Reads an awful lot like the justification for the purging of undesirables in certain regimes...
You mean like any college class in the humanities? I think their official kill list includes males in general (unless gay), white people in general, the "US", the police, and the military. Whoever is left can then have an aggrievement olympics to see who's next.
Nazis are going to exist.
Jihadis are going to exist.
Communists are going to exist.
Evangelical Christians are going to exist.
Odd grouping since only Christians are responsible for building things and improving the world. Unless you subscribe to unsupported yet trendy views like religion has killed more people than anything else.
When you go and campaign on how white men are keeping you down in a nation that is 74% white and 49% male then you should not be surprised that you lose. It's actually amazing she got as many votes as she did. Oh, and it doesn't help to run a campaign on getting a majority of the popular vote in an election that chooses the winner based on state allocation of electors. Trump and his campaign knew this and so campaigned on getting electors, so he won.
You and your common sense. I have been clearly told by CNN and other media that Trump only won because of sexism and racism. That's the only possible reason why one wouldn't vote for the most qualified candidate ever.
Nope. Having the wrong gender/race mix is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing in a civil suit.
The elephant in the room is that different groups tend to favor different professions. As an example, did you know that speech pathologists are over 90% women? They must either hate the hell out of men or for whatever reason women are more likely to go into that profession. Unsurprisingly I don't see anyone claiming that there needs to be equality in that profession. The whole SJW movement is not based on equality it's based on tearing down men and white people with a focus on white men.
And those people could maybe lose the headscarf or turban when they move to the United States, a place where that isn't the norm. You can't expect only the GP to have to adapt to others. People immigrating to the US need to adapt their lives to fit in with ours too.
That's crazy talk. Next you'll start suggesting that they learn to speak English and actually assimilate.
Unskilled manufacturing had entirely gone to China etc. by the 90s. It has nothing to do with the wage stagnation in this century.
Are you suggesting that supply and demand does not in fact apply? When you move a large chunk of stuff offshore the remaining people then are in competition for what remains. This lowers wages for everyone, even if they don't start off in your field some of them will re-train and enter your field.
Mass immigration doesn't help, but if you can do skilled work you're not really competing with the tide of migrant agricultural workers.
Which is why H1B visas and the like exist, to bring down wages for more than just unskilled labor. Still part of mass immigration, just the legal variety, and still screwing over US workers.
Perhaps you recall boom times, for example 1999 or earlier booms. Wages actually went up, people got signing bonuses, business was not dying in fact business was great because when consumers are 70% of your customers then anytime consumers are doing well then business is doing well. Mass immigration allows the 1% to never share the pie. You can force them to share under threat of guillotines, or you can force them by limiting options on labor so that they will choose to share by necessity. This is why both the Koch brothers as well as the left leaning tech types like Zuckerberg et al both support mass immigration.
After enacting the welfare system president Lyndon B. Johnson was heard saying in triumph "I'll have those ni**ers voting Democratic for 200 years." So far, it's working.
Indeed. Despite African-Americans being probably the most hurt by mass immigration they continue to support it. In reality the working class gets shafted by both parties, they just say it differently. The African Americans are shafted by the Democrats just as the white working class has been shafted by both the Democrats and the Republicans. An astute person would observe that the working class gets shafted by both parties. An astute observant person might even try and organize along economic lines instead of racial ones. Good thing colleges don't train observant people or the 1% might have to worry.
Where did the jobs go? It's hardly a mystery: automation.
While automation played a role, outsourcing played an even bigger role. Media doublespeak blames automation and tries to ignore or play down the impact of trade and claims that only ~13% of the job losses are due to trade (mostly China). If that were true then we're to believe that a mere 13% of US manufacturing is single handedly powering China. The math doesn't add up for that to be accurate.
The middle class is shrinking due to a combination of mass legal immigration, mass illegal immigration, trade policies that favor outsourcing, and automation. Of these only automation is a plus for US citizens. Automation holds the promise of 30 hour work weeks and the like. Mass immigration (legal and illegal) and outsourcing don't help the US citizen who still works. Even if you note that your job can't be outsourced more people will be competing for it thus lowering wages and working conditions. This is why the 1% favors mass immigration - they get cheaper labor and have already made their fortunes.
I think a lot of us want that 1960 brand American Dream. Work a job, own a house, raise a family.
That shit is getting so hard to actually do now it may as well stay a dream.
I think the hardest part of that dream is finding a woman willing to cook, clean, and be a decent mother and wife. But I'm in CA, maybe it's easier in the midwest.
But it is not better to think every person is a conspirator.
There was a study that showed that Americans trust each other a lot more than Russians trust each other and that impedes Russian growth.
