Konstantin Kisin | This House Believes Woke Culture Has Gone Too Far

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  s  •  2 weeks ago  •  83 comments

Konstantin Kisin | This House Believes Woke Culture Has Gone Too Far
The only way to deal with the problem of racism is to treat people on the content of their character. And nothing else. And the fact that WOKE culture seeks to overturn that is a new form of racism that we must all oppose.”

This is a  speech from Oxford that was released a few days ago on a debate over woke culture.  Just a tour de force


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1  author  Sean Treacy    2 weeks ago

This is an effective a speech as I've seen in years. Just pure common sense. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago

The first half of it sounded like this guy had taken over Tucker Carlson's mind and put on a better suit. 

I havent heard woke culture associated with laziness before , but to each their own. 

Personally I dont care about woke culture and I dont care about the people who constantly, and I mean constantly, complain about it. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1  CB   replied to  JohnRussell @2    2 weeks ago

Such people are bothered about a great many liberal 'things' and it keeps them talking and capitalizing on books, films, and media profiteering. Dare I say, it is more a matter of bread and butter for them and their careers which otherwise would fall into mediocrity and boredom. Attacking liberals is a cash-cow for conservatives. They need a foe, a foil, and a 'packaged' enemy to contrast themselves so as to 'pop' with people who think patriotic is holding ground against anybody who won't conform to ideas and ways of the past.

Such conservatives are locked in to their narrow-minded worldview/s about most things in this life-which they declare "perfect" for their way of life—what's left out is negligible and left to 'burn' down and negate.

It plays itself out in conservatives waiting for liberals to give voice and name to a problem; then, conservatives, wide and large, will contend against it for power, influence, and 'fame.' Lastly, hoping to pull votes for their agendas too.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Sophomore Principal
2.1.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1    2 weeks ago
Attacking liberals is a cash-cow for conservatives.

Exactly, you never see liberals here on in any other media, attacking conservatives.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.2  CB   replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.1    2 weeks ago

Of course liberals have no choice but to mount a defense or get slaughtered politically by a never-ending  closed-minded conservative takeover mentality. But carry-on. Because now the 'blame-game' has matured, feeding, financing  and caring for its own survival.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Sophomore Principal
2.1.3  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.2    2 weeks ago

Exactly, you are never ending victims.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.4  CB   replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.3    2 weeks ago

And some conservatives are not?!  Some conservatives tried to let their 'freak flag' fly and stormed the capitol building, the people's house, and the house STRIKES back. They are in jails/prisons/and under house arrest because of attempting to play 'victims' of a national election.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Sophomore Principal
2.1.5  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.4    2 weeks ago
Some conservatives tried to let their 'freak flag' fly and stormed the capitol building, the people's house, and the house STRIKES back.

Why do you call them conservatives?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Sophomore Principal
2.1.6  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.2    2 weeks ago
Of course liberals have no choice but to mount a defense or get slaughtered politically by a never-ending  closed-minded conservative takeover mentality.

Exactly, you’re victimization is never ending.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.7  CB   replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.6    2 weeks ago

  . . . .

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
2.1.8  Split Personality  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.3    2 weeks ago

Gab, Parlor, Truth Social and now gradually Twitter?

Breitbart, Info Wars, Rush Limbaugh?

Conservatives fit the bill equally.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Sophomore Principal
2.1.9  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.8    2 weeks ago

Isn’t Rush dead, in the ratings?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Sophomore Principal
2.1.10  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.7    2 weeks ago

Exactly.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
2.1.11  Split Personality  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.9    2 weeks ago

Yes but he left a 40 year legacy, didn't he?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3  CB     2 weeks ago

The speaker makes comedic issues that are serious. He attacks "woke" culture by claiming it is liberal and whimsical. He equates, whether self-righteously, that conservatism is FREEDOM. It is not freedom to ignore climate change or destroy the eco-system of this planet for the sake of 'today's' children or entire population. Simply put, that is SHORT-SIGHTEDNESS.  For what damage/s caused to the world we are here as STEWARDS of 'today,' will bear 'witness' of its effects in some future eco-system probably down to the level of the DNA makeup or its diminishing in a 'next' generation.

