France, Britain, Australia, Yankeeland. Multiculturalism is such a startling success!
Racial inequalities in American justice
- Thread starter Willy
- Start date
- Status
How does tightly regulated immigration and the expectation of near total assimilation amount to multiculturalism?
Multiracialism does not necessarily = multiculturalism. Countries such as France grew into world powers because they incorporating other races, but expected near total assimilation into the Empire. France is now declining due to allowing all sorts of filth to sleaze their way in and fragment a once mighty nation.
Multiracialism does not necessarily = multiculturalism. Countries such as France grew into world powers because they incorporating other races, but expected near total assimilation into the Empire. France is now declining due to allowing all sorts of filth to sleaze their way in and fragment a once mighty nation.
Last edited:
Mod Hat - Intervention
Mod Hat - Intervention
You know, all I really want, in order to justify leaving this topic open, is some sort of discussion that isn't intended to circle back to unfounded mischaracterizations. I am not anxious to presume certain racists to be calculating this standoff, but nor am I able in this capacity to simply presume you so stupid that you can't tell the difference.
So here's a note to the racists: If you wish to treat these issues so disrespectfully, do it elsewhere.
You've been asked to substantiate your claims, and have only responded by demanding that people accept untenable, non-demonstrable presuppositions. You have been asked to offer up affirmative theses that can be argued, demonstrated, or validated, and have responded only with hostility, condescenscion, and untenable, non-demonstrable presuppositions.
It would be to the benefit of this community in general and these topics specifically if you could make something of your performances other than dazzling us with yet another reminder of how spectacularly stupid devoted racism looks and sounds.
Thus: behave responsibly and appropriately, or take it elsewhere.
Mod Hat - Intervention
You know, all I really want, in order to justify leaving this topic open, is some sort of discussion that isn't intended to circle back to unfounded mischaracterizations. I am not anxious to presume certain racists to be calculating this standoff, but nor am I able in this capacity to simply presume you so stupid that you can't tell the difference.
So here's a note to the racists: If you wish to treat these issues so disrespectfully, do it elsewhere.
You've been asked to substantiate your claims, and have only responded by demanding that people accept untenable, non-demonstrable presuppositions. You have been asked to offer up affirmative theses that can be argued, demonstrated, or validated, and have responded only with hostility, condescenscion, and untenable, non-demonstrable presuppositions.
It would be to the benefit of this community in general and these topics specifically if you could make something of your performances other than dazzling us with yet another reminder of how spectacularly stupid devoted racism looks and sounds.
Thus: behave responsibly and appropriately, or take it elsewhere.
Last edited:
Using your mod powers to intimidate, tiassa? Why am I not surprised?
By the way, we're still waiting for you to *substantiate* this claim:
Mod Hat - Response
Mod Hat - Response
To intimidate? Hardly. Rather, Sciforums will not be used as a soapbox for the terminally hateful. This is a discussion board. Racist provocateurs and other hatemongers don't actually wish to participate in discussions. They don't actually wish to be part of the community here. Instead, they would rather build a soapbox with the intention of ridicule and spite.
People are welcome here as part of this community. However, any community will move to protect itself from those who would intentionally harm it.
If it's too much to present a thesis that doesn't rely on so many undemonstrable presuppositions that it's not worth having the discussion (after all, once one acknowledges the insupportable presuppositions required by the thesis, the discussion is over), then those folks ought to go start a blog.
Consider a simple thesis: "Blacks are inherently more violent than whites."
No racist can actually support this thesis; it crumbles at the first exploration of social relationships between groups or classes. An experiment--admittedly a difficult one--has been presented and an outcome hypothesized. This was met with a rather idiotic response that, while I'm sure the poster thought it was clever, failed to actually propose an experiment and only reiterated an insupportable thesis. That the idiotic response was intended in some way to be humorous only suggests that the racists don't want to be taken seriously.
And that's fine.
I won't speak for other moderators, since we don't march in lockstep. (If we did, somewhere between several and many of our more disruptive posters would be suddenly absent.) But I can say that the most recent adventures of one who wants to be an idiot have tempered our willingness to act in defense of deliberate and willful idiocy.
If you or anyone else should expect that this board is intended to be chaotic anarchy, you're well advised to go elsewhere. If you intend to be received with respect by this community at large, you do actually need to behave with some measure of respect. And hey, take a look around. That measure can be quite small.
So if minimal effort is beyond any particular poster, a voluntary community setting seems a perverse choice of roost.
My duty here is to maintain order. Deterring constant offenders is part of that job.
Mod Hat - Response
mountainhare said:
To intimidate? Hardly. Rather, Sciforums will not be used as a soapbox for the terminally hateful. This is a discussion board. Racist provocateurs and other hatemongers don't actually wish to participate in discussions. They don't actually wish to be part of the community here. Instead, they would rather build a soapbox with the intention of ridicule and spite.
People are welcome here as part of this community. However, any community will move to protect itself from those who would intentionally harm it.
If it's too much to present a thesis that doesn't rely on so many undemonstrable presuppositions that it's not worth having the discussion (after all, once one acknowledges the insupportable presuppositions required by the thesis, the discussion is over), then those folks ought to go start a blog.
