Re: Denkverbot

by **kic** 29/12/2016, 12:13

Sowell je tako upecatljiv, i meni je dojmljivo koliko drugi izgledaju kao debili ako su te nesrece da se zateknu u emisiji s njim..

istina kao bomba, sve usutka oko sebe, Milo samo hoce reakciju recimo..

by aben 29/12/2016, 16:51

kic wrote:
Sowell je tako upecatljiv, i meni je dojmljivo koliko drugi izgledaju kao debili ako su te nesrece da se zateknu u emisiji s njim..

istina kao bomba, sve usutka oko sebe, Milo samo hoce reakciju recimo..

sowell i milo su otrov istog tipa, jedan crni a drugi peder, ali ta neotesanost modernog diskursa je ko ona tvoja glazba, kako se ono zove, gay rock...sowell unatoč kvaliteti jednostavno više ne more projti kod današnje publike ko ni pink floydi...

istina je bumba

by aben 29/12/2016, 16:53

Maria wrote:Sretno sretno
Di smo stali ?

sritan božić,

evo, izaberi jedun sowellov citat, pa objosni zoč je krivu:)

by **kic** 29/12/2016, 21:19

aben wrote:
kic wrote:
Sowell je tako upecatljiv, i meni je dojmljivo koliko drugi izgledaju kao debili ako su te nesrece da se zateknu u emisiji s njim..

istina kao bomba, sve usutka oko sebe, Milo samo hoce reakciju recimo..
sowell i milo su otrov istog tipa, jedan crni a drugi peder, ali ta neotesanost modernog diskursa je ko ona tvoja glazba, kako se ono zove, gay rock...sowell unatoč kvaliteti jednostavno više ne more projti kod današnje publike ko ni pink floydi...

istina je bumba

zato sam ih stavio u istu rečenicu, Sowell će postati klasik, jedan od najvećih mislilaca svog, i svih vremena u svakom slučaju..

by aben 29/12/2016, 22:09

Figure 1. The 40 universities by D:R ratio (Economics, History, Journalism/ Communications, Law, and Psychology)

Caltech 13:0
Worc. Poly. 9:0
Brown 60:1
Boston U. 40:1
Rochester 35:1
Johns Hopkins 35:1
Northeastern 33:1
Tufts 32:1
Princeton 30:1
Columbia 30:1
Brandeis 28:1
Maryland 26:1
UC-Davis 26:1
USC 26:1
UNC 23:1
Boston C. 22:1
MIT 19:1
Yale 16:1
NYU 16:1
Carnegie Mellon 16:1
UC-Irvine 15:1
UC-Berkeley 14:1
Cornell 13:1
UConn 13:1
Lehigh 12:1
Yeshiva 8.6:1
Dartmouth 12:1
Stanford 11:1
Duke 11:1
uCSD 10:1
Harvard 10:1
UCLA 8.8:1
Wake Forest 7.6:1
Rensselaer 6.0:1
Penn State 6.0:1
Penn 6.4:1

udio demokrata prema republikancima na merikunskin sveučilištima, iz pet studijskih grup.

In all, we looked up 7,243 professors and found 3,623 to be registered Democratic and 314 Republican.7 The overall D:R ratio is 11.5 to 1.

s tin da je odnos samo za povijest=33:1

Data suggest that humanities/ social-science professors who vote Democratic are, on the whole, more inclined towards governmentalization than are those who vote Republican.9 The data also show that Democratic professors have significantly greater uniformity in their policy views, more of a ‘party line,’ than do Republican professors,10 and that Republican members of scholarly associations more frequently wind up in careers outside of academia.11 The data show that there are virtually no classical liberals among Democratic professors, whereas there are some among Republican professors.12

The question of why academia is so dominated by left-leaners is, to our mind, tertiary to the puzzle of why human civilization isn’t more classical liberal.

