A liberal's perspective on the smugness of liberalism:
http://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/11451378/smug-american-liberalism
There is a smug style in American liberalism. It has been growing these past decades. It is a way of conducting politics, predicated on the belief that American life is not divided by moral difference or policy divergence — not really — but by the failure of half the country to know what's good for them.
In 2016, the smug style has found expression in media and in policy, in the attitudes of liberals both visible and private, providing a foundational set of assumptions above which a great number of liberals comport their understanding of the world.
It has led an American ideology hitherto responsible for a great share of the good accomplished over the past century of our political life to a posture of reaction and disrespect: a condescending, defensive sneer toward any person or movement outside of its consensus, dressed up as a monopoly on reason.
The smug style is a psychological reaction to a profound shift in American political demography.
Beginning in the middle of the 20th century, the working class, once the core of the coalition, began abandoning the Democratic Party. In 1948, in the immediate wake of the Franklin Roosevelt, 66 percent of manual laborers voted for Democrats, along with 60 percent of farmers. In 1964, it was 55 percent of working-class voters. By 1980, it was 35 percent.
Continued . . .
The white working class in particular saw even sharper declines. Despite historic advantages with both poor and middle-class white voters, by 2012 Democrats possessed only a 2-point advantage among poor white voters. Among white voters making between $30,000 and $75,000 per year, the GOP has taken a 17-point lead.
"Finding comfort in the notion that their former allies were disdainful, hapless rubes, smug liberals created a culture animated by that contempt"
The consequence was a shift in liberalism's center of intellectual gravity. A movement once fleshed out in union halls and little magazines shifted into universities and major press, from the center of the country to its cities and elite enclaves. Minority voters remained, but bereft of the material and social capital required to dominate elite decision-making, they were largely excluded from an agenda driven by the new Democratic core: the educated, the coastal, and the professional [OP's note: Their conservative counterparts are referred to as the 1%].
It is not that these forces captured the party so much as it fell to them. When the laborer left, they remained.
The origins of this shift are overdetermined. Richard Nixon bears a large part of the blame, but so does Bill Clinton. The evangelical revival, yes, but the destruction of labor unions, too. I have my own sympathies, but I do not propose to adjudicate that question here.
Suffice it to say, by the 1990s the better part of the working class wanted nothing to do with the word liberal. What remained of the American progressive elite was left to puzzle: What happened to our coalition?
Continued . . .
Why did they abandon us?
What's the matter with Kansas?
The smug style arose to answer these questions. It provided an answer so simple and so emotionally satisfying that its success was perhaps inevitable: the theory that conservatism, and particularly the kind embraced by those out there in the country, was not a political ideology at all.
The trouble is that stupid hicks don't know what's good for them. They're getting conned by right-wingers and tent revivalists until they believe all the lies that've made them so wrong. They don't know any better. That's why they're voting against their own self-interest.
As anybody who has gone through a particularly nasty breakup knows, disdain cultivated in the aftermath of a divide quickly exceeds the original grievance. You lose somebody. You blame them. Soon, the blame is reason enough to keep them at a distance, the excuse to drive them even further away.
Finding comfort in the notion that their former allies were disdainful, hapless rubes, smug liberals created a culture animated by that contempt. The rubes noticed and replied in kind. The result is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Financial incentive compounded this tendency — there is money, after all, in reassuring the bitter. Over 20 years, an industry arose to cater to the smug style. It began in humor, and culminated for a time in The Daily Show, a program that more than any other thing advanced the idea that liberal orthodoxy was a kind of educated savvy and that its opponents were, before anything else, stupid. The smug liberal found relief in ridiculing them.
The internet only made it worse. Today, a liberal who finds himself troubled by the currents of contemporary political life need look no further than his Facebook newsfeed to find the explanation:
Study finds Daily Show viewers more informed than viewers of Fox News.
They're beating CNN watchers too.
NPR listeners are best informed of all. He likes that.
You're better off watching nothing than watching Fox. He likes that even more.
The good news doesn't stop.
Liberals aren't just better informed. They're smarter.
They've got better grammar. They know more words.
Smart kids grow up to be liberals, while conservatives reason like drunks.
Liberals are better able to process new information; they're less biased like that. They've got different brains. Better ones. Why? Evolution. They've got better brains, top-notch amygdalae, science finds.
The smug style created a feedback loop. If the trouble with conservatives was ignorance, then the liberal impulse was to correct it. When such corrections failed, disdain followed after it.
Of course, there is a smug style in every political movement: elitism among every ideology believing itself in possession of the solutions to society's ills. But few movements have let the smug tendency so corrupt them, or make so tenuous its case against its enemies.
"Conservatives are always at a bit of a disadvantage in the theater of mass democracy," the conservative editorialist Kevin Williamson wrote in National Review last October, "because people en masse aren't very bright or sophisticated, and they're vulnerable to cheap, hysterical emotional appeals."
The smug style thinks Williamson is wrong, of course, but not in principle. It's only that he's confused about who the hordes of stupid, hysterical people are voting for. The smug style reads Williamson and says, "No! You!"
nice dissertation, you've just earned a PhD from the university of /pol/, congratulations
I resonate a lot with this, its one of the reasons I started browsing /pol/ and identified less with people that claimed to be "leftists"
>>71689185
What this really suggests is that it's more than just the RNC that is warming to Trump this past week ...
>>71689687
What kind of trophy do I get?
This kind of stuff doesn't really interest /pol/ like a good stormtard or risk thread.
10/10 would read again.
Lefties are definitely full of themselves
This is why I can't wait for Trump to win so I can watch them all go
"Woah, what happened? I don't know a single person dumb enough to vote Republican!"
>>71689993
a (You) for you
A lot of truth in this. Same thing in Britain has happened with the Labour party too. The working class has been drifting further and further away from social-democracy (what Americans call liberalism) over the last few decades.
I put it down to the left abandoning its class focus. Now the left cares about feminism, minorities, environmentalism. It's forgotten its purpose, which is to represent the workers of that country and empower them economically. The modern left is a bunch of cosmopolitan hand-wringers who sneer at the working class.
>>71689993
Have a rare pepe
>>71689521
That is partially accurate, although it's sorta a chicken and egg to blame liberals for it.
But it's hard not to be smug.
