Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43
  1. #21
    Senior Member mgtower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Dead body politic, deceased corporate corpse.
    Posts
    2,872
    Reputation
    10108
    Type
    Ghosted by law and order.

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by African-Daoist View Post
    I was slow to respond because I did not want to be reactive, merely as a result of trying to defend the common heritage I share with black Americans . After going over your comments a second time, I do believe it is necessary for me to respond to certain assertions you made,whether out of inadequate information on the history of the region or merely lack of interest, which I would consider a more likely reason for your comments.

    I do seek the indulgence of the mods as regards this and I think if this conversation is to continue beyond this point, we would do it via pm's going forward .

    First off, your comment about defeat in warfare being an indication of inferiority seems odd to me, given that in another prior post, you had asserted that even if a superior alien power offered you terms you found violated your individual sovereignty, you'd fight them even though certainty of death was evident . From that I am led to believe that you don't really believe that being better at violence is an indicator of superiority, otherwise I question why you'd resist at all ?

    Consequently, it comes to mind that over the life span of humanity on this rock, very few people have not in one form or the other been conquered in warfare, resulting in vassalage,slavery and other indignities . Even the British who at one point held sway over India and a large portion of the world, where at one time under the dominion of the Romans .
    I am sure you did not know this but before a lot of communities in my country where conquered it took years of warfare and thats because of the fact that there are over 200 linguistic groups ( just do a web search ) which have totally different authority structures . So it was not some monolithic culture which had a central government that was toppled but rather the people from different tribes did not share much in common to begin with, you can check that out if in doubt.


    As regards your comment about prosperity, I think it means different things to different people and hence there can be no singular yardstick to quantify that. What however can be used is the quality of life and contentment found amongst the people and I doubt we can accurately estimate that in any objective way, so I will pass over that.


    You mention advancement in arts and culture again using a single brush stroke to describe a region about which you evidently know so little, just so you know the egyptians where historically a black culture and at its height people from all over the world came to learn mathematics, geometry and many emerging technological innovations. Pythagoras and a lot of other prominent western scholars travelled to egypt to learn the wisdom that built the foundations of their city states . You can probably do a web search for the great wall of zimbabwe,the ancient churches in ethiopia and so many other marvels on the continent. So we were not swinging on tree branches prior to losing the battle, just like no other culture around the world is accused of such backwardness, it baffles me why that fable still persists. For example my tribe (edo) has historical records going back farther than that of the house of Windsor,make of that what you will. I used egyptians because that would be easiest for you to verify.

    Finally, you come to the issue of technology and my assumption is you are using the present metric of what you see on television, shown by people looking to make a quick buck off the ravages of war torn areas of the countries of Africa . Isn't it funny they never show the major cities ? Just the back water areas to curry your sympathy. Technologically though, I have to say well, it depends on what the technology is being applied to and even then why single Africa out of the other cultures around the world who are also not as advanced in the modern context ? That I will concede but so what I ask ? Various nations have stood at the top heap of humanity over the years and now we don't consider them so godlike as they were viewed then. The egyptians, Babylonians,Romans,Persians e.t.c, come to mind . Yet I am sure if you go to compare them technologically with America for example, they'd be at a serious deficit but does that then detract from their worth as humans ? I think an emphatic no is obvious.

    You used the analogy of fat as being a slur but there is some utility to being fat, a healthy fat man is probably going to be stronger than a healthy skinny man all things being equal, thats why there are weight classes in combat sports but not height classes. Using a singular arbitrary criteria to determine the worth of a person is actually not a good metric to determine value at all . Dwayne "the rock " Johnson could probably best Bill Gates in a fight, but that does not mean he is superior.

    Subjectively selecting criteria which agree with one's preestablished bias, is the whole origin of the intolerance so common in modern society .

    Lest we get bogged down trading anecdotes, I did mention the issue of slavery previously but what I was getting at you seemed to miss . I was merely stating that words can take on a meaning completely unrelated to their origin . Of course fat and thin are used pejoratively, but it was merely at some point used descriptively. In fact in Africa a muscular slim man is consisered to be probably poor and a fat man is seen as the standard . Either way the knowledge of BMI should be the guide, not some arbritary standards seens in a movie. It's like how women see the intelligent,tall,suave, muscular,romantic, rogue in the movie and want a man like that; never mind that some of those qualities are mutually exclusive. The notion that one person is perfect because they look a certain way, does a great diservice to humanity . There are so many dimensions where we could find common ground and if we find it difficult to forgo competition, we can do like the prophet muhammad said " strive to exceed each other in virtue ". One thing we do agree on though, is one ought to learn from past errors. Do have a good day .

    Cheers
    The Persians learned that lesson the hard way with Leonidas and the Spartans!

    Are you sure you're not a black Spartan? You have what it takes, that's for sure!
    01/20/2021 Hell on Earth Day 1.

  2. #22
    Senior Member rkspsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Delhi, India
    Posts
    566
    Reputation
    1339
    Type
    Propertarian

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by African-Daoist View Post
    I do seek the indulgence of the mods as regards this and I think if this conversation is to continue beyond this point, we would do it via pm's going forward .
    I hope that wont be needed, cuz we are merely asserting over past. I believe racism is saying a group cannot do X. I am never saying that. I might only be saying havent done X or have scored lower in X in the past. And I welcome any correction, either in the facts or in my interpretation of racism if mods think that is the case.

    Quote Originally Posted by African-Daoist View Post
    First off, your comment about defeat in warfare being an indication of inferiority seems odd to me, given that in another prior post, you had asserted that even if a superior alien power offered you terms you found violated your individual sovereignty, you'd fight them even though certainty of death was evident . From that I am led to believe that you don't really believe that being better at violence is an indicator of superiority, otherwise I question why you'd resist at all ?
    In that post you refer too, I never said that we were likely to win or superior in any way. Fighting till death refers to trying your best, but its not necessary that you will win. Here again I will say, nature has no notion of fairness. Your case can be justified, you might try your best, and still get defeated very badly. In animal kingdom this happens all the time.

    Before moving forward, let me more clearly define superiority, which I will refer to explaining furthur of your criticisms (and I will write why this criteria, in the end). I will consider something superior with respect to a market. If there is a demand for something, and you supply that service, commodity, then in that market you are superior. If there is no market for that, then that is not the superiority I am talking about.

    Secondly, the market/demand can exist at any level of society, not just individual. In fact I'll often refer to market at civilization level.

    So first is violence. Yes violence has demand, always had demand, everywhere in world and at every point in history. Even if we look past the humans, into the animal world, violence has demand. Sometimes preys are save themselves from violence or threat it. So yeah, according to my definition of superiority, ability to supply superior violence, does makes you superior.

    Quote Originally Posted by African-Daoist View Post
    Consequently, it comes to mind that over the life span of humanity on this rock, very few people have not in one form or the other been conquered in warfare, resulting in vassalage,slavery and other indignities . Even the British who at one point held sway over India and a large portion of the world, where at one time under the dominion of the Romans .
    I am sure you did not know this but before a lot of communities in my country where conquered it took years of warfare and thats because of the fact that there are over 200 linguistic groups ( just do a web search ) which have totally different authority structures . So it was not some monolithic culture which had a central government that was toppled but rather the people from different tribes did not share much in common to begin with, you can check that out if in doubt.
    Yes, I am referring to post renaissance world. And because of exactly the property you mentioned (very small human lifespan), the markets in the current world will be more affected by recent events. Which means the farther back you go, the less relevant it becomes in determining who will meet more demand in any market (eg: violence).