The study is the basis for the Russian strategy now -- cripple the US by making them distrust each other as much as Russians do.
It's a really good strategy. It'll work, and there's nothing we can do about it.
The Russians have the help of the 1%, and the left, which are both always pushing for diversity and mass immigration. Both lower social cohesion as shown even by left leaning sociologists. Want to fragment America, just let enough Spanish speakers who won't assimilate and you'll get your wish.
...Likewise, diversity is not supposed to be about competitive advantage, but about the betterment of society and the fair treatment of all people.
Careful, the last diversity officer that said that had to step down. Diversity has been nakedly about promoting favored classes for some time. If you even suggest that a white male might be more than an evil oppressor you will be punished.
These are all problems inherent in human society as a whole. Social media just amplifies these problems, rather than creating them.
Let's try using social media to push human interaction in more desirable directions, supposing that we can even agree on what those directions should be.
We can't even agree that saying "Black lives matter" or "it's OK to be white" is acceptable, so I'm not optimistic about us finding a common direction. When America abandoned the melting pot analogy and started emphasizing tribes the seeds of strife were sown. We're just reaping the rather expected results now.
Segregation is such a dated word. The proper term is "POC Only", which sounds much more exclusive. Good thing they redefined the word racist to only apply to white people, otherwise this would qualify for certain.
Nor can we get the absurdly large amount of cash (ie buying elections) out of the voting process.
Just a reminder, the HRC billion dollar campaign came in second in the 2016 election - Trump spent about 1/2 as much as HRC and won.
Big money lost in 2016.
That's like saying that because a person using steroids failed to win the gold medal in a single event that steroids aren't a problem. I'm glad that big money lost but I'd be far more glad if big money wan't able to even compete at all.
Not a bot, but I do have to admit that one of my first thoughts was..."Why isn't anyone thinking the individual themselves might need to start thinking ahead and training themselves for different jobs"?
Geez...when exactly did this "someone else do it for me" mentality hit the US with such full force and become so widespread?
What happened to self-suffiency?
I think the 60's Great Society is where it started. The Great Depression programs were about creating jobs (ie you still worked). The Great Society stuff was money for nothing. Money for nothing always rots personal development plus creates a dependent class. That's where it started.
Slashdotters have been raising red flags for years about weaknesses in the voting systems - and indeed systems that handle our voter roles were broken into. But somehow enough Slashdotters have become 'anti-liberal' enough that running interference for the likes of Donald Trump is more important to them than, oh, the integrity of our democracy. As DJT would say, SAD!
We can't even get people to agree that having ID for voting is a good idea. Nor can we get the absurdly large amount of cash (ie buying elections) out of the voting process. The notion of securing voting is far more obscure than the first two obvious points so I'm not optimistic about it getting tackled.
The Republicans opted out of the process entirely. I think this was a huge mistake, because Obamacare could have been a market-driven way to keep healthcare costs down. They blew it. With that said, the resulting law had nothing at all to do with Republicans - the entire law rests at the feet of the Democrats.
To actually make health care affordable the fact that the US pays many times more for the same drugs would have to be addressed. As both D and R have been bought off don't expect that to happen.
The reason Hillary lost the election was because her supporters were too concentrated in too few states.
When her husband ran for President in 1992 and 1996 he and his campaign understood what every 10th grade civics student knows, that we elect Presidents via the Electoral College, not popular vote.
I think you could fit Hillary's supporters in a football stadium. The vast majority of people who voted for her held their noses and voted against Trump. Had the Democrats nominated just about anyone other than Hillary they would have won.
Unless the US can get rid of the cancerous politics called Trumpism, China will be the next imperial colonial power.
I'm mixed on Trump but he really is more a symptom than a cause. To "get rid of him" you need to address the causes. Otherwise you'll just get another person like him - or worse.
That always cracks me up. In the past, you might have a peasant rebellion. These days, a single Sarin gas canister would get rid of not just an entire rebellion, but ensure it won't happen again, due to residual poison left in the area. Or, a single A10 with some BRRT.
Sorry. Syria showed us what happens when revolutions happen. It just means a lot of dead stupid civilians, and showing that the people in charge can stay in charge. Revolution is impossible these days.
Remember that when they tell you that sniper rifles must be banned even though a single real crime has never been committed with one (other than the victimless crime of possession). The elites know their limits and are working hard to ensure their uninterrupted rule.
Citation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The root of this problem is that MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, The New York Times, and virtually all the mainstream media has lost all credibility in the eyes of conservatives and independents (only 32% of Americans trust the media, coincidentally aligning with the dyed in the wool alt left crowd who have no knowledge of history and "think" with their emotions). http://news.gallup.com/poll/19...
