tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post7036204717311198860..comments2024-03-18T15:45:32.866-04:00Comments on bensozia: Meeting Trump's Louisiana SupportersJohnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01037215533094998996noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-23144278406859963262016-09-03T19:11:56.727-04:002016-09-03T19:11:56.727-04:00"In this line, whites start out placed ahead ..."In this line, whites start out placed ahead of minorities. Why is that?"<br /><br />-Genes.<br /><br />"why aren't they even more upset about by the obvious degree of "stacking the deck" going on, where certain people are given positions ahead of others for no apparent reason?"<br /><br />-Disdain for Manhattanite Clinton/Kasich voters is common in Louisiana.<br /><br />"but at the same time, the fact that they started out 100 spaces behind you may not be readily apparent."<br /><br />-Due to Blacks being, on average, less intelligent than Whites of the same income level, it's primarily children of higher-income Blacks who are the largest beneficiaries of affirmative action. #RedPill<br /><br />"despite the fact [or perhaps oblivious to it] that the whites forcibly put them there."<br /><br />-Maybe they did, but after they were allowed citizenship in the 1920s, many didn't dig themselves out of their hole. Bolivia has been independent for quite some time, as has Peru.<br /><br />"And why is their being "moved forward" (by the government or by their own actions) seen as an upheaval of the "correct" line ordering, rather than a delayed correction of a flawed one?"<br /><br />-Because it obviously is.<br /><br />"But as has been pointed out time and again, many Americans today care very little for logic or fact, and much more for feelings, no matter how ignorant or misguided."<br /><br />-And you are a prime example of this.<br /><br />Institutional racism has been a persistent argument in explaining poor average Black outcomes in the aftermath of slavery. It was wrong in the 1880s (Chinese), it was wrong in the 1920s (Jews), and it is even more wrong today (Vietnamese).<br /><br />What do West Virginia, Arkansas, and Louisiana all have in common?<br /><br />Majorities in all of them went for Clinton 20 years ago and will go for Trump this year. Also, all these went for Trump in the primary.<br />pithomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13997094225496018110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-44064627526431481272016-09-02T14:59:03.882-04:002016-09-02T14:59:03.882-04:00What strikes me about the "standing in line&q...What strikes me about the "standing in line" viewpoint is that it leaves out crucial details and makes pretty simplistic and wrongheaded assumptions.<br /><br />First, cutting in line isn't an apt analogy. When you cut in line, you not only move ahead, but you also move other people backwards. Lines have positions which are mutually exclusive - only one person can ever be tenth in line at a time, for example.<br /><br />But life isn't like a line. We're not ranked in endless numbers of incrementing value. Multiple people can all be in the same spot at once, and people can "move forward" without forcing other people to move backwards.<br /><br />Second, even if we stick with the flawed line analogy, we have to consider placement. In this line, whites start out placed ahead of minorities. Why is that? If people are upset about perceptions of "cutting in line", why aren't they even more upset about by the obvious degree of "stacking the deck" going on, where certain people are given positions ahead of others for no apparent reason?<br /><br />There's also the problem of false proximity. In a real line, space is constant and you can't very well see what's happening far behind or far ahead of you. But in the imagination of the reality, space and distance has no meaning. From most any vantage point you can easily "see" a minority who "cuts" forward twenty spaces - but at the same time, the fact that they started out 100 spaces behind you may not be readily apparent.<br /><br />Why was this individual so far back in the line to begin with? And why is their being "moved forward" (by the government or by their own actions) seen as an upheaval of the "correct" line ordering, rather than a delayed correction of a flawed one?<br /><br />Many whites will argue that immigrants should go to the back of the line, and that those who have been here longest deserve to be in the front. But what would they say if you pointed out that the majority of Native Americans are just as far back in line as they are, or even further? (Well, probably they'd point out that the government is letting Native Americans "cut" in line through various assistance programs - going right back to that notion that such people are "supposed" to be in the back of the line, despite the fact [or perhaps oblivious to it] that the whites forcibly put them there.)<br /><br />Overall, the line analogy stinks and has pretty huge logic holes riddled through it. But as has been pointed out time and again, many Americans today care very little for logic or fact, and much more for feelings, no matter how ignorant or misguided.G. Verlorennoreply@blogger.com