    Otherwise we can go a lot back... and I believe if I remember correctly, all the current europeans actually originated from some region in central asia. The older natives of europe are no longer there, they became extinct. Dont quote me on this, this is just to highlight that the nearer some event is to present, the more its likely to determine the market superiority.

    Quote Originally Posted by African-Daoist View Post
    You mention advancement in arts and culture again using a single brush stroke to describe a region about which you evidently know so little, just so you know the egyptians where historically a black culture and at its height people from all over the world came to learn mathematics, geometry and many emerging technological innovations. Pythagoras and a lot of other prominent western scholars travelled to egypt to learn the wisdom that built the foundations of their city states . You can probably do a web search for the great wall of zimbabwe,the ancient churches in ethiopia and so many other marvels on the continent. So we were not swinging on tree branches prior to losing the battle, just like no other culture around the world is accused of such backwardness, it baffles me why that fable still persists. For example my tribe (edo) has historical records going back farther than that of the house of Windsor,make of that what you will. I used egyptians because that would be easiest for you to verify.

    Finally, you come to the issue of technology and my assumption is you are using the present metric of what you see on television, shown by people looking to make a quick buck off the ravages of war torn areas of the countries of Africa . Isn't it funny they never show the major cities ? Just the back water areas to curry your sympathy. Technologically though, I have to say well, it depends on what the technology is being applied to and even then why single Africa out of the other cultures around the world who are also not as advanced in the modern context ? That I will concede but so what I ask ? Various nations have stood at the top heap of humanity over the years and now we don't consider them so godlike as they were viewed then. The egyptians, Babylonians,Romans,Persians e.t.c, come to mind . Yet I am sure if you go to compare them technologically with America for example, they'd be at a serious deficit but does that then detract from their worth as humans ? I think an emphatic no is obvious.
    I'll first address technology, then on art. Again, I am merely focusing on markets, which means nearer past becomes way more important. I am not denying your points on ancient African civilizations like Egypt, and there were even more lesser known ones, but it wont matter today as a market. Africa is not the one selling tech expertise better than current Europe, and the disparity was a lot worse before information age in the post renaissance world. I am not referring to any televised sources of backwater Africa, I am referring to inventions of machines, discovery of mathematical concepts, discovery in modern laws of physics, etc. In post renaissance world, any list you make, Europe is going to beat rest of the world, combined, most likely. And even if I have to give a casual example from my own direct and frequent experience, its not television. Its simply any math or physics book I read. I am continuously bombarded with formulas and concepts named after people who are europeans (and white).

    Though, just to be clear on this, from technology I mean capability to invent or create something new, NOT the capability to use or provide cheap labor.

    Now on arts and culture. Against violence and technology, this point is weaker I agree and more open to personal preferences. But still, today's arts and culture market is quite tied to technology, and sometimes the art may REQUIRE a technology. Say making a 3D model of something. Or making special effects in a movie/film. Or even in discovering novel ways designing something, say UI. Though I already concede its a weak point, I am not going to expand too much on it.

    Quote Originally Posted by African-Daoist View Post
    You used the analogy of fat as being a slur but there is some utility to being fat, a healthy fat man is probably going to be stronger than a healthy skinny man all things being equal, thats why there are weight classes in combat sports but not height classes. Using a singular arbitrary criteria to determine the worth of a person is actually not a good metric to determine value at all . Dwayne "the rock " Johnson could probably best Bill Gates in a fight, but that does not mean he is superior.
    When we say "fat" to a person with an intention of insulting them, we dont really mean Dwayne Johnson type of fat. I can refer to example of this word : "motherfker". We can say to our friends, in friendly way : "hey motherfker !", and its not insulting, its humor. But we can also use this in an insulting way, say in a phrase : "you pathetic retarded motherfker !". Now that second phrase is a whole other thing. Same is with fat (or the N word). The context is often sufficient to add to the words, which can be quite intended by the one saying (or writing) it.

    Quote Originally Posted by African-Daoist View Post
    It's like how women see the intelligent,tall,suave, muscular,romantic, rogue in the movie and want a man like that; never mind that some of those qualities are mutually exclusive.
    Exactly !

    Regardless of how we view women or society in general in terms of their ridiculousness of ideas, the markets are still generated by them. For a man who is going to "sell" himself on sexual market, women are the buyers, and unfortunately, they will set the standard. But in general, any entity can be market, not just women. The usage of market as measuring device for superiority, allows me to devise strategies where, if I am superior in some regard, I can exchange it for something I desire but lack of.

    I'll say this as a closing point, almost nothing you wrote I find wrong, in fact I already knew that. I know (generally) about past civilizations which were of non-european origin. But our major point of disagreement (I think), is how we tend to define things. I never use meanings and definitions which I "think" should be appropriate. I need some objective criteria. Something which is open to falsification and to Occam's Razor. Falsification guarantees that the description wont survive any unexplained counter evidence. And Occam's Razor (simplicity, minimizing the number of transactions) guarantees that if I use that theory to chalk out some plan or build some machine, its number of weak points are minimum.

    An example I give at the end. Some Indians think that Wright brothers didnt invent airplanes, it was some Indians. They think that it was just stolen and then written off as invented by them (Wright Brothers). Now I dont have any evidence to deny that (thus I cannot apply falsification). Maybe they are true. But, if I belong to that time period when airplane was invented, and I need some expertise on airplanes, where will I go to buy that expertise (applying the concept of markets) ? I'll go to Wright Brothers because its based on only one assumption (that they invented airplanes). If I go to Indians, then I will based on TWO assumptions (Wright Brothers stolen it AND Indians invented it).
    Last edited by rkspsm; February 19, 2021 at 12:02 PM.
    "Truth is enough." - Curt Doolittle
    "Truth, and violence to enforce it." - Eli Harman
    "Gandhi, ... until Viking." - Curt Doolittle
    "There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy." - Alfred Henry Lewis

  3. #23
    Senior Member rkspsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Delhi, India
    Posts
    566
    Reputation
    1339
    Type
    Propertarian

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by mgtower View Post
    The Persians learned that lesson the hard way with Leonidas and the Spartans!

    Are you sure you're not a black Spartan? You have what it takes, that's for sure!
    Does that make me Persia ?

    Or do you mean some random nobody who tried to fight Sparta out of sheer stupidity ?
    "Truth is enough." - Curt Doolittle
    "Truth, and violence to enforce it." - Eli Harman
    "Gandhi, ... until Viking." - Curt Doolittle
    "There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy." - Alfred Henry Lewis

  4. #24
    Senior Member mgtower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Dead body politic, deceased corporate corpse.
    Posts
    2,872
    Reputation
    10108
    Type
    Ghosted by law and order.

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by rkspsm View Post
    Does that make me Persia ?

    Or do you mean some random nobody who tried to fight Sparta out of sheer stupidity ?
    No, I'm saying I recognize a Spartan just about anywhere. They come in all shapes, colors, and sizes!
    01/20/2021 Hell on Earth Day 1.

  5. #25

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by mgtower View Post
    The Persians learned that lesson the hard way with Leonidas and the Spartans!