Being a conservative has turned into claiming that anthropogenic climate change and evolution don't exist. That trickle-down economics is a thing. That laws should tell us who to fuck and what women do with our bodies, and should never cost any money to enforce because taxes are evil, so keep your government hands off my social security.
It's hard not to be smug. The vast majority of conservatives ARE hapless rubes, being screwed by people like the Koch brothers who convince them that voting against their self-interest is ok because it lets them be part of the "real American!!!1!" club.
They're dupes. They disdain fact and science and cling to religion and "traditional" values that were mostly made up in the eighties.
How can we not be smug, towards conservatives? They aren't just naive. They work really hard to intentionally believe things that are wrong and stupid.
>>71689185
This was great.
I have been thinking this for a while.
BBC radio aired an interview with a German woman who was volunteering to help "refugees" (coincidentally this woman was middle aged and had never married) and at the conclusion of her analysis of the public reaction to the crisis she had this tone of an outraged schoolmarm who has caught the bad boy chewing gum in class: "They say 'I'm not racist, but ...' and as long as they say that, well, I think you see we have a problem!"
All they have to fall back on is their own baseless assumption of unearned categoric superiority.
>>71691811
As with normal atheist and socialist arguments, you do not know what you are talking about.
>>71691811
Trickle-down isn't a right-left thing it's a rich-poor thing
The rich on both sides of the aisle love it.
>>71691811
Call me when leftists figure out economics and stop claiming a man can become a woman, ok?
>>71691895
Really took my legs out from under me with that one, anon.
Look around /pol/: it's true. Being conservative has turned into convincing yourself of things that are false. How many times a day do posts about climate change being fake? Conservatives actively train themselves to believe things that are lies that are being fed to them by big industries, who need their votes to make them poorer..
>>71691816
This is the most un-self aware post made by a person on a white nationalism forum.
I have never in my life seen a liberal change their mind on a policy position they hold. Look to Sweden for the future. They will still be smug pieces of shit right up until they get their asses stabbed to death by their new diverse neighbors. And then their family members will blame their death on white privilege
>>71692100
>Projecting THIS MUCH
>The trouble is that stupid hicks don't know what's good for them.
Is this what leftists actually believe?
>>71692343
So I am assuming you don't watch the news? Both Obama and hillary apposed gay marriage prior to their "evolution". Now they support it. Is that not a violation of your generalization?
>>71691811
>Being a conservative has turned into claiming that anthropogenic climate change and evolution don't exist.
When one liberal argument (anthropogenic climate alarmism in this case) is a little weak, they will always conflate it with something else (in this case, evolution).
Gotta bolster that strawman with your big broad brush.
>>71692100
I don't believe any of those things so I don't understand where your legs went. Are you operating in some universe where John Derbyshire was never born?
>>71692313
Not really.
I don't want an all-policing state to guarantee rights thoughts. I might be wrong but mine is the system in which you are allowed to be wrong.
>>71692644
Yes. They view themselves as the enlightened ones who should rule ignorant masses
>>71692644
This is literally the career of Jew Thomas Frank.
>>71692644
Speaking as a liberal?
Nope. It's what we are certain of. Look at the fucking clown car of candidates "conservatives" ran for their nominees in the election. And now they've got a b-list, reality-tv star as their front-runner. It should be horribly embarrassing, for conservatives. And the fact that it's not?
Yes, anon: we genuinely think you're a buncha dumb hicks who wouldn't know your ass from a hole in the ground.
>>71692644
Ever hear a liberal ask "why do republicans vote against their own interests?"
>>71691811
Kek. Talk about a self fulfilling prophecy if there was ever one.
>>71692882
But Hillary is a good candidate and Bernie is sincere about socialism.
>>71692808
I was referring to your
>All they have to fall back on is their own baseless assumption of unearned categoric superiority.
Comment
>>71692882
How many of these hicks actually chose the current GOP candidates.
>>71692100
>How many times a day do posts about climate change being fake?
Even liberal plebes need a dooms day cult that they can be 100% certain of. No different than a born again, really.
>>71692644
Thomas Sowell wrote that they are "The Annointed Ones."
They have this feminine aspect that believe they're always right(which means you're always wrong.) and know what's better for you better than you do.
>>71689185
>turn once safe cities into shitholes
>massive white flight
>we da smart onez
liberals are funny
>>71693100
Enough to get Trump into the front-runner's position, with Cruz behind him.
Look at this shit: >>71693109
They have trained themselves to treat science as if it were voodoo. Anons like that actually work hard to make themselves dumb enough to believe the things that they say. It doesn't just happen on accident. They put effort into making themselves stupider.
>>71689841
you got it backwards dude, you don't use resonate like that, if you agree with something you say it resonates with you, not the otherway around.
just helping my /pol/ famdango not look so fucking retarded when you write
>>71692882
>Speaking as a liberal?
>Nope. It's what we are certain of.
Way to enforce the premise in the OP. Your opinions are all 100% correct and you have the echo chamber to prove it.
>>71693051
My beliefs come from reality and theirs comes from a digest article about an article about an article about a lecture about a paper. Not the same. This is also why there are no people who are "mugged by reality" and turn liberal.
>>71693403
>Your opinions are all 100% correct and you have the echo chamber to prove it.
Right? I come to /pol/ 'cuz it's my comfy, liberal hugbox of an echo chamber. I'm terrified that someone might disagree with me, so I come here, to my safe space.
>>71689185
Liberal doesn't mean what you use it as. It's hijacked by the left in the US but is a right wing in the EU.
>>71693351
>They have trained themselves to treat science as if it were voodoo.
You have moved "science" into the realm of religious belief.
>>71691811
This is so regurgitated, I hope you die soon because you bring literally no useful perspective to this or any other community
>>71693492
your post has been downvoted and hidden
if you keep posting in this fashion you will be shadowbanned/banned
>>71693352
This guy is neutral and correct.
"It resonates with me."
I have been noticing lately that the whole transitive-intransitive thing has been abandoned, even by journalists.
>>71693207
Do you think use of the descriptor " feminine" strengthened or weakened your argument?
>>71693492
>Right? I come to /pol/ 'cuz it's my comfy, liberal hugbox
Did I aver that in any way? You keep setting up these strawmen.
a guy i know who has no job, money, car, or education has said out loud that he was "white male privilege"...... pretty sad honestly
>>71693540
You understand statements like that are the reason it's impossible not to be smug, right?