Consider a simple thesis: "Blacks are inherently more violent than whites."
No racist can actually support this thesis; it crumbles at the first exploration of social relationships between groups or classes. An experiment--admittedly a difficult one--has been presented and an outcome hypothesized. This was met with a rather idiotic response that, while I'm sure the poster thought it was clever, failed to actually propose an experiment and only reiterated an insupportable thesis. That the idiotic response was intended in some way to be humorous only suggests that the racists don't want to be taken seriously.
And that's fine.
I won't speak for other moderators, since we don't march in lockstep. (If we did, somewhere between several and many of our more disruptive posters would be suddenly absent.) But I can say that the most recent adventures of one who wants to be an idiot have tempered our willingness to act in defense of deliberate and willful idiocy.
If you or anyone else should expect that this board is intended to be chaotic anarchy, you're well advised to go elsewhere. If you intend to be received with respect by this community at large, you do actually need to behave with some measure of respect. And hey, take a look around. That measure can be quite small.
So if minimal effort is beyond any particular poster, a voluntary community setting seems a perverse choice of roost.
My duty here is to maintain order. Deterring constant offenders is part of that job.
Last edited:
(Yawn)
Like I said, I'll need about a trillion dollars. Had you stopped to think before making your joke, you might have made the simplest connection.
Propose a reasonable hypothesis instead of parroting shite. Seriously, you might simply be repeating the crap, but crap is still the whole of what you're giving us. Sculpt it into Venus de Milo if you want. It will still stink like shite, and for good reason.
mountainhare said:
Like I said, I'll need about a trillion dollars. Had you stopped to think before making your joke, you might have made the simplest connection.
Propose a reasonable hypothesis instead of parroting shite. Seriously, you might simply be repeating the crap, but crap is still the whole of what you're giving us. Sculpt it into Venus de Milo if you want. It will still stink like shite, and for good reason.
Awww jeez. Sorry tiassa, but reading your post loosened my bowels 
I just don't understand the cowardice. Faced with the prospect that you won't be allowed to get away with willful stupidity, you run and hide behind scanty veils of sarcasm.
See, the phenomenon is fascinating. Are you a racist because you're a coward, or a coward because you're a racist?
The problem is that the one thing experience teaches to never expect from a racist is a straight, or even decent answer.
See, the phenomenon is fascinating. Are you a racist because you're a coward, or a coward because you're a racist?
The problem is that the one thing experience teaches to never expect from a racist is a straight, or even decent answer.
Ad hominem.
Personal attacks are against the rules. I thought a moderator would know that, but I guess I was wrong.
Sorry, gotta run to take a poop!
Personal attacks are against the rules. I thought a moderator would know that, but I guess I was wrong.
Sorry, gotta run to take a poop!
Is that really the best you can come up with? Seriously, when you consider that you can't even respond honestly to my posts, when you consider that you can't even respond to JamesR without botching history and slinging mud, and when you consider that you can't tell the difference between an hypothesis and sarcasm, what is anyone supposed to think?
That you presume hostility in order to justify your own hatred is apparent in your response to the moderator "Intervention" post. You could have claimed that it was unfair to demand arguable theses of people. You could have blamed your attitude problem on Howard Dean. You could have chosen any route, but instead you chose to ignore the reason moderators exist at such fora and try to make it personal.
Then you turn around and demand substantiation of an experiment not yet performed, and, really, if you hadn't been so self-obsessed the first time 'round, perhaps you would have understood the point.
I've tried to address the problematic issues as a poster. You are inflexible. I've tried to address them as a moderator. You are inflexible. I try to treat you as you treat others, and you complain.
You could help both of us a great deal by giving an honest answer: What respect do you expect of this community and its authorities?
That you presume hostility in order to justify your own hatred is apparent in your response to the moderator "Intervention" post. You could have claimed that it was unfair to demand arguable theses of people. You could have blamed your attitude problem on Howard Dean. You could have chosen any route, but instead you chose to ignore the reason moderators exist at such fora and try to make it personal.
Then you turn around and demand substantiation of an experiment not yet performed, and, really, if you hadn't been so self-obsessed the first time 'round, perhaps you would have understood the point.
I've tried to address the problematic issues as a poster. You are inflexible. I've tried to address them as a moderator. You are inflexible. I try to treat you as you treat others, and you complain.
You could help both of us a great deal by giving an honest answer: What respect do you expect of this community and its authorities?
Attempting to justify your outburst? Please, do keep me amused
I'm actually trying to give you a chance to keep this topic open, and also attempting to justify myself for not issuing infraction points for hate press. While Sciforums is not a democracy, I can promise you that the moderators and adminstration do actually care about the opinions of the members.
However, I see no reason to give your opinion any more respect than you do.
I suppose I should ask the question in green type, but we'll try again anyway.
What respect do you expect of this community and its authorities?
However, I see no reason to give your opinion any more respect than you do.
I suppose I should ask the question in green type, but we'll try again anyway.
What respect do you expect of this community and its authorities?
None. Why would the respect of a 'nothing' be of value to me?
- Status