Oh man. I accidentally changed the page while writing a comment down. I'm such a dumbass.
Basically, what I wrote is that there comes a problem with arguing with them. Those variables are always dynamic to them and fit whatever argument they want. There are no standards, and that's what frustrates me the most. What I'd call a chair, they would put a cup of tea and call it a table, and without a mutual agreement on what variables constitute a chair and not a table, there will always be disagreement.
They don't seem to want to have an honest discussion. More like they'd rather play a game with rules they want to set. You rolled a five? Well, it's a Tuesday, so it's really only a two.
It's why I rather say hey, remember when you guys said this? I find it's personally less aggravating than actually sitting down and trying to figure out which "definition" of racism they want to use today, whether systemic, internalized, or whatever suits them best.
Oh there's absolutely no point in trying to figure out which bullshit definition of "racism" is being used or what the implications are.
That's the whole point. You have to reject the entire thing outright, at the root. Not because the construct is illogical or irrational, it isn't. But because the construct is useless bullshit with no practical or functional purpose outside the personal increase of wealth and power for those insidious bullshit-smiths who crafted the thing in the halls of academia.
I think I see what you’re saying. There is a purpose, something illogical stuff wouldn’t necessarily have. Yeah, if only they could see they’re being used.
Oh man. I accidentally changed the page while writing a comment down. I'm such a dumbass.
Basically, what I wrote is that there comes a problem with arguing with them. Those variables are always dynamic to them and fit whatever argument they want. There are no standards, and that's what frustrates me the most. What I'd call a chair, they would put a cup of tea and call it a table, and without a mutual agreement on what variables constitute a chair and not a table, there will always be disagreement.
They don't seem to want to have an honest discussion. More like they'd rather play a game with rules they want to set. You rolled a five? Well, it's a Tuesday, so it's really only a two.
It's why I rather say hey, remember when you guys said this? I find it's personally less aggravating than actually sitting down and trying to figure out which "definition" of racism they want to use today, whether systemic, internalized, or whatever suits them best.
Oh there's absolutely no point in trying to figure out which bullshit definition of "racism" is being used or what the implications are.
That's the whole point. You have to reject the entire thing outright, at the root. Not because the construct is illogical or irrational, it isn't. But because the construct is useless bullshit with no practical or functional purpose outside the personal increase of wealth and power for those insidious bullshit-smiths who crafted the thing in the halls of academia.
I think I see what you’re saying. There is a purpose, something illogical stuff wouldn’t necessarily have. Yeah, if only they could see they’re being used.