I remember subscribing to this Substack thinking “FINALLY A writer devoted to taking down the crooked seismology industry.” I’ve been disappointed ever since.
Please cite some of the "Liberals who further the delusion that America has basically been a nonstop Klan rally for the past 400 years." Please limit yourself to those who are as prominent as the voices of the Far Right.
What's the due date for this assignment, Glenn? Does it count towards my final grade?
Biden's "Jim Crow 2.0" speech, Nikole Hannah-Jones entire existence, the large number of liberals who believe that the number of police shooting of Black men is higher by several orders of magnitude than it actually is, the significant number of people who believe that no racial progress has been made over the last 50 years (https://apnews.com/article/death-of-george-floyd-only-on-ap-race-and-ethnicity-racial-injustice-police-9a73b306d00aa423e330d26d99f973a1). Jesus...do you actually think that liberals do not sometimes exaggerate racism? Don't answer -- I don't actually want to talk to you.
What a stupid response to a legitimately framed request. At Berkeley we learned to look for documentation and additional information no matter who was making the assertion. Interesting that you weaseled the word "sometimes" into your last sentence. Thanks for showing me that I don't want to waste my time on you.
(1) I asked for prominent ones (on a par with Tucker Carlson, for example. I never heard of Hannah-Jones. (2) I didn't ask to be insulted as a result of a legitimate request for information.
Not sure this is a fight you want to start. There are a lot of us liberals who believe American public conversations and policy have been stained with racism for 400 years. We even have the evidence to point to, and we don't call it the "civil war" as if it was just a tribal dispute. The official name for that war should be the Slaver Rebellion. Because that's what it was.
Not only that, but after a million people died in that war and Congress and the Union added the 13th and 14th Amendments, it took over 100 years for SCOTUS to piecemeal recognize the legislative intent of the 14th Amendment. And now we have actual racists and Christo-fascists on that bench eager to roll back all those hard fought gains.
Yes, it's been 400 years of fighting the racists, and we're nowhere near a victory.
"Liberals use mass shootings to push for gun control and to further the delusion that America has basically been a nonstop Klan rally for the past 400 years." - some white guy on the internet
What is bad is the vastly larger number of people who are seduced by the transification cult into believing that they are trans when they are actually not, like the Nashville shooter. Here's just one of a zillion such stories: https://pitt.substack.com/p/i-didnt-realize-you-think-of-her
No, what is bad is the conservatives using transgender persons (not "transgenderism") to push politicized medical viewpoints from people who are not doctors. Not to go Godwin, but it's a legitimate argument that the Nazis were as committed to fighting "deviant sexuality" (transgender medical diagnosis began in Weimar Germany) as they were committed to fighting Communism and The Jewish Problem.
The doctors in the UK, Sweden, Finland, and Norway who have actually taken the time and effort to review the actual medical evidence (which has NOT been done in the US) have all concluded that minors should not undergo medical transition: https://bprice.substack.com/p/why-have-many-nations-concluded-that
IDK, I think maybe after this substack's recent addressing of that issue he probably doesn't
I mean, I'm extremely Terfy these days but I'm okay with neutral observers occasionally wrinkling their brow with a "hmmm - bit weird over there" and then going back to talking about other stuff.
I've been arguing statistical significance with other Terfs all day. Insufficient sample size for meaningful conclusions.
"Terf" originally stood for "Trans exclusive radical feminist", but now it's often used to mean any woman who is "gender critical" (think you can't split the world into male-brain-gender and female-brain-gender people, but only into male-sex and female-sex) and otherwise on the left of politics.
Used to be a slur, but is being reclaimed, since women got a little bored of pretending that "sex is in some cases a salient difference between people, and same-sex changerooms, same-sex sport, same-sex prisons should be retained" was in any way an abnormal, radical or embarrassing position to hold.
I knew MarkS would understand my jargon and its implications instantly, but sometimes forget that other people won't, even in conversing on trans-related issues!
"rare events" - how many mass shootings a day would make mass shootings not rare? How many school shootings a day would make talking about school shootings the sort of thing that is not "confirming our priors?"
And exactly how many people do you think talk about gun control only when there's been a school shooting? Yes, the conversation about gun control gets more noticeable after a tragedy but that doesn't mean any of us gun control proponents needed a shooting to think that way. That is one of the dumbest accusations I've yet read.
I remember subscribing to this Substack thinking “FINALLY A writer devoted to taking down the crooked seismology industry.” I’ve been disappointed ever since.
Um, easy access to AR-15s is really bad public policy.
Only if you start with the default assumption that citizens should be unarmed, which is an assumption that the preponderance of citizens do not share
Um, no.