It is a fool's argument, he is making. Why? Because the speaker is making an EMOTIONAL/PASSIONATE jingoistic plea for freedom to reign over logic.

Here is a scenario/example to consider based on his speech:  The Trolley Dilemma:

The Basic Trolley Problem

A version of this moral dilemma was first put forward in 1967 by the British moral philosopher Phillipa Foot, well-known as one of those responsible for reviving virtue ethics.

Here’s the basic dilemma: A tram is running down a track and is out control. If it continues on its course unchecked and undiverted, it will run over five people who have been tied to the tracks. You have the chance to divert it onto another track simply by pulling a lever. If you do this, though, the tram will kill a man who happens to be standing on this other track. What should you do?

The Utilitarian Response

For many utilitarians, the problem is a no-brainer. Our duty is to promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number. Five lives saved is better than one life saved. Therefore, the right thing to do is to pull the lever.

Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism. It judges actions by their consequences. But there are many who think that we have to consider other aspects of action as well. In the case of the trolley dilemma, many are troubled by the fact that if they pull the lever they will be actively engaged in causing the death of an innocent person. According to our normal moral intuitions, this is wrong, and we should pay some heed to our normal moral intuitions.

So-called “rule utilitarians” may well agree with this point of view. They hold that we should not judge every action by its consequences. Instead, we should establish a set of moral rules to follow according to which rules will promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number in the long term. And then we should follow those rules, even if in specific cases doing so may not produce the best consequences.

But so-called “act utilitarians” judge each act by its consequences; so they will simply do the math and pull the lever. Moreover, they will argue that there is no significant difference between causing a death by pulling the lever and not preventing a death by refusing to pull the lever. One is equally responsible for the consequences in either case.

Those who think that it would be right to divert the tram often appeal to what philosophers call the doctrine of double effect. Simply put, this doctrine states that it is morally acceptable to do something that causes a serious harm in the course of promoting some greater good if the harm in question is not an intended consequence of the action but is, rather, an unintended side-effect. The fact that the harm caused is predictable doesn’t matter. What matters is whether or not the agent intends it.

The doctrine of double effect plays an important role in just war theory. It has often been used to justify certain military actions which cause “collateral damage.” An example of such an action would be the bombing of an ammunition dump that not only destroys the military target but also causes a number of civilian deaths.

Studies show that the majority of people today, at least in modern Western societies, say that they would pull the lever. However, they respond differently when the situation is tweaked. 

This speaker while taking the time to insult and taunt his attentive listeners with group/association attacks, did not establish how he would fix a planet destined in his scenario not to have a western world as free and clear at some distant time in the here to come future. 

Thus, if we foolishly could split the world's eco-climate down the center of the planet (we can not) one could imagine a better outcome for the 'eastern' world which acts CONSERVATIVELY to save 'itself.' That is its sphere of influence and control.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1  author  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @3    2 weeks ago
It is not freedom to ignore climate change or destroy the eco-system of this planet for the sake of 'today's' children or entire population

I'm not sure how you could miss the point that badly.  He's trying to get you to wake up and deal with reality. 

HIs point is that performative outrage, like throwing soup at art or forcing people to give up conveniences that achieve almost zero, or actually have a negative effect, will accomplish nothing to solve climate change, and the poor countries who do most of the polluting (China) aren't going to keep their people in poverty to satisfy western demands.   90%of new Co2 emissions come from China and India.   They aren't going to stop emitting. 

But I guess the left has  embraced a much more pernicious form of colonialism., in which they strive to keep the developing world living in  as much squalor as possible. 

 
 
 
Hallux
Junior Principal
3.1.1  Hallux  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1    2 weeks ago
90%of new Co2 emissions come from China and India

That's what happens when production is outsourced. You can start blaming Nixon, Carter and the corporate greed that dove in belly first.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.2  author  Sean Treacy  replied to  Hallux @3.1.1    2 weeks ago

You can start blaming Nixon, Carter a

Or they just wanted to improve their lives. Poverty is bad. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.3  CB   replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.2    2 weeks ago

Destroying the atmosphere (and suffering permanent planetary burn-out) in a century is 'worse.'