    Are you sure you're not a black Spartan? You have what it takes, that's for sure!
    I am much gratified to be mentioned in the same breath as such noble men . Thank you for the compliment . Cheers

  6. #26

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by rkspsm View Post
    I hope that wont be needed, cuz we are merely asserting over past. I believe racism is saying a group cannot do X. I am never saying that. I might only be saying havent done X or have scored lower in X in the past. And I welcome any correction, either in the facts or in my interpretation of racism if mods think that is the case.



    In that post you refer too, I never said that we were likely to win or superior in any way. Fighting till death refers to trying your best, but its not necessary that you will win. Here again I will say, nature has no notion of fairness. Your case can be justified, you might try your best, and still get defeated very badly. In animal kingdom this happens all the time.

    Before moving forward, let me more clearly define superiority, which I will refer to explaining furthur of your criticisms (and I will write why this criteria, in the end). I will consider something superior with respect to a market. If there is a demand for something, and you supply that service, commodity, then in that market you are superior. If there is no market for that, then that is not the superiority I am talking about.

    Secondly, the market/demand can exist at any level of society, not just individual. In fact I'll often refer to market at civilization level.

    So first is violence. Yes violence has demand, always had demand, everywhere in world and at every point in history. Even if we look past the humans, into the animal world, violence has demand. Sometimes preys are save themselves from violence or threat it. So yeah, according to my definition of superiority, ability to supply superior violence, does makes you superior.



    Yes, I am referring to post renaissance world. And because of exactly the property you mentioned (very small human lifespan), the markets in the current world will be more affected by recent events. Which means the farther back you go, the less relevant it becomes in determining who will meet more demand in any market (eg: violence).

    Otherwise we can go a lot back... and I believe if I remember correctly, all the current europeans actually originated from some region in central asia. The older natives of europe are no longer there, they became extinct. Dont quote me on this, this is just to highlight that the nearer some event is to present, the more its likely to determine the market superiority.



    I'll first address technology, then on art. Again, I am merely focusing on markets, which means nearer past becomes way more important. I am not denying your points on ancient African civilizations like Egypt, and there were even more lesser known ones, but it wont matter today as a market. Africa is not the one selling tech expertise better than current Europe, and the disparity was a lot worse before information age in the post renaissance world. I am not referring to any televised sources of backwater Africa, I am referring to inventions of machines, discovery of mathematical concepts, discovery in modern laws of physics, etc. In post renaissance world, any list you make, Europe is going to beat rest of the world, combined, most likely. And even if I have to give a casual example from my own direct and frequent experience, its not television. Its simply any math or physics book I read. I am continuously bombarded with formulas and concepts named after people who are europeans (and white).

    Though, just to be clear on this, from technology I mean capability to invent or create something new, NOT the capability to use or provide cheap labor.

    Now on arts and culture. Against violence and technology, this point is weaker I agree and more open to personal preferences. But still, today's arts and culture market is quite tied to technology, and sometimes the art may REQUIRE a technology. Say making a 3D model of something. Or making special effects in a movie/film. Or even in discovering novel ways designing something, say UI. Though I already concede its a weak point, I am not going to expand too much on it.



    When we say "fat" to a person with an intention of insulting them, we dont really mean Dwayne Johnson type of fat. I can refer to example of this word : "motherfker". We can say to our friends, in friendly way : "hey motherfker !", and its not insulting, its humor. But we can also use this in an insulting way, say in a phrase : "you pathetic retarded motherfker !". Now that second phrase is a whole other thing. Same is with fat (or the N word). The context is often sufficient to add to the words, which can be quite intended by the one saying (or writing) it.



    Exactly !

    Regardless of how we view women or society in general in terms of their ridiculousness of ideas, the markets are still generated by them. For a man who is going to "sell" himself on sexual market, women are the buyers, and unfortunately, they will set the standard. But in general, any entity can be market, not just women. The usage of market as measuring device for superiority, allows me to devise strategies where, if I am superior in some regard, I can exchange it for something I desire but lack of.

    I'll say this as a closing point, almost nothing you wrote I find wrong, in fact I already knew that. I know (generally) about past civilizations which were of non-european origin. But our major point of disagreement (I think), is how we tend to define things. I never use meanings and definitions which I "think" should be appropriate. I need some objective criteria. Something which is open to falsification and to Occam's Razor. Falsification guarantees that the description wont survive any unexplained counter evidence. And Occam's Razor (simplicity, minimizing the number of transactions) guarantees that if I use that theory to chalk out some plan or build some machine, its number of weak points are minimum.

    An example I give at the end. Some Indians think that Wright brothers didnt invent airplanes, it was some Indians. They think that it was just stolen and then written off as invented by them (Wright Brothers). Now I dont have any evidence to deny that (thus I cannot apply falsification). Maybe they are true. But, if I belong to that time period when airplane was invented, and I need some expertise on airplanes, where will I go to buy that expertise (applying the concept of markets) ? I'll go to Wright Brothers because its based on only one assumption (that they invented airplanes). If I go to Indians, then I will based on TWO assumptions (Wright Brothers stolen it AND Indians invented it).
    Lest I lose sight of my main point, all I've been saying is that every form of superiority humanity has considered inviolable over the years has proven to be merely illusory .

    The only superiority which has withstood the ravages of time, cultural bias and even captivated the minds of people across centuries, has always been the doings of the virtuous .

    Is it any wonder why people flock to movies to watch tales of people overcoming insurmountable odds to prevail, for that is he human condition, there is always a deficit in our ability but the spirit that stands against the vagaries of fate and declares it's desire to defy even that which can break the body; refusing to submit it's very soul !?

    That I truly consider as superior, no matter which culture produces such an individual .Ever consider that the first person to propound the so called theories that resulted in Pythagoras' name being appended to it might have been quite popular ? Or what of the first person to invent the wheel, do you remember his name ? What of the arabic numerals ? Thing is, over time all technological significance fades into the mists of the distant forgotten irrelevancies but what remains is the tales of the human spirit .

    Did the western enlightenment spring fully formed out of the ether ? Of course it was built upon the foundations of knowledge now taken for granted, garnered from god knows where over long periods of time .

    The proximity of our life span to the western ascendancy makes it seem as though all else before was nonsense but civilisations do not have similar life spans to humans .

    A hundred years is merely a culture in infancy, so a bid you not to be hasty to dismiss all else as insignificant .During the time of Roman dominance, they were the most technologically advanced, even having access to salt, yes salt, which was at a point used to pay their soldiers .

    In present times, someone would laugh at the absurdity of being paid in salt, but at that time it was such a rare commodity, it was worth it's metaphorical weight in gold .This has always been my favorite poem, it's titled Ozymandias by Shelley;


    I met a traveller from an antique land Who said:
    "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone Stand in the desert . . .
    Near them, on the sand,Half sunk, a shattered visage lies,

    whose frown,And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,

    Tell that its sculptor well those passions readWhich yet survive,

    stamped on these lifeless things,The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed:

    And on the pedestal these words appear:

    'My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
    'Nothing beside remains.

    Round the decayOf that colossal wreck, boundless and bareThe lone and level sands stretch far away."


