Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Coyote, Nov 5, 2017.
I don't see how anyone can speak to something they refuse to watch. There's no way to know.
Which video? Xelor's? He's just trying weasel out of taking responsibility for his own words. His words speak for themselves. And apparently, he's grown comfortable with debating amateurs.
If you're talking about the vid in the op, sure there's legitimacy to it. But, again, these are only symptoms of a much deeper issue.
Ah well. I'll leave you all with the thread. I've said what I wanted here.
Well now, that remark illustrates that you don't fully understand what you've implied as a result of the fallacious inference you drew from my remarks. I'm not denying what I wrote. I'm saying the inference about me that you made based on what I wrote is irrational, and I provided you with two videos that explain the nature of the inference's irrationality.
The world of functional debate is one in which keen thinkers don't deign to refute irrational propositions, inferences and conclusions. Lines of thought/expression that are flawed from square one cannot be refuted; one can only point out the flaw in the speaker's/writer's reasoning and hope the individual has the cognition and integrity to appreciate that the notions they expressed sit on flawed reasoning and, in turn, either revise their argument or yield. That keen thinkers do not bother trying to refute materially flawed reasoning is part of why the following sayings and others resembling them came to be:
The video has some merit. Some people start with significant disadvantages or advantages that is true. But the race was way too short. Life is not a short sprint decided only by your starting place. That was the implication in this video.
The best part of the video IMO was the overhead shot seeing people in the back streaking past people given a start ahead of them. You saw every person running his or her own speed and THAT is the way real life is. We are not all the same, we have different abilities and different levels of DETERMINATION.
If you are disadvantaged and you work hard and are determined, the resources are there for you to succeed. Millions of disadvantaged Americans have demonstrated this by emerging from poverty to independence regardless of their starting position in life.
To take that inference from the video is to make more of it than it presented. The tacit claim of the video was not about the "voyage" called life, but rather the portion of the "voyage" that constitutes the period during which one makes one's way to the waypoint called "economic success."
Yes, that was among the most poignant parts of the video.
Yes, those different innate abilities, moxie included, play a material role in one's achievement of economic success. Be that as it is, the point of the video's metaphor isn't the role of innate abilities, but rather about that of constructs that delay or completely impede many people's reaching the "waypoint" we call economic success.
I don't disagree with that statement in general. What I take exception with and decry is the fact that race was made into and remains a construct that makes it a "failure factor" from which a host of additional and material other disadvantages issue. It should not be be.
Take a look at the following:
Distribution of U.S. millionaires by race/ethnicity, as of 2013 -- In and of itself, that whites comprise the majority of U.S. millionaires is not disconcerting. That the distribution of millionaires by race is not fairly well in line with the distribution of race among the population is what's disturbing. To the extent that the lack of proportionality is attributable to constructs emplaced in association with the circumstance of one's race and the disadvantages accruing therefrom, we have an ethical (and macroeconomic, frankly) obligation to mollify as much as possible the impacts of those constructs.
Income inequality -- Though I don't have a problem with the fact that some people make more, or even vastly more than others, I do have a problem with the fact that if one begins life poor and suffers the increased burdens that entails, the likelihood that one remains poor is far greater than the likelihood that one does not remain poor. And I disapprove of the fact that penury is for blacks the result of, among other things, past and current constructs combining to make it that much harder for them to alter that status than it is for non-minorities. (I linked the preceding sentence to an essay. I chose that essay for it's objective linked content more so than for its editorial content.)
Now as go these racially applied constructs of which I write:
-- I know am not the creator of them.
-- I know I am not a perpetuator of them.
-- I am not assuming blame for their existence, but I assume my part of the burden for effecting their end.
-- I know I am a beneficiary of them.
-- I don't feel guilty for so benefitting; I simply know it is unjust that I benefit thus.
-- I know that upon their diminution or removal, I and my kids will no longer benefit from them.
And I'm okay with all of that.
Yes, I saw that. You can imagine the rich kids going home that night and laughing about it, talking about how they live great lives. How America is their sort of place.
No, it wasn't implied in the video. The video was making a point, if you start picking up on silly little details rather than the ACTUAL POINT, then you're not watching the video properly.
I would reword that slightly as follows:
"...racial divisions create "sub-colonies" within the "colony," and that is not good for the country."
That is not to say inequalities based on race are not a problem (as they are), just to put an emphasis on the fact that the division along racial lines is a bigger problem. To put it another way: which is a bigger problem?
one is disadvantaged by their racial identity? or:
one identifies themselves (or is identified by society) based on race?
I contend that the answer is that number two is a greater issue, one that, if corrected, the other would no longer be a factor. Sure, everyone identifies with certain groups (some based on race) the problem is when it shifts from being a group you identify with, to an identity in and of itself.
I hope I am making myself clear here.
I reject the video because it is racist and is pushing an authoritarian message.
I spent the first 5 years in a fucking logging camp up 20 miles of unpaved road, did not have a t.v., few toys, and was not priviliged by any stretch of the imagination. Having some idiot tell me I am privileged simply because of my skin color is just as offensive as it is racist.
and after two generations of affirmative action where those with one skin color receive an advantage over those with another, it should be obvious to any thinking individual that what matters is attitude.
Goodness, gracious sakes alive, if Vietnamese people can come to this country with just the shirts on their back and are thriving a couple of decades later, then it isn't race that holds anybody back. Heck, Asians are the MOST disadvantaged by affirmative action, yet they succeed. Blacks are the MOST advantaged by affirmative action yet they don't.
Can't people ever figure out that it is attitude and not color that determines outcome, DESPITE what the authoritarians pushing the victim mentality try to cram down everybody's throats?
Separate names with a comma.