Donald J. Trump: President of the USA Part III Covfefe

[Gingerbeardman]

Yes, like the Dem Congress being sworn in...

But I see what you're trying to do GBM... You'd prefer we circle the airport with you're, Repubs "would be doing more for the sake of diversity" equivocation, rather than land on Repubs protect their white privilege, everyone else be damned.

It's not my equivocation, it's the definition of white privilege that your entire argument rests on.

Here it is again:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege

White privilege (or white skin privilege) is the societal privilege that benefits people whom society identifies as white in some countries, beyond what is commonly experienced by non-white people under the same social, political, or economic circumstances. Academic perspectives such as critical race theory and whiteness studies use the concept to analyze how racism and racialized societies affect the lives of white or white-skinned people.

According to Peggy McIntosh, whites in Western societies enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience, as "an invisible package of unearned assets".[1] White privilege denotes both obvious and less obvious passive advantages that white people may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice. These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely. The effects can be seen in professional, educational, and personal contexts. The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.[2][3]

Pray tell, how are you going to justify the existence of white privilege if you don't resort to concepts derived from critical race theory?

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Oh, not much... Just figured it was a good time to post a photo of GOP Congressmen being sworn in.

Such diversity don'tcha think?

I don't think you two are having the same conversation. It's possible they don't "believe" white privilege is a thing, while being the biggest exemplars and disseminators of it.

Doesn't change that the modern (Civil Rights era onwards) GOP is built on white privilege and white identity politics, of course.

 

[greg0205]

It is called simple logic. If you choose a criteria (any criteria, be it diversity, equality, the colour of your toenails, your mother's hobbies etc.) other than performance/excellence then performance/excellence will degrade.

So, you're saying that women and folk of colour *can't* be excellent because... diversity and equality? Is that how I should be reading your post?

 

[Gingerbeardman]

Well, just look at you assuming diversity negates excellence. There's a word for that... Give me a moment, it's on the tip of my tongue... Just one more moment, I know it'll come to me...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/20/us/harvard-asian-american-students-discrimination.html

Now, it wouldn't be racist to assume that all races have the same IQ, and that if there is a disparity in outcomes, racism must be to blame, right? So it wouldn't be racist to force undeserving people into positions because of irrelevant immutable characteristics, right?

When all those high IQ asians and Jews have to be excluded from positions of power for demographic reasons to fit your deluded racialised ideology, do you think excellence will be served, or not?

 

[Whright]

Well, just look at you assuming diversity negates excellence. There's a word for that... Give me a moment, it's on the tip of my tongue... Just one more moment, I know it'll come to me...

Realism???

 

[Techne]

So, you're saying that women and folk of colour *can't* be excellent because... diversity and equality? Is that how I should be reading your post?

Yes, if you are totally obsessed with race and a racist, and gender and you are a sexist.

 

[greg0205]

I don't think you two are having the same conversation. It's possible they don't "believe" white privilege is a thing, while being the biggest exemplars and disseminators of it.

Doesn't change that the modern (Civil Rights era onwards) GOP is built on white privilege and white identity politics, of course.

I think you have a point here, and the conversation seems to have triggered the usual... I wanna say... nationalists.

Who to deal with first... Hmmmm.

 

[Whright]

Well, just look at you assuming diversity negates excellence. There's a word for that... Give me a moment, it's on the tip of my tongue... Just one more moment, I know it'll come to me...

Quota???

 

[greg0205]

It's not my equivocation, it's the definition of white privilege that your entire argument rests on.

Here it is again:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege


Pray tell, how are you going to justify the existence of white privilege if you don't resort to concepts derived from critical race theory?

So you're asserting there is no such thing as white privilege?

You, who live in a country where apartheid is a living memory? And you're saying that you, in no way, shape or form, whatsoever, have benefited from being white?

Is this how I should read your posts?

(of course I assume you're white because you, self-deprecatingly, have ginger in your nic)

 

[greg0205]

Yes, if you are totally obsessed with race and a racist, and gender and you are a sexist.

I believe it was you who made the point that *you* thought women and people of colour *can't* be excellent... Which kinda makes you the racist and misogynist in this conversation... Calling it out just means I credit you with representing yourself honestly in your posts.

... I assume you'll be responding with your usual we're-living-in-the-upsidedown gaslighting now. Please, enjoy. Have fun.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

So you're asserting there is no such thing as white privilege?

You'll have to be more specific as to what you think "white privilege" is. I mean, I'll freely acknowledge that white people have a privilege over black people by virtue of their higher average IQ. But then we can say that about Asians and Jews versus white people. These IQ inequalities definitely produce inequalities in hierarchies of power, but I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with this, given that I desire to live in a society orientated around meritocracy.