    On that note I will end by saying technological or any other material superiority pales in significance to the superiority of spirit which humans inherently acknowledge by deifying those who come close to such ideals .In any age Marcus Aurelius, Socrates,Lao Tsu, Mandela,Ghandi etc, would be considered great men, not because of the technology of their times but for the magnificence of their souls and that's the only superiority I consider worthy of such veneration, for thst is honoring the fivinr spark within one's own breast . A quick diclaimer though, least I be misunderstood, I am under no circumstance trying to scoff at the marvelous intellectual achievements of these nations over these centuries, they are achievements worthy of admiration, all I'm saying is humanity has to have more meaning than owning the latest bauble.

    Cheers

  7. #27
    Senior Member rkspsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Delhi, India
    Posts
    566
    Reputation
    1339
    Type
    Propertarian

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by African-Daoist View Post
    Is it any wonder why people flock to movies to watch tales of people overcoming insurmountable odds to prevail, for that is he human condition, there is always a deficit in our ability but the spirit that stands against the vagaries of fate and declares it's desire to defy even that which can break the body; refusing to submit it's very soul !?
    Okay, you are still arguing about the meaning of superiority YOU consider meaningful, and I actually agree with it. There was never any disagreement there.

    Let me give a simplified example, before I directly address that. Lets say you have 5 apples and I have 5 oranges. If one asks who is superior with number of apples, the answer can be objectively given as YOU. Similarly if one is asked who is superior with oranges, the objective answer is ME.

    Now, what if the question becomes, who is superior generally in that situation, you or me ? To answer that question objectively you will need one additional data : the exchange rate. Which is provided by a market. If there is only one market available, and which is willing to exchange, say one apple for 50 oranges, suddenly you are VASTLY superior to me. You can make it rain oranges while still being "inferior" in "oranges" criteria.

    Of course, there will be many complications once you try to apply it to real world. What if I dont need apples and I only need two oranges ? (Eg: MGTOW operates on this). Then the question will become undecidable. BUT, this assumes that I have the option forego/ignore the need for apples or more oranges than I have.

    And that brings me to the point I was making. The market of violence is a universal market, everyone needs that to satisfy their basic needs of food, water, clothing, shelter etc. For me, currently that market is provided by the state, in exchange for me being a tax slave or wage slave or marriage slave or all of that. The state gives me enough violence to prevent the next violent group of hooligans roaming around to randomly enter my house and take whatever they want with impunity.

    And that is the age we live today, an age of luxury. But slowly and steadily the "old world" is returning. We are descending into violence and chaos, and pain is becoming less and less optional each passing day. Which is why I want to keep my head straight on the UTILITARIAN meaning of things. And that is especially when some piece of philosophy can put me in danger, I dont have enough supply of violence on my own to meet even rudimentary of dangers in any conflict.

    Spiritual superiority or virtue may or may not translate to utility. It has its own place, and so does the utility. Mixing them together can be dangerous when bad times are near.
    "Truth is enough." - Curt Doolittle
    "Truth, and violence to enforce it." - Eli Harman
    "Gandhi, ... until Viking." - Curt Doolittle
    "There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy." - Alfred Henry Lewis

  8. #28

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by rkspsm View Post
    Okay, you are still arguing about the meaning of superiority YOU consider meaningful, and I actually agree with it. There was never any disagreement there.

    Let me give a simplified example, before I directly address that. Lets say you have 5 apples and I have 5 oranges. If one asks who is superior with number of apples, the answer can be objectively given as YOU. Similarly if one is asked who is superior with oranges, the objective answer is ME.

    Now, what if the question becomes, who is superior generally in that situation, you or me ? To answer that question objectively you will need one additional data : the exchange rate. Which is provided by a market. If there is only one market available, and which is willing to exchange, say one apple for 50 oranges, suddenly you are VASTLY superior to me. You can make it rain oranges while still being "inferior" in "oranges" criteria.

    Of course, there will be many complications once you try to apply it to real world. What if I dont need apples and I only need two oranges ? (Eg: MGTOW operates on this). Then the question will become undecidable. BUT, this assumes that I have the option forego/ignore the need for apples or more oranges than I have.

    And that brings me to the point I was making. The market of violence is a universal market, everyone needs that to satisfy their basic needs of food, water, clothing, shelter etc. For me, currently that market is provided by the state, in exchange for me being a tax slave or wage slave or marriage slave or all of that. The state gives me enough violence to prevent the next violent group of hooligans roaming around to randomly enter my house and take whatever they want with impunity.

    And that is the age we live today, an age of luxury. But slowly and steadily the "old world" is returning. We are descending into violence and chaos, and pain is becoming less and less optional each passing day. Which is why I want to keep my head straight on the UTILITARIAN meaning of things. And that is especially when some piece of philosophy can put me in danger, I dont have enough supply of violence on my own to meet even rudimentary of dangers in any conflict.

    Spiritual superiority or virtue may or may not translate to utility. It has its own place, and so does the utility. Mixing them together can be dangerous when bad times are near.
    At the risk of sounding like some pretentious twat, I think it's necessary to clarify certain misconceptions I seem to perceive might be assumed about my personal motivations for my earlier statements .
    To put it mildly, I never got into philosophy because I was some bohemian scholar waltzing through life and trying to seem profound, to put it mildly I needed and still need philosophy because it's the only rock I have found solid enough to graft my sanity upon .

    To make a not too fine point at the cost of blowing my own trumpet, Nigeria is a violent country, remember my comment about different linguistic groups being grafted together ? Well, it has always been an uneasy union, which occasionally erupts in blood shed . I have lost relatives to such violence both from the "law" and from "riots" . I have been in life or death situations myself and yet I found solace not in my ability to defend myself but in the eternal truths from such sages. If you doubt the veracity of my claims, just do a web search with Nigeria and violence or riots, I am certain there will be more results than you could possibly go through. We are currently on the brink of another civil war, so I do not make these statements lightly.

    What I am saying is that, I have seen the worst violence can do and personally I have come to the conclusion that the only thing worse than death is the shrivelling of the spirit that comes with the fear of death . Death is inevitable anyway, so why should I let myself fret over something from which no human has yet escaped to my knowledge ?

    It might sound pessimistic but it's merely the reality that we spend so much of our energy fretting about dying that, forgive the cliche, we forget to live .
    Now, I'm not some macho, ninja, samurai-knight; all rolled into one . What I do know however is that one can onky choose to live with dignity and though the body can be harmed by a violent man, the soul alwats stands beyond reach but such is going into the realm of the abstract which might not be to the taste of many, so I'll end by saying, what matters to me is not so much safety but rathe being able to live in a manner in line with my values. As to the utility of spirituality or virtue having utility ? Believe me, that's the time when such have the most value as it ensures the survival of the collective more certainly than just their common fear of death .

    In the final analysis, I suppose we can agree to disagree . L have no monopoly on truth, hence there is no need for our views on life's issues to be similar . With that I rest my case . Do have a good day
    Cheers

  9. #29
    Senior Member rkspsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Delhi, India
    Posts
    566
    Reputation
    1339
    Type
    Propertarian

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by African-Daoist View Post
    At the risk of sounding like some pretentious twat, I think it's necessary to clarify certain misconceptions I seem to perceive might be assumed about my personal motivations for my earlier statements .
    To put it mildly, I never got into philosophy because I was some bohemian scholar waltzing through life and trying to seem profound, to put it mildly I needed and still need philosophy because it's the only rock I have found solid enough to graft my sanity upon .

