The tone of your words is so pleasant. It differs so much to me from some of the other things I've read here (posted by you). On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 9:01 AM Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:
How does this subject land for you? What feelings are you trying to get across with it?
It lands as true, in many ways - in fact in all ways that I am able to discern, and this is in where I've read the whole thing, and listened to the Jordan Peterson video.
And so I have to recommend Jordan Peterson again - some of JP's words have not entirely "gelled" for me, but the majority of what he says resonates really well for me, and to me is "spot on". So I can't recommend him enough...
It's hard for me to dedicate a lot of time to listening to extensive things when it is so hard for me to produce work. I need my time to try to work.
I'm actually not trying to get any feelings across - I'm hoping that some concepts get across to people, which they may not have thought about before.
Without understand the problems and the causes of our problems, what hope have we to fix those problems?
Yes! Completely! Similarly, don't we need to consider the arguments of all sides, when there are disagreements?
So fundamentally I am attempting to assist the conversation generally, for everybody. And I think this is one of the most powerful things we can do.
I expect the content to be pushing divisive politics.
No - at least not from my perspective, not at all. It's about concepts, understanding, perceiving that which we have not seen before - and similarly, and perhaps more importantly, finding words and ways to speak these things which we are not taught about, and are otherwise not able to speak about.
This is not at all about flinging mud, it's about having a conversation we desperately need to have.
We have to start somewhere.
Outcome and opportunities really look basically the same to me;
Well, that's not the case.
I see you are focusing on their difference; I see them as basically the same.
Outcome is the result.
Opportunity is the environment, the "rules", a level playing field - conceptually very different to outcome.
The environment, the rules, the playing field: are all the result of things that have happened. Peoples' behaviors, acting in their outcomes. Outcome is your opportunity, within and after that outcome. Opportunity, is the outcome of what happened before, to give it to you. I'm not up to speed on the politically-specific meanings, obviously. But what it sounds like it comes down to, is that we need to be free to talk about and address the real issues instead of putting 'socialist' bandaids on them. So long as we are fighting instead of talking productively, those bandaids keep emerging (on a scale of decades).
If you look at the reasons outcomes change, undiscussed differences in opportunities show up.
Here's where people often get all dichomatic - the false assertion that "it must be all the environment and luck".
It's not, but it's also NOT not those things:
It's both, all three, all four etc:
- latent capacity/ abillity, genetics, shape of your vocal chords, length of your legs etc
- luck
- opportunity
- environment of nurture, training, etc
- internal characteristics like will, persistence, emotional temperament and more
... and as we progress through life, one or another of these facets of an individual and his/her environment, can impact, benefit or restrict, some other aspect(s).
I'm not quite sure what point you're making here, but some relevant additional information is that opportunity and outcome flow forward, to children and grandchildren. They inherit not only your genes, but also a ton of your knowledge, beliefs, wealth, friends, education, laws, culture. If their parents were slaves, workers of an oppressive regime, or addicted to a youtube channel, these things were probably given to them by those who guide what they learn.
We are to at least some degree, authors of our own lives.
AND we are to a degree a product of our environment.
AND we are blessed, or challenged by our latent capacities.
All things that we can influence, and that others have influenced.
Once again, I must thank Cari for reminding us (for values of "us" corresponding to "me") of being conscious when we use dichotomies.
Oh, since there are very few real dichotomies, if any, dichotomies show the boundaries of all the things we described above.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 1:02 AM Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:
A good summary for anyone who might've missed the memo on equality of outcome (equity) vs equality of opportunity:
Why Equality Of Outcome Can Never, Ever Work Troy Smith via AmericanThinker.com https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/10/why_equality_of_outcome_can_nev... https://www.zerohedge.com/political/why-equality-outcome-can-never-ever-work
In the early 20th century, in support of equality of outcome, Soviet communist dictator Vladimir Lenin coined the phrase, "Who, Whom." The concept was simple.
In a socialist society, where equality of outcome takes precedence over equality of opportunity, a critical question arises: who plans, directs, and redistributes the resources of a society, and to who is the beneficiary, or victim — the object, the "whom" — of said redistribution?
Politically speaking, the central maxim is to represent "disenfranchised" groups, provide them with monetary resources and government or state positions, and reshape any imbalances of power that have come to exist. The catch is that once power is given to central planners to initiate such action, "there will be no economic or social questions that would not be political questions in the sense that their solution will depend exclusive on who wields the coercive power" (Hayek, p. 138). In other words, the question of Who, Whom is what equality of outcome hinges upon. All internal struggles are squashed.
In a society structured to foster equality of opportunity, three things tend to determine how successful someone is or isn't: intelligence (or skill), industriousness, and luck. On the surface, these things may seem unfair. For example, someone born into a family that promotes and develops education, who was taught about the value of hard work and had resources and connections on hand, would clearly have an enormous advantage over someone born into a split or uninterested family, enduring a failing public school system, with few or no mentors. Despite this, the equality of opportunity has two overwhelming advantages:
- first, success, or the lack thereof, is not predetermined by any bureaucracy or person in charge but instead by one's own ability and fortune.
- Second, it is the only guarantee that we have freedom to own property and control our own lives, whereas with equality of outcome, all properties and liberties must be tightly regulated by the bureaucrat.
As Hayek notes,
"In a planned society we shall all know that we are better or worse off than others, not because of circumstances which nobody controls, and which it is impossible to foresee with certainty, but because some authority wills it" (p, 138).
Who would these bureaucrats then be in a landscape that promotes equality of outcome?
...
On Sat, Feb 01, 2020 at 07:53:41PM +1100, Zig the N.g wrote:
Saw female reporter's nipple prominence and asked "is it cold in argentina?"
https://sputniknews.com/viral/202001311078192175-is-it-cold-in-argentina-jou...
Apparently, this is called sexism, not reporting - although I guess I was asking a question, but implicit in the question was a fact - if you looked, deep, enough.
Got told I should get some sex-ism training.
Absolutely frustrating. @SvenSpoormakers your comment is inappropriate. We are more than the clothes we wear. If you can't understand why your comment is inappropriate I suggest getting some training around sexism. — Michele Reid (@Bliss_On_Earth) January 30, 2020 https://twitter.com/Bliss_On_Earth/status/1222736807894241280?ref_src=twsrc%...
Sounded possibly kinky so I went along until I discovered that not only was it about some neo-linguistic cultural marxism, but absolutely no one had their nipples showing!
Absolutely frustrating!
Just looking at my bike on the balcony, thinking how much I love cycling and bam, yet again something happens to remind me that it is a great sport despite the people in it. Spoormakers needs to grow up. @SvenSpoormakers — Peter Warne (@pzwarne) January 30, 2020 https://twitter.com/pzwarne/status/1222874772452904960?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
"Bam!" alright - there's a reason I love cycling,
https://www.yandex.com/search/?text=cycling+love+seat Joyride: New Device Poised to Turn Bicycles Into Sex Machine https://sputniknews.com/society/202001301078181463-joyride-new-device-poised...
... but it's more along the lines of "I wonder, does a sex change actually "work"?"
Our real concern of course is the NSA monitoring - completely illegally - our teledildonics metadata!
Absolutely frustrating!
Teledildonics Users 'Sexually Assaulted' by Hackers bitchute.com›video/j2jB9IsnP2A/ "Mr. Roger's NSA & Death of The Sex Symbol" 12/6/19.
Well, at least now that females are equal to males, including biologically, women are free to talk pub talk as much as the blokes are too ... right? I guess that's how the twitterati finally figured out the real problem with this female reporter - she was wearing, like, waaay too much, like (did I mention 'like'?):
... Also, This girl btw was not going around naked ffs — Flavia Cappellini (@FlaviaCapps) January 30, 2020 https://twitter.com/FlaviaCapps/status/1222836406625718276?ref_src=twsrc%5Et...
Glad we cleared -that- argentinian ex-pro-cyclist nipple problem up. The sad part is that women take it all so seriously, like you're out in public without a chaperone already, surely that's enough to have a laugh?
Or is it "have a laugh, but not when men crack a joke, because they're more equal than we are it's just not fair" ??
So, someone is upset that a woman is not wearing a bra, while reporting on an event which has 150 men, all of whom are not wearing underpants? — Girona Cycling (@GironaCycling) January 30, 2020 https://twitter.com/GironaCycling/status/1223018508306567171?ref_src=twsrc%5...
Listen hunni bunni sweeti pickle pie, it was humorous, and you're assuming upset? Experiencing a distinct lack of pickles in ya diet per'aps?
Nipple up, buttercup :)
Nice to see the sex is finally equal ... except for females who want privileges to not be commented on, whilst claiming all male pribileges.
Absolutely frustrating - I'm just so, frustrated "just like a female" ... I guess :D
Remember folks, penis = man, which is an extraordinarily powerful message - you see, penis power arises from being a man, and inherent with being a man, is having a penis - just ignore the statistically insignificant hermaphrodites for a moment:
No Justice: Penis Man Taken Down by AR-15-Wielding SWAT Team http://dstormer6em3i4km.onion/no-justice-penis-man-taken-down-by-ar-15-wield...
(We can guess that expanding his message to be just -slightly- more factual (literally, factually inclusive) from "penis man" to "penis, man or hermaphrodite" wouldn't have had the same ring.
+1 for confronting anti-CIS anti-factual bigots I guess...
At least swat teams also arrest women who get public with vagina propaganda ... don't they? )
Next up, N.gger Joe beer :D
Germany Produces Nazi Beer, Jews Do Not Find Humor in This http://dstormer6em3i4km.onion/germany-produces-nazi-beer-jews-do-not-find-hu...
... I personally walked into the Jewish Question because the Jews were so whiny. You can always rely on Jews to flip out and start whining. And this is beneficial to my personal life mission, which is to cause people to become upset on the internet.
They are even more reliable than women. At least one in a million times, a woman will manage to walk away from the screen instead of gobbling up bait like a hypersonic bait-gobbling machine. ...