Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One take away for me is that in modern times, there is absolutely no point in going to a university outside of it's usefulness as a trade school (electrical engineering, music performance, civil engineering, and the like). It isn't like being a scholar and being formally educated are the same thing, and a bunch of lunatics are running the asylum.
The kind of nonsense that happens in schools in recent years makes for first rate comedy.
It's one of the reasons why it's imperative that these prestige school and even for-profit school loans not be forgiven.
In the last half century this turned into an 'education-industrial' arms race where jobseekers attempted to amass ever larger caches of academic credentials--and more were created--in order to try to topple other employment candidates. Experience, common sense, self initiatiated development began to account for less in a decision where, insidiously, those who rose through the collegiate system into hiring roles insisted on 'dues' payers who could appreciate firsthand what they themselves were compelled to go through instead of problem solvers.
As with housing, bubbles are popped only when they can no longer be sustained from the buy side. It's happening now with formal education; it should have happened with 'health care'--but there was too much pill and device manufacturing, and services, muscle behind the last.
Yes, the whole social justice thing can be taken to absurd lengths. But it also does produce some much-needed changes as well. What's better: dealing with occasional overreach or not having any meaningful social rights for people other than white Euro males? Because the latter is what we'd have if conservatives were always in charge.
Your own sentence "the latter is what we'd have if conservatives were in charge" is proof of how idiotic social justice is. It's based on ignorance and absurdity. The social justice movement is based on pandering rhetoric, not history or reality.
You make lame assertions such as that one, without offering any sort of evidence that backs it up. The fact is that there have been many points at which Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress and the Presidency, and yet somehow amazingly enough they never proposed any return to Jim Crow laws the way people such as yourself claim they would if they have power. They've already had the power, and didn't do what you claim. Therefore, you're 100% wrong. Yet here you are, still claiming that conservatives would reverse civil rights if they were in charge anyway.
Quote:
If social conservatives led this country throughout its history, women would still not be voting, blacks would still be treated like cattle, gays would still be mistreated at whim, and kids would still be working mines. You can bank on that. To this day, it is still a struggle for them to get their act together to fully and consistently admit that these various kinds of minorities should be treated fairly. Everyone who spends an afternoon on this forum should see that.
No, what we see is people such as yourself making false claims.
For example, women got the vote decades before the social justice movement started. Therefore, it is completely false to say that without social justice women still wouldn't be voting. You are, once again, 100% wrong.
You're spewing rhetoric, not fact.
Quote:
I'd rather risk being associated with social justice overreach than as an opponent to social justice.
It's past the point of being a "risk" with you. You placed yourself squarely in the overreach camp. And I'm 99% sure that even though I've shown conclusively that you are provably wrong - you simply cannot dismiss the fact that women's suffrage predates the social justice movement, it's incontrovertible historical fact - you will show up in another thread a few days or weeks from now making the exact same claims. I say this because I remember you from the discussions about the Violence Against Women Act where you were given hard statistics showing the incidence of violence committed against men, and yet later I saw you giving the same false statements about how men don't get abused after you were already proven wrong.
And that's why I say that rhetoric is more important than reality to people like you. You all have a demonstrated history of ignoring information and facts that don't fit your preconceived worldview. The dangerous thing is that you all are willing to enact law and government policy based on that worldview even after it is proven wrong.
They believe that due process, the presumption of innocence, the scientific method, artistic freedom, freedom of speech, intellectual inquiry, and logical reasoning are merely creations of "Dead White Men"
Er, you are talking about the Conservatives? Because they just can't stand that Science. Also due process- who needs it when everyone is a potential terrorist? THEY ARE DOING IT FOR OUR FREEDOMS! Intellectual inquiry? You mean, when we blacklisted Oppenheimer and any other intellectual who ever had a friend or associate who knew someone who might have brushed up against someone's cuff one time at a Commie gathering?
So, its the social justice nuts, Obama with a hypo full of cannabis oil, the homosexuals, the immigrants, and the universities who are now coming for your children?
No, more like Nike, Apple, Coca-Cola, the Kardashians, and Wall Street are coming for your....wait, they already got 'em.
The idea of laughing about social justice in a so-called Christian country is a far more succinct picture of our downward spiral than attempting to construct a false satirical commonality between people who fight for what they think is right.
They believe that due process, the presumption of innocence, the scientific method, artistic freedom, freedom of speech, intellectual inquiry, and logical reasoning are merely creations of "Dead White Men"
Er, you are talking about the Conservatives? Because they just can't stand that Science. Also due process- who needs it when everyone is a potential terrorist? THEY ARE DOING IT FOR OUR FREEDOMS! Intellectual inquiry? You mean, when we blacklisted Oppenheimer and any other intellectual who ever had a friend or associate who knew someone who might have brushed up against someone's cuff one time at a Commie gathering?
So, its the social justice nuts, Obama with a hypo full of cannabis oil, the homosexuals, the immigrants, and the universities who are now coming for your children?
No, more like Nike, Apple, Coca-Cola, the Kardashians, and Wall Street are coming for your....wait, they already got 'em.
The idea of laughing about social justice in a so-called Christian country is a far more succinct picture of our downward spiral than attempting to construct a false satirical commonality between people who fight for what they think is right.
Bill Nye the Science Guy and Neil deGrasse Tyson suggest that you not worry about GMO.
Your own sentence "the latter is what we'd have if conservatives were in charge" is proof of how idiotic social justice is. It's based on ignorance and absurdity. The social justice movement is based on pandering rhetoric, not history or reality.
You make lame assertions such as that one, without offering any sort of evidence that backs it up. The fact is that there have been many points at which Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress and the Presidency, and yet somehow amazingly enough they never proposed any return to Jim Crow laws the way people such as yourself claim they would if they have power. They've already had the power, and didn't do what you claim. Therefore, you're 100% wrong. Yet here you are, still claiming that conservatives would reverse civil rights if they were in charge anyway.
No, what we see is people such as yourself making false claims.
For example, women got the vote decades before the social justice movement started. Therefore, it is completely false to say that without social justice women still wouldn't be voting. You are, once again, 100% wrong.
You're spewing rhetoric, not fact.
It's past the point of being a "risk" with you. You placed yourself squarely in the overreach camp. And I'm 99% sure that even though I've shown conclusively that you are provably wrong - you simply cannot dismiss the fact that women's suffrage predates the social justice movement, it's incontrovertible historical fact - you will show up in another thread a few days or weeks from now making the exact same claims. I say this because I remember you from the discussions about the Violence Against Women Act where you were given hard statistics showing the incidence of violence committed against men, and yet later I saw you giving the same false statements about how men don't get abused after you were already proven wrong.
And that's why I say that rhetoric is more important than reality to people like you. You all have a demonstrated history of ignoring information and facts that don't fit your preconceived worldview. The dangerous thing is that you all are willing to enact law and government policy based on that worldview even after it is proven wrong.
Anyone can take any subset of movements and throw them into the same camp. Its what J. Edgar Hoover did when he decided that anyone working for civil rights was a Commie, because only the Reds talked about injustice and racism. Great logic, but its not logic.
What exactly are you espousing in your own world view other than "kill them all"? Rhetoric did you say?
I agree that much is made over race, sexual orientation and so on, energy that could be best going after the far more obvious yet-easily-ignored economic injustices that hit you no matter who you vote for or who you sleep with.
Would parents be on the privileged or the oppressed side?
Privileged
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