    To make a not too fine point at the cost of blowing my own trumpet, Nigeria is a violent country, remember my comment about different linguistic groups being grafted together ? Well, it has always been an uneasy union, which occasionally erupts in blood shed . I have lost relatives to such violence both from the "law" and from "riots" . I have been in life or death situations myself and yet I found solace not in my ability to defend myself but in the eternal truths from such sages. If you doubt the veracity of my claims, just do a web search with Nigeria and violence or riots, I am certain there will be more results than you could possibly go through. We are currently on the brink of another civil war, so I do not make these statements lightly.

    What I am saying is that, I have seen the worst violence can do and personally I have come to the conclusion that the only thing worse than death is the shrivelling of the spirit that comes with the fear of death . Death is inevitable anyway, so why should I let myself fret over something from which no human has yet escaped to my knowledge ?

    It might sound pessimistic but it's merely the reality that we spend so much of our energy fretting about dying that, forgive the cliche, we forget to live .
    Now, I'm not some macho, ninja, samurai-knight; all rolled into one . What I do know however is that one can onky choose to live with dignity and though the body can be harmed by a violent man, the soul alwats stands beyond reach but such is going into the realm of the abstract which might not be to the taste of many, so I'll end by saying, what matters to me is not so much safety but rathe being able to live in a manner in line with my values. As to the utility of spirituality or virtue having utility ? Believe me, that's the time when such have the most value as it ensures the survival of the collective more certainly than just their common fear of death .

    In the final analysis, I suppose we can agree to disagree . L have no monopoly on truth, hence there is no need for our views on life's issues to be similar . With that I rest my case . Do have a good day
    Cheers
    We are actually agreeing on more than you are (probably) understanding from the way I am putting my points (I am guessing).

    The spiritual virtue you talk so highly of is actually VERY VALUABLE. Its just that, upto only few years ago, it was not discovered a way to describe (as in, put forward a theory in pure scientific terms), that WHY those virtues are good.

    Let me go into a little distraction here to give a background. In very late 19th century, ALL physics was known, everything was explained... EXCEPT 2 experiments. Those two experiments later turned into their own branch of physics, one quantum physics and one relativistic physics. The physicists, to their absolute horror, realized that whatever they have known (Newtonian physics) is only partial truth (and thus a lie, in a way).

    This lead to development of this concept called Operationalism, which was more rigorous than any scientific method of that time. The debate on how to utilize it raged on for several decades. It even gave rise to a separate branch of mathematics called "Constructive Logic". It differs slightly from our usual understanding of binary (true/false logic). This new logic system is Ternary (true, false and undecidable). Why is that will require its own topic, but the point is, this is very deep and involved than it might appear, and its main purpose was to root out any philosophy or pseudo-science from scientific discussion. This is where you can say the science and philosophy were at the crossroads, the constructive logic is purely evidence based logic.

    Then few decades later, the economics ecosystem adopted the operationalism, atleast some branches. I dont know much about this but there are texts which I can refer to. And then, only very recently (like maybe a decade) a small group of people were able to apply this to law and politics. And that is where most of my ideas come from. Of course I am not just spitting out what I hear, I try to understand that to the best of my ability then make up my own points. I have some education (self-taught) in Constructive Logic which helps a lot there.

    Now back to the topic of spirituality and virtue. This system of understanding actually explains WHY or HOW that is important. You see, the thing which you call high spirituality, allows one to ignore the what is right in front of them and see beyond. This makes them somewhat impervious to many of the problems of modern technology (like you said about having the latest and shiny bauble). And this is why, even if by accident, the spiritual people tend to often make many right decisions. And that is GOOD. What is better, in my opinion of course, is able to deconstruct all the good decisions into the smaller terms which can be verified and understood. Just like you can deconstruct math operations into some handful of basic operations (you can explain subtraction, multiplication and division just in terms of addition). This new system which I study is able to deconstruct most if not all the day to day traditional wisdom, into correct, partially correct, conditionally correct and incorrect, purely in terms of utility.

    And that is why, I get along so well with conservative people (over post modern) and spiritual ones (over materialistic ones). Not only I get along well with them, my life's spiritual goals and ambitions MATCH with them on almost all the points except marriage.

    One example, I value knowledge and skill over money. In my line of work, I sometimes, agree to do some work (writing a small software) for free IF, it is from a field where I have no knowledge in and they are willing to teach me the basics. Essentially I traded my expertise for a different expertise. No "material" transaction ever took place. You can explain the benefit of this spiritually or you can explain this in utility terms, the end remains the same.

    Regarding facing actual violence in life, I have faced none yet (except some fights in teenage years which are like meh at this point). I am living in absolute fantasy, and its my spirituality which is making me uneasy all the time. I have heard about violence in other countries, not just in Nigeria, but in Bosnia, Yugoslavia and some others. Detailed accounts from survivors etc. That is the "mother nature" in her truest, most brutal form. Its my responsibility for myself, both in spirit and in utility, not to fall for any temporary and ephemeral safety and luxury which can disappear in a blink of an eye if I am not careful.
    "Truth is enough." - Curt Doolittle
    "Truth, and violence to enforce it." - Eli Harman
    "Gandhi, ... until Viking." - Curt Doolittle
    "There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy." - Alfred Henry Lewis

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,236
    Reputation
    2869
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Sorry for the delay in responding, but life sometimes gets in the way.

    I do believe diversity to be a good thing only where there is context in some form.
    Agreed. But many are swayed by the opinions of others and only think as far as the group. (Sheep)

    I believe diversity is a good thing when those with differing viewpoints come together to solve a problem in good faith, or even to agree that there is no real problem. For example, as an atheist I have absolutely no problem with those of faith so long as they don’t try to impose their views and moralities upon me.

    However, many don’t see it this way. Diversity becomes a bad thing when one section tries to impose its views on others. This can only lead to division.

    tends to result in balkanization as the structure becomes so all encompasing it means nothing to be part of it.
    Maybe I’m mistaken, but I think this relates to what I was trying to get at about immigration. Those from similar backgrounds, from what I see, tend to congregate; Whites tend to live in White areas; Blacks and Asians the same. This, to me, is perfectly natural – birds of a feather et al. But over time they form their own mind-sets and this tends to lead to distrust between these communities, leading to accusations of discrimination. This seems to be a self-fulfilling prophesy insofar as once swathes of people are accused of discrimination when the notion never even entered their minds, then what more do they have to lose? The cards have been dealt.

    So while I think diversity is good, I don't think it's inherently good merely because of its inclusivity.
    Absolutely. Few things exist in absolutes.

    In regard to your comment about the male-female thing, I think first off, we have to look at the society as a whole. Most people get their values from society and when there is a tilt in one direction or another the members of the herd inevitably are the most likely indicators of the situation.

    Transition between sexes is quite common in nature such as the clown fish,frogs I think and a few other organisms. Now while it might seem different because one is biological and the other technological, I beg to differ, because inherently man has long been regarded as the tool user . So while our evolutionary path seems quite unnatural, it still follows the same dictates as every other organism. I think in the case of the clown fish when the head female dies, a male changes into a female and takes up that position.

    Not to casigate anyone but I do believe there is ample evidence that suggests human societies also function along somewhat similar dynamics . If you look through history, it seems when women become aggressive and unappealing, some men usually go celibate, some become "players", some then take up the role of emotional support in forms akin to gay and other similar relations .