I mean, it's just impossible not to feel smug and superior.
>>71693540
Cletus, my son. Do not reason with bitches and whores. Especially every cunt on the Internet that thinks their opinion is worth a damn.
Your lucky numbers are 23, 10, 15
>>71693656
>I mean, it's just impossible not to feel smug and superior.
You sound like a born again christian condemning the unfaithful.
No self-awareness at all.
>>71693636
I never got the whole white male priviledge thing
especially since liberals think everyone should be judged independently then make broad statements like that
>>71689185
>liberals
>responsible for anything good
nah senpai
>>71689185
even if true, so what? It is not as if the other side isn't as fucking smug. Look at /pol/. If everyone has that trait it becomes meaningless
>>71693590
What's your angle?
>>71693351
You didn't answer my question and it's because you know none of those "dumb hicks" actually had enough influence to line up the current GOP candidates.
There's "the dumb hicks" and then there is the GOP.
>>71693847
Anthropogenic climate change is happening. That is flatly, settled, proved, scientific fact.
You equate believe in it with religion.
Then you wonder why liberals treat conservatives like a buncha inbred retards.
>>71692100
>convincing yourself of things that are false
You mean like the left does with race?
>>71693985
>There's "the dumb hicks" and then there is the GOP.
No, I think you're right, anon: conservatives are, in fact, hapless rubes who are easily manipulated. Because guess who they're gonna vote for?
>>71692027
>imblying Obama didn't raise taxes on just rich people
Leftists are incredibly self righteous and condescending
I think it's because they fancy themselves as exemplars of society in that they want to correct human nature so no one can hate.
>>71694016
>Anthropogenic climate change is happening. That is flatly, settled, proved, scientific fact.
You are easily duped. The religious parallels are striking. To me you are an unreasoning, unquestioning cultist.
it should at least be rephrased "educated high earning white male privilege"
the guy i know is pretty fucked
>>71694080
>Look at these statistics on behavior and performance
>Now let me tell you what conclusions about biology you should draw from them!
You don't even know you're making my case for me, do you?
>>71693862
see >>71694213
messed that up
and of course its a stupid concept over all
>>71694084
>Because guess who they're gonna vote for?
Hillary?
>>71689185
This article is on point and articulates the nature of American politics really well.
Politics in the US is performative on both sides but especially on the left. What leftists fear most isn't an unequal society but that they themselves might be perceived as non-bourgeois
>>71692710
tfw our weakest argument is backed by 97% of scientists
>>71694084
You're begging the question in such an acerbic way - your words flail about like a toddler having a tantrum as a means to get mommy to buy you an ice cream cone.
0/10
>>71694300
The 97% consensus has been repeatedly debunked.
>>71694237
>Implying I mentioned behavior and performance at all
>Implying there isn't evidence for the reality of race that goes beyond behavior and performance.
Jesus, you people are insufferable.
>>71689993
A friend request, a new follower, retweet, reblog, and the coveted reddit gold.
Upboat.
>>71689687
First post best post
>>71692882
>Clown car of candidates
Right, a 100% authentic communist and autistic felon are much better choices.
>>71694259
>rich people have priviledge
that is a bit more true but even then its not really a priviledge its what people have earned
>>71693482
Are you even responding to me?
And why so you keep making sweeping statements?
I would point to the omish and children who attend university as general examples of people who embrace liberal ideals after being "mugged by reality". In addition, as a specific example I place forward senator elizabeth Warren; she will most likely be running in the next 8 years; her change from republican to Democrat is entirely driven by realization that the Republicans support Wallstreet priorities over those of every other sector of the economy.
>>71694496
>implying there isn't evidence for climate change
It works both ways senpai
>>71689185
not to defend liberals but I am pretty sure this is a symptom of whoever the US president is
when Bush was in power liberals were pretending to be some oppressed worker class and conservatives thought they were hot shit policing the world, now liberals are smug about winning progressive victories and conservatives are pretending its illegal to be christian
its just that americans dont seem to realize their culture swings back and fourth like a hypnotists watch based on whichever party is in power
>>71694389
even if it isn't 97% exactly i'm still trusting NASA over you
>>71694792
>Conservatives don't intentionally teach themselves to believe things that are false!
>Hilary Clinton is a felon! Fox news says so! Courts? What do those have to do with whether someone is a felon?
>>71693636
I don't think you know what they mean when they say white privilege.
I'll explain If you would like.>>71693862
>>71691811
Trickle down economics is literally not a thing. like its not even a real theory nor has it ever been proposed as one. It's a straw man.
>>71694865
I haven't taken a stance against climate change, senpai.
>>71692882
Look at your front runner
The Criminal in Chief
>>71694892
>when Bush was in power liberals were pretending to be some oppressed worker class and conservatives
Nope. We were smug as shit about how retarded conservatives are then, too. Holy shit, was Bush's presidency fun for liberal media. They sold trading cards of quotes from that dipshit, that were for no other purpose than laughing at the stupid things that he and other conservatives believe.
>>71694832
>And why so you keep making sweeping statements?
Because he is an absolutist. Like any religious nut.
>>71693948
My angle is that you make yourself look a fool. You criticize liberals for being condescending towards conservatives, while simultaneously condescending towards a majority of the population.
>>71694996
pls explain
so interested in the new perspective and insight you will bring to my life
>>71694940
You do realize she's being investigated by the FBI, right? Innocent people don't have huge investigations lobbed against them.
>>71695179
No, please teach me more about the American judicial system. I've really started to take an interest, lately.
>>71691811
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODZ-RUufHgI
Educate yourself you fucking retard.
>>71695322
I'm not giving you youtube videos any upboats, anon. You may type things that you have to say, or not.
>>71695119
Oh please, women can be condescended from time to time.
Men get it all the time. The "stupid impulsive neanderthal man" meme is huge in media.
And women are largely (and I'm talking about a bell curve here, so don't you go pointing at the 3rd standard deviation and tell me they're all like that) less likely to critically self-analyze and admit they are wrong.
If you can't see that you probably just haven't spent time around a lot of women.
>>71694923
>i'm still trusting NASA over you
Follow the money then. Not that NASA hasn't been completely commandeered from its original purpose and is now dependent on big climate bux and toeing the clime syndicate propagandic line.
>>71691811
>That trickle-down economics is a thing.
