161–170 of 182 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Old Soviet joke: "The Soviet Union is just like the United States. In the US, you can criticize the American President. In the USSR, you can also criticize the American President!"
Interesting how silent we are. Obama is way worse than Bush ever was.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, that was in 1988. This is 2013, you can criticize the Russian president, but you can't criticize the American president because he is listening .
The Russian president rides a bear. You can't criticize that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Old Soviet joke: "The Soviet Union is just like the United States. In the US, you can criticize the American President. In the USSR, you can also criticize the American President!"
Interesting how silent we are. Obama is way worse than Bush ever was.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting how silent we are. Obama is way worse than Bush ever was.
Worse? Good lord, Bush was on watch during the 9/11 terrorist attacks, housing collapse, stock market crash, two economic recessions, the hurricane Katrina debacle, tortured people in Gitmo and started two unwinnable wars. Someone has a short memory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's in the section defining cultural racism: Those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and Whiteness, and devalue, stereotype, and label people of color as “other”, different, less than, or render them invisible. Examples of these norms include defining white skin tones as nude or flesh colored, having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as oppo…
I do think schools shouldn't emphasize either collectivism or individualism over each other and I don't think the text you are quoting here advises that, either. Only a pretty narrow-mindes reading of that text would suggest that in any way. At any rate you would have to look at the actual implementation of that policy to really criticise it. As is this text is quite tame. Please also note that schools can hardly be…
Is there somethig that I as a non-american don't get that makes this newspeak palatable? Have american racists historically been more individualistic or something?
EDIT: this comment from elnate nails it:
"They're conflating racism with enthnocentrism, the idea that one culture (usually yours) is better than others."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The claims that a benign, offhand comment on social media will bring the school into "disrepute" is absurd. The fact that claims like this are becoming increasingly common would indicate that the West (or perhaps just North America) is slowly retreating from the idea of reasonable individual freedom of expression.
What absurd responses, though hardly unexpected given the story. Rabble rabble rabble! An institution gains disrepute through many actions over time. This particular action is very small, just as the response is . Hysterical responses as if she were sent the gallows denote a complete inability of so many to discuss a complex topic without instantly jerking to an extreme. But there is no extreme. And the whole slipper…
It's not absurd, or hysterical, to be concerned about people being interrogated for reasonable, completely normal forms of expression.
The slippery slope thing isn't nonsense. Society changes incrementally. Over longer timeframes continual incremental changes in a certain direction become recognizable trends.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do think schools shouldn't emphasize either collectivism or individualism over each other and I don't think the text you are quoting here advises that, either. Only a pretty narrow-mindes reading of that text would suggest that in any way. At any rate you would have to look at the actual implementation of that policy to really criticise it. As is this text is quite tame. Please also note that schools can hardly be…
It's one thing for an institution to position itself against emphasizing individualism. It's a couple steps further to define emphasizing individualism as a form of racism . Is there somethig that I as a non-american don't get that makes this newspeak palatable? Have american racists historically been more individualistic or something? EDIT: this comment from elnate nails it: "They're conflating racism with enthnocen…
Not to my knowledge. As far as I can tell they are doing nothing more than using existing strong negative connotations of racism to slander an unrelated ideology. It doesn't make logical sense, but it doesn't have to; they are counting on the strong emotional response it evokes to be sufficiently persuasive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have GOT to be kidding us.
I am not. Republicans are reluctant to criticize their own, and so Bush got criticized almost solely from the left. Obama gets a lot of criticism from both left and right.
Give it another year or three and we might get there (particularly if this Syria shit goes Obama's way...).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Russian president rides a bear. You can't criticize that.
You can criticize moobs though. Even if they're bear mounted moobs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you read the blog in question? Are you in possession of the full facts of the case? Do you know those involved? Or have you formed your opinions based on some gossippy trash reporting. There is almost always far more to stories like this than the reporting has us to believe. That's because the reporting is pushing an agenda. Which internet hate mobs etc absolutely love.
So you dispute the story and the reporting is "pushing an agenda"? Why do I have the feeling that you don't think that the "teacher" was wrong in what he did?
Not sure he really should have called the police, but it's up to him isn't it. But as I said, there's very likely far more to the story than just a blog.
If for example the story was "teacher calls police after student damages property / makes threats / brings knife to school / etc etc, and also shows police his weird ranty blog", then it wouldn't fit with the 'internet hate mob' agenda.