by marcellus 30/12/2016, 18:24

aben wrote:[size=30]U čemu je fora s HDZovcima?[/size]

teorije urote 101

Mislim da je jasno i općeprihvaćeno, a ako i nije, trebalo bi biti, da su sile koje jesu uz ponešto truda i neadekvatnosti Tuđmanovih nasljednika krajem 90ih potakle (a kada kažem potakle, mislim ostvarile) smjenu vlasti u Hrvatskoj. Međutim, ono što je slijedilo nakon toga nije toliko niti jasno niti općeprihvaćeno, pa ćemo to ovdje pokušati razjasniti.
Da biste razumjeli ovaj post morate još nešto razumjeti: korupcijski skandal u Hrvatskoj nije ono nešto kada je netko korumpiran i to izađe u javnost, nego je to ono nešto kada se osobi na položaju naredi da odstupi s položaja/promijeni svoje ponašanje pisanjem o korupcijskom skandalu koji možda je, a možda i nije stvaran. Češće je nego nije, ali to nikome nije osobito bitno. Bitno je da svi mediji izvještavaju o tome dok dotični ne odstupi/prilagodi se, dok s druge strane, ako nije potrebno da dotični odstupi/prilagodi se, a zapanjujuća korupcija se nekako pojavi i onda dalje ignorira u medijima, onda nemamo korupcijski skandal.
Evo na primjer, jučer mi je zapelo za oko (a kada to kažem, mislim da su urlali to na TVu u prime timeu) da je otkriveno da HAKOM troši na neke skupe kravate. Uh, što bi to moglo značiti?

Točka I.
Sile koje jesu nisu zadovoljne svojom kreacijom, Račanovom Vladom. Mislim da možemo reći da su razlozi šaroliki, od relativne nestabilnosti te Vlade, “straha od desničara” i aljkave suradnje na različitim poljima, i zanimljivo, suicidalne odluke da se… s Rusima uđe u nekakav projekt naftovoda zvan Družba Adria. S druge strane, gospodin Sanader nakon što je na prevaru dobio izbore i došao na čelo HDZa sav je nešto umjeren i rado sklapa ugovor s vragom, khm silama koje jesu. Sanader nesiguran u svoju pobjedu na svoju stranu za te izbore dobiva kojekakve NGOove i EPHaove, a sile koje jesu dobivaju Sanadera.

Točka II.
Sjećate se afere Imostroj? Ono kada je Miomir Žužul nešto nešto, pa je nakon višemjesečnog natezanja morao dati ostavku na mjesto MVP. Spekulirajmo zašto je stvarno dao ostavku na mjesto MVP. Depeša američkog MVP iz toga vremena dostupna na wikileaksima tvrdi da Miomir Žužul radi više za hrvatskog gospodarstvo od ministra gospodarstva. Više od bilo kojeg ministra. Istovremeno, s Rusima se aktivno pregovara o realizaciji projekta Družba Adria iako su na noge dignuti kojekakvi eko NGOovi koji svim silama pokušavaju spriječiti taj projekt. Jasno vam je kako ide nastavak ove priče?
Nedugo nakon Žužulove ostavke Hrvatska odustaje od toga projekta. Sanaderu je poslana poruka da se ne igra. MVP dolazi u ruke odane igračice sila koje jesu, tada relativno nepoznate i nezanimljive token plavuše Kolinde Grabar Kitarović. Zanimljiv je i stav koji zauzima Jadranka Kosor tijekom svojeg patetičnog pokušaja postajanja predsjednicom RH – ona je naime žestoko protiv Družba Adrije.
BTW Znate one priče kako Rusija potiho financira anti-fracking eko ekoe? Pitam se otkuda im ideja?

Točka III.
“Najvećih enigma suvremene hrvatske politike”, zašto je Ivo Sanader dao ostavku? Reći ću vam odmah sada ja zašto je je.eni enigmatični Sanader dao ostavku.