Actually, no. That was a buzzword invented by liberals. No Conservative ever used that term. I'm going to pretend that that wasn't satire so that I can be angry at you.
You're literally doing the thing the paper talked about. You're unprepared to discuss the larger issues facing society, so you retreat behind shallow banner phrases and single issues that don't matter. Trickle Down economics--you mean like Obama bailing out billionaires? You mean like soaking the living shit out of factory farms to keep the cornpickers in line? You mean like the F-35 project that literally everyone supported?
What about Detroit? What black sorcery did we use to impoverish Chicago? When you fucked up Kansas City's educational program, and then spent five billion dollars failing to fix it, was that because Conservatives used lasers from their eyes to lobotomize black students?
When Obama blew the living shit out of Libya--who cooperated with international inspectors, mind you--without congressional support, what was that? Was that the evil Conservatives? When he funded rebel groups in Syria with the express purpose of destabilizing the country, how does that come back to Conservatives?
At least with Iraq we had a formal reason to go to war. The war was stupid, but it was legal. You have a lot of nerve acting smug, unless this is satire. More people die in this country every year in your shithole ghettoes than die in all of our foreign wars combined.
Evolution, Leftism is the Creation Science of economics, and you dare to lecture us on some hicks wanting to teach their kids the earth is 6000 years old? People DIE because of your willful ignorance, cities are DESTROYED by your religious zealots, ours just get rekt on youtube.
>>71691811
I will concede the point that far too much right-wing cuckservatice rhetoric has been around ridiculous wedge issues that are entirely false like climate change, evolution, ect. but there are plenty of POLITICAL issues that conservatives CAN be correct about when it actually matters. Being a smug liberal hand waves the entire conservative movement away because of the beliefs of the lowest common denominator.
Guess what? That same tide is now biting the left in the ass because the loudest BLM SJWs and feminazi Muslim apologists are the liberals tea-party and they are getting to be made more and more ridiculous by the second yet the left will immediate disavow them as not representative of the left in general.
Yeah, there is blame to share on both sides but articulate and intelligent conservatives have long since been ridiculed right out of the debate by the left with complete contempt for actual facts. Any time a conservative has actually thrown a salient point backed by unbiased evidence to the smirking John Stuarts of the world, they simple zoom out to the "bigger picture" and ask why said point is being brought up when children are starving in Africa or some shit that happened 200 years ago with slaves.
>>71695179
>what is innocent until proven guilty
>>71689185
Fucking TL;DR
Faggot.
Very good article.
"We fight for the poor, but they are dumb and stupid and vote against themselves, so fuck them"
I hate progressives, classic liberals are the shit and always will be
>>71695529
>tfw no african qt of my own
>>71695525
>NASA scientists originally estimate that Venus is super hot because greenhouse gases
>continue same logic with Earth
It's clearly a conspiracy.
>>71695389
basically liberals are dumb dumbs who don't know how the world works
he also uses evidence
>>71695529
>You're literally doing the thing the paper talked about.
I'm perfectly-well aware of that. I've explicitly stated it, in like six or seven different posts. It's hard not to be feel smug in the face of the batshit-crazy, dip-shit dumb that is the American conservative.
>Evolution, Leftism is the Creation Science of economics, and you dare to lecture us on some hicks wanting to teach their kids the earth is 6000 years old?
See stuff like that?
Yeah. That's why we'll stay smug. But I liked how you tried to pin "wars for no reason in the middle east" on liberals. That isn't historically myopic at all.
>>71695529
Leave troll
>>71695813
>It's clearly a conspiracy.
It doesn't need to be a conspiracy, retard, its just stuck in its own feedback loop.
>>71693590
shill shill shill
>>71692653
politicians don't believe ANYTHING
they just hold the positions they think will get them enough votes from the right people
>>71695843
I SWEAR TO GOD I WILL FUCKING DO IT IF REDDIT DOESN'T LEAVE.
>>71695967
>they just hold the positions they think will get them enough votes from the right people
Or whatever will line their pockets.
>>71695529
"What black sorcery did we use to impoverish Chicago?"
I'll have housing segregation for 500, Alex.
>>71695843
>See stuff like that?
The complete BTFO? Yes, I did see that, and I just saw you brush it aside smugly without addressing it, exactly as described.
>But I liked how you tried to pin "wars for no reason in the middle east" on liberals. That isn't historically myopic at all.
No, it really isn't, which you would know if you were old enough to browse this site. In the 1990s, the entirety of Congress--Republican and Democrat--with the exception of 11 Senators, signed a resolution declaring regime change in Iraq to be official US foreign policy. They did this because Saddam Hussein was challenging the petrodollar, and had refused to cooperate with UN officials.
When the Iraq War was launched, it was with bipartisan support. Why? Because it had already been agreed upon as US Foreign Policy by both sides. Do you know who signed that Resolution? Bernie Sanders.
Sanders wasn't anti-war until a Republican was in charge, but more importantly, that war was legal, and served a definitely purpose. Saddam Hussein refused to cooperate with UN Inspectors and challenged US No-Fly Zones. Believe it or not, Iraq, however much of a mistake, was a BIPARTISAN mistake, and it was legal.
Syria and Libya on the other hand were both illegal and pointless. If you would like to explain how I am wrong, you are free to do so at any length you so choose.
>>71694923
>NASA "science"
>The Reproducibility Project: Psychology was a collaboration completed by 270 contributing authors to repeat 100 published experimental and correlational psychological studies to see if they could get the same results a second time. It showed that only 39 percent of replications obtained statistically significant results. While the authors emphasize that the findings reflect the reality of doing science and there is room to improve reproducibility in psychology, they have been interpreted as part of a growing problem of "failed" reproducibility in science. There was no evidence of fraud and no evidence that any original study was definitely false. The conclusion of the collaboration was that evidence for frequently published findings in psychological science was not as strong as originally claimed. This may be a result of pressure to publish and a hypercompetitive culture across the sciences that favor novel findings and provide little incentive for replicating findings.
>they have been interpreted as part of a growing problem of "failed" reproducibility in science.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducibility_Project#cite_note-4
http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
Fuck your blind faith in so called "science".
>>71695119
It isnt condescending. I stated that it was a feminine quality.
Does stating something turn everyone in a flabbergasted kid on hyperdrive nao?
>>71696054
Right, exactly. Some people vote with money.