As per the white privilege link:

White privilege was legally enshrined in South Africa through apartheid. Apartheid was institutionalized in 1948 and lasted formally into the early 1990s. Under apartheid, racial privilege was not only socially meaningful—it became bureaucratically regulated. Laws such as the 1950 Population Registration Act established criteria to officially classify South Africans by race: White, Indian, Coloured (mixed), or Black.[111]

Apartheid was a genuine instance of systematised/institutionalised racism. I'm glad it has come to an end. But I don't think society as a whole now has a responsibility to reverse every last injustice of the past, as you seem to. And the reason that I don't support it is because it would just create a greater injustice than the one it purports to rectify, and that's stupid.

 

[Techne]

So you're asserting there is no such thing as white privilege?

You, who live in a country where apartheid is a living memory? And you're saying that you, in no way, shape or form, whatsoever, have benefited from being white?

Is this how I should read your posts?

(of course I assume you're white because you, self-deprecatingly, have ginger in your nic)

Are you white? As in, Christian European ancestry? Well, I don't even know what you are doing posting in this forum. You need to repent, your white privilege is suffocating those that suffered due to white privilege. Disgusting, your white privilege here is an affront to humanity.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Trump Is Doing the Same Thing on Iran That George W. Bush Did on Iraq

 

[Gingerbeardman]

I believe it was you who made the point that *you* thought women and people of colour *can't* be excellent... Which kinda makes you the racist and misogynist in this conversation... Calling it out just means I credit you with representing yourself honestly in your posts.

... I assume you'll be responding with your usual we're-living-in-the-upsidedown gaslighting now. Please, enjoy. Have fun.

Men have greater IQ variability than women, which means that there are more men than women on the dumb end of the scale, and the high end of the scale. So if your system selects for excellence, the highest IQ individuals will necessarily be male. At an IQ of 150, men outnumber women 4 to 1.

But of course, the disparity in pay gap and CEO placement and all of that is pure sexism, and nothing to do with natural differences between the sexes, amirite?

 

[greg0205]

You'll have to be more specific as to what you think "white privilege" is. I mean, I'll freely acknowledge that white people have a privilege over black people by virtue of their higher average IQ. But then we can say that about Asians and Jews versus white people. These IQ inequalities definitely produce inequalities in hierarchies of power, but I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with this, given that I desire to live in a society orientated around meritocracy.

As per the white privilege link:

Apartheid was a genuine instance of systematised/institutionalised racism. I'm glad it has come to an end. But I don't think society as a whole now has a responsibility to reverse every last injustice of the past, as you seem to. And the reason that I don't support it is because it would just create a greater injustice than the one it purports to rectify, and that's stupid.

Where even to start..?

Higher IQ? Peeling off Jews? The racism dripping off your first paragraph is something GBM, it really is.

The second paragraph? Well, that's just oozing privilege... Acknowledging a racist past would be such an injustice to your delicate sensibilities... Yet injustice in that racist past meant family separations, limited movement, an alienation from property rights, beatings and murder.

You poor soul. How tough it must be for you to maintain that bubble. How tight that benign mask you pull over your intolerant face must feel.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

Where even to start..?

Higher IQ?

So you're denying that smart people do better in society than dumb people, and that there is such a thing as smart privilege?

Peeling off Jews? The racism dripping off your first paragraph is something GBM, it really is.

It's not my fault Jews don't identify as white.

See there for a nice recent example.

The second paragraph? Well, that's just oozing privilege... Acknowledging a racist past would be such an injustice to your delicate sensibilities... Yet injustice in that racist past meant family separations, limited movement, an alienation from property rights, beatings and murder.

In what way did I fail to acknowledge a racist past?

You poor soul. How tough it must be for you to maintain that bubble. How tight that benign mask you pull over your intolerant face must feel.

Dude, you're the racialist here, not me.

 

[access]

lol

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Trump Inaugural Committee Ordered to Hand Over Documents to Federal Investigators

President Trump’s inaugural committee was ordered on Monday to turn over documents about its donors, finances and activities to federal prosecutors in Manhattan, according to two people familiar with their investigation into the committee’s activities.

A lawyer working with the inaugural committee received a subpoena on Monday evening seeking documents related to all of the committee’s donors and event attendees; any benefits handed out, including tickets and photo opportunities with the president; federal disclosure filings; vendors; contracts; and more, one of the people said.

Prosecutors also showed interest in whether any foreigners illegally donated to the committee, as well as whether committee staff knew that such donations were illegal, asking for documents laying out legal requirements for donations. Federal law prohibits foreign contributions to federal campaigns, political action committees and inaugural funds.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

I think you have a point here, and the conversation seems to have triggered the usual... I wanna say... nationalists.

Who to deal with first... Hmmmm.

The word you're looking for is liberals. Time to cash in your liberal membership card in favour of a progressive one, now that you've sacrificed your liberal principles on the altar of social justice, Greg.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Sure, typical... https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/?utm_term=.e0782c7e64de

means nothing unless you have an equally meticulous list of all previous administrations, you'd struggle to find one though, the MSM wasn't always this biased against their own president