    I'm neither condemning nor condoning, just stating what I have observed . We humans tend to forget, that while we might make claims of being higher creatures, we are still animals and "herd animals" at that.
    There are usually social indicators for the acceptability and manifestation of such behaviour is what I'm saying.
    Again I agree. However, in nature when one spurns the rules there are consequences: ostracisation to name but one. But these days you are not allowed, under penalty of law, to ostracise anyone. ALL views must be considered equal. This is absolute bullshit and needs to be called out as so. Some views obviously have more merit than others, but when the facts are obscured then weirdness gets a shout. And I said weirdness as opposed to anarchy intentionally.

    Everyone’s views are equal. Yes. But only up to a point. There comes a time when any rational mind says: “Ah no, we can’t be having that!”

    On the issue of religion, I think most people do not practice religion because they believe it has some truths to teach but because they want to be in with the right group that puts them in a position of benefit.

    Freud was right on religion being wishful thinking in this regard, in my opinion, but where he missed the mark is that he was using the lowest common denominator of the people who professed a belief merely out of convenience and not as a genuine conviction it would be a path to personal growth.
    I think that identification is still found even in people whom become football hooligans, there really is no justification for their violent behaviour as regards the outcome of the match but it gives their lives some meaning and helps let off some pent up rage. All the better when you know god wants you to kill the other fucker. People want simple answers basically.
    Not practicing religion puts you in a position of benefit? I would have thought the opposite to be true. Yes you can slag off religion amongst your peers in the pub or coffee shop and this MAY gain you some social standing, but being part of a community, any community, will introduce you to new people that may benefit you. This I believe far outweighs any perceived gain from your closed society (mates).

    With regards Freud I cannot comment not having read his, er, teachings. Yes I have heard things but that’s not quite the same as interpreting things for yourself. All I can do is re-iterate my point about religion should be for personal enlightenment and not to impose said enlightenment upon others.

    With regards hooligans, whether football or otherwise, I have heard the suggestion that relieving such emotive urges only encourages more of the same. In other words, when you hit out once, you’re more likely to do the same again. As I say, this is something I have heard – I have no facts or figures to back me up – but it does seem reasonable.

    I can only add that, there does tend to be an oscillation between the extremes of leftism in the present form, but lets not forget that there have been similar situations created by right wing ideologues . I think in the end its not really about the politics but rather the kind of people who are engaged in it.
    This is so true. All that we see in Western ‘democracies’ lately has little to do with political ideology. Those that wish to cause dissent ally themselves with those that they believe will champion their cause. It has little to do with political ideology.

    I think we tend to forget how easy people are to influence
    This.

    Many people act upon reaction. If that’s what others are doing then this is what we need to do in response. Totally reactionist.

    Whilst I admit I succumb to this way of thinking occasionally, there is a thought that drives me:

    How can a society improve if the people that make up that society are acting totally out of reaction? If you wish that society was better, then how are you making it better? If the people in your society are acting like thugs, how are they going to change their attitudes if they see no example?

    I live my life in a bubble. I try to be kind without being taken advantage of. I try to be polite unless the situation warrants otherwise.

    Live life as you believe it SHOULD be, otherwise we’re all fucked!
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

  11. #31
    Senior Member stanmsl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    THE ENGLISH COUNTRYSIDE
    Posts
    221
    Reputation
    1348
    Type
    Bachelor

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Interesting thread, heres my 2 cents for the original post.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    The gender wars (and I don’t mean between men and women)..................it is absolutely none of my business what consenting adults get up to or believe, still (and I mean no disrespect here) there seems to be something within me, possibly genetic, that is repulsed at the sight of two men kissing, never mind the rest. This dichotomy bothers me, as it should. Nonetheless in this case at least it’s something I just have to live with. There will never be a true resolution. For those out there in the ether that are repulsed at this try to understand that I am not alone in this, it is something I have no control over.

    Exactly how I feel, however I live in a rural area and only know of one openly gay man. They tend to go to the citys to gay clubs so it's not something I see on a regular basis. My issue is how the law has gone too far in their favour. Just as woman beats up man gets treated less seriously then the other way round, a homophobic assult is now treated far more seriously than the exact same non homophobic assult.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    Religion.....Another of my pet hates. Unfortunately it gets abused and used as a hammer to beat down those that “don’t see the world as I do”. You MUST comply!

    I hate religion for being irrational nonsense, but it's an unfortunate byproduct of the way our brains are hard wired by nature. Religion was the only thing that constrained female hypergamy, ultimately there is no non religious society on earth that reproduces above replacement rates.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    Politics: When I was a youth (some 40 years ago) left and right wing policies were mainly about economic ideals. Which services should be controlled by the state and which should be allowed to operate in the free market.

    I agree with a lot of things from both sides, more so than a lot of people in the manosphere. However both sides are drifting further apart espically over in the USA. I try and ignore politics as much as possible, if your society is dying politics won't make any difference in the long run.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    Many differing views coming together on a non-political topic, say a scientific endeavour, may throw up novel ideas.

    Unfortunately there's far too many people in this world who will read a few web pages or watch a 10 minute youtube video and think they know more about a scientific endeavour than the people who have spent years studying the subject. Espically over the last year.....


    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    Immigration: Open borders / closed borders. Which is best?

    Open to people who actually benefit your country. While we should welcome a qualified doctor from a third world country it raises the deeper question of why our country is not producing that qualified doctor in the first place.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    Sterotypes: I’m Irish and for decades we were stereotyped as idiots,

    I'm English and often get stereotyped as a drunken football holligan when travelling. Part of human nature I believe.




    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    Law and order: This is a tricky one. Laws divest us of our individuality, of our diversity. That being said they are necessary for a conducive society.

    There's no solution to this we can all agree on, you could visit every country on the planet and there will be a law that makes you think "why don't they do this back home" while at the same time there will be another that has you scratching your head in disbelief. Ultimately laws are only as effective as the people who enforce them.
    Men are becoming MGTOW by the millions, most without ever having heard the term. They are simply doing what all living organisms finding themselves in a toxic environment do. They adapt to it or remove themselves from it. Females are not liking either the adaptations or the removal.

    FACEBOOK PAGE, TWITTER FEED

  12. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,236
    Reputation
    2869
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by rkspsm View Post
    On individual level, which I know by talking to ppl around me who either dream of migrating to some country or already migrated, I'd say its the very same mentality which women have when they ask for equality in jobs. They dont want bad jobs or responsibilities, just the benefits, because in their head they believe its wrong that they are not getting all the goodies. There is one to one mapping, most of the time as per what I have seen (which means sample space is low, take it with a grain of salt).
    Of course this is true. The grass is always greener etc. But if these people can’t make it in the land in which they grew up where they know the culture and the language, what makes them think they can make it elsewhere? Don’t they realise we have just as many homeless per capita as many other nations (official records aside, many fly under the radar and there are differences in recording these stats.)? 20 years ago I saw many Irish homeless here and few others, but today the Irish numbers are dwarfed by immigrant homeless. For every Irishman I see on the street I see 20/30/40 non-Irish. Sad, but true. Many come here ‘hoping’ for the better, easier life without any clue as to how to attain it. They seem to have been convinced, maybe by social media that a ‘good life’ will be automatically afforded them; nothing could be further from the truth.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ess_population

    In addition to this, if you come here as a refugee you are basically locked up in what they call ‘Direct Provision Centres’. You are given a roof (often shared), shared amenities (such as washing and cooking facilities) and food but are not allowed to work or interact with the general populace. Privacy is virtually non-existent. As regards safety (law and order) I can only guess, but my guess is it does not bode well for them. This can last many, many years.
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

  13. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,236
    Reputation
    2869
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by rkspsm View Post
    I think it does imply inferiority in a way, but before I explain ...