>>71693351
Liberals do it with evolution, tell a liberal that iq is genetically inherited and they will agree with you. Tell them that this means there would be significant differences for different races and you get called a racist.
>>71693513
It's quite interesting that to be called a true liberal these days you have to be prostrating your ass in front of Muslims hordes, not just passively accepting white genocide, but actively pushing for the destruction your own race.
>>71696181
>experimental and correlational psychological studies
Similar meta-analyses have been done in 'hard' sciences, most of STEM appears to be safe from the non-reproducibility issue.
>>71695921
I'm sorry that I understood your "clime syndicate propaganda" to be part of a conspiracy, I clearly misunderestimated you.
>>71691811
Displaying your smugness and profound lack of knowledge in one post. Wew.
>>71696219
>I stated that it was a feminine quality.
That's not trans-fluid enough, buddy.
>>71693492
[upboated]
>>71696265
At best you get "muh outliers" but more than likely you get them accusing the studies as being skewed or biased because it doesn't fit the leftist narrative. Basically "why would you even TEST IQ across races you racist shitlord."
>>71692100
> how many times a day do you post about climate change being fake.
But, it is though.
>>71696181
No one ever was arguing that Psychology was a real science my dude
>>71689521
against their own self interest
i fucking love this patronizing lib meme
>>71696398
I prefer my trans fluid to be 90W
>implying /pol/ isn't smuggest of them all
>>71696358
Propaganda does not have to originate from conspiracy, retard. I thought liberals were supposed to be 'nuanced' thinkers.
>>71696532
yep
the very most smugliest
>>71689185
Derek, I know you are the OO.
No: it is only that the wrong beliefs are unchallenged — that their believers are trapped in "information bubbles" and confirmation bias. That no one knows the truth, except the New York Times (or Vox). If only we could tell them, question them, show them this graph. If they don't get it then, well, then they're hopeless.
>>71689185
closed epistemology is a sickness that can affect anyone, not just a specific ideology
>>71696319
>appears
Yeah, you believe that if you want to. Just because no one wants to check the boat for leaks doesn't mean the boat's leak free.
>>71696477
>Psychology
http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
Posting the link again, because you're apparently too lazy to actually read through both links I posted.
http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
On reproducibility:
>One earlier study found that around $28 billion worth of research per year in medical fields is non-reproducible.
>>71690620
Some of us come here for the "high level of discourse". Others simply want to make fun of the cuckold faggots. /pol/ is a beautiful place where these two dichotomies can coexist.
>>71696494
They can't comprehend that someone's "interest" is "I don't want to flood the country with immigrants and become demographically irrelevant in my own country because it's 2016"
>>71692882
>One term senator who was a 'community organizer'
And let's not forget what your enlightened friends up north voted into office. A former camp counselor and bouncer.
>>71693351
t. vaccines autism, t. GMOs are evil, t. nuclear energy is evil.
Hostility to climate change is more to do with the death-cult rhetoric of it which promotes the almost Gaiaism like notion of a vengeful mother earth and utterly misanthropic suicide fantasy. We are not told the more sober, unsexy and subdued reality that "Climate change is real and it will make life more miserable for the already miserable third world. The impact on the United States will be more diffuse, increasing freak weather events like superstorm sandy but not having an impact the average person can easily recognize in their day to day lives: I.e. knowing that the freak storm that made them lose power for 2 weeks was due to global warming and not just weather."
Instead we're treated to the most histrionic apocalyptic narrative of new york being flooded or turned to glacial ice, that using or producing fossil fuels is akin to spitting and pissing on the Eucharist and pricking it to make Christ bleed, that we need to pay alms and bow and prostrate before the enlightened green-clergy and scourge ourselves in shame for what we've done.
Climate Change has adopted the trappings of a millenialism religion complete with an impending apocalypse. If you take your head out of your ass you can understand why people are turned off of a message that sounds like a sandwhich board wearing hippy screaming about the end of the world on december 31st 1999.
If climate change wasn't utilized as a cudgel to force extreme environmentalist agendas then it would be less poisonous and partisan.
>>71696622
>you come to /pol/ to feel smug about how dumb liberals feel smug about themselves
>>71696770
>no one wants to check the boat for leaks
Oh scientists are champing at the bit to do these studies, and my point was that they have been done in other fields without nearly as many issues. I've been subscribed to Science Magazine for years and have been following this specific issue.
>>71696797
Yeah, this thread took off unexpectedly. Probably has a little to do with all the libtards rushing in here to prove the OP's premise.
>>71696876
Counter-signal memes for fashy goys has to be the ultimate manifestation of this
>>71696805
Diversity is strength. How can you not get that?
>>71696091
Housing segregation did not destroy Chicago, a combination of three factors did:
-A Welfare State that encouraged the breakup of families and provided enough low-level income to the poor to fuel a constant low flame of drugs, alcoholism and crime.
-The War on Drugs, a bipartisan mistake originally championed by black community leaders, and maintained to this day by both lobbies. On this issue the liberal may rightly claim to have made some minor headway, but it is nothing compared to the final blow:
-The collapse of business in the city due to high property and business taxes.
This is the same disease that killed Detroit and Los Angeles, but you'll notice that while it economically destroys white cities as well, the effect is not as extreme. Poor white areas tend to be rural, in Appalachia, where industry has completely dissolved, and people are essentially sustained indefinitely by welfare--BUT who are Conservative, and so not exposed to the lattermost poison, artificially high standards of living that cause low-income people to coalesce into ghettos. That pressure is uniquely Democrat.
I live in Bay Area California. I can tell you without any reservation whatsoever that the crisis of San Francisco is exactly following this pattern. Housing prices rise to the point of absurdity, new development is functionally illegal, low-income individuals are forced into Oakland, the economy hemorrhages wealth as the welfare state grows out of control. Then, one day, it snaps, the manpower to sustain the tax burden is simply no longer there, businesses cannot develop in the stifled environment, and the whole rotten complex collapses in a blasted fury of poverty and decay.
That is the world YOU have built, but you and the other smug late-drinking Liberals will never have to suffer the consequences of your arrogance.
There is a strong anti-christian sentiment among liberals. It lingers over everything they do. You can only really see the big picture when they apologize for muslims. Preaching of tolerance, when they actively rail against the collective morality of christian civilzation.
Gender issues are top priority in their christian host countries, but that's where it stops. For every other culture, there has to be respect and tolerance for their beliefs.
