4 ms·

1) Evolution is not "a truth", as in a revealed truth that is true just by uttering it. Evolution is a well-supported and falsifiable scientific theory. 2) Ev

1) Evolution is not "a truth", as in a revealed truth that is true just by uttering it. Evolution is a well-supported and falsifiable scientific theory. 2) Evolution was not blindly accepted as "truth" the way you seem to expect this so-called "principle" to be accepted simply on your say-so (or prophet Kendi's?). Quite the contrary, it was not accepted at all and evidence had to provided. Lots and lots of evidence. Overwhelming evidence. And it is not accepted as truth by faith now either. 3) The mere claim "you can model [this] quite nicely mathematically" is not evidence for the claim. It is only evidence for you making that claim. 4) Even an actual mathematical model, should one actually be presented rather than just claimed, is not evidence for the claim. There are infinite mathematical models that are consistent with themselves yet inconsistent with the real world. 5) Yet, there are mountains of evidence that identity politics lead to bad outcomes. 6) And yes, racism (which this so-called "anti-racism" clearly is) is clearly reprehensible. This is something we fortunately figured out a while ago, and the fact that we figured it out was a major step up in our societal evolution. Quite frankly I am shocked and dismayed that we are even having a discussion about this. No. NO. Doing away with this nonsense was a major achievement for humanity, we can't give it up this easily. 6) Also: two wrongs never make a right.

kenjackson 4y ago
For 1-4, we will mostly set that aside for now. But I do think that most people find it obviously true -- it just may or may not be to their benefit to say so. Identity politics does lead to bad outcomes, yet here we are. Unfortunately we've gotten ourselves to the point that now acting like there are no identities is just another form of identity politics. E.g., saying "lets stop talking about gender -- we have male and female and lets just stop there and move on" seems less appealing to those that feel currently disenfranchised by the status quo. On 6, anti-racism is racist, but not for the reason that most people assume. It is because white people tend to double down when confronted with anti-racist data. For example, when whites are told that the legal system is unjust to blacks, they tend to support it more. By anti-racisms very definition of being strictly results, and not intent, oriented -- it itself is racist. On your second 6 -- the second wrong can dampen the impact of the first wrong. I also notice that the beneficiaries of the first wrong, do love this quote. A tad convenient?
- mpweiher 4y ago
  > For 1-4, we will mostly set that aside for now. Hmm... > most people find it obviously true Reminds me of the rental manager at my London flat justifying a raise in my rent with "well, rents are rising". When I confronted him with his own organisation's web site, which unambiguously said that rents were flat or falling, he countered with "Statistics aside, rents are rising". But I see the problem. Previously you claimed that these things actually were true. That people may believe they are "obviously" true is an entirely different matter, and probably the crux of the problem. Because people believe in false things as "obviously true" all the time. For example, people used to believe that the sun obviously revolves around the earth, and many still do (and our language certainly still does: sunrise, sunset etc.) And these things are just as false. > that now acting like there are no identities is just another form of identity politics. No it's not, and that's also a false dichotomy. Repudiating identity politics does not require claiming that (or acting like) there are no identities. But group identities don't define us, and certainly not to the exclusion of everything else. I am an individual first, and a member of various groups second. This isn't hard. > anti-racism is racist Glad we agree. > It is because white people tend to double down when confronted with anti-racist data. That's both untrue and also even if it were true it would not mean that "anti-racism" is racist. "Anti-racism" is racist all by itself without any external help required. > when whites are told that the legal system is unjust to blacks, they tend to support it more. This is not true. However, speaking of doubling down on the false (and inconsistent) things people believe: the same people who believe that blacks are discriminated against, and use the legal system bias to justify their belief, also fervently believe that males are privileged. Yet the bias against males in the criminal justice system has been shown to be 6x larger than the bias against blacks. When confronted with these facts, do they ever double down! But thanks for clarifying that what you are talking about is the not actual facts, but all the various false beliefs that people in fact do have. My experience has been that it is better to base policy based on actual facts, not on things that feel truthy, though of course policy based on the latter is easier to sell.
  - kenjackson 4y ago
    There’s a lot here that is wrong, but you clearly won’t admit it. That said for others still reading here is a good article: https://www.vox.com/2014/8/7/5978551/study-racism-criminal-justice-stop-and-frisk-reform-support https://www.vox.com/2014/8/7/5978551/study-racism-criminal-j... I know it doesn’t sell well, but most whites do, at some level, prefer blacks not to do well. Not because they necessarily hate blacks, but in aggregate it means they’ll do less well (in aggregate). So you talk about facts, but the data shows that whites will choose to enact policy they think hurts blacks. Those are the facts.

