matrix07012 @matrix@gameliberty.club

I got sick at the second worst time possible. I'm not graduating this year gg

@Aldo2
>Definition of implicit bias admitting you can't prove it, just trust us bro

I expected nothing better from Reddit.
The quality of schools is largely selection. A school is good because good students attend it. It's why private schools are so good because they can be very selective who goes there.

Ironically, schools that could select out the problematic black kids would help individual black people more than things like Obama era restrictions on black kids.

The definition of systemic racism is just the equity fallacy, unequal results = racism.

Result we don't like is totally racism, but explicit policy that discriminates against a race of people is actually anti-racism.

>"China and Bumfuckistan aren't right either, but they don't give a fuck that they aren't"
The American empire is right more often than the thirdworld tyrants, partially because it does understand that might isn't right

>Austrian schoolers gonna Austrian school...
yes

@Wiz

@Wiz check their account

UK isn't making it

They're fucking retarded

@LukeAlmighty

@Aldo2
>opportunist first and foremost
Trump, but in the same way I can just dismiss your Salon article.

>It is not self-hate
It often is. Or empathy one should have for children misplaced towards "oppressed" people. There is no pragmatic reason for subsidizing an unproductive group (ever growing if you consider the entire world), while also opposing ways of filtering out the productive ones.

>So because someone is engaging in racially motivated crime, you're blaming White liberals?
I'm not the best at expressing myself, but there's no way you can reasonably interpret my reply like that

>They play one group against the other all the time!
You're saying it like that makes it better

>this is sociology 1-0-1.
I know, you can't say that after claiming DEI is pragmatic.

>in your mind, Trumpian nepotism is better than DEI
From the start I've said it's same or worse depending on the angle.

>You think Trumpian nepotism is "neutral"
It's racially neutral. The criteria is "How many yes'es you can say", not "Are you non white"

>So you're saying a "pro-White" presidency is naturally not meritocratic in any way?
Explicitly pro-white implies racism so yes.

>Also, being "pro-White" is also an ideology, just like being pro-DEI
yes, that's why it's bad.
But being against anti-white racism isn't being pro-white

>The whole argument for being "pro-White" was a "return to meritocracy". Hundreds of articles were written about this.
No? The racial identarians don't want a meritocracy, because it doesn't benefit whites 100%.

>Import turd world ideas, become the turd world, no?
Guarding against thirdworldism isn't importing thirdworld ideas.

Many of the failures of capitalism (like expensive housing) are actually just a consequence of government policy. Or don't event matter (like inequality).

@p this is extremely funny

@Aldo2
>Richard Hanania
Cmon, throw me something

>egalitarianism by WASPs
I know. That's what I said. WASPs have some naive ideals, but sometimes it's self hate and the reason they resonate with the oppressed is because they see it as way to get back at whitey. BLM is that
Lots of migrant crime in Europe is racially motivated.

>not all
They are the same in the eyes of the egalitarian elites.
Obviously, "the oppressed" aren't an united block, but the ones that get lifted up by activists, media etc do have, if not resentment, strong feelings of kinship with their ethic group. And in general are more likely to feel that way than westerners.

>Absolute LOL moment
Diversity as a goal you actively aim for isn't equivalent to diversity as a neutral consequence of policy.

>If there is no difference between the two, why change from DEI?
Because there's a difference between a personal dick sucker and an ideological stooge, even if both weren't hired on merit.
Explain why you can't have a presidency that doesn't support anti white discrimination and also isn't full of president's dick suckers.

>The point is Cofnas is not "right", ergo he doesn't deserve the "might" that comes with it
China or some warlord in some Bumfuckistan aren't right either but they don't give a fuck that they aren't

>There is EVERY reason to blame C(r)apitalism.
You gotta show me some