I'm a atheist, and spend the better part of my teens and early 20s surrounded by atheist liberals. They literally can't shut the fuck up about christian conservatives.
Christian conservatives I've known always focus on specific policies, social issues, etc. Not "muh current year" or "they're just stupid." The superiority complex the left has makes me sick
I often wonder, if we were to all submit and turn liberal, how low would we go before people woke up. Would dismantling one or two amendments do it? States rights being completely dissolved?
My favorite part about Trump is how hard he tries to focus on things that affect every citizen. Trade deals, the economy, jobs, controlling the border. Focusing on abortion and pushing christian morality argument is not working. GOP haven't gotten shit done, they let obama and dems walk all over them.
>>71696573
okay, so what's this "clime syndicate" that would produce this propaganda?
>>71696881
>Oh scientists are champing at the bit to do these studies
>I've been subscribed to Science Magazine for years
Honestly, I think you're probably just pretending to be retarded right now. You just keep chugging on that Kool-Aid though if not.
>>71696876
>>you come to /pol/ to feel smug about how dumb liberals feel smug about themselves
The article was written by a liberal.
>>71696979
It happens all the time here. The article was good and largely true. But there is no point to argue against as most of us would agree with it.
/pol/ responds to arguments mostly. The only thing to respond to the article would be "I agree" or personal anecdotes or talking points that have gone over a million times.
>>71691811
>conservatives are dumb meme
Just a reminder that the tea party has higher scientific comprehension than the general populace.
http://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2013/10/15/some-data-on-education-religiosity-ideology-and-science-comp.html?lastPage=true&postSubmitted=true
>>71691811
Liberals love to talk aboit evolution, right up until you point out that evolution applies to humans also.
Different groups of humans that evolved in different environments separated by tens of thousands of years will be different.
But that's racist, isn't it libshit.
Liberals deny science more than conservatives do.
You try to justify child murder and then try telling us a man is a woman. You have no high ground.
Your economic policies have turned our once great cities into broken down cesspits
It's why you cling to your fringe memes to portray conservatives as the idiotic bad ones.
>>71697190
I know. It's on vox. Still is conducive to a conservatitive circlejerk.
>>71697317
Where does that graph come from? That would be pretty funny if true.
>>71697150
anon pls
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/if-you-fail-reproduce-another-scientist-s-results-journal-wants-know
There will be plenty of grant money as an incentive for publishing failures to replicate
>>71692653
Easy, liberalism is a rachet, you can always go further left, you just can't take a more conservative/nationalist one. If liberal "thinkers" in major institutions decided tomorrow that bestiality was A-OK and that opposition to it was horrible bigotry, you'd have John Oliver on the TV the next night saying.
"If one man wants to show his love for not just another man, or (heaven forbid) a woman, but with all the creatures of the Earth, that's supposed to be wrong? I mean why are we even talking about this?!? IT'S TWOTHOUSANDSIXTEEN!"
Great read, and I completely agree. The old Democrats are gone and minorities are played like fiddles while their masters run the show. It's quite disgusting really.
>>71689185
Good article. The liberal style seems to be "wow you're so fucking stupid, here's a video that proves I'm right! wow I can't believe you don't support my viewpoints!" (or, as Carl the Cuck says, ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?)
>>71697317
>the general populace isn't brought down by niggers and spics
Yeah if you have a mostly white movement it's probably going to be statistically smarter than any other movement, except maybe an Asian college student protest.
>>71697432
I literally linked it m8. Some professor did some statistics on his own spare time and this was an unexpected result that he found.
>>71697073
>new development is functionally illegal
I'm not a liberal, but I don't think San Francisco's economy will collapse anytime soon. I worked there as an electrician for 15 years. As for "new development," there's no more room there for new construction. It's all built up. Not unless you start building over park lands. And parks are the only thing they have left that makes that place good.
>>71696445
Yeah, it's true. Leftists tried to argue there was a massive cultural bias in the SAT and used a single question about regattas as evidence kek.
>>71696797
>where these two dichotomies can coexist.
Do you even know what the word "dichotomy" means?
>>71691811
>Being a conservative has turned into claiming that anthropogenic climate change and evolution don't exist.
If you see a debate going on and you want to get in on it, try learning what the debate is about first. Yes, the planet has warmed a fraction of a degree. Yes, we have some effect. The question is how much and will it be net positive or net negative.
Yes, a lot of "conservatives" don't believe in evolution. But not believing in evolution isn't a conservative principle, it's a religious one. That there's a high degree of comorbidity between these two groups in 2016 isn't the fault of conservatism. It's the fault of a 2 party system that leaves nowhere else for a lot of people to go. That works both ways, you know. Look at some of the utterly retarded people on the left. People who, in the span of a single minute, can claim that men and women are not neurologically different and that transsexualism is proved by brains scans. Well, if a man can be born with a female brain, there must be such a thing as a female brain. You're no more the party of science than the people you oppose.
>That trickle-down economics is a thing.
A single post isn't enough to educate you on this matter. Read Hayek or Mises or something. Listen to Friedman or Sowell. Check out Bob Murphy and Tom Woods' podcast. There are lots of ways to learn about economics. Also, "trickle-down economics" isn't something that's said by actual economists, as far as I've read.
>That laws should tell us who to fuck and what women do with our bodies
See the 2 party problem I described above. But keep in mind, they don't think they're telling you what to do with your body. They think unborn children are people. Personally, I'm pro-choice but it helps to not pretend people who disagree with you do so because they're evil.
>because taxes are evil
This is a strawman. Conservatives know taxes are necessary for a functioning democracy, they just think they should be lower
>>71697146
Big Fat Money.
>>71697550
>i literally linked it
I've trained myself to ignore links on 4chan that it honestly didn't even register.
>>71697542
Well isn't that my point? Liberals love to go on and on about how dumb conservatives are, but there's nothing to support that notion. Here's another fun paper.
>In all three cases, individuals who identify as Republican score slightly higher than those who identify as Democrat; the unadjusted differences are 1–3 IQ points, 2–4 IQ points and 2–3 IQ points, respectively. Path analyses indicate that the associations between cognitive ability and party identity are largely but not totally accounted for by socio-economic position: individuals with higher cognitive ability tend to have better socio-economic positions, and individuals with better socio-economic positions are more likely to identify as Republican.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614001081
>>71697640
>biomedicine
There are some interesting correlations to be found there with funding from biotech and pharmaceuticals firms.