This has occurred for a simple reason. Traditional constitutional journalism necessary for democracy targeted one simple principle: find the truth no mater what it was and follow it no matter where it led. Throughout history journalists have achieved this with varying degrees of success. However, the modern alt left infested main stream media now has the motto: "Change the world." They have divested all semblance of independence, fair reporting or pursuit of the truth instead choosing to only report stories and/or slant stories (i.e. lie by omission) that further their world view and political candidates. This is not some grand conspiracy, but rather an organic result of the alt left fascist cesspool that is the college campuses in the US where the next generation of journalists are spoon fed the alt left propaganda.
The democracy has recognized and is rejecting this poisoned fruit and is in the process of finding new avenues to get accurate news that covers the entire set of facts including historical background and objective facts. In the 1990s we saw the explosion of talk radio, then Fox news, then citizen journalists online, and now Facebook and more broadly online sources.
There have always been propaganda stories during elections, it is up to the individual voter, more than ever, to find the truth and sources that are trustworthy. The Democrats last election cycle ran Hillary Clinton, and most people knew exactly who and what she was (a grasping, lying, cheating, back stabbing politician lawyer who only wants power and money, in that order; don't believe me, ask the Bernie Sanders supporters). You could have run a false story that she ate babies for dinner every night to stay young and most conservatives would believe it because she has been in the public eye for 20 years and has extremely high negatives with conservatives and those who actually pay attention to politics.
The fact is that Russia and China try to meddle in US elections every time to varying degrees of success (the Chinese successfully funneled millions into Bill Clinton's campaign and no one said boo until he gave them ICBM guidance technology, Ted Kennedy tried to work with the Russians to get Reagan out of office, etc. etc.) https://www.dailywire.com/news...
Well stated. If I had a buck for every time the media at large conflates legal immigrants with illegal immigrants I'd be retired.
Slashdot Mirror
Reads an awful lot like the justification for the purging of undesirables in certain regimes...
You mean like any college class in the humanities? I think their official kill list includes males in general (unless gay), white people in general, the "US", the police, and the military. Whoever is left can then have an aggrievement olympics to see who's next.
Nazis are going to exist. Jihadis are going to exist. Communists are going to exist. Evangelical Christians are going to exist.
Odd grouping since only Christians are responsible for building things and improving the world. Unless you subscribe to unsupported yet trendy views like religion has killed more people than anything else.
When you go and campaign on how white men are keeping you down in a nation that is 74% white and 49% male then you should not be surprised that you lose. It's actually amazing she got as many votes as she did. Oh, and it doesn't help to run a campaign on getting a majority of the popular vote in an election that chooses the winner based on state allocation of electors. Trump and his campaign knew this and so campaigned on getting electors, so he won.
You and your common sense. I have been clearly told by CNN and other media that Trump only won because of sexism and racism. That's the only possible reason why one wouldn't vote for the most qualified candidate ever.
Nope. Having the wrong gender/race mix is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing in a civil suit.
The elephant in the room is that different groups tend to favor different professions. As an example, did you know that speech pathologists are over 90% women? They must either hate the hell out of men or for whatever reason women are more likely to go into that profession. Unsurprisingly I don't see anyone claiming that there needs to be equality in that profession. The whole SJW movement is not based on equality it's based on tearing down men and white people with a focus on white men.
But at least for now, it doesn't seem like in general white dudes are less able to find jobs in tech than black women, so no need to freak out.
So we pursue bad and discriminatory policy until we have created a new underclass. What a great idea.
And those people could maybe lose the headscarf or turban when they move to the United States, a place where that isn't the norm. You can't expect only the GP to have to adapt to others. People immigrating to the US need to adapt their lives to fit in with ours too.
That's crazy talk. Next you'll start suggesting that they learn to speak English and actually assimilate.
Unskilled manufacturing had entirely gone to China etc. by the 90s. It has nothing to do with the wage stagnation in this century.
Are you suggesting that supply and demand does not in fact apply? When you move a large chunk of stuff offshore the remaining people then are in competition for what remains. This lowers wages for everyone, even if they don't start off in your field some of them will re-train and enter your field.
Mass immigration doesn't help, but if you can do skilled work you're not really competing with the tide of migrant agricultural workers.