Please cite some of the "Liberals who further the delusion that America has basically been a nonstop Klan rally for the past 400 years." Please limit yourself to those who are as prominent as the voices of the Far Right.
What's the due date for this assignment, Glenn? Does it count towards my final grade?
Biden's "Jim Crow 2.0" speech, Nikole Hannah-Jones entire existence, the large number of liberals who believe that the number of police shooting of Black men is higher by several orders of magnitude than it actually is, the significant number of people who believe that no racial progress has been made over the last 50 years (https://apnews.com/article/death-of-george-floyd-only-on-ap-race-and-ethnicity-racial-injustice-police-9a73b306d00aa423e330d26d99f973a1). Jesus...do you actually think that liberals do not sometimes exaggerate racism? Don't answer -- I don't actually want to talk to you.
What a stupid response to a legitimately framed request. At Berkeley we learned to look for documentation and additional information no matter who was making the assertion. Interesting that you weaseled the word "sometimes" into your last sentence. Thanks for showing me that I don't want to waste my time on you.
You literally asked for "some" liberals.
(1) I asked for prominent ones (on a par with Tucker Carlson, for example. I never heard of Hannah-Jones. (2) I didn't ask to be insulted as a result of a legitimate request for information.
Not sure this is a fight you want to start. There are a lot of us liberals who believe American public conversations and policy have been stained with racism for 400 years. We even have the evidence to point to, and we don't call it the "civil war" as if it was just a tribal dispute. The official name for that war should be the Slaver Rebellion. Because that's what it was.
Not only that, but after a million people died in that war and Congress and the Union added the 13th and 14th Amendments, it took over 100 years for SCOTUS to piecemeal recognize the legislative intent of the 14th Amendment. And now we have actual racists and Christo-fascists on that bench eager to roll back all those hard fought gains.
Yes, it's been 400 years of fighting the racists, and we're nowhere near a victory.
"Liberals use mass shootings to push for gun control and to further the delusion that America has basically been a nonstop Klan rally for the past 400 years." - some white guy on the internet
Interesting that you just now write this piece. Hmmm.
Well, I actually wrote it a year ago.
Good to know.
"I don’t need to ruminate on large-scale tragedies to know that things like white supremacy and radical Islam are bad."
Do you need a large-scale tragedy to know that transgenderism is bad?
I kinda think that you do.
I think that some people are transgender and I do not think that is bad.
What is bad is the vastly larger number of people who are seduced by the transification cult into believing that they are trans when they are actually not, like the Nashville shooter. Here's just one of a zillion such stories: https://pitt.substack.com/p/i-didnt-realize-you-think-of-her
No, what is bad is the conservatives using transgender persons (not "transgenderism") to push politicized medical viewpoints from people who are not doctors. Not to go Godwin, but it's a legitimate argument that the Nazis were as committed to fighting "deviant sexuality" (transgender medical diagnosis began in Weimar Germany) as they were committed to fighting Communism and The Jewish Problem.
The doctors in the UK, Sweden, Finland, and Norway who have actually taken the time and effort to review the actual medical evidence (which has NOT been done in the US) have all concluded that minors should not undergo medical transition: https://bprice.substack.com/p/why-have-many-nations-concluded-that
IDK, I think maybe after this substack's recent addressing of that issue he probably doesn't
I mean, I'm extremely Terfy these days but I'm okay with neutral observers occasionally wrinkling their brow with a "hmmm - bit weird over there" and then going back to talking about other stuff.
I've been arguing statistical significance with other Terfs all day. Insufficient sample size for meaningful conclusions.
Kindly, what are Terfs, and "Terfy"?
"Terf" originally stood for "Trans exclusive radical feminist", but now it's often used to mean any woman who is "gender critical" (think you can't split the world into male-brain-gender and female-brain-gender people, but only into male-sex and female-sex) and otherwise on the left of politics.
Used to be a slur, but is being reclaimed, since women got a little bored of pretending that "sex is in some cases a salient difference between people, and same-sex changerooms, same-sex sport, same-sex prisons should be retained" was in any way an abnormal, radical or embarrassing position to hold.
I knew MarkS would understand my jargon and its implications instantly, but sometimes forget that other people won't, even in conversing on trans-related issues!
Thank you!
"rare events" - how many mass shootings a day would make mass shootings not rare? How many school shootings a day would make talking about school shootings the sort of thing that is not "confirming our priors?"
And exactly how many people do you think talk about gun control only when there's been a school shooting? Yes, the conversation about gun control gets more noticeable after a tragedy but that doesn't mean any of us gun control proponents needed a shooting to think that way. That is one of the dumbest accusations I've yet read.