Južni tok, a ja sam zelenom stralicom na slici ucrtao kraću rutu dostave ruskog plina u sjevernu Italiju

15.05.2009. u Sočiju Rusija, Bugarska, Srbija i Italija potpisale su sporazum o izgradnji Južnog toka. Samo se još jedna zemlja trebala priključiti, i čini se da je Sander bio blizu tome da podlegne iskušenju.
01.07.2009. Sanader je dao ostavku.
Je.eni enigmatični Sandaer je dao ostavku jer su sile koje jesu došle i rekle mu da da ostavku or else… Jedino što je enigmatično u cijeloj toj priči je to da li je Sanader na kraju procesuiran na ponešto smiješnim korupcijskim optužbama zato što je u svojem drugom ugovoru s vragom prijeđen, ili zato što je izabrana nasljednica, do tada HDZova javna kurva Jadranka Kosor, toliko u sebe nesigurna kokoš da je bez vanjskoga naloga pokrenula lov na njega.
Bilo kako bilo, Južni tok je trebao zaobići Hrvatsku kroz neke normalnije zemlje, međutim, sile koje jesu uspjele su ga na kraju ubiti tek u Bugarskoj i to tek kada su Rusi ušli u Ukrajinu.

Točka IV.
Jadranka Kosor gubi izbore jer je… pa budimo iskreni, Jadranka Kosor i dolazi nam Zoran Milanović. I sve je to lijepo i dobro, i Kosor i Milanović, dragi su i uglavnom poslušni, međutim, jasno je da će Milanović izgubiti iduće izbore jer… pa budimo iskreni, on je Zoran Milanović. A nešto se opasno dogodilo. HDZovci, bijesni i poniženi, razočarani i ljuti, za vođu biraju nekakvog Tomislava Karamarka na platformi lustracije (i mutnih poslovnih veza sa… ta daa, Rusima). Odmah se pokreće Milanovićevska NGOovsko EPHaovska sila na Karamarka, i godine prolaze, i godine prolaze, i ankete pokazuje da ga mrzi 140% Hrvata i 580% svih ostalih… a Karamarko nikako da padne. Čini se da je dovoljno samo to da ne savije kičmu i dobiva sve izbore na kojima se HDZ pojavi. Čak je i ponekad pametan, recimo zna da ne može vjerovati malom ljigavcu koji ide pod imenom Andrej Plenković pa ga šalje u anonimnost Europskog parlamenta da bi ovoga tamo posramljivao Nigel Farage. Izvjesno je da Hrvatska dolazi u ruke Karamarka.
Međutim, i Karamarko umišljajući da je Sanader sklapa ugovor s vragom. Nakon višemjesečnog pritiska na njega pristaje kandidirati NATO barbiku na predsjedničkim izborima smatrajući da je time zadovoljio njihove apetite. I doista, Kolinda Grabar Kitarović bi progurana preko finiš crte i postade predsjednica.

NATO barbika… znate, ona kurva koja iz životopisa prikladno izostavlja činjenicu da pod njenim vodstvom Hrvatska snabdjeva oružjem Al-Kaidu i njeno nestašno dijete Islamsku državu

Točka V.
Sile koje jesu baš ne puše svoj dogovor s Karamarkom pa u Zagreb šalju ekipu iz Penn Schoen Berlanda da budu slavni Milanovićevi američki savjetnici, pri čemu je zanimljivo možda to da je… Penn Schoen Berland zapravo paravan za fakin CIAu i između ostalog bavi se s tzv regime change operacijama. No Milanovića ne može niti sam Bog spasiti, a kamoli Penn Schoen Berland, tako da ništa od toga. Međutim, Penn Schoen Berland uspjeva napuhujući ankete i nadanja glupih Hrvata napuhati nekakav “mladi i pošteni” pun korisnih budala… MOST.
Retarda Karamarko pristaje da mu NATO barbika za šefa postavi nekakvog “kanađanina” Tihomira Oreškovića umjesto da ode na nove izbore. Mislim, kako to točno ide provjera toga tipa kada je u pitanju Karamarko. Hm, započeo je i 13 godina gradio karijeru u kompaniji kojoj je George H.W. Bush bio član upravnog odbora, trenutni dikrektor je Sidney Taurel, George W. Bushev “Homeland Security Advisory Council member”, a usput, ta firma ima moć napisati djelove Patriot acta da zaštiti svoje poslovne interese. Ništa sumnjivo, idemo dalje?
Ni ne sjećam se Karamarkova korupcijskog skandala, a valjda nije ni bitan, danas jesi, sutra nisi. Pogotovo ako si glup.