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.4  CB   replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1    2 weeks ago

"Performative" outrage: 1. Got some 'hidden' homosexuals in high places to come out when they heard a rumor that their 'T" was going to be spilled if they didn't "do it" themselves. 2. Performative outrage: Got HIV/AIDS research and medicines policies developed and out to what some conservatives stigmatized in the public as 'nasty' people.'  3. Performative outrage: caused animal fur to remain on the hides of animals slaughtered for their hairy 'coats.'

Undoubtedly, some conservatives don't like "performative" outrage because it works!

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Professor Guide
3.2  Drakkonis  replied to  CB @3    2 weeks ago
It is a fool's argument, he is making. Why? Because the speaker is making an EMOTIONAL/PASSIONATE jingoistic plea for freedom to reign over logic.

As Sean said, I'm not sure how you could miss the point that badly. He's making the same point I tried to make here a year and a half ago about the futility of wearing masks to protect against Covid. Yes, Covid exists, like climate change, but there's little point in masks when most of the rest of the world is busy creating variants as fast as they can naturally produce themselves. It is the same with climate change. You can pat yourself on the back by putting your plastic in the proper recycling bin rather than the trash. After you do, though, you should go look at pictures of waterways in Malaisia, India and other countries. 

So, let's see if I can put this vid's point in terms you might be able to understand. Assume there's some issue with wearing clothes that the woke crowd believes is killing the planet. Whether it's true or not is irrelevant. His point is, you're never going to convince people to freeze to death for the sake the planet. You can bravely stand on the street corner, taking all your clothes off to show the world  how much you care and all that will happen is people will take your clothes and keep themselves and their family warm. This is what is called 'human nature.'

Now, you can choose to continue to believe the point was an emotional or passionate plea of some sort, but he was just pointing out the stupidity of being the only one standing on the street corner. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.2.1  CB   replied to  Drakkonis @3.2    one week ago

Drakkonis, I almost overlooked that this is you! Still, I thank God that I have worn/wear masks outdoors and indoors since the start of the Covid 19 'season' (2020) and I successfully completed all by (seasonal) vaccinations and booster programs. To date, millions worldwide have contracted Covid-19 and depending on the state of their personal health/constitution: They have gotten mildly, dreadfully, ill or dead!

Each time I have tested for Covid-19 for some planned medical procedure (been several such occasions at least since 2020) I have tested "NON-DETECTED."  As recently as December 2022, I have friends/family that have tested positive for Covid-19 several of them 2 times. As is my 'norm' for such things: I give God the glory for such happenings.  Thus,  it is my determined opinion through being in the proximity (nearness) of sick people (who do not yet know they are infected or do not care about being so) that mask do work to protect me against the ignorance and arrogance of people surrounding me on all sides: Unmasked and improperly vaccinated against viruses.

As for plastic bags. . . how are we 'doing' on the problem of sea life deaths offshore of California (12 miles out in the Pacific Ocean)? It would be interesting to know if we are making headway in saving sea life by limiting the number of plastic bags we once were freely given, but now are required to purchase (10 cents each).

Moving on.

So, let's see if I can put this vid's point in terms you might be able to understand. Assume there's some issue with wearing clothes that the woke crowd believes is killing the planet. Whether it's true or not is irrelevant. His point is, you're never going to convince people to freeze to death for the sake the planet. You can bravely stand on the street corner, taking all your clothes off to show the world  how much you care and all that will happen is people will take your clothes and keep themselves and their family warm. This is what is called 'human nature.'

I will point out that planetary catastrophe (seas flooding coastal lands, etceteras) outweighs extreme nakedness by a lot. I will point out to you the irony of a conservative, choosing to put liberty and freedom on 'display' over an beyond conservation.

That some in our citizenry intend to make liberty and freedom into a 'saintly' state holds not sway with nature. Nature will 'drop' us where we stand in its path!

