NationStates

This poll's hilarious. You may as well have written

1. I agree

2. I strongly agree

3. I'm an idiot for disagreeing

Aglanen wrote:This poll's hilarious. You may as well have written

1. I agree

2. I strongly agree

3. I'm an idiot for disagreeing

If you can think of a valid forth option i'll add it.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Aglanen wrote:This poll's hilarious. You may as well have written

1. I agree

2. I strongly agree

3. I'm an idiot for disagreeing

If you can think of a valid forth option i'll add it.

How about 'while interesting, I disagree with the conclusions that OP has drawn here.'

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Sungai Pusat wrote:See, the reason why people went "gosh, why is that white person so poor" is probably because they were only exposed to one form of privilege that can exist.

Nonetheless, white privilege reduced empathy for whites rather than increasing empathy for blacks, so what good is it exactly?

You know. Like the study says it does.

Not all it says.

Also, the logical extremes would suggest that talking about privilege of any kind, some of which you would hopefully agree really does fucking exist (e.g... the privilege of having more money to start with in your life versus having little at all) would be bad because it would encourage anti-rich people sentiments, even though not everyone who is rich is a bad person.

You can stop being rich, you can't stop being white.

The fault in your interpretation of this is assuming that all this exists as a simple on-off switch; talk about one form of privilege is bad because anti-people "with that privilege", supposedly because, y'know, poverty. Talking about them all means everyone suddenly becomes anti-white/rich/Christian/male, etc.

Pretty much. Because you can talk about how people face problems, rather than bitterly noting how other people don't. What's your excuse for that type of framing device?

Instead of recognising that having less empathy for someone based on the things they're supposedly privileged for is kind of fucking nonsensical because hey, maybe they've got some other bullshit in their life, like... being poor. Or being LGBT. Or having mental issues, etc.

And yet, that's what the study shows.

It's a whole fucking system. Just as the professor. Fucking. Mentioned.

No actually, they rationalized that excuse but didn't study it to back it up.

Oh god, this is "anti racist = anti white" with a new coat of paint, isn't it?

Well, do you have a counter argument?

I will apologise for going off the cuff on most of this thread; the more posts come up about this, the more I'm realising that the issue you have/that exists with this lies with the phrasing of the issue, rather than with the notion of it existing to begin with.

Especially for the comment in question comparing this to neo-nazi bullshit.

Vice Media founded by the same person who founded neo-fascist group The Proud Boys.

Caracasus wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
If you can think of a valid forth option i'll add it.

How about 'while interesting, I disagree with the conclusions that OP has drawn here.'

Okey doke.

Poll reset due to legitimate grievance with options, options added.

Well colour me unsurprised.

This is why such ideological brainwashing must be purged from our colleges and our schools.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Ifreann wrote:So we should figure out how to better educate people to avoid this reaction. I don't think we should throw out facts just because people don't tend to have good reactions to them.

Also, you have a plural in your title that should probably be a singular.

Right, now here's how you do that.

Talk about disadvantage, not privilege. Real simple.

I figure that people who, you know, actually know about this stuff will work something out. Maybe people who didn't start with the conclusion they wanted and then worked backwards to find evidence for it.

An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:Vice Media founded by the same person who founded neo-fascist group The Proud Boys.

He was a co-founder actually, and he no longer seems to be a part of Vice.

So we're supposed to be complaining that people don't think white people are the greatest race ever again?

Vassenor wrote:So we're supposed to be complaining that people don't think white people are the greatest race ever again?

No, but if you ever actually bothered to read a post on NSG in its entirety you would know that.

Ifreann wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Right, now here's how you do that.

Talk about disadvantage, not privilege. Real simple.

I figure that people who, you know, actually know about this stuff will work something out. Maybe people who didn't start with the conclusion they wanted and then worked backwards to find evidence for it.

Like many grievance studies professors didn't start with the conclusions they wanted.

Vassenor wrote:So we're supposed to be complaining that people don't think white people are the greatest race ever again?

Read before straw-manning!

Galloism wrote:

Vassenor wrote:So we're supposed to be complaining that people don't think white people are the greatest race ever again?

No, but if you ever actually bothered to read a post on NSG in its entirety you would know that.

It's good to try and push people to become their best selves, but scaling that mountain in one go is a lot to ask.

Shocked, but not that shocked.

Dumb Ideologies wrote:

Galloism wrote:No, but if you ever actually bothered to read a post on NSG in its entirety you would know that.

It's good to try and push people to become their best selves, but scaling that mountain in one go is a lot to ask.

What can I say?

I'm an idealist.

Ifreann wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Right, now here's how you do that.

Talk about disadvantage, not privilege. Real simple.

I figure that people who, you know, actually know about this stuff will work something out. Maybe people who didn't start with the conclusion they wanted and then worked backwards to find evidence for it.

Irony.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:

Ifreann wrote:I figure that people who, you know, actually know about this stuff will work something out. Maybe people who didn't start with the conclusion they wanted and then worked backwards to find evidence for it.

Like many grievance studies professors didn't start with the conclusions they wanted.

This.

Right now, I'm the only one to vote I don't believe the evidence...But that is because I am wary of two studies from the same source showing similar results - at least that is how I read the article.

Until these results are replicated elsewhere (something difficult to do in these softer sciences) I'll remain skeptical that any breakthrough or meaningful discovery has been made.

I mean personally I can believe it but I'd be wary of proclaiming victory just yet.

Also, I'm uncomfortable with their solution. Intersectionality is not the answer because of how it gets abused.

I note plenty of the progressives here backpeddling and saying all it proves is that we need to include class in order not to be anti-white have implicitly conceded by doing so that the media is massively racist against white people on a regular basis, since any article not doing so is in effect racism.

Hirota wrote:Right now, I'm the only one to vote I don't believe the evidence...But that is because I am wary of two studies from the same source showing similar results - at least that is how I read the article.

Until these results are replicated elsewhere (something difficult to do in these softer sciences) I'll remain skeptical that any breakthrough or meaningful discovery has been made.

I mean personally I can believe it but I'd be wary of proclaiming victory just yet.

Also, I'm uncomfortable with their solution. Intersectionality is not the answer because of how it gets abused.

Prior studies showed that exposure to white homeless people reduced peoples inclination to support higher taxes and welfare, while exposure to black homeless people didn't affect it, which is what I previously used to draw this conclusion, but that was more suggestive and not as explicit as this one.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:

Ifreann wrote:I figure that people who, you know, actually know about this stuff will work something out. Maybe people who didn't start with the conclusion they wanted and then worked backwards to find evidence for it.

Like many grievance studies professors didn't start with the conclusions they wanted.

What?

Galloism wrote:

Dumb Ideologies wrote:
It's good to try and push people to become their best selves, but scaling that mountain in one go is a lot to ask.

What can I say?

I'm an idealist.

We should all be doing the best we can to encourage posters to do a better job. C'mon Vass we all believe that with just an iota of effort you can develop basic reading skills!

-Ocelot- wrote:There is going to be a time when you'll regret spending so much of your time and youth defending white supremacists and MRAs in a niche nation-building forum, Ostro.

I doubt it. Such people waste their lives 'til the end of them, usually.

Ostroeuropa wrote:I note plenty of the progressives here backpeddling and saying all it proves is that we need to include class in order not to be anti-white have implicitly conceded by doing so that the media is massively racist against white people on a regular basis.

I am not backpeddling in the least. I have always held classism and gaslighting of the working classes is a cornerstone of our media and entertainment industry and I still believe this highlights its existence as opposed to the existence of racism against white people.