I to je otprilike priča o tome kako je na vlast u Hrvatskoj došao čovjek koji porijeklo vuče iz UDBE i čijem je ocu dan danas ili neugodno ili nepoželjno živjeti u Hrvatskoj, karijera mu se svodi na seminare i junačke pregovore (prihvatili smo sve zahtjeve) o ulasku u EU, i koji je u osnovi, kontrolabilan i kontroliran. Podrška kojekakvih NGOova i EPHaova, Milanović poslan na TV da se samoubije u sučeljavanju s tim finim creeepy dečkom, i ostalo je povijest.

There is something off with my face Andrej Plenković…

A isto tako, to i priča o tome zašto mali ljigavac smatra nužnim otrčati u Ukrajinu i stvarati apsolutno nepotrebne konflikte s Rusijom kao svoj prvi potez. Kažem, danas jesi, sutra nisi.

Naravno, sve je to skupa, kao što i podnaslov kaže, teorija urote, kojoj ne trebate, a možda bi bilo bolje da i ne, vjerujete. Gluposti kao i one da papa zapravo nije katolik već pripadnik nekakvog komunjarskog kulta koji je za južnoameričke prilike promovirao SSSR, ili da SAD za koji tjedan po prvi puta u zadnjih 28 godina dobiva predsjednika koji nije agencijski momak. U najboljem slučaju, samo ćete postati cinični. Ako ste već prije čitali ovaj blog, ciničniji nego što jeste.

U svakom slučaju, Čestit Božić i sve najbolje u novoj 2017.
Bit će zanimljiva.

auch.

bojim se da je ovo prokleto točno

by Maria 31/12/2016, 09:16

aben wrote:
Maria wrote:Sretno sretno
Di smo stali ?
sritan božić,

evo, izaberi jedun sowellov citat, pa objosni zoč je krivu:)

Hvala i tebi i sritan Božić i cijela 2017. godina pa i dalje :) Neću proučavati sowela preko praznika ali već crnac dsničar mi je antipatično, kao židov čuvar u aušvicu, doduše ono je bilo za život ovo je za slavu .)
Ali pročitat ću nešto prije komentiranja:)
na ono prije ćeš isto dobit odgovor samo sad nemam vremena za polemike, draži su mi kolači:)

by aben 31/12/2016, 09:53

Maria wrote:
aben wrote:
Maria wrote:Sretno sretno
Di smo stali ?
sritan božić,

evo, izaberi jedun sowellov citat, pa objosni zoč je krivu:)
ali već crnac dsničar mi je antipatično, kao židov čuvar u aušvicu, doduše ono je bilo za život ovo je za slavu .)

[size=45]“The problem isn’t that Johnny can’t read. The problem isn’t even that Johnny can’t think. The problem is that Johnny doesn’t know what thinking is; he confuses it with feeling.”[/size]

[size=45]ako ćeš čitati, imoš onalajn njegovu knjigu black rednecks and white liberals, u kojoj demontira crnačku nekulturu i bjelačku pomoć toj nekulturi.[/size]

[size=45] ako ukucaš u google sowell black family, vidit ćeš ča su ljevičari dobrih namjera učinili crncima, ni ropstvo ih ni toliko uništilo. ali, jasno, more se i ostati na crnac-rob-židov-logor razini, zaklopiti oči, rinuti prsti u uši i pivati lalalala
[/size]

by **kic** 31/12/2016, 18:12

dosta dobro..

by Guest 31/12/2016, 23:55

[quote="aben"]

kic wrote:
Sowell više neće pisati, nj epilog: https://www.creators.com/read/thomas-sowell/12/16/farewell

evo se i galt oprosti,

pazi ti sowellove sposobnosti sažimanja:

“The welfare state is not really about the welfare of the masses. It is about the egos of the elites.”

