Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
US should have made universities free like funded by state instead of making race quotas. Maybe then people wouldn’t think it’s unfair to the white dudes. But I don’t know.
You’re over simplifying it and ignoring the characteristics and complexities of these races in specific fields and how they are treated by the race that holds power.
It’s not racism indeed but it’s pseudoscience
You’re over simplifying it and ignoring the characteristics and complexities of these races in specific fields and how they are treated by the race that holds power.
It’s not racism indeed but it’s pseudoscience
It's not racism.
Now that is different from saying meritocracy is not racial, it is racial because it will highlight differences in performance between races because equality is a myth.
However there are systems that are racist fundamentally, meritocracy is race-blind.
Your point seems to be that Kirk disliked or hated black people including Rob Smith
I'm going to need statements that he was anti-black and hated them, not just your fucking feelings lol
Now that is different from saying meritocracy is not racial, it is racial because it will highlight differences in performance between races because equality is a myth.
However there are systems that are racist fundamentally, meritocracy is race-blind.
Post automatically merged:
Your point seems to be that Kirk disliked or hated black people including Rob Smith
I'm going to need statements that he was anti-black and hated them, not just your fucking feelings lol
Let's be honest. The only reason why I fight against people is VERY simple:
- Most people here are idealistic (as in opposition to historical materialists)
> Which prevents them from understanding or accepting the 90% of what I'm actually saying (except for Blax who, for some reasons, shortcircuited radical leftism with religion without even being materialist)
- Most people here consider social sciences as legit sciences
> Which prevents people from accepting what I say as basic factual rethoric.
White supremacy is a domination system that derives from systemic racism and capitalism that considers that white people are in everyway superior to racialized groups of population.
White supremacy creates a system called "whiteness", which is a non verbal social contract that will basically say that no matter the social class under capitalism, a non racialized person will have a superior social status than a racialized one. Which in return pushes racialized people to seek the acceptations on society (for ex, Fanon explains how subjegated people under colonization where systematically pushed to adopt the colonist mindset to be assimilated by the metropole and extract themselves from the oppression of colonist and imperialism as a whole.
BEing against DEI means refusing the factual observation that white supremacy and therefore systemic racism are the social backbone of western society. It's an invisibilization of a domination system and by consequences a perpetuation of oppression as... if we treat oppressed and non oppressed people the same way, people who don't live oppression will ALWAYS be favorized by the system.
DEI is meant to return equity. Badly in the case of america, but it's still a necessity.
It's no "me". It's a scientific affirmation based on two centuries of observation and researches.
Your vision of racism is idealist. This means that Racism is just a result of bad behavior. But that's not how social structure work in reality. My approach in materialist. It takes systems of domination into account.
I don't have to. His words are public, you have to search for them. It's you who has to prove that he was a good guy, not the other way around.
His rethoric is racist, sexist, homophobic, and he cheered for a genocide. So the guy was a fascist.
Yeah. WHile explaining that the bible says that gay should be stoned to death. Fuck him.
Friendship requieres the knowledge of the oppression that your friends are facing. In the case of gay people it's heteronormativity and patriarchy, in the case of brown people it's systemic racism.
This guy (and you) have no knowledge about this and are defending racist point of view, therefore no matter how many black or gay friends you have or him, you are still participating in their oppression.
HE was not race blind, he was a white supremacist. And fascism is a spectrum it's not 1 or 0, and this guy was a fascist. Stop defending this piece of turd.
Yes it is. Indirectly and sometimes directly.
But to understand - AGAIN - you need to look at how social sciences picture meritocracy and domination systems such as racism
- Most people here are idealistic (as in opposition to historical materialists)
> Which prevents them from understanding or accepting the 90% of what I'm actually saying (except for Blax who, for some reasons, shortcircuited radical leftism with religion without even being materialist)
- Most people here consider social sciences as legit sciences
> Which prevents people from accepting what I say as basic factual rethoric.
White supremacy is a domination system that derives from systemic racism and capitalism that considers that white people are in everyway superior to racialized groups of population.
White supremacy creates a system called "whiteness", which is a non verbal social contract that will basically say that no matter the social class under capitalism, a non racialized person will have a superior social status than a racialized one. Which in return pushes racialized people to seek the acceptations on society (for ex, Fanon explains how subjegated people under colonization where systematically pushed to adopt the colonist mindset to be assimilated by the metropole and extract themselves from the oppression of colonist and imperialism as a whole.
BEing against DEI means refusing the factual observation that white supremacy and therefore systemic racism are the social backbone of western society. It's an invisibilization of a domination system and by consequences a perpetuation of oppression as... if we treat oppressed and non oppressed people the same way, people who don't live oppression will ALWAYS be favorized by the system.
DEI is meant to return equity. Badly in the case of america, but it's still a necessity.
It's no "me". It's a scientific affirmation based on two centuries of observation and researches.
Your vision of racism is idealist. This means that Racism is just a result of bad behavior. But that's not how social structure work in reality. My approach in materialist. It takes systems of domination into account.
I don't have to. His words are public, you have to search for them. It's you who has to prove that he was a good guy, not the other way around.
His rethoric is racist, sexist, homophobic, and he cheered for a genocide. So the guy was a fascist.
Yeah. WHile explaining that the bible says that gay should be stoned to death. Fuck him.
Friendship requieres the knowledge of the oppression that your friends are facing. In the case of gay people it's heteronormativity and patriarchy, in the case of brown people it's systemic racism.
This guy (and you) have no knowledge about this and are defending racist point of view, therefore no matter how many black or gay friends you have or him, you are still participating in their oppression.
HE was not race blind, he was a white supremacist. And fascism is a spectrum it's not 1 or 0, and this guy was a fascist. Stop defending this piece of turd.
Yes it is. Indirectly and sometimes directly.
But to understand - AGAIN - you need to look at how social sciences picture meritocracy and domination systems such as racism
Last edited:
RyoQ erasing all memories of Charlie Kirk being a horrible bigot from his mind (he has to push an agenda that all right wingers who say horrible things are just taken out of context):
Post automatically merged:
Also, legal slavery was long since abolished in the 40s you clown, how the fuck is saying they had it better in the 40s meant Kirk said they should be slaves again you idiots LOL
It pisses me off
Here is the clip you fascist defender:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOcqXWzDMHn/?hl=fr
Here is the clip you fascist defender:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOcqXWzDMHn/?hl=fr
Where the fuck does he mention blacks should be slaves again here LOL @Monster Zoro's Tesla Supplier
You could say this is extremely ignorant of him, but it isn't even a racist statement to say blacks were doing better in the 40s than today
You could say this is extremely ignorant of him, but it isn't even a racist statement to say blacks were doing better in the 40s than today
Also, legal slavery was long since abolished in the 40s you clown, how the fuck is saying they had it better in the 40s meant Kirk said they should be slaves again you idiots LOL
Where the fuck does he mention blacks should be slaves again here LOL @Monster Zoro's Tesla Supplier
Telling that black people were better off under segregation is "NOT a racist statement" ????
@Uncle Van My patience is running out with this one, I'm about to insult him.