kenjackson 4y ago

For 1-4, we will mostly set that aside for now. But I do think that most people find it obviously true -- it just may or may not be to their benefit to say so. Identity politics does lead to bad outcomes, yet here we are. Unfortunately we've gotten ourselves to the point that now acting like there are no identities is just another form of identity politics. E.g., saying "lets stop talking about gender -- we have male and female and lets just stop there and move on" seems less appealing to those that feel currently disenfranchised by the status quo. On 6, anti-racism is racist, but not for the reason that most people assume. It is because white people tend to double down when confronted with anti-racist data. For example, when whites are told that the legal system is unjust to blacks, they tend to support it more. By anti-racisms very definition of being strictly results, and not intent, oriented -- it itself is racist. On your second 6 -- the second wrong can dampen the impact of the first wrong. I also notice that the beneficiaries of the first wrong, do love this quote. A tad convenient?

mpweiher 4y ago
> For 1-4, we will mostly set that aside for now. Hmm... > most people find it obviously true Reminds me of the rental manager at my London flat justifying a raise in my rent with "well, rents are rising". When I confronted him with his own organisation's web site, which unambiguously said that rents were flat or falling, he countered with "Statistics aside, rents are rising". But I see the problem. Previously you claimed that these things actually were true. That people may believe they are "obviously" true is an entirely different matter, and probably the crux of the problem. Because people believe in false things as "obviously true" all the time. For example, people used to believe that the sun obviously revolves around the earth, and many still do (and our language certainly still does: sunrise, sunset etc.) And these things are just as false. > that now acting like there are no identities is just another form of identity politics. No it's not, and that's also a false dichotomy. Repudiating identity politics does not require claiming that (or acting like) there are no identities. But group identities don't define us, and certainly not to the exclusion of everything else. I am an individual first, and a member of various groups second. This isn't hard. > anti-racism is racist Glad we agree. > It is because white people tend to double down when confronted with anti-racist data. That's both untrue and also even if it were true it would not mean that "anti-racism" is racist. "Anti-racism" is racist all by itself without any external help required. > when whites are told that the legal system is unjust to blacks, they tend to support it more. This is not true. However, speaking of doubling down on the false (and inconsistent) things people believe: the same people who believe that blacks are discriminated against, and use the legal system bias to justify their belief, also fervently believe that males are privileged. Yet the bias against males in the criminal justice system has been shown to be 6x larger than the bias against blacks. When confronted with these facts, do they ever double down! But thanks for clarifying that what you are talking about is the not actual facts, but all the various false beliefs that people in fact do have. My experience has been that it is better to base policy based on actual facts, not on things that feel truthy, though of course policy based on the latter is easier to sell.
- kenjackson 4y ago
  There’s a lot here that is wrong, but you clearly won’t admit it. That said for others still reading here is a good article: https://www.vox.com/2014/8/7/5978551/study-racism-criminal-justice-stop-and-frisk-reform-support https://www.vox.com/2014/8/7/5978551/study-racism-criminal-j... I know it doesn’t sell well, but most whites do, at some level, prefer blacks not to do well. Not because they necessarily hate blacks, but in aggregate it means they’ll do less well (in aggregate). So you talk about facts, but the data shows that whites will choose to enact policy they think hurts blacks. Those are the facts.