E, o ovome ja cijelo vrijeme tepem...
Pobrkala sam od vaših linkova misao koju želim da nadovežem, a radi se o dokumentarcu zvanom: generacija x. U njemu je početna misao kako se cijeli sistem raspao i to gubitkom vjere u predsjednika. ...

by aben 1/1/2017, 00:17

mativka wrote:
aben wrote:
kic wrote:
Sowell više neće pisati, nj epilog: https://www.creators.com/read/thomas-sowell/12/16/farewell
evo se i galt oprosti,

pazi ti sowellove sposobnosti sažimanja:

“The welfare state is not really about the welfare of the masses. It is about the egos of the elites.”
E, o ovome ja cijelo vrijeme tepem...
Pobrkala sam od vaših linkova misao koju želim da nadovežem, a radi se o dokumentarcu zvanom: generacija x. U njemu je početna misao kako se cijeli sistem raspao i to gubitkom vjere u predsjednika. ...

nis gljedo dokumentarac,
ali mnogi se ne složu sa sowellom oko toga s predsjednikom, uključujući i mene. jedun je napiso i celi članak na tu temu:

by aben 1/1/2017, 00:20

Back in 1962, President John F. Kennedy, a man narrowly elected just two years earlier, came on television to tell the nation that he was taking us to the brink of nuclear war with the Soviet Union, because the Soviets had secretly built bases for nuclear missiles in Cuba, just 90 miles from America.
Most of us did not question what he did. He was President of the United States, and he knew things that the rest of us couldn't know -- and that was good enough for us. Fortunately, the Soviets backed down. But could any President today do anything like that and have the American people behind him?

To his last question, which he asks rhetorically, my answer is "I certainly hope not." If you want to know more about why, see my post yesterday.

