It would take hours to define all of those with precision and I don't have that time nor the motivation. If you thing is dictionnaries, you will never get what I'm saying.
Nice strawman
I don't assume, I imagine. I don't know but your cynism does not come from nowhere, we are not born with it.
"Our" as in "us human"
We are on a weeb forum discussing a manga with a political center story. So yeah, I'm sorry if I find this affirmation really funny
The refusal or the undermining of the politicization of the masses through culture is one of the reason why I consider you as a political opponent since it's the same behavior that adopt people who want to protect the status co.
It's not an assumption but an observation. You do seem to have biases against social studies, if it wasn't the case, you would agree with the majority of what i'm saying on this forum and would not try to undermine my words constantly on diverse subjects.
Thus confirming what I'm saying literally in the message above. There is no dialogue possible since there is a refusal of a certain form of knowledge from your part.
There is no such thing as "official sources" mate. There are studies, researchers and then there are the encyclopedia, the data sources and vulgarizers than spread them. You will find all of that all around the web, not just in one place. Especially since the scientific field is a very fruitfull domain.
This ideas that somehow I'm push to accept only the science that fit my agenda is blinding you. I wish I could show you how many time the scientific process of learning about scientific datas in social studies made me unconfortable.
I mean, you only have to take a look at the notion of orientalism in the context of post colonialism to understand how the entire mainstream media field is influenced by colonial after thoughts. It was not a very pleasant self questionning at first..
I'm not only "caring about sources that validates my political agenda",
it's the SOURCES that CREATES the political agenda.
It's crazy how how don't get that yet. For me it's not politic then science.
It's science THEN politic (at the exception of the cases where we need to indeed question the biases in sciences). It's science that influences leftism. Simply because we are materialists for the most part (cases like Blax are an exception) and materialists care about the
reality of the world. We want to be sure that our knowledge gets as close as possible from what the social world is.
And yes, it happens than Sciences shows us very clearly a world with systems oppressions and with dynamics of dominations and thus, it also implies a world where all of those can simply be absent.
It's not my fault if science shows us that humans are the result of the material condition of theirexistence. It's a simple logical consequence of the reality of our universe.