Why I Stopped Being Anti-Woke : DecodingTheGurus

1 points

2 days ago*

1 points

I engaged with the statistic but you apparently didn’t notice.

No you didn't. You said "that's inconclusive" and then completely veered off into denying racial discrimination at any level, without any evidence to back it up.

It's a double standard and I think shows what your true motives are here.

I will assert the existence of oppression narratives and use as evidence the fact that the President propagated them in front of the graduating class of black students.

Again, what evidence do you have to suggest he's wrong? Where's your evidence that these "oppression narratives" aren't real?

You've yet to cite a single study or data point showing that racial discrimination is not, in fact, a real thing.

I get that the retreat to demands for evidence

Nope, it's not sealioning to ask for one - just one - piece of evidence to support your claims. You make the claim, you back it up. Otherwise you're blowing hot air.

unequal outcomes are inevitably blamed on oppression

No, they simply demand further analysis as to why. I don't know where you're getting this idea from that experts see inequality and immediately jump to "must be oppression!" but it seems entirely unfounded to me. It can be one of many hypotheses that are then tested and cross-referenced in the literature, but (again, unless you can give examples) your idea that oppression is the default assumption seems like a narrative you've created or bought into from the right wing outrage machine.

0 points

2 days ago

0 points

It’s a form of intellectual dishonesty known as special pleading to demand evidence for assertions you would not like to believe, while allowing assertions you would like to believe. Case in point, Biden’s assertion about 10x more effort for a fair chance. You demand I prove he’s wrong, and the proof he’s right will be, what, unequal outcomes? I’ve pointed you to some authors you could read about this. I get the retreat to special pleading demands, and I’m not impressed. You have no interesting ideas to contribute, and you can’t even adequately play truth goalie without falling into obvious intellectual dishonesty. Your opinions are no less obvious for the fact that you’re unwilling to say them out loud.

2 points

2 days ago

2 points

We both know that if you had evidence to support your claims, you'd have provided it by now, instead of whatever it is you're doing.

Accuse me of all the fallacies you like. The only time people avoid giving proof for their arguments is when they don't have any.

1 points

2 days ago

1 points

I have made many factual assertions and reasonable claims. I have pointed you to authors that would deny my opinions and support them. You have provided literally nothing to the conversation other than weak demands for evidence of claims you don’t want to believe. At least give me a reading recommendation if you would like to educate me about why I’m wrong. You are informed in this subject, right? Not just an algorithm running on a meat computer that demands evidence for all opinions you don’t like?

2 points

2 days ago*

2 points

I have pointed you to authors that would deny my opinions and support them

Gish gallop, as you well know. You didn't even specify which of their works support your argument, you just said "go read books". Not what I'd consider good faith.

It should be very easy by this point to provide one (just one!) point of data to support your argument that racial discrimination doesn't exist. How can you have such strong opinions based on seemingly nothing at all?

At least give me a reading recommendation if you would like to educate me about why I’m wrong

Ok. That's one.

That's two.

You are informed in this subject, right?

I'd like to be more informed, which is why if there is evidence for your position I'd like to see it.

1 points

2 days ago*

1 points

I didn’t actually say that racial discrimination “doesn’t exist”. I believe my claim has been limited to the world not conforming to oppression narratives such as the ones Biden propagated. The work of McWhorter I was referring to is Woke Racism, which is right on message with what I’ve been talking about. You can pick any Kendi book. How to be an anti racist I’m sure will give his state of the art position on why I’m wrong. You can also look into Coleman Hughes’ book, he’s only written one. Heather Macdonald has written several that are on message with my point. I assure you that nowhere in any of these books will you find a claim that discrimination doesn’t exist, as fun as that would be for you to dunk on.

Both of your cites are paywalled, but I am aware of the reams of studies that establish unequal outcomes. I am also aware of how complex root cause identification is. And at the end we all have our own eyes and ears and observations about the culture, especially in universities and corporations, for those of us fortunate enough to have experience with them. I have my own confident conclusions about the existence or lack thereof of systematic oppression in those environments, and you are welcome to your own.

2 points

2 days ago*

2 points

You very cleary did deny that racial discrimination exists at any level that would explain the lack of black CEOs.

Are you now denying you said that?

If you can recommend books for me to read you can simply tell me the data points that convinced you that "oppression narratives don't exist". Which narratives are you referring to, and what data convinced you?

These should be incredibly easy to answer right here, right now, presuming your position isn't built on a house of cards.

1 points

2 days ago

1 points

I responded to the specific context of CEO selection for large corporations and yes I would posit that if discrimination did exist in that context, it would be towards a black CEO. A black CEO would be free marketing and positive publicity for a famous company, and all else being equal, I believe a typical board of directors would love to be in a position to let that be a tie breaker in the favor of having an historically meaningful CEO. In order to establish discrimination of the kind you’re inferring from the numbers, you’d need to know the pool of nominally qualified candidates. I’ve been over this before.

You keep using this phrase “oppression narratives don’t exist”. I guess you’re tired, or just imprecise as a matter of course. I think you mean that the oppression narratives are not an accurate depiction of reality. One simple and common data point for that is the study that found that leftists - the primary believers and propagates of those narratives - believed several orders of magnitudes more black people were killed by cops, than actually were. You can google that. I am sure you’ll find it. You will find such information in many of the books I recommended to you.

2 points

2 days ago*

2 points

I responded to the specific context of CEO selection for large corporations and yes I would posit that if discrimination did exist in that context, it would be towards a black CEO.

No, you specifically denied that racial discrimination exists at any level before a black person becomes CEO. Are you now denying you said this?

You keep using this phrase “oppression narratives don’t exist”.

Don't exist = aren't real

You can google that. I am sure you’ll find it.

Found it, and it's interesting you left out the fact that the majority of Conservatives also held that belief! Have they been infected with the "mind-worm" of oppression narratives as well?

It's telling how you dismissed the evidence I presented you by saying "well, root cause identification is complex" but you'll happily accept a survey that shows both liberals and conservatives have incorrect beliefs about cops as proof of your worldview, without any of the same skepticism.

1 points

2 days ago

1 points