Indeed, it is a failure to understand priorities that costed an UNKNOWN virus to kill tens of thousands upward to a million plus citizens of this country. People 'went around' boasting about liberty and freedom with their unmasked, unvaccinated selves—got sick, got ill, got long-covid-19, and got grave-yard dead. Why? Because they did not show DUE RESPECT FOR THE UNKNOWN. That is, Covid-19, which later became a lot less an unknown, but still is a vicious viral contagion.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4  CB     2 weeks ago

Mr. Kisin, in trying to appear confident and strong in his remarks, fails to take account that he is utterly missing the point: Being woke, with intention to save a planet scientists are expressing as ticking its way to destruction, can not extend freedom and liberty to any humanity that will not be here to take it in. His argument is bogus, but it is delivered with all a substantial amount of arrogance.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5  Vic Eldred    2 weeks ago

There is no doubt about it: everything sounds so much better with a British accent.

The point is so logical. Shall we destroy ourselves over something we can't fix all by ourselves?

Why do we allow our young to be trained to think with nothing but emotion? 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
6  Jasper2529    2 weeks ago

I'm not surprised that Mr. Kisin's many critics in the media and social media oppose teaching our young people critical thinking and want to create another dumbed-down DEI generation.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Jasper2529 @6    2 weeks ago

Who teaches you not to believe conspiracy theories? 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.1.1  Ender  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1    2 weeks ago

You have to remember these are the same people that refuse to let kids talk about race and want to ban books from libraries.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
6.1.2  Jasper2529  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1    2 weeks ago
Who teaches you not to believe conspiracy theories? 

Why would you accuse me of believing conspiracy theories when my comment 6   specifically states critical thinking?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1.3  CB   replied to  Ender @6.1.1    2 weeks ago

Which is outright ignorance on its face. BTW, refusing to teach kids about the past is a setup for them finding out about racism 'in the streets.' And when those red-state youths do find out about it, they will resent their parents for allowing them to be blind-sided by it. It's happened before in the 60s when kids found out what their dads where doing to run the country and disadvantage minorities: Those kids were traumatized and hated their parents for being leeches and liars about who and how they 'created' wealth. Also, it is the same as when a reader reads the bible and 'discovers' for his/her self that certain bible passages are consistently told/taught to them from childhood but actually read differently. The betrayal is palpable.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
6.1.4  author  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @6.1.3    2 weeks ago
BTW, refusing to teach kids about the past is a setup for them finding out about racism 'in the streets.'

That's some strawman!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Jasper2529 @6.1.2    2 weeks ago

Are you denying that from time to time you believe in conspiracy theories?

Conspiracy theories are not critical thinking. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1.6  CB   replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.4    2 weeks ago

Explain why. Else you just popped up to say, "nuh-uh.'

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
6.1.7  author  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @6.1.6    2 weeks ago

No one is refusing to teach kids about the past.  It’s a fictional talking point.

It is your argument. Prove it.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1.8  CB   replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.7    2 weeks ago

If you don't know or understand what all the CRT 'backlash' in red-states is about, it's U.S. history which conservatives suggest is making young white youths 'mental,' and sorry for the sad-sacks of the past who caused the troubles for others living in this country not apart of their collective tribes, then you need to get a better understanding of the subject you are anemic on, because this, this, ain't serving you well at all.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
6.1.9  author  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @6.1.8    2 weeks ago
, it's U.S. history which conservatives sugges

So no evidence anyone is "refusing to teach kids about the past." 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  CB @6.1.8    2 weeks ago

your argument might hold some water if history wasn't being taught, but it is.

whether the woke idiots ever acknowledge it might be a different story.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.9    2 weeks ago

of course not.

some liberals like to embellish or just make stuff up out of whole cloth.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1.12  CB   replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.9    2 weeks ago

I am going to let you catch up on your own time.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1.13  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.10    2 weeks ago

That $hit some conservatives are trying to sell states/nation/world is what's truly silly and fake. And as wrong as two-left schools. Some conservatives can lie to themselves and their children,. . . but when the children grow up. They will look at some conservative old, tired, and fragile (by then) with resentment, laughter, or just simply say: "God bless you!"

