Lot’s O’ Ivys have problematic names…Columbia? Dartmouth? What do we really know about John Harvard, and his dealings with the Indians?
Scott Adams wants someone to explain systemic racism.
I google it:
— Kennedy Mitchum, 22, said the dictionary definition needed to be expanded to include systemic racism. The dictionary’s editors agreed.- https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/us/merriam-webster-racism-definition.html
Scott also find “white privilege” offensive, and has not met anyone who is white supremacist.
I have run across apparently white people who think white people going to go extinct- which seems racists. But not a white supremacist, exactly. Certainty not in sense of superior though maybe as a memory of the past. But idea of white people going extinct is crazy. There seems to be definition of white that I am unaware of.
As I said, racism is pseudo science. But there is a lot pseudo science and I find irrationality and dumbness as a problem- and I like problems- kind of a learning opportunity.
I see not real point in not to call Chinese, mostly white. They seem quite white. But I get that Chinese are not called white. And the First world and Third World, and quite awhile Chinese were considered part of Third World. And it seems Chinese government continues to want the “privilege” of remaining to be regarded as Third World status.
I would say First World are countries which fully engaged in the “Industrial Revolution” and Industrial Revolution has a system- which largely has to with making available cheaper usable energy- largely electrical power. And China apparently has electrical power widely available and cheap.
Now the racist who worried about going extinct seem to talking about is kind “white homogeneity” or opposite of what called diversity. Some might call different color of skin as diversity
but I see it a variety of cultures and many things. I call pseudo science as a variety of cultures, as are all the different religions. Or having atheism {though it appears to be a dumb religion] is part of having diversity. And would if you have caste system, you in sense trying to reduce effects of diversity {the advantages of diversity- by imposing isolation between classes}. Though one see as part system of specialization- and specialization is another kind of diversity.
It seems if the was white supremacy you should able to point to it.
It seems to me {as Canadian] that White Supremacy and White Privilege, in US, refers to people in the US.
And as something to do the American government.
Americans do seem to their system of government is superior.
Canadians generally don’t think this. But I think this is true- I would say that because I am on average more familiar with it.
But I think their little doubt in the world that US is great. Though a bit mad/crazy- particularly in regard to the energy and time put into elections.
But what is systemic racism is US welfare system. And US educational system. And Abortion.
He says maybe we need two systems.
I have long thought that we do.
Major part of why Mars exploration is important,
because Mars might be viable planet for settlements-
and should get “another system”. I also think Mars is challenging
environment. Which see as plus for “another system”.
But anyway Scott say maybe buy some land somewhere- because
not much money and lots unused land.
But there really isn’t. And it’s unused land “for a reason”.
But there is unused ocean. And it’s free in terms government being
involved with getting a “another system”. Or a nation having “another system”.
Now, I long thought such another system, is roughly speaking equal to “native land” where people could go “native”. But views have changed and called “going primitive”- or Left is stuck on going primitive.
Now going primitive in terms living on the Ocean- it’s a bit a stretch, or one think it as “going modern” but mostly confusing technology with primitive or modern. Or caveman was quite technological- just not involving “electrical technology and etc”]
So living on ocean is similarly challenging as Mars- though seems easier.
Of course the ocean is sort of owned in terms coastal oceans and those living near the beach. So it seems for “non owned land” it should be further from the shore. Or a State “owns” waters near coast, and federal government owns water further from coast. So want federal owned ocean. And it should not be regions which have mineable resources. Or not talking about “mining settlements”. But rather urban living and tourism and stuff {could include gambling- and whole point is could involve anything, hence, idea of two systems}.
Would not federally fund {other than give land/ocean area}. Just as would not fund Mars settlements. And will also require some kind exploration, but far cheaper than Mars exploration.
While they’re at it, rename all those places with “Robert C. Byrd” in their name. Do we really want a radio telescope named after a Klan Kleagle?