>>71695133
White privilege is difficult to explain directly because it is so intertwined with our culture. Combined with cognitive dissonance avoidance it becomes nearly impossible to explain to a white person who doesn't want to understand. This of course is true among all groups. Explaining black privilege is just as difficult to an audience of black people.
Ironically, it is best to start with the privileged status of a different group in order to approach your own privilege I'm baby steps.
>>71697466
>>71697745
>Reproducible research is key to new discoveries in pharmacology. A Phase I discovery will be followed by Phase II reproductions as a drug develops towards commercial production. In recent decades Phase II success has fallen from 28% to 18%. A 2011 study found that 65% of medical studies were inconsistent when re-tested, and only 6% were completely reproducible.
>6%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>In 2012, a study by Begley and Ellis was published in Nature that reviewed a decade of research. That study found that 47 out of 53 medical research papers focused on cancer research were irreproducible. The irreproducible studies had a number of features in common, including that studies were not performed by investigators blinded to the experimental versus the control arms, there was a failure to repeat experiments, a lack of positive and negative controls, failure to show all the data, inappropriate use of statistical tests and use of reagents that were not appropriately validated. John P. A. Ioannidis writes, "While currently there is unilateral emphasis on 'first' discoveries, there should be as much emphasis on replication of discoveries."The Nature study was itself reproduced in the journal PLOS ONE, which confirmed that a majority of cancer researchers surveyed had been unable to reproduce a result. Attempts to reproduce studies often strained relationships with the laboratories that were first to publish.
Yep. Uh, huh. *glug*glug*glug*
>>71697717
90% of roody-poos voted for Obama
that has to hurt the Democrats a lot
>>71697385
Most of the stuff the liberals smugly say conservatives are wrong about are not even proven sciences.
- Global warming... NASA, the Pentagon, the UN, etc. constantly have terrible predictions that fail (50 million "climate migrants" by 2010 for example, kek)
- Atheism... An unprovable theory, and this is coming from an atheist.
- Men can be women... science actually proves otherwise, yet the left pretend that it doesn't
They bring these up constantly, even though they are non-pressing issues. They do this so that low-information, emotional voters will vote for them.
>>71697670
go to bed Bernie
>>71697787
>whites are better than minorities
>"muh white privilege"
>>71691811
Cont
Being 19 trillion dollars in debt (just at the federal level and not including unfunded liabilities like SS) isn't ok. It's unsustainable and irresponsible. It's selling your own grandchildren down the river for your own retirement ponzi scheme.
>being screwed by people like the Koch brothers who convince them that voting against their self-interest is ok because it lets them be part of the "real American!!!1!" club.
There is so much wrong with this. Top political doner billionaires are actually Democrats. You know, people like Bill Gates, for example. And perhaps those people realize that they're actually not voting against their own interests. Perhaps they realize that having more and more and more and more and more people on the take in one's country isn't the best thing for its future. Something like half the country gets more from the government than it puts in. The top 10% is paying what, like 70% of the taxes? Maybe they see that as wrong. Maybe they don't want their country to go under even if it means not getting a handout from someone else's unwilling pocket.
>How can we not be smug, towards conservatives? They aren't just naive. They work really hard to intentionally believe things that are wrong and stupid.
This sentiment is painfully ignorant and hypocritical and now you know why.
You're welcome.
>>71697787
Can you read this article for me and tell me how privilege theory helped this man?
If you say "That's not what it's about!", how did this man ever come to believe these things in the first place if not from learning from other progressives, and get published on a feminist progressive site?
>>71697818
What was your point again? To prove that global warming is a hoax invented by the Chinese?
I am fully aware of the incentive issues in the problem fields, which are much less 'hard' for several reasons.
>>71697825
Unfortunately the study is behind a paywall, but I've read that it supposedly has results with only whites and still found that republicans were smarter.
>>71695590
yet the left will immediate disavow them as not representative of the left in general
>>71698120
fug I forgot the greentext
>>71697637
Great post. There are so many levels to a lot of these arguments on our side. There is a big difference between morning after pill and late term vacuuming. I think the latter is fucked, and I'm not religious. A lot of Christians believe life happens from moment of conception and argue that. That is their right and a respectable position. I mean, think of the positions that islam takes on life.
>>71697853
>atheism
>theory
pick one atheist
AGW is as correct as we can get, but predicting what will happen to humanity as a result is ridiculously difficult. There are a tremendous number of factors to consider and hundreds of models currently being developed. Who knows what black swans await us in the next ten or twenty years?
>>71697787
>Ironically, it is best to start with the privileged status of a different group in order to approach your own privilege
Do something to change your own privilege level instead. This will in turn elevate the privilege in your community.
For blacks, it's easy. All you have to do is show up on time and make an effort. Whites will fall over backwards trying to pay you to fill their quotas.
>>71698061
My point is that blind faith in "science" is folly. "Climate change" is almost certainly bullshit because most so called "science" is bullshit.
>>71698041
>not italicizing words from foreign languages as is proper formatting
The degenerate cuck.
>>71693351
You know, you guys are on equal footing to the evangelist idiots. You don't respect "science", science to anyone in a political debate means "smart dweebs in some lab cooked up something an infallible cabal of other nerds meticulously tested all their findings and proved them to be true."
It's fucking not, speaking as an Environmental Chemist, you'd think I'd be one of you twats too with my job title but I'm not. Science is just as prone to cronyism, intimidation, corruption, and most especially laziness as anything else. And that 97% of climate scientists? Well goley gee, If I see weather stations show anomalous readings outside the mean of the data I have available (usually about 20-30 years or so at best, assuming someones bothered to enter it into a database you have access to). I can chalk it up as "this doesn't mean much as we simply don't know what climate conditions are truly the norm, we need further data" and get no grant or fame or rubber stamp your bosses report that says "people did it, give us more funding"
But anyways, liberals piss me off more about their scientism than bible thumpers do over their bullshit about evolution and cosmology. I at least know where Jimbob and the congregation of First Baptist Church of the Grand Epiphany are coming from. Liberal assholes just use "science" as a post hoc rationalization for whatever they're pushing, same way they use "PoC" as a shield for making things worse in every way imaginable for black people
>>71697947
>go to bed Bernie
Even Bernie is not wrong about everything, baby.