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
6.1.14  author  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @6.1.12    2 weeks ago
m going to let you catch up on your own time.

You aren't fooling anyone. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  CB @6.1.13    2 weeks ago

oh gee whatever will some liberals DO when their silliness is rejected outright?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.14    2 weeks ago

maybe he sees you behind him and thinks you are behind when in reality you are about to lap him.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.17  Texan1211  replied to  CB @6.1.13    2 weeks ago

if left schools are wrong fix them!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1.18  CB   replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.14    2 weeks ago

Ohhh! It's not April Fool's Day so why would I even bother to try fooling you? Spend the time wisely.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1.19  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.15    2 weeks ago

God sincerely bless you, Texan1211!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.20  Texan1211  replied to  CB @6.1.19    2 weeks ago

He has!

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
6.1.21  Jasper2529  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.5    2 weeks ago
Are you denying that from time to time you believe in conspiracy theories?

Well, I have to admit that there was a time when I believed that:

  • the Tooth Fairy and Santa were real
  • Jussie Smollett really went out for a chicken sandwich during a polar vortex and was attacked by white "MAGA" people (waited for facts, gave him benefit of doubt for a brief time)
  • Covid was "a disease of the unvaccinated" (very short-lived)
  • the Covid vaccines would "stop the spread" (very short-lived)
Conspiracy theories are not critical thinking. 

Thank you for stating the obvious. 

Have a great weekend.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
6.1.22  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.5    2 weeks ago
"Conspiracy theories are not critical thinking." 

You post wacky conspiracy theories all the time.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.23  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @6.1.22    2 weeks ago

name one

 
 
 
Hallux
Junior Principal
6.2  Hallux  replied to  Jasper2529 @6    2 weeks ago
DEI

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion ... which of the 3 don't you like?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
6.2.1  author  Sean Treacy  replied to  Hallux @6.2    2 weeks ago
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion 

Racism is racism. Whatever you call it.  Do you think calling a bill the "inflation reduction act" means it reduces inflation? 

 
 
 
Hallux
Junior Principal
6.2.2  Hallux  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.2.1    2 weeks ago

I didn't ask you.

 
 
 
George
Freshman Guide
6.2.3  George  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.2.1    2 weeks ago
Do you think calling a bill the "inflation reduction act" means it reduces inflation?

Why not? I've read morons who claim ANTIFA aren't fascists because it's in their name. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
6.2.4  Jasper2529  replied to  Hallux @6.2.2    2 weeks ago
I didn't ask you.

Then why, in your comment 6.2 , did you ask me a question I directed only to John Russell's 6.1.2? This is, after all, supposed to be a public forum where we are encouraged to engage in Free Speech.

 
 
 
George
Freshman Guide
6.2.5  George  replied to  Jasper2529 @6.2.4    2 weeks ago

Free Speech

Hahahahahahahaha…………

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
6.2.6  bugsy  replied to  George @6.2.3    2 weeks ago

Actually, ANTIFA stands for Anti First Amendment

You will never see a leftist here admit to it.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Professor Guide
6.2.7  Drakkonis  replied to  Hallux @6.2    2 weeks ago
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion ... which of the 3 don't you like?

None of them, as the Left defines them. 

Diversity: Does not primarily refer to acceptance of differences in others. Rather, diversity means not having firm, foundational ideas about anything concerning what is morally right or even objectively true. It isn't simply relativism in society but within one's own thoughts. 

Equity: A metric without any discernible objective standard beyond "You have more than she does. You must give her some of what you have." Not only does it not take into account effort, contribution and merit, it seeks to actively eliminate such from consideration. 

Inclusion: A restatement of diversity. You must discard any value or principle you may hold because validating something or someone else takes precedence over yourself. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
6.2.8  Greg Jones  replied to  Hallux @6.2    2 weeks ago
"Diversity, Equity and Inclusion ... which of the 3 don't you like?"