Lot’s O’ Ivys have problematic names…Columbia? Dartmouth? What do we really know about John Harvard, and his dealings with the Indians?
Scott Adams wants someone to explain systemic racism.
I google it:
— Kennedy Mitchum, 22, said the dictionary definition needed to be expanded to include systemic racism. The dictionary’s editors agreed.-
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/us/merriam-webster-racism-definition.html
Scott also find “white privilege” offensive, and has not met anyone who is white supremacist.
I have run across apparently white people who think white people going to go extinct- which seems racists. But not a white supremacist, exactly. Certainty not in sense of superior though maybe as a memory of the past. But idea of white people going extinct is crazy. There seems to be definition of white that I am unaware of.
As I said, racism is pseudo science. But there is a lot pseudo science and I find irrationality and dumbness as a problem- and I like problems- kind of a learning opportunity.
I see not real point in not to call Chinese, mostly white. They seem quite white. But I get that Chinese are not called white. And the First world and Third World, and quite awhile Chinese were considered part of Third World. And it seems Chinese government continues to want the “privilege” of remaining to be regarded as Third World status.
I would say First World are countries which fully engaged in the “Industrial Revolution” and Industrial Revolution has a system- which largely has to with making available cheaper usable energy- largely electrical power. And China apparently has electrical power widely available and cheap.
Now the racist who worried about going extinct seem to talking about is kind “white homogeneity” or opposite of what called diversity. Some might call different color of skin as diversity
but I see it a variety of cultures and many things. I call pseudo science as a variety of cultures, as are all the different religions. Or having atheism {though it appears to be a dumb religion] is part of having diversity. And would if you have caste system, you in sense trying to reduce effects of diversity {the advantages of diversity- by imposing isolation between classes}. Though one see as part system of specialization- and specialization is another kind of diversity.
It seems if the was white supremacy you should able to point to it.
It seems to me {as Canadian] that White Supremacy and White Privilege, in US, refers to people in the US.
And as something to do the American government.
Americans do seem to their system of government is superior.
Canadians generally don’t think this. But I think this is true- I would say that because I am on average more familiar with it.
But I think their little doubt in the world that US is great. Though a bit mad/crazy- particularly in regard to the energy and time put into elections.
But what is systemic racism is US welfare system. And US educational system. And Abortion.
Still listening to Adams:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhaDpIdbvt8
He says maybe we need two systems.
I have long thought that we do.
Major part of why Mars exploration is important,
because Mars might be viable planet for settlements-
and should get “another system”. I also think Mars is challenging
environment. Which see as plus for “another system”.
But anyway Scott say maybe buy some land somewhere- because
not much money and lots unused land.
But there really isn’t. And it’s unused land “for a reason”.
But there is unused ocean. And it’s free in terms government being
involved with getting a “another system”. Or a nation having “another system”.
Now, I long thought such another system, is roughly speaking equal to “native land” where people could go “native”. But views have changed and called “going primitive”- or Left is stuck on going primitive.
Now going primitive in terms living on the Ocean- it’s a bit a stretch, or one think it as “going modern” but mostly confusing technology with primitive or modern. Or caveman was quite technological- just not involving “electrical technology and etc”]
So living on ocean is similarly challenging as Mars- though seems easier.
Of course the ocean is sort of owned in terms coastal oceans and those living near the beach. So it seems for “non owned land” it should be further from the shore. Or a State “owns” waters near coast, and federal government owns water further from coast. So want federal owned ocean. And it should not be regions which have mineable resources. Or not talking about “mining settlements”. But rather urban living and tourism and stuff {could include gambling- and whole point is could involve anything, hence, idea of two systems}.
Would not federally fund {other than give land/ocean area}. Just as would not fund Mars settlements. And will also require some kind exploration, but far cheaper than Mars exploration.
While they’re at it, rename all those places with “Robert C. Byrd” in their name. Do we really want a radio telescope named after a Klan Kleagle?