    Yes, the short and fat does imply inferiority, again if we stop denying the reality that individuals are different. And the MEANING of difference is that you are not equal to the other in every aspect. Now nature has no notion of "fairness", it may make you inferior in too many aspects and superior in very little or none.

    The pareto distribution is easily evidenced in every aspect of life. A small fraction at top is always better in almost every aspect than a small fraction from the bottom.

    The fat person is LIKELY inferior in several regards, he/she can be slow in sports, slow in combat, low in stamina and energy, low in sexual appeal, messed up with hormones resulting in depression, having more health problems, etc etc and list goes on. So telling someone is fat, is REMINDING them that they are LIKELY inferior in several of the aspects WITHOUT anything to have superiority in.

    I have to stress on the word "LIKELY", because that is the key in understanding the supposed "inferiority" of the n-word. For whatever reason, moral or immoral, there are several ways where blacks were and even are EVIDENCED to be inferior to whites. Again, I am only talking about confirmed facts, history, and nothing else. Be it prosperity of society, advancement in tech, advancement in arts and culture, and last but not least, they were conquered over by the whites/europeans.

    Now on the n-word, the usage of n-word is often attributed to your intention of insulting the person, not very different from calling that person a dog or an ass. But this insult is a very widespread shot, from a shotgun. You are essentially telling them, as a reminder, that they and their family, belong to a group, which are evidenced to be inferior, so he is likely inferior.

    Nature is BRUTALLY unfair, and lots of people have a lot of difficulty in digesting this. Its the reddest of the red pill. The bottom is soo soo inferior in so many ways that its HOPELESS for them to compete with even the average in many walks of life, forget any competition with crème de la crème of the society. And that too permanently in their life, unfixable by any means whatsoever, atleast none we have found so far.

    Why talking about evidence is important ? Because people are so fixated that they were "defeated" that they dont even want to understand why. I see that in my fellow indians all the damn time. They are soo butthurt that they were colonized by Britain, that they dont want to analyze WHY. And because of that, they are certain to repeat the mistakes, they made it over and over and over again (yeah, indians were so weak, that every wandering group was able to come and plunder/conquer us). You gotta learn from defeats, both as individual and as society/civilization. Or else you will be defeated again, justifying any stereotypes others have about you.
    Wow.

    Of course you are right on every point you have made, that being said I was referring to intellectual discussion and not being able to use the correct descriptive word due to political correctness.

    Oftentimes we refer to peoples in groups – fat, thin, tall, short, black, white, male, female – whatever. These are, of course generalities and should never be applied to the individual. Using these terms as such, to me, is the sign of self-doubt and an inferiority complex. (Comedy aside, if a person can’t take a joke directed at them that’s on them – we ALL have to take it and sometimes it hurts, but that’s life! Humour should be taken as it’s intended, as a friendly banter, though sometimes it can be hard to tell).

    On the other hand, if one is the type to go around calling people by these terms to inflict pain then that, of course, is a different matter. I’ve no time for those cunts.
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,236
    Reputation
    2869
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    First, let me say thanks for bringing things back to the original point. For some reason many of my threads seem to take on a life of their own.

    Views and opinions are as many and varied as there are people on the planet. I was merely trying to explore some of the more controversial with regards modern day life. Banging on about history doesn’t do it for me, I live in the here and now and the points you raise are of much interest to me. If I may reply to just two:

    Quote Originally Posted by stanmsl View Post
    Exactly how I feel, however I live in a rural area and only know of one openly gay man. They tend to go to the citys to gay clubs so it's not something I see on a regular basis.
    I live in a (small) city and see very little of it also even though I know it to be very prevalent here. But the propensity of it on the media suggests otherwise. You can’t watch an otherwise decent show without it being thrust in your face (oh, err). Even the newscasters and weathermen here have an over-representation. I’m sorry if I offend others with this but I find it reprehensible in the extreme, for extreme is what it has become.

    And gay pride rallies REALLY piss me off. Be gay if that’s your thing but don’t try to force others to accept your delinquency, and that it what gay pride is about, waving flags and behaving and dressing like what?: nothing to do with being a homosexual – it’s only about gaining acceptance for their decision to reject the norms like unruly teenagers. Before anyone castigates me for this I know a few gays and they agree with me on this.

    Quote Originally Posted by stanmsl View Post
    My issue is how the law has gone too far in their favour. Just as woman beats up man gets treated less seriously then the other way round, a homophobic assult is now treated far more seriously than the exact same non homophobic assult.
    Absolutely I agree. Hate crimes. Everything these days seems to have to be cloaked in these terms. If a gay is acting like a dick he’s likely to get what’s coming to him. (innuendo intended). It’s kinda like women are able to say whatever the fuck they like. They just keep coming with their shit and there’s nothing you can legally do to shut them the fuck up.
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

  15. #35
    Senior Member rkspsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Delhi, India
    Posts
    566
    Reputation
    1339
    Type
    Propertarian

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    For some reason many of my threads seem to take on a life of their own.
    I actually chortled a little bit when reading this...
    "Truth is enough." - Curt Doolittle
    "Truth, and violence to enforce it." - Eli Harman
    "Gandhi, ... until Viking." - Curt Doolittle
    "There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy." - Alfred Henry Lewis

  16. #36
    Senior Member rkspsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Delhi, India
    Posts
    566
    Reputation
    1339
    Type
    Propertarian

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    if a person can’t take a joke directed at them that’s on them...
    Sadly, there are too many people who belong that group. And me being not a very people person in real life, I just made some policies, like never ever joke on anything which can even remotely be controversial and just stay on the topic like a cold grey rock. Ofc the constraint doesnt exist when talking to old friends.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    On the other hand, if one is the type to go around calling people by these terms to inflict pain then that, of course, is a different matter. I’ve no time for those cunts.
    True, but there is a third scenario too. And that is where I often find myself. Its talking matter of factly (like in this thread) to explain some point or analyze something and then quoting history where some group was/is inferior without a doubt. That very often derails the entire thing, they get stuck on that very thing and original point goes down the drain.

    And to solve this, I sometimes have to be partial "cunt/asshole", that is to tell them that they are incapable of coherently talking and understanding the whole so I wont discuss the topics with them.
    "Truth is enough." - Curt Doolittle
    "Truth, and violence to enforce it." - Eli Harman
    "Gandhi, ... until Viking." - Curt Doolittle
    "There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy." - Alfred Henry Lewis

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,236
    Reputation
    2869
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by rkspsm View Post
    And to solve this, I sometimes have to be partial "cunt/asshole", that is to tell them that they are incapable of coherently talking and understanding the whole so I wont discuss the topics with them.
    I understand where you’re coming from, but you also need to understand that many people need a bit of ‘dutch courage’ (drink/drugs) before speaking forthrightly. Try to see past this. Also some are using their smartphones and grammar/spelling can become difficult to interpret. They’re typing ‘on the go’ so to speak.