Which is why H1B visas and the like exist, to bring down wages for more than just unskilled labor. Still part of mass immigration, just the legal variety, and still screwing over US workers. Perhaps you recall boom times, for example 1999 or earlier booms. Wages actually went up, people got signing bonuses, business was not dying in fact business was great because when consumers are 70% of your customers then anytime consumers are doing well then business is doing well. Mass immigration allows the 1% to never share the pie. You can force them to share under threat of guillotines, or you can force them by limiting options on labor so that they will choose to share by necessity. This is why both the Koch brothers as well as the left leaning tech types like Zuckerberg et al both support mass immigration.
After enacting the welfare system president Lyndon B. Johnson was heard saying in triumph "I'll have those ni**ers voting Democratic for 200 years." So far, it's working.
Indeed. Despite African-Americans being probably the most hurt by mass immigration they continue to support it. In reality the working class gets shafted by both parties, they just say it differently. The African Americans are shafted by the Democrats just as the white working class has been shafted by both the Democrats and the Republicans. An astute person would observe that the working class gets shafted by both parties. An astute observant person might even try and organize along economic lines instead of racial ones. Good thing colleges don't train observant people or the 1% might have to worry.
Where did the jobs go? It's hardly a mystery: automation.
While automation played a role, outsourcing played an even bigger role. Media doublespeak blames automation and tries to ignore or play down the impact of trade and claims that only ~13% of the job losses are due to trade (mostly China). If that were true then we're to believe that a mere 13% of US manufacturing is single handedly powering China. The math doesn't add up for that to be accurate.
The middle class is shrinking due to a combination of mass legal immigration, mass illegal immigration, trade policies that favor outsourcing, and automation. Of these only automation is a plus for US citizens. Automation holds the promise of 30 hour work weeks and the like. Mass immigration (legal and illegal) and outsourcing don't help the US citizen who still works. Even if you note that your job can't be outsourced more people will be competing for it thus lowering wages and working conditions. This is why the 1% favors mass immigration - they get cheaper labor and have already made their fortunes.
I think a lot of us want that 1960 brand American Dream. Work a job, own a house, raise a family.
That shit is getting so hard to actually do now it may as well stay a dream.
I think the hardest part of that dream is finding a woman willing to cook, clean, and be a decent mother and wife. But I'm in CA, maybe it's easier in the midwest.
The Welfare system unfortunately has so many crazy rules to prevent abuse, that it also creates a system which is difficult to get out.
The real question is if that's a bug or a feature. Maybe I'm a cynic but I think it's the latter.
But it is not better to think every person is a conspirator.
There was a study that showed that Americans trust each other a lot more than Russians trust each other and that impedes Russian growth.
The study is the basis for the Russian strategy now -- cripple the US by making them distrust each other as much as Russians do.
It's a really good strategy. It'll work, and there's nothing we can do about it.
The Russians have the help of the 1%, and the left, which are both always pushing for diversity and mass immigration. Both lower social cohesion as shown even by left leaning sociologists. Want to fragment America, just let enough Spanish speakers who won't assimilate and you'll get your wish.
Citation
http://archive.boston.com/news...
...Likewise, diversity is not supposed to be about competitive advantage, but about the betterment of society and the fair treatment of all people.
Careful, the last diversity officer that said that had to step down. Diversity has been nakedly about promoting favored classes for some time. If you even suggest that a white male might be more than an evil oppressor you will be punished.
Citation:
https://nypost.com/2017/11/17/...
These are all problems inherent in human society as a whole. Social media just amplifies these problems, rather than creating them.
Let's try using social media to push human interaction in more desirable directions, supposing that we can even agree on what those directions should be.
We can't even agree that saying "Black lives matter" or "it's OK to be white" is acceptable, so I'm not optimistic about us finding a common direction. When America abandoned the melting pot analogy and started emphasizing tribes the seeds of strife were sown. We're just reaping the rather expected results now.
...factor in segregation.
Segregation is such a dated word. The proper term is "POC Only", which sounds much more exclusive. Good thing they redefined the word racist to only apply to white people, otherwise this would qualify for certain.
Citations:
https://www.dailywire.com/news... https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/...
Nor can we get the absurdly large amount of cash (ie buying elections) out of the voting process.
Just a reminder, the HRC billion dollar campaign came in second in the 2016 election - Trump spent about 1/2 as much as HRC and won.
Big money lost in 2016.
That's like saying that because a person using steroids failed to win the gold medal in a single event that steroids aren't a problem. I'm glad that big money lost but I'd be far more glad if big money wan't able to even compete at all.
Not a bot, but I do have to admit that one of my first thoughts was..."Why isn't anyone thinking the individual themselves might need to start thinking ahead and training themselves for different jobs"?
Geez...when exactly did this "someone else do it for me" mentality hit the US with such full force and become so widespread?
What happened to self-suffiency?