Where, and to what extent is this not happening?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.2.9  CB   replied to  Drakkonis @6.2.7    one week ago

Drakkonis, I am going to speak directly to you about equity from a Christ-centric point of view: What is God's grace to mankind?

Is it not the granting of unmerited favor to someone who has/can not do anything to MERIT/EFFORT IT/CONTRIBUTE to it? Moreover, grace, is extended to our world without any consideration of man's past dealings/harms against others, is it not? (Our past is put into a 'sea of God's forgetfulness.' Hebrews 8:12.)

Therefore, God has granted EQUITY to humanity while in this life! And yet, you dare say you can not extend the same to your 'brethren' in this life! That is wrong and shameful!

 
 
 
Hallux
Junior Principal
8  Hallux    2 weeks ago

          "The only way to deal with the problem of racism is to treat people on the content of their character. And nothing else."

Ever get the feeling this is the only thing folks such as Kisin can quote by MLK? It's not used as an argument but as a weapon to own the "woke". The hypocrisy is not only glaring but also devoured by the cancel culture crowd.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Professor Guide
8.1  Drakkonis  replied to  Hallux @8    2 weeks ago
Ever get the feeling this is the only thing folks such as Kisin can quote by MLK?

Ever get the feeling that this same quote is the most hated by the Left? 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
8.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Drakkonis @8.1    2 weeks ago

Pretty obvious at times. Special privilege and treatment due to the color of their skin. If they'd quit doing that shit, perhaps people of color would quit feeling as though they are victims.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.2  CB   replied to  Drakkonis @8.1    one week ago

Not everybody on the 'Left' or not every liberal is a god-hater, Drakkonis. Do modulate your statements accordingly.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.3  CB   replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @8.1.1    one week ago

Some conservatives are crazy to think they can call for law and order, or some concocted, selective, version of racial reconciliation while being stubborn and ridiculous hypocrites still trying to turn liberals (and the majority of minorities) into stamped copies of themselves. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
9  CB     2 weeks ago
The only way to deal with the problem of racism is to treat people on the content of their character. And nothing else. And the fact that WOKE culture seeks to overturn that is a new form of racism that we must all oppose.”

Well, it is good (I guess) that some conservatives think minorities need to be schooled about the causes and effects of racism. All the while, when you read through the comments on this and other discussion boards; one could make a list all the denigrating remarks about blacks and other minorities not be equal to the task of carrying some white (or other minority) conservative boots. So tell me: How is denigrating minorities while feigning denigrating liberals is "treating people on the content of their character.

Some conservatives, y'all are delusional! Liberals might can learn some things politically from you, but how to have better character content is not one of them!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.1  Texan1211  replied to  CB @9    2 weeks ago

you have a vivid imagination.

care to quote any of what you claim?

let's see your list!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
9.1.1  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @9.1    2 weeks ago

And some conservaties have closed minds. Which is worse.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  CB @9.1.1    2 weeks ago

still waiting on that list you were going on about.

you don't really have anything to back that silly claim up, do you?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
9.1.3  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @9.1.2    2 weeks ago

It was a request for you to make a list, Texan1211. Read the thread and across NT and get back to us with your list. If not: you know what you can dol. (Biggest smile ever.)

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  CB @9.1.3    2 weeks ago
It was a request for you to make a list, Texan1211.

That is simply unadulterated crap.

Here are your very own words:

Well, it is good (I guess) that some conservatives think minorities need to be schooled about the causes and effects of racism. All the while, when you read through the comments on this and other discussion boards; one could make a list all the denigrating remarks about blacks and other minorities not be equal to the task of carrying some white (or other minority)conservativeboots. So tell me: How is denigrating minorities while feigning denigrating liberals is "treating people on the content of their character.

To start with, your comment wasn't even addressed to anyone. Secondly, "one could" is not a request.

You made a claim, and when challenged to prove it, you deflect in the usual manner.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
9.1.5  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @9.1.4    2 weeks ago

. . . .

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  CB @9.1.5    2 weeks ago
. . . .

