So it is a plot to steal the white man's health care ?

Fascinating.

Divying up and prioritizing health care based on race is the "plot", the motive for this clearly unethical plot is irrelevant.. The result is people dying based on race. Your need to mischaracterize that speaks to the unrighteousness of your character and criticism.

And as I said prior IHIV becomes WOKE to this stuff the minute he sees a POC might be the beneficiary.

It is the same old argument over and over and over again 'ok, ok yes white men had sole exclusive for hundreds of years in the job market that horrible tilts the playing field TODAY. But any divvying up of jobs today to the benefit of POC or women would be unethical. We should correct the system by just removing the prior advantage given to white men, but then let a now balanced approach correct things over time.'

Sounds good. Sounds 'woke' but then you realize it is simply an argument to leave the tilted playing field tilted for generations to come and maintain the advantage while pretending it is about fairness.

We've even had the same arguments over movie characters now getting more diverse as scream of 'how dare Hollywood pander like that by inserting a POC or women into that role which was prior a white mans'. Oh the horror!' Which of course ignores a hundred years of Hollywood pandering almost exclusively to white men with White Saviours, Black face whites playing POC, etc, etc.

Nope, nope, just leave all the prior advantage in place is the cry but you can adjust the prior biased behaviour to neutral now but nothing more.

Cupee stop virtue signaling, you the only one posting racist **** ITT.

Is Traditional Liberalism Vanishing?
Really nice Taibbi piece that touches on some themes of this thread (lots now touch on themes here). Taibbi talks about former ALCU director Ira Glasser and the new documentary about him, and compares Glasser's vision of liberalism and the ALCU with how things are today.
The film touches on the ALCU's decision to defend the neo-nazis who wanted to march in Skokie, Illinois

Ultimately, the ACLU argued that Skokie was a Tower-of-Babel moment for American law. If you grant the village of Skokie the right to ban hate speech, or require insurance bonds, or prevent anyone in a military uniform from marching, the constitutional edifice comes down and every town in the country will soon be making its own rules. Next thing you know, Forsyth County, Georgia, might be banning Hosea Williams from marching on Martin Luther King Day. “Do you want every little town to decide which speech is permitted?” Glasser asked.
.....
The ACLU was central to what liberalism meant once, and not just because it had a history of pursuing social justice cases like Brown v. Board of Education (taking on school segregation) and Mapp v. Ohio (helping create the exclusionary rule to protect against abusive prosecutions). Skokie seemed to establish the willingness to take an unpopular stand in defense of a principle as another prerequisite for all liberal thinkers of my generation, especially young ones.

Taibbi discusses how the Clinton years transformed liberalism and corrupted it.

Bill Clinton supposedly changed all of this. He presented an image of a Democrat and sixties child who was also a winner. However, Clinton won by hurling overboard most of the meaningful principles of liberalism. Over and over, his DLC strategists worked the same theme: switching out a working-class political template for an upper-class, authoritarian substitute. Liberalism was pro-labor: Clinton Democrats embraced NAFTA and accelerated the Reagan-era export of the manufacturing economy, which allowed them to attract Wall Street donors and end their dependence on union money. Human rights were non-negotiable for true liberals: Clinton gave Most Favored Nation trading status to China. Liberals opposed the death penalty, and favored criminal justice reform: Clinton went out of his way to execute mentally impaired Ricky Ray Rector in the middle of an election campaign, and worked with future president Joe Biden to pass a crime bill that did everything but “hang people for jaywalking."...

He continues to go on in this vein talking about the transformation of the Democratic party.

The Democratic Party and its supporters have undergone so many changes in the last forty years that big parts of its platform sound indistinguishable from what was once called Buckley-esque conservatism. It’s yet another switch. Buckley is dead, but his politics are enjoying a posthumous rebrand, while Glasser has been forced to watch his ideas recast as regressive and racist.

It's a really good piece that deals with freedom.

