2 ms·
I'm unclear on what a "race rant" is or how this could qualify. The behavior I have described is the academic consensus on the appropriate treatment of race, i
by h4nkoslo 10y ago
I'm unclear on what a "race rant" is or how this could qualify. The behavior I have described is the academic consensus on the appropriate treatment of race, it's not totally surprising that Google or anyone else would participate in that consensus. The footnotes of this article are a good starting point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiteness_studies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiteness_studies
- dang 10y agoWhat I'm calling a rant is making grand statements on inflammatory topics that come from a place of resentment. On HN, we're hoping for thoughtful statements that come from a place of curiosity. Those aren't just two different kinds of discourse, they're incompatible, like forest fires are incompatible with forests. Edit: one privilege of HN moderation is getting devastating critiques of one's analogies from emailers. Ok, forest fires don't really make my point here. But there is an article called "When Analogies Fail" on the front page right now, so I'll leave it.