    I rarely post here without a drink or two (or more) on me and because of this my views may on occasion seem contradictory. But I’m a bit OCD and try to review my posts BEFORE submitting them. Many don’t bother. That doesn’t mean their opinions are less valid but sometimes it takes a bit of reflection to see exactly what they’re getting at.

    Opinions are a dime a dozen, so to speak, but if one dismisses them because of ‘rules’ then one may miss out on the underlying point.

    Flexibility in thought can be a useful tool although I admit it can also lead you astray. Use it wisely.
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

  18. #38
    Senior Member rkspsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Delhi, India
    Posts
    566
    Reputation
    1339
    Type
    Propertarian

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    I understand where you’re coming from, but you also need to understand that many people need a bit of ‘dutch courage’ (drink/drugs) before speaking forthrightly. Try to see past this. Also some are using their smartphones and grammar/spelling can become difficult to interpret. They’re typing ‘on the go’ so to speak.

    I rarely post here without a drink or two (or more) on me and because of this my views may on occasion seem contradictory. But I’m a bit OCD and try to review my posts BEFORE submitting them. Many don’t bother. That doesn’t mean their opinions are less valid but sometimes it takes a bit of reflection to see exactly what they’re getting at.

    Opinions are a dime a dozen, so to speak, but if one dismisses them because of ‘rules’ then one may miss out on the underlying point.

    Flexibility in thought can be a useful tool although I admit it can also lead you astray. Use it wisely.
    Uhh, I wasnt talking about spelling mistakes or anything, and not even on this forum. The people on this forum are a LOT smarter.

    I was talking mostly of face to face interaction with everyday Joe(s) and Jane(s). Their capability to connect together few logical points is soooo dangerously low on the average that I have to first pre-filter who I talk to more than just greetings, and the filter test is : they must be ATLEAST purple pill. If I dont do that, all what will happen is, none of us will be making any sense to the other.

    So me saying to someone that I dont wanna talk either directly or indirectly by just avoiding any communication, its because they failed that filter test.
    "Truth is enough." - Curt Doolittle
    "Truth, and violence to enforce it." - Eli Harman
    "Gandhi, ... until Viking." - Curt Doolittle
    "There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy." - Alfred Henry Lewis

  19. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,236
    Reputation
    2869
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by rkspsm View Post
    Uhh, I wasnt talking about spelling mistakes or anything, and not even on this forum. The people on this forum are a LOT smarter.

    I was talking mostly of face to face interaction with everyday Joe(s) and Jane(s). Their capability to connect together few logical points is soooo dangerously low on the average that I have to first pre-filter who I talk to more than just greetings, and the filter test is : they must be ATLEAST purple pill. If I dont do that, all what will happen is, none of us will be making any sense to the other.

    So me saying to someone that I dont wanna talk either directly or indirectly by just avoiding any communication, its because they failed that filter test.
    Ah. My mistake and my apologies.

    But it just goes to show how easy it is to get the wrong end of the stick. This applies to real life conversations just as much as the written word.

    Personally, IRL I don’t really care that much where their views lie so long as they can make a cogent argument. I can’t really deal with fatuous fekkers that speak only in slogans and catch-phrases.
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    495
    Reputation
    4191
    Type
    Neutral

    Re: Understanding Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by rkspsm View Post
    I think it does imply inferiority in a way, but before I explain ...



    Yes, the short and fat does imply inferiority, again if we stop denying the reality that individuals are different. And the MEANING of difference is that you are not equal to the other in every aspect. Now nature has no notion of "fairness", it may make you inferior in too many aspects and superior in very little or none.

    The pareto distribution is easily evidenced in every aspect of life. A small fraction at top is always better in almost every aspect than a small fraction from the bottom.

    The fat person is LIKELY inferior in several regards, he/she can be slow in sports, slow in combat, low in stamina and energy, low in sexual appeal, messed up with hormones resulting in depression, having more health problems, etc etc and list goes on. So telling someone is fat, is REMINDING them that they are LIKELY inferior in several of the aspects WITHOUT anything to have superiority in.

    I have to stress on the word "LIKELY", because that is the key in understanding the supposed "inferiority" of the n-word. For whatever reason, moral or immoral, there are several ways where blacks were and even are EVIDENCED to be inferior to whites. Again, I am only talking about confirmed facts, history, and nothing else. Be it prosperity of society, advancement in tech, advancement in arts and culture, and last but not least, they were conquered over by the whites/europeans.

    Now on the n-word, the usage of n-word is often attributed to your intention of insulting the person, not very different from calling that person a dog or an ass. But this insult is a very widespread shot, from a shotgun. You are essentially telling them, as a reminder, that they and their family, belong to a group, which are evidenced to be inferior, so he is likely inferior.

    Nature is BRUTALLY unfair, and lots of people have a lot of difficulty in digesting this. Its the reddest of the red pill. The bottom is soo soo inferior in so many ways that its HOPELESS for them to compete with even the average in many walks of life, forget any competition with crème de la crème of the society. And that too permanently in their life, unfixable by any means whatsoever, atleast none we have found so far.

    Why talking about evidence is important ? Because people are so fixated that they were "defeated" that they dont even want to understand why. I see that in my fellow indians all the damn time. They are soo butthurt that they were colonized by Britain, that they dont want to analyze WHY. And because of that, they are certain to repeat the mistakes, they made it over and over and over again (yeah, indians were so weak, that every wandering group was able to come and plunder/conquer us). You gotta learn from defeats, both as individual and as society/civilization. Or else you will be defeated again, justifying any stereotypes others have about you.
    I totally agree with this - I would add I dislike it when feminists say 'nature is unfair' when we come to the discussion of who has the better life experience. We have the LAW which protects those who are weak and vulnerable in context, person or situation. A 7 foot Chad with bulging muscles cannot jump on a 5'4 simp without repercussions if he is caught. Just like a man cannot punch a female in the face without a police officer jumping on him. We also cannot run around saying the N word to black people or pay women less than men. Yet, when it comes to attractiveness we somehow fall back to the 'nature is nature' argument? I also say that political correctness should extend to negativity towards those with an unattractive appearence. Lets take Brazil as an example - in Brazil right now if your physical appearence and teeth are bad, you will never get a job.....

    People claim their teams or workplace is diverse yet refuse to hire ugly people? For instance an ugly person cannot get a job in the airline industry or high sales positions. The data is clear and obvious. I do agree with the fundementals of diversity as having a diverse team really does lead to better performance. Having a host of people from different backgrounds, cultures and experiences, leads to further progression and thought.

    Now if you say this to the average person they will instantly think 'incel' as society has conditioned a instant response in the recipient. Until everyone is free no one is free. I believe the next few generations will hold our generation accountable for this.


Similar Threads

  1. Understanding Sex Through Porn
    By Jackoff in forum Lounge
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: April 25, 2020, 5:53 AM
  2. Replies: 12
    Last Post: January 31, 2018, 8:51 PM
  3. Adolf Hitler: Diversity is good, diversity is our strength!
    By Aintdealingwithyoshit in forum Random (Non-MGTOW subjects)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 18, 2017, 10:28 PM
  4. Understanding the rationalisation hamster.
    By fathermarker in forum Lounge
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: July 11, 2015, 2:02 AM
  5. The women understanding manifesto
    By VLazarusC in forum Lounge
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: October 29, 2014, 7:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •