111–120 of 396 posts
It said that only when people were safe and secure in their relationship, were they able to speak freely and voice their true opinions.
Maybe this is similar. If people are financially and physically secure can believe things openly, even if they have little to do with reality.
Strangely, this reminds me of a book on relationships I read. It said that only when people were safe and secure in their relationship, were they able to speak freely and voice their true opinions. Maybe this is similar. If people are financially and physically secure can believe things openly, even if they have little to do with reality.
> When I was growing up in foster homes, or making minimum wage as a > dishwasher, or serving in the military, I never heard words like “cultural > appropriation” or “gendered” or “heteronormative.” > > Working class people could not tell you what these terms mean. But if you > visit an elite university, you’ll find plenty of affluent people who will > eagerly explain them to you. I figured out as soon as I saw the l…
Well.. it's not at all clear that those things he mention has anything to do with anti-racism and feminism. In fact, it seems quite clear they are the opposite of that.
Strangely, this reminds me of a book on relationships I read. It said that only when people were safe and secure in their relationship, were they able to speak freely and voice their true opinions. Maybe this is similar. If people are financially and physically secure can believe things openly, even if they have little to do with reality.
Or put another way: after reality is removed, beliefs can become insane.
I'm thinking of Rudy Giuliani and Elon Musk, but examples abound.
> “I’m so fit that I can afford to expend valuable energy to show you how strong and robust I am compared with the other gazelles.” Is this why humans dance?
This is basically the old paradigm saying that "people don't make money, money makes money." No one became a billionaire without being in the right place and knowing the right people. Access to that environment can be only gained if one already has significant capital. I guess this is what they mean by luck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we're talking a security firm paying minimum wage hired by the HOA to do rounds at a gated townhouse complex, that's not some unattainable luxury for someone making "just" $100K.
it's funny contrasting California expectations with the rest of the country.
Like those described in the article above, this is very much a middle-class movement whose proponents have seized the opportunity to sneer at working-class people as bigoted, stupid and reactionary.
> They can afford to hold this position, because they already live in safe, often gated communities. And they can afford to hire private security.
This isn't what defund the police was about at all and is just a strawman to stop inquisitions into the actual point of the defund the police movement.
> In the United States, "defund the police" is a slogan that supports removing funds from police departments and reallocating them to non-policing forms of public safety and community support, such as social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defund_the_police
Defund the police was never a anarcho communist feel good movement despite what articles like this will guide you believe.
That said, the slogan was slightly ambiguous so it was absolutely destroyed in the "marketplace of ideas". Apparently defunding the police actually means get rid of the police entirely. I guess the slogan had to be "decrease the budget, not entirely remove it just less money, for the police and move that money into other prevention and treatment methods for community support".