These disaffected liberals are conservatives, don't you know? The odd thing is, liberals won the previous culture war, in almost all manners.

Fascinating.

So we have disparities. And our goal is equity.

Do you think the average CRT proponent would rather have a 99% positive outcome or a 50% positive outcome (assuming equity is achieved).

Yup. Socially liberal, fiscally conservative and instead of representing the majority of Americans the Dems represent the top ten percent or so. The GOP has always been the party of the elite and that hasn't changed.

That leaves the 90% of Americans with no way to address their needs.

If they aren't careful there will be an insurrection at the Capitol one day.

He's just an 80's guy.
lol

It doesn't matter. You can't socially engineer outcomes without opressing people. We've learned this a lesson many many times.

Just as an example...

You can't socially engineer outcomes for addicts. You can only provide them opportunity to get clean.

People are already being oppressed. They are being denied reasonable access to health care. So your worries about oppressing people are moot.

Comparing pregnant black ladies to drug addicts if ****ing brilliant btw.

Honestly I'm kind of curious as to how drug addicts have been oppressed.

I don't know why I bother. I wasn't comparing them. You keep commiting this logical fallacy. You specifically ask a question about CRT proponents and their desire for equity. I was pointing out the flaws with that rationale. I just don't understand how you can continue to be this dishonest.

Hey, let's stop drug addiction by putting people in jail who use drugs, i.e. let's socially engineer outcomes for drug addicts.

Not only that, forcing folks into treatment has it's issues as well.

More on that:

I think the aclu/nazi thing isn't quite the great example it's being trotted out as. Tolerating the nazis/kkk/whateverthefk having a little march thru town 1 day a year for an hour is one thing and things haven't really changed on that front. It's not a 1:1 correlation to flooding the internet with propaganda on a constant basis imo anyway--that's a different animal altogether.

Oh.

So treating a person with a health condition and putting them in jail are equal.

Fascinating.

Facebook And Twitter Limit Sharing 'New York Post' Story About Joe Biden.

Those people being wrong once all the facts are in and looking like idiots--doesn't necessarily mean they were wrong about why things played out the way they did in the moment though.

Socially engineering outcomes. @RF white people aren't the only ones who get hurt.

And to be clear, everyone gets hurt.

The funny thing about the Skokie case is that they canceled the march. Is it your claim though that it's the GOP that has pushed the left to illiberalism as a response to the right wing stuff online?
My take on the Skokie thing is just like Taibbi's-- that it definitely is indicative of a bygone era and that we're all worse off for that. Obviously we are all inundated with propaganda of all sorts now-- but I don't think we need to be afraid of skinheads. I never see any anywhere.

So blacks are stupid and unhealthy and there's nothing we can do about it ?

I guess that's one way to approach the world.

I think given the history people just get a little touchy when there's a perception it's gaining any momentum outside of the generally tiny little sliver it's occupied in recent decades. And while they're not really all running around in swastikas--this whole alt-right/whatever you wanna call it thing at least kinda looks like something close to it--some definitely are. I don't have much trouble believing that there are some people who are wildly alarmed at seeing so many young guys being pulled in that direction. Quite a few of the skinheads weren't actually nazis fwiw--though they may kinda look the same--there were definitely 2 sides to that coin.

Way back in the day when you had to mail order things to get a hold of some of the juicy conspiracy stuff it's kinda disturbing how much of it was served up within that context. At least from where I see it--the internet has been a huge help in recruiting people into those ranks--it's just so much more efficient/effective.

We may like to pat ourselves on the back for that bit of tolerance that's been extended like with say the old kkk marches etc. But I think it's a bit off to assume that means that it's boundless and that there were/are no lines. And leveling half of Europe is kind of a good example to show what happens when people have said ok we've hit the line now it's our turn to talk War may be good for biz and all that jazz but I still kinda think most people would rather try to head it off at the pass before things get to that point again--unless it's nice and contained over in some far away place.