by aben 1/1/2017, 00:26

naravski, to su finese, oko bitnih stvori sowell je ko blek stena

1. Knowledge. The cavemen had the same natural resources at their disposal as we have today, and the difference between their standard of living and ours is a difference between the knowledge they could bring to bear on those resources and the knowledge used today.
2. Obamacare. If we cannot afford to pay for doctors, hospitals and pharmaceutical drugs now, how can we afford to pay for doctors, hospitals and pharmaceutical drugs, in addition to a new federal bureaucracy to administer a government-run medical system?
3. Economics vs. Politics I. Economics and politics confront the same fundamental problem: What everyone wants adds up to more than there is. Market economies deal with this problem by confronting individuals with the costs of producing what they want, and letting those individuals make their own trade-offs when presented with prices that convey those costs. That leads to self-rationing, in the light of each individual’s own circumstances and preferences.
4. Economics vs. Politics II. The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.”
Politics deals with the same problem by making promises that cannot be kept, or which can be kept only by creating other problems that cannot be acknowledged when the promises are made.
5. Predicting the Future. Economists are often asked to predict what the economy is going to do. But economic predictions require predicting what politicians are going to do– and nothing is more unpredictable.
6. Politicians as Santa Claus. The big question that seldom— if ever— gets asked in the mainstream media is whether these are a net increase in jobs. Since the only resources that the government has are the resources it takes from the private sector, using those resources to create jobs means reducing the resources available to create jobs in the private sector.
So long as most people do not look beyond superficial appearances, politicians can get away with playing Santa Claus on all sorts of issues, while leaving havoc in their wake— such as growing unemployment, despite all the jobs being “created.”
7. Health Insurance. Whatever position people take on health care reform, there seems to be a bipartisan consensus— usually a sign of mushy thinking— that it is a good idea for the government to force insurance companies to insure people whom politicians want them to insure, and to insure them for things that politicians think should be insured. Contrary to what politicians expect us to do, let’s stop and think.
Why aren’t insurance companies already insuring the people and the conditions that they are now going to be forced to cover? Because that means additional costs— and because the insurance companies don’t think their customers are willing to pay those particular costs for those particular coverages.
It costs politicians nothing to mandate more insurance coverage for more people. But that doesn’t mean that the costs vanish into thin air. It simply means that both buyers and sellers of insurance are forced to pay costs that neither of them wants to pay. But, because political rhetoric leaves out such grubby things as costs, it sounds like a great deal.
8. Diversity. If there is any place in the Guinness Book of World Records for words repeated the most often, over the most years, without one speck of evidence, “diversity” should be a prime candidate. Is diversity our strength? Or anybody’s strength, anywhere in the world? Does Japan’s homogeneous population cause the Japanese to suffer? Have the Balkans been blessed by their heterogeneity — or does the very word “Balkanization” remind us of centuries of strife, bloodshed and unspeakable atrocities, extending into our own times? Has Europe become a safer place after importing vast numbers of people from the Middle East, with cultures hostile to the fundamental values of Western civilization?
“When in Rome do as the Romans do” was once a common saying. Today, after generations in the West have been indoctrinated with the rhetoric of multiculturalism, the borders of Western nations on both sides of the Atlantic have been thrown open to people who think it is their prerogative to come as refugees and tell the Romans what to do — and to assault those who don’t knuckle under to foreign religious standards.
It has not been our diversity, but our ability to overcome the problems inherent in diversity, and to act together as Americans, that has been our strength.
9. Greed. Someone pointed out that blaming economic crises on “greed” is like blaming plane crashes on gravity. Certainly planes wouldn’t crash if it wasn’t for gravity. But when thousands of planes fly millions of miles every day without crashing, explaining why a particular plane crashed because of gravity gets you nowhere. Neither does talking about “greed,” which is constant like gravity.
10. The Anointed Ones. In their haste to be wiser and nobler than others, the anointed have misconceived two basic issues. They seem to assume: 1) that they have more knowledge than the average member of the benighted, and 2) that this is the relevant comparison. The real comparison, however, is not between the knowledge possessed by the average member of the educated elite versus the average member of the general public, but rather the total direct knowledge brought to bear through social processes (the competition of the marketplace, social sorting, etc.), involving millions of people, versus the secondhand knowledge of generalities possessed by a smaller elite group.
The vision of the anointed is one in which ills as poverty, irresponsible sex, and crime derive primarily from ‘society,’ rather than from individual choices and behavior. To believe in personal responsibility would be to destroy the whole special role of the anointed, whose vision casts them in the role of rescuers of people treated unfairly by ‘society.’
11. There’s No Free Red Tape/Obamacare. Do you seriously believe that millions more people can be given medical care and vast new bureaucracies created to administer payment for it, with no additional costs?
Just as there is no free lunch, there is no free red tape. Bureaucrats have to eat, just like everyone else, and they need a place to live and some other amenities. How do you suppose the price of medical care can go down when the costs of new government bureaucracies are added to the costs of the medical treatment itself?
And where are the extra doctors going to come from, to treat the millions of additional patients? Training more people to become doctors is not free. Politicians may ignore costs but ignoring those costs will not make them go away. With bureaucratically controlled medical care, you are going to need more doctors, just to treat a given number of patients, because time that is spent filling out government forms is time that is not spent treating patients. And doctors have the same 24 hours in the day as everybody else.
When you add more patients to more paperwork per patient, you are talking about still more costs. How can that lower medical costs? But although that may be impossible, politics is the art of the impossible. All it takes is rhetoric and a public that does not think beyond the rhetoric they hear.