Is that some sort of code for "surrender"?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
9.1.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @9.1.6    2 weeks ago

I thought it was to show that they have lost contact with the mothership.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
9.1.8  Ronin2  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @9.1.7    2 weeks ago

That is the same thing Comcast does on the TV screen when trying to reestablish a signal. 

So you may be on to something.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @9.1.7    one week ago

Some liberals really get upset when they claim wild shit and get called out on it.

The one thing you can count on is that they won't back it up.

Well, that, and deflection of course.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
9.1.10  Thrawn 31  replied to  Texan1211 @9.1.9    one week ago

And conservatives aren’t guilty of exactly that? Yourself included? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  Thrawn 31 @9.1.10    one week ago

what exactly have I claimed that you need me to prove to you?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
9.1.13  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Thrawn 31 @9.1.10    one week ago
And conservatives aren’t guilty of exactly that?

From what I've seen the vast majority of conservatives are able to back up their claims and do it.  And do it without using the MSM.

I'll venture a guess that 90% of the deflections we see here on NT are coming from the liberal side.  Don't like the topic - deflect.  And it's usually the normal "but Trruuummmmppppp" bullshit.  Or like another person here on NT likes to do and just spam and troll the article.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
10  Thrawn 31    2 weeks ago

As soon as someone uses a buzz word like “woke” I stop listening. The use of buzz words tell me all I need to know about the content of the rest of a speech, video, or article. It is an attempt to get an emotional reaction and not an attempt at any sort of rational discourse. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
11  TᵢG    one week ago

The speaker makes a very good point.   They way to address climate change is to make renewable energy more affordable (and more available).   Indeed.

I would extend his argument.    In addition to economics and availability, it is important that nations set examples for those who are not on board by actively moving towards renewable energy.

In addition, innovation and change need drivers.   To get less costly / more available renewable energy, we need a global market that will consume it and encourage more research and development; we need a global market that is shifting (incrementally of course) from fossil fuels to renewable.

Commonsense and history tells us that China, India, etc. will indeed continue to use carbon-dirty sources of energy as long as these are convenient and economical.    So the challenge is indeed to gather renewable momentum, develop technology that can deliver affordable renewable energy and, in result, reduce demand on fossil fuels (which will, in turn, have the economic effect of making them less affordable and renewables more affordable).

If the largest carbon emitters on the planet never play ball, then we are all screwed.    So one can take a cynical position of "fuck it, my clean practices will not make a difference" or one can recognize that a strong momentum towards renewables and away from fossil fuels is our best course of action to mitigate anthropogenic factors adversely affecting the climate.

In the end, those who understand the problem and are willing to work on its solution will either drive critical mass to effect necessary global change (as described above) or we will all suffer the consequences of failure.

 
 
 
Freewill
Junior Participates
11.1  Freewill  replied to  TᵢG @11    one week ago
The speaker makes a very good point.   They way to address climate change is to make renewable energy more affordable (and more available).   Indeed.

Work - build - innovate, nothing wrong with that motto.  We have come to lack an interest in critical thinking, mathematics, science and engineering when they are most desperately needed.  Interesting article here about The Decline of American Science & Engineering .

Over the last several decades, the United States has made two huge errors in science and educational policy that have severely limited progress in the world of atoms, and which have profound implications for the country’s industrial and military competitiveness. First, it has turned its back on the conceptual framework underlying three centuries of modern science , from Isaac Newton’s   Principia   in 1687 through the extraordinary achievements of the first three quarters of the twentieth century. Second, it has allowed an alarming deterioration in the quality of mathematical education .

The risk is obvious: a nation’s industrial and military might rests squarely on its engineering capacity, and advances in engineering rely upon advances in scientific knowledge and the ability to mathematically leverage that knowledge to achieve operational objectives. Perhaps the United States could afford a cavalier attitude towards its declining science and engineering capacity if its advantage over competitors were insurmountable, but that is not the present reality.

Suppose that during the Cold War, the United States focused on designing video games while the Soviets were building ICBMs. Or, to reduce the hyperbole, suppose the Soviets had been applying the mathematical methods of control, signal processing, statistics, and information theory, while we were satisfied with arithmetic. The Cold War might have ended very differently.

