Banthum

13 ms·

91.
by Banthum 9y ago
73% of incidents ? This is pure sleight of hand meant to deceive. When incident can be defined arbitrarily and possibly include both a gun massacre and a spray painted swastika as equal events, this stat is incredibly deceptive. What&#x2
92.
by Banthum 9y ago
These two things are not the same. A) Noticing a woman's beauty when you first encounter her. B) Making a 'valuation' of a woman 'solely' based on her looks. What's really deeply disturbing about the above is t
93.
by Banthum 9y ago
Radical feminist, or hyper-devout Christian? I can't even conclusively tell the difference any more.
94.
by Banthum 9y ago
Professor Nicholas Matte states it in this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kasiov0ytEc Not a really exotic belief in the core social justice circles. Though advocates tend to avoid stating it outright, since it&#
95.
by Banthum 9y ago
Google's "pro-diversity" hiring policies also have the unavoidable implication that some of Damore's colleagues actually shouldn't be with the company. The broader patriarchy/privilege theory behind those &quot
96.
by Banthum 9y ago
>the rest of us recognize that the debate is indeed about the severity and consequences of a rapidly changing climate And yet, your grandparent comment... >the other says that CO2 has no effect on natural, periodic climate cycles [E
97.
by Banthum 9y ago
I think it'd be a challenge to even dig up a serious Internet comment that clearly stated this. If you think someone's saying this, be sure you're not just inferring it to make a strawman. In any case, it's verifiable th
98.
by Banthum 9y ago
Diversity programs are doing a lot more than "recognizing". Recognition is just perception and perhaps symbolic communication. Diversity programs are action. In this case, the action is to shift economic opportunity from one group
99.
by Banthum 9y ago
Conflation and a strawman. What you're referring to is the idea that climate change exists . Nobody disputes this. The headline describes "drastic impact of climate change on U.S" happening today. "X exists" != &
100.
by Banthum 9y ago
"The "treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group" sentiment of the author is fine except that we have hundreds of years of doing just this in order to oppress and disenfranchise groups of people.&q
101.
by Banthum 9y ago
>if there is proof that diverse companies perform better then his reasoning about how diversity initiatives are wasteful must be incorrect. Absolutely not true. There are many other possible reasons for such a correlation. A few examples
102.
by Banthum 9y ago
No, they really wouldn't, not nearly with the same frequency. Trump inspires a special "rules no longer apply" insanity in far-leftists. They enjoy feeling like the normal rules of conduct don't apply, so they lean into
103.
by Banthum 9y ago
You argument would suggest this: If an organization does, at any time, use hiring priorities besides work ability, and thus hires people whose work ability was not as good as it could be - from henceforth on, nobody can ever criticize those
104.
by Banthum 9y ago
>This comes down to your views on a single question: do you have to be tolerant of opinions or actions that harm others? Right now, I think most progressives say no, conservatives obviously say yes. That is the actual gray area this come
105.
by Banthum 9y ago
You can't force people to be happy, but you can strongly encourage them to contribute to the welfare of others, thus sustaining the conditions that give everyone a chance at happiness.
106.
by Banthum 9y ago
False dichotomy. The question is not yes/no. It is a matter of degree. How angelic do people need to be for a system to work? If he had angels any system could work. If we had devils no system could work. The reality is in between.
107.
by Banthum 9y ago
The issue is that those rules are enforced energetically and stringently against dissidents, but are often not enforced or enforced in a lax way for orthodox activists. E.g. Anita Sarkeesian publicly calling one of her online political oppo
108.
by Banthum 9y ago
If there's an explanation based on principles, and one based on tribalism, generally the tribalism one has more predictive power. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything... Apple&#x2
109.
by Banthum 9y ago
Even if all you're doing is making yourself unhealthy, you're still harming others by destroying your own ability to contribute what you should be contributing. Simple non-aggression isn't good enough. We all depend on others
110.
by Banthum 9y ago
If other peoples' actions affect me, I absolutely have the right to influence those actions.
111.
by Banthum 9y ago
I wish that were true but I don't think more than perhaps 10% (possibly much less) of the population have the mental horsepower to deal with the raw truth about the moral and historical foundations of their identities. I'm in the
112.
by Banthum 9y ago
Your dreams of noble savagery are ridiculous. Humans in prehistory fought each other just as hard and as viciously as chimps fight each other today.
113.
by Banthum 9y ago
No, to maximize their chance of a happy, productive life, and maximize the chances of those around them, and maximize the health and strength and long-term viability of our society as a whole. Humans are not well-adapted to the temptations,
114.
by Banthum 9y ago
Nobody thinks the USA is perfect. But there is no comparison with China. Having a lot of violent crime and putting many people behind bars is nothing like mass executing prisoners to take their organs for profit. Openly arresting dissident
115.
by Banthum 9y ago
More representation of people from different backgrounds and philosophies in the media is one way to help get us out of this mess. The further concentration of 'voice' in our society towards an already hyper-powerful few will only
116.
by Banthum 9y ago
It can be true, but still harmful. To function, society depends on mass belief in many falsehoods and fictions. Teaching everyone the truth about everything will destroy any society. Theres a very strong tension between true beliefs and bel
117.
by Banthum 9y ago
>no one should ever have to worry about the consequences of reporting a crime The rub is, they should have to worry about the consequences, if they're making a bad-faith false report. They should have to worry a lot, because they th
118.
by Banthum 9y ago
The "scheming" comment is a classic false dichotomy. There's a big spectrum of behavior towards a political outcome between "opposed with deadly force" and "supportive with deadly force". Most Germans in 1
119.
by Banthum 9y ago
They don't want to solve the problem, they want to exploit the problem. A lot of media/activist/political activity makes a lot more sense through this lens.
120.
by Banthum 9y ago
But if you're willing to do that for organic you're also willing to do that for non organic.

More ›