4 ms·

Could "conservative areas" be a [unintended] euphemism? The article cites a Univ. of Cincinatti study: "Their conclusion: “Whiteness encourages whites to rejec

Could "conservative areas" be a [unintended] euphemism? The article cites a Univ. of Cincinatti study: "Their conclusion: “Whiteness encourages whites to reject policies designed to help the poor and reduce inequality because of animosity toward people of color as well as being unaware that the poor include a great many white people.” "

pclmulqdq 3y ago
That is one of the most racist sentences I've read in a long time.
- gcanyon 3y ago
  Yeah -- wow, just wow.
  - pclmulqdq 3y ago
    I will also point out that this kind of quote being allowed into a "scientific" study is exhibit A for why conservatives are rejecting the scientific establishment, throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
    - the_third_wave 3y ago
      Once you take some distance from the subjects and gaze upon the production of these 'academics' you start to notice that their entire corpus is circumreferential with hardly any references going in from the outside other than to point out the fallacies of those 'studies'. The entirety of '-studies' subjects lives inside a world of its own where self-proclaimed 'experts' in self-invented 'fields' produce 'studies' which are then referenced by other 'academics' in their own 'studies'. This has created a vast corpus of nonsense [1] which is cited by activist-politicians as 'scientific proof' of the validity of their endeavours. Most of these '-studies' might as well have been produced by LLMs and it is not hard to predict someone will train a model to come up with new 'studies' to prove this point. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair
    - one_level_deep2 3y ago
      Those same conservatives happily supported the Southern Strategy which is what this sentence references. One political party made this a basis for their platform for decades. These are the results of that strategy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy#:~:text=In%20American%20politics%2C%20the%20Southern,to%20racism%20against%20African%20Americans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy#:~:text=In%2....
the_third_wave 3y ago
Imagine a university publishing an article with the following phrase: Blackness encourages blacks to reject policies designed to help ${some group} and ${some political target} because of animosity toward whites as well as being unaware that ${some group} include a great many black people. That university would be burned at the stake for being racist neocolonialists. What's good for the goose is good for the gander - any time an 'academic' starts about 'whiteness' she should be called out for being just the racist stereotype she claims to want to fight. She is a racist, pure and simple, and racists are not welcome. No matter how many circumreferential 'studies' she will cite, no matter how many other 'academics' she has on her side, let the facts speak for themselves.

pclmulqdq 3y ago

That is one of the most racist sentences I've read in a long time.

gcanyon 3y ago
Yeah -- wow, just wow.
- pclmulqdq 3y ago
  I will also point out that this kind of quote being allowed into a "scientific" study is exhibit A for why conservatives are rejecting the scientific establishment, throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
  - the_third_wave 3y ago
    Once you take some distance from the subjects and gaze upon the production of these 'academics' you start to notice that their entire corpus is circumreferential with hardly any references going in from the outside other than to point out the fallacies of those 'studies'. The entirety of '-studies' subjects lives inside a world of its own where self-proclaimed 'experts' in self-invented 'fields' produce 'studies' which are then referenced by other 'academics' in their own 'studies'. This has created a vast corpus of nonsense [1] which is cited by activist-politicians as 'scientific proof' of the validity of their endeavours. Most of these '-studies' might as well have been produced by LLMs and it is not hard to predict someone will train a model to come up with new 'studies' to prove this point. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair
  - one_level_deep2 3y ago
    Those same conservatives happily supported the Southern Strategy which is what this sentence references. One political party made this a basis for their platform for decades. These are the results of that strategy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy#:~:text=In%20American%20politics%2C%20the%20Southern,to%20racism%20against%20African%20Americans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy#:~:text=In%2....

the_third_wave 3y ago

Imagine a university publishing an article with the following phrase: Blackness encourages blacks to reject policies designed to help ${some group} and ${some political target} because of animosity toward whites as well as being unaware that ${some group} include a great many black people. That university would be burned at the stake for being racist neocolonialists. What's good for the goose is good for the gander - any time an 'academic' starts about 'whiteness' she should be called out for being just the racist stereotype she claims to want to fight. She is a racist, pure and simple, and racists are not welcome. No matter how many circumreferential 'studies' she will cite, no matter how many other 'academics' she has on her side, let the facts speak for themselves.