As a rule of thumb, fundamental scientific and engineering research is generally limited to the top 0.1 percentile in mathematical ability. There are exceptions, and there are vast differences within the top 0.1 percent. A good education, effort, and creativity are also required, though there is no way to judge the latter abilities until the student encounters deep problems. Given the relatively small population capable of functioning at this level, we need to ensure that the one-in-a-thousand student gets an excellent mathematical education, from childhood through graduate school. Especially in poor areas, this means finding children at a young age and getting them into high-performing school systems. Throughout the education process, evaluation must focus solely on academic ability, paying no attention to “holistic” balderdash. Our competitors employ unforgiving meritocratic systems that increasingly filter students. At the completion of high school, the best students are entered into the best  universities—free  of charge.

This same decline, or lack of educational prioritization, in the fields of mathematics, science and engineering has put us behind the eight-ball in terms of designing real solutions to climate change at a time when we need it the most.  Only 7% of US students in college study engineering and over half of them never graduate.  Video games, apps that can warp one's face, Snapchat, Instagram, TikTok - all great, but all a tremendously useless waste of time when in comes to addressing real engineering problems like avoiding hunger, poverty and climate change around the globe.  

In addition to economics and availability, it is important that nations set examples for those who are not on board by actively moving towards renewable energy. In addition, innovation and change need drivers. 

Exactly!  And that starts with driving renewed interest in mathematics, science and engineering to solve problems and effect positive change.  We MUST,  once again, put these subjects and critical thinking at the top of our educational priorities from elementary to post-graduate studies and beyond!  We need to wake up.  THAT is the "woke" we need.

 
 
 
Freewill
Junior Participates
12  Freewill    one week ago

In addition to my rant at #11.1 above, I found this article on LinkedIn regarding the top 5 reasons why engineering students drop out at such a high rate these days.  It both hits the nail on the head and infuriates me at the same time.  Perhaps before we can cure our educational woes, we must address what underlies them. 

Retention rates among students studying engineering are among the lowest of all majors. Around 60% of students that study engineering will either drop-out or change majors and 40% of those students will do so in their first year.

The top 5 reasons why engineering students drop out are as follows, with my smart-ass commentary to follow each:

1.  Engineering is Difficult

Yeah no shit!  And since when did tackling the difficult become just so impossible to bear?  What have we done to our children?

2.  Poor Work Ethic

Yeah no shit again!  This actually started in my generation, saw plenty of it in high school.  I have my father to thank for showing me the right path when it comes to hard work and not seeking the easy way around it.   

3.  Inability to Deal with Failure

Again, what have we done to our children?  Coddling or shielding our kids from failure did not help them, in fact it may have crippled them and our society for generations to come.  Life, like baseball, is a game of failure.  The most important lessons in life, on our path to success, are learned when we get back up and try again after we first strike-out. 

4.  Lacking the Engineering Mindset

Logical and rational thinking, problem solving, trouble-shooting, time management, organizational skills - all things crucial to being a successful engineer.  These things need to be instilled in us when we are very young.  Even if one is not pursuing an engineering career, these things are crucial to being a productive member of society and a teacher to our children.

5.  Stress Overload

Sure - occasionally.  And one can either give in to it and quit, or one can learn how to manage it like an engineering project.  Identify the exact nature of the problem and design an elegant solution.  Of all the reasons above, I can relate to this one the most both in engineering college and in my career.  When I did complain about the stress my Dad always gave me the best advice. He looked me straight in the eye and said, "Deal with it!".  I said "Screw you Pops!"... and I dealt with it.  

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
13  Perrie Halpern R.A.    one week ago

Sean,

This article is not a blog. It is a regular seed since the majority of it is from a youtube and the other part is a quote from Ron De Santos. Blogs are original articles written by a member, which is why they get prominent standing on the front page, for that member's work. I am moving this into the regular article section. 

 
 

Who is online

JBB
Drakkonis


23 visitors