I think the 60's Great Society is where it started. The Great Depression programs were about creating jobs (ie you still worked). The Great Society stuff was money for nothing. Money for nothing always rots personal development plus creates a dependent class. That's where it started.
Slashdotters have been raising red flags for years about weaknesses in the voting systems - and indeed systems that handle our voter roles were broken into. But somehow enough Slashdotters have become 'anti-liberal' enough that running interference for the likes of Donald Trump is more important to them than, oh, the integrity of our democracy. As DJT would say, SAD!
We can't even get people to agree that having ID for voting is a good idea. Nor can we get the absurdly large amount of cash (ie buying elections) out of the voting process. The notion of securing voting is far more obscure than the first two obvious points so I'm not optimistic about it getting tackled.
The Republicans opted out of the process entirely. I think this was a huge mistake, because Obamacare could have been a market-driven way to keep healthcare costs down. They blew it. With that said, the resulting law had nothing at all to do with Republicans - the entire law rests at the feet of the Democrats.
To actually make health care affordable the fact that the US pays many times more for the same drugs would have to be addressed. As both D and R have been bought off don't expect that to happen.
The reason Hillary lost the election was because her supporters were too concentrated in too few states.
When her husband ran for President in 1992 and 1996 he and his campaign understood what every 10th grade civics student knows, that we elect Presidents via the Electoral College, not popular vote.
I think you could fit Hillary's supporters in a football stadium. The vast majority of people who voted for her held their noses and voted against Trump. Had the Democrats nominated just about anyone other than Hillary they would have won.
And they will most likely be speaking Mandarin.
Unless the US can get rid of the cancerous politics called Trumpism, China will be the next imperial colonial power.
I'm mixed on Trump but he really is more a symptom than a cause. To "get rid of him" you need to address the causes. Otherwise you'll just get another person like him - or worse.
Citations:
https://peoplespolicyproject.o...
But we already have a generation called Baby Boomers
That always cracks me up. In the past, you might have a peasant rebellion. These days, a single Sarin gas canister would get rid of not just an entire rebellion, but ensure it won't happen again, due to residual poison left in the area. Or, a single A10 with some BRRT.
Sorry. Syria showed us what happens when revolutions happen. It just means a lot of dead stupid civilians, and showing that the people in charge can stay in charge. Revolution is impossible these days.
Remember that when they tell you that sniper rifles must be banned even though a single real crime has never been committed with one (other than the victimless crime of possession). The elites know their limits and are working hard to ensure their uninterrupted rule. Citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The root of this problem is that MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, The New York Times, and virtually all the mainstream media has lost all credibility in the eyes of conservatives and independents (only 32% of Americans trust the media, coincidentally aligning with the dyed in the wool alt left crowd who have no knowledge of history and "think" with their emotions). http://news.gallup.com/poll/19...
This has occurred for a simple reason. Traditional constitutional journalism necessary for democracy targeted one simple principle: find the truth no mater what it was and follow it no matter where it led. Throughout history journalists have achieved this with varying degrees of success. However, the modern alt left infested main stream media now has the motto: "Change the world." They have divested all semblance of independence, fair reporting or pursuit of the truth instead choosing to only report stories and/or slant stories (i.e. lie by omission) that further their world view and political candidates. This is not some grand conspiracy, but rather an organic result of the alt left fascist cesspool that is the college campuses in the US where the next generation of journalists are spoon fed the alt left propaganda.
The democracy has recognized and is rejecting this poisoned fruit and is in the process of finding new avenues to get accurate news that covers the entire set of facts including historical background and objective facts. In the 1990s we saw the explosion of talk radio, then Fox news, then citizen journalists online, and now Facebook and more broadly online sources.
There have always been propaganda stories during elections, it is up to the individual voter, more than ever, to find the truth and sources that are trustworthy. The Democrats last election cycle ran Hillary Clinton, and most people knew exactly who and what she was (a grasping, lying, cheating, back stabbing politician lawyer who only wants power and money, in that order; don't believe me, ask the Bernie Sanders supporters). You could have run a false story that she ate babies for dinner every night to stay young and most conservatives would believe it because she has been in the public eye for 20 years and has extremely high negatives with conservatives and those who actually pay attention to politics.
The fact is that Russia and China try to meddle in US elections every time to varying degrees of success (the Chinese successfully funneled millions into Bill Clinton's campaign and no one said boo until he gave them ICBM guidance technology, Ted Kennedy tried to work with the Russians to get Reagan out of office, etc. etc.) https://www.dailywire.com/news...
Well stated. If I had a buck for every time the media at large conflates legal immigrants with illegal immigrants I'd be retired.