and Western Civilization
By: rp Date: October 8, 2024, 3:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Enemy Hanania accurately points out that Wokeism is an extension
of counterculture era civil rights legislation:
HTML https://www.richardhanania.com/p/woke-institutions-is-just-civil-rights
#Post#: 28177--------------------------------------------------
Re: Re: Counterculture and Western Civilization
By: 90sRetroFan Date: October 8, 2024, 5:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Please quote the relevant excerpt so every visitor doesn't have
to sift through the entire (long) article just to find the point
you claim he made. What happened to division of labour?
#Post#: 28181--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rightists getting leftism wrong
By: rp Date: October 8, 2024, 5:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Ok. Here is the specific section
[quote]
Wokeness is Government Policy
Before proceeding, it is important to clarify what wokeness
actually is. I’d argue it has 3 components:
1) A belief that any disparities in outcomes favoring whites
over non-whites or men over women are caused by discrimination
(Sometimes wokeness cares about other disparities too, like
fat/nonfat, but those are given less attention. I’m putting
aside LGBT issues, which seem to be at an earlier stage of
wokeness in which the left is still mostly fighting battles
regarding explicit differences in treatment rather than
disparate outcomes, although the latter does get attention
sometimes.)
2) The speech of those who would argue against 1 needs to be
restricted in the interest of overcoming such disparities, and
the safety and emotional well-being of the victimized group in
question.
3) Bureaucracies are needed that reflect the beliefs in 1 and 2,
working to overcome disparities and managing speech and social
relations.
Each of these things can be traced to law. The Civil Rights Act
of 1964 banned discrimination based on race and gender. While
most at the time thought this would simply remove explicit
discrimination, and many of the proponents of the bill made that
promise, courts and regulators expanded the concept of
“non-discrimination” to mean almost anything that advantages one
group over another. An important watershed was the decision in
Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971), in which the Supreme Court
ruled that intelligence tests, because they were not shown to be
directly related to job performance, could not be used in hiring
since blacks scored lower on them, and it did not matter whether
there was any intent to discriminate. People act as if
“standardized tests are racist if they show disparities” is some
kind of new idea, but it’s basically been the law in the United
States for 50 years, albeit inconsistently enforced.
Standardized tests aren’t the only target of the doctrine of
disparate impact. In 2019 (under Trump), the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) settled a suit brought against
Dollar General for $6 million for doing criminal background
checks that disproportionately prevented blacks from being
hired. The Obama administration went after schools for
disciplining black and white students at different rates, with
predictably disastrous results. Police departments, fire
departments, and other institutions use “gender normed” tests to
stop the EEOC and private applicants from suing them for gender
discrimination. This is of course completely insane; criminals
can’t be relied on to go easier on female cops on account of
their sex, but somehow we’ve all come to accept affirmative
action policing and firefighting (in 2014, a guy who jumped the
White House fence overpowered a female Secret Service agent and
made it all the way to the East Room).
As the government invented new standards for what counts as
“discrimination,” it was forcing more aggressive action on the
part of the private sector. Executive Order 11246, signed by
President Johnson, required all government contractors and
subcontractors who did over $10,000 in government business to
"take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed,
and that employees are treated during employment, without regard
to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin." The
category of “sex” was added in 1967. In 1969, Richard Nixon
signed EO 11478, which forced affirmative action onto the
federal government itself.
Across the federal government and among contractors, affirmative
action assumed that “but for discrimination, statistical parity
among racial and ethnic groups would be the norm.”
Government interpretation of the Civil Rights Act also invented
the concept of the “hostile work environment.” UCLA law
professor Eugene Volokh has written about how this has been used
to restrict free speech. Writing in 1997, he pointed out that
The scope of harassment law is thus molded by three facts:
1. On its face, harassment law draws no distinction among slurs,
pornography, political, religious, or social commentary, jokes,
art, and other forms of speech. All can be punished, so long as
they are “severe or pervasive” enough to create a “hostile
environment.”
2. The vagueness of the terms “severe” and “pervasive” — and the
fact that the law is implemented by employers, who have an
incentive to oversuppress — means that the law may practically
restrict any speech that an employer concludes might be found by
a fact-finder to be “severe or pervasive” enough.
3. Finally, because an employer is liable for the aggregate of
all its employees’ speech, wise employers will bar any sort of
statement that might, if repeated by enough people, be “severe
or pervasive” enough to create a hostile environment.
Putting all this together, harassment law potentially burdens
any workplace speech that's offensive to at least one person in
the workplace based on [protected characteristics] … even when
the speech is political and even when it’s not severe or
pervasive enough to itself be actionable.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page