12. Helping the Poor. It was Thomas Edison who brought us electricity, not the Sierra Club. It was the Wright brothers who got us off the ground, not the Federal Aviation Administration. It was Henry Ford who ended the isolation of millions of Americans by making the automobile affordable, not Ralph Nader.
Those who have helped the poor the most have not been those who have gone around loudly expressing “compassion” for the poor, but those who found ways to make industry more productive and distribution more efficient, so that the poor of today can afford things that the affluent of yesterday could only dream about.
13. Income Mobility. Only by focusing on the income brackets, instead of the actual people moving between those brackets, have the intelligentsia been able to verbally create a “problem” for which a “solution” is necessary. They have created a powerful vision of “classes” with “disparities” and “inequities” in income, caused by “barriers” created by “society.” But the routine rise of millions of people out of the lowest quintile over time makes a mockery of the “barriers” assumed by many, if not most, of the intelligentsia.
14. “Giving Back.” All the high-flown talk about how people who are successful in business should “give back” to the community that created the things that facilitated their success is, again, something that sounds plausible to people who do not stop and think through what is being said. After years of dumbed-down education, that apparently includes a lot of people.
Take Obama’s example of the business that benefits from being able to ship their products on roads that the government built. How does that create a need to “give back”? Did the taxpayers, including business taxpayers, not pay for that road when it was built? Why should they have to pay for it twice?
What about the workers that businesses hire, whose education is usually created in government-financed schools? The government doesn’t have any wealth of its own, except what it takes from taxpayers, whether individuals or businesses. They have already paid for that education. It is not a gift that they have to “give back” by letting politicians take more of their money and freedom.
When businesses hire highly educated people, such as chemists or engineers, competition in the labor market forces them to pay higher salaries for people with longer years of valuable education. That education is not a government gift to the employers. It is paid for while it is being created in schools and universities, and it is paid for in higher salaries when highly educated people are hired.
One of the tricks of professional magicians is to distract the audience’s attention from what they are doing while they are creating an illusion of magic. Pious talk about “giving back” distracts our attention from the cold fact that politicians are taking away more and more of our money and our freedom.
15. Government Assistance. Do people who advocate special government programs for blacks realize that the federal government has had special programs for American Indians, including affirmative action, since the early 19th century — and that American Indians remain one of the few groups worse off than blacks?
16. Statistical Disparities and Discrimination. Many of us have been so brainwashed over the years — by sheer repetition, rather than by either logic or empirical tests — that statistical disparities are automatically taken to mean discrimination, whether between races, sexes or whatever. The plain fact that different individuals and groups make different choices is resolutely ignored, because it does not fit the prevailing preconceptions, or the crusades based on those preconceptions.
Women make different career choices than men, and wisely so, because men do not become mothers, and being a mother is not the same as being a father. And we can’t make them the same by simply calling them both “parents” or saying that “the couple” is pregnant. Discrimination can certainly cause statistical disparities. But statistical disparities do not automatically mean discrimination.
17. Black Lives Matter. We keep hearing that “black lives matter,” but they seem to matter only when that helps politicians to get votes, or when that slogan helps demagogues demonize the police. The other 99% of black lives destroyed by people who are not police do not seem to attract nearly as much attention in the media. What about black success? Does that matter? Apparently not so much.
We have heard a lot about black students failing to meet academic standards. So you might think that it would be front-page news when some whole ghetto schools not only meet, but exceed, the academic standards of schools in more upscale communities. There are in fact whole chains of charter schools where black and Hispanic youngsters score well above the national average on tests.
If black success was considered half as newsworthy as black failures, such facts would be headline news — and people who have the real interests of black and other minority students at heart would be asking, “Wow! How can we get more kids into these charter schools?” But the teachers’ unions are opposed to charter schools — and they give big bucks to politicians, who in turn put obstacles and restrictions on the expansion of charter schools. These include politicians like New York’s “progressive” mayor Bill de Blasio, who poses as a friend of blacks by denigrating the police, standing alongside Al Sharpton.
18. The Legacy of Slavery vs. the Legacy of Liberalism. If we wanted to be serious about evidence, we might compare where blacks stood a hundred years after the end of slavery with where they stood after 30 years of the liberal welfare state. In other words, we could compare hard evidence on “the legacy of slavery” with hard evidence on the legacy of liberals.
Despite the grand myth that black economic progress began or accelerated with the passage of the civil rights laws and “war on poverty” programs of the 1960s, the cold fact is that the poverty rate among blacks fell from 87 percent in 1940 to 47 percent by 1960. This was before any of those programs began.
Over the next 20 years, the poverty rate among blacks fell another 18 percentage points, compared to the 40-point drop in the previous 20 years. This was the continuation of a previous economic trend, at a slower rate of progress, not the economic grand deliverance proclaimed by liberals and self-serving black “leaders.”
Nearly a hundred years of the supposed “legacy of slavery” found most black children [78%] being raised in two-parent families in 1960. But thirty years after the liberal welfare state found the great majority of black children being raised by a single parent [66%]. Public housing projects in the first half of the 20th century were clean, safe places, where people slept outside on hot summer nights, when they were too poor to afford air conditioning. That was before admissions standards for public housing projects were lowered or abandoned, in the euphoria of liberal non-judgmental notions. And it was before the toxic message of victimhood was spread by liberals. We all know what hell holes public housing has become in our times. The same toxic message produced similar social results among lower-income people in England, despite an absence of a “legacy of slavery” there.
If we are to go by evidence of social retrogression, liberals have wreaked more havoc on blacks than the supposed “legacy of slavery” they talk about.

by Guest 1/1/2017, 00:28

Abende, zar doista misliš da sam sposobna biti koncentrirana na engleski? :)

by Guest 1/1/2017, 00:29

E, sretna ti Nova, puno zdravlja, novca, ljubavi, sreće, i da do godine budemo ovako :)

by aben 1/1/2017, 00:29

mativka wrote:Abende, zar doista misliš da sam sposobna biti koncentrirana na engleski? :)

mišu, ti samo triboš reći ka točka te posebno zanimo, i jo ću ti je prevesti:)

by aben 1/1/2017, 00:32

mativka wrote:E, sretna ti Nova, puno zdravlja, novca, ljubavi, sreće, i da do godine budemo ovako :)

sritna i tebi nova, s molin n,
želin ti od srca da izojdeš i materice u provi život, tj. dobiješ otkaz u javnoj službi, i da se snojdeš na tržištu deset puti bolje!

zoč ne tulumariš?

by Guest 1/1/2017, 00:33

Pa ne mogu sada jer nisam koncentrirana niti mogu toliko široko razmišljati, svaka stavka je povezana s puno toga. Baš je dobar taj lik, a za njega mi treba vrijeme, koncentracija, tišina i misao :) Nakon šampanjca, nisam baš dobra u tome :)

by aben 1/1/2017, 00:35

a tako, ipak se truješ. drogo mi je da te sowell zainteresiro. ka ozdraviš, moja ponuda za prevodon stoji!

by Guest 1/1/2017, 00:37

aben wrote:
mativka wrote:E, sretna ti Nova, puno zdravlja, novca, ljubavi, sreće, i da do godine budemo ovako :)
sritna i tebi nova, s molin n,
želin ti od srca da izojdeš i materice u provi život, tj. dobiješ otkaz u javnoj službi, i da se snojdeš na tržištu deset puti bolje!

zoč ne tulumariš?

E moj Abende...da znaš samo moje jade :))) (hvala na ispravci, al jebem ti i ja taj pravopis kad stalno me uče razvoji, ono na kraju spoji, i ostale nebuloze vremena i pojedinaca:)) Zabole me za pravopis :) Sve mi je podrctano samo Nova nije :)

Jesam malo...ali sam bolesna...tj. neki dan me sastavilo dobrano...i sada sam opet popila maxflu i šampanjac imam kraj sebe :) Svi ko penzioneri..al ajd nešto sam upoznala kvalitetnih ljudi :)

Zač ti ne? :)

(a i nedostajao si mi) :)

by Guest 1/1/2017, 00:38

aben wrote:a tako, ipak se truješ. drogo mi je da te sowell zainteresiro. ka ozdraviš, moja ponuda za prevodon stoji!

Je, jako mi je dobar, s svim se slažem..Imala sam osjećaj kao da piše ono što ja mislim...

by Sponsored content