>>71698356
It's translated actually
https://feministisktperspektiv.se/2014/12/16/den-manliga-skammens-feminism/
One of the most...illuminating articles I've ever read.
>>71698321
>Do something to change your own privilege level instead.
But hard work and responsibility promotes the patriarchy.
>>71698061
>What was your point again? To prove that global warming is a hoax invented by the Chinese?
Liberals love strawmen.
>>71697787
Cont.
The best example I have found is mexicans.
Anyone living in a diverse area who has recently searched for work on craiglist or any similar site knows that most employers prefer candidates who are bilingual regardless of its relevance to the position.
>>71698446
>that picture
FUUUCCCCKKKKKK
>>71698324
Oh ok epistemological anarchism. Gotcha. When in doubt destroy all standards for evidence.
It's too bad you don't know anything about climate science.
>>71698321
>>71698041
>>71697964
C'mom guys at least let me finish.>>71698597
>>71697637
>not believing in evolution isn't a conservative principle, it's a religious one.
Not even that. Its a yank evangelist thing. Even the pope has declared evolution an instrument of Gods will.
>>71689185
That is: Kim Davis was not only on the wrong side of the law. She was not even a subscriber to a religious ideology that had found itself at moral odds with American culture. Rather, she was a subscriber to nothing, a hateful bigot who did not even understand her own religion.
Christianity, as many hastened to point out, is about love. Christ commands us to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. If the Bible took any position on the issue at all, it was that divorce, beloved by Davis, was a sin, and that she was a hypocrite masquerading among the faithful.
what the fuck he just did exactly what he wrote a whole fucking article about
>>71698492
Read my posts by ID, not a liberal.
Anthropogenic warming = real science
Human biological diversity = real science
it's not hard
Why do liberals bash christians for not believing in evolution, but love muslims despite also not believing in it?
>>71689185
Flush yourself down the toilet, Flyover Phil.
>>71698944
I thought Muslims actually believed in evolution. Maybe I'm wrong though.
>>71694996
drink a gallon of bleach, wait a bit, then explain it to me
>>71698324
not sure what part of "science" you're insulting. Science as a process isn't corruptible as ultimately it's just a pattern of thinking for isolating the cause and effect of interactions in the universe.
How people take that info and apply it however certainly is fallible. As for climate change, i'll believe their computer models when you can take atmospheric data from say 40 years ago, combined with CO2 output, industrial development, solar radiation, and starting from say 1975 and accurately predict the planets climate up to where we are today.
If your model can correctly and without pre-bias tell you what has already happened then I trust it fairly well to forecast at least medium term into the future. If not you and your model are full of shit.
>>71698446
WHAT THE FUCK
>>71698993
Quran is a literal ctrl+v of the old testament, plus some mohammed shit.
And the Quran is the literal word of god.
Therefore the world is 6000 years old and you get to be beheaded for denying it, kuffar.
>>71695605
While he's an idiot and misusing the word "felon," he's right in saying she committed a crime. Hillary has already admitted that she is guilty of sharing state secrets. The only thing being investigated is whether she can be prosecuted for it. It's about as hard as you'd expect to prove in court that she knowingly accidentally leaked information.
>>71698993
Why would stone age third worlder fucktards believe in anything scientific, mass majority of muslims are hyper religious fundies just like evolution-denying christians. Even if just 1% of either religion denied evolution, liberals would still bash all christians and love all muslims regardless
Actually a better question, why do liberals hate christians for WBC protesting gay funerals, but love muslims despite them massively increasing the number of gay funerals?
>>71698993
muslims believe some crazy shit, and evolution is not on the table
the Koran says in two different places that man was formed out of clay, and that he was formed out of dust, so even on that simple issue it contradicts itself
>>71689185
>"The wages of smug is Trump."
That's a great line. It sums up this election perfectly.
>>71699115
>>71699294
>>71699331
I checked that Pew study and it doesn't seem too bad to me. I mean considering how barbaric the religion is otherwise.
>>71698597
I don't get why liberals think conservatives have a problem understanding this. What you call white privilege or black privilege could just be summed up as "being the majority demographic in a nation privilege." It's neither good nor evil and it's completely unexciting when you stop and think about it. A Han Chinese person in Shanghai can walk around confident near everyone will speak his language, share his cultural touchstones, share similar ideas about religion. Nobody is telling him he needs to let in more Moroccans to open kebab shops to be more authentic.
But that wouldn't place blame on all the ills of the world on the backs of White westerners, and that wouldn't convince hundreds of millions of people in America and Western Europe to eagerly destroy themselves demographically.
>>71699026
it is infinitely more easy to determine how the past turned into the present than how the present will turn into the future
A model that does what you say may be flat impossible due to unforseeable black swans
>>71699383
>this study was not conducted in sub-Saharan Africa
but yeah that's actually not too bad considering how long Creationism has held on in the US
>>71689185
Just read the whole article. Probably one of the best I've read this year. The section on W. really drove the point home.
>>71698492
Science is his religion/faith, he doesn't want to **believe** that most "scientific" results aren't scientific at all even though the very LIMITED studies concerning this matter all point in that direction. See >>71698733, you can't reason with a zealot.
>>71699026
>Science as a process isn't corruptible
I'm not talking about actual science, I'm talking about "science", which is what the majority of this "climate change" bullshit is.
>>71699294
We all know the answer, they functionally believe white people are born with a secular version of original sin, which can only be washed away when all the accomplishments of white people have either been destroyed or taken over by others.
And yes, I honestly think that's the core motivation of every true believer leftist in the West
>>71699412
Ding, this is the answer. Ethnocentrism is a basic human value, to penalize and demonize it is only going to cause cognitive dissonance and emotional problems, like cuckism.
>>71699431
Well sure, a bollide asteroid might whack us tomorrow and all the arguments on Mongolian girl cartoon sticky-note boards will become moot. But if your computer model is really using a correct predictive model and is taking everything important into account it should be able to start at any point given enough initial data (assuming you don't try to start it in like 1900 or something) and accurate predict our climate in broad strokes as it is today.
If it *can't* do that then obviously your model isn't accounting for something important
>>71699293
It's not the fact that any secrets got shared, it's that she had the server in the first place. Not just a public non-.gov email address that some other dumbshit boomer politicians had in a few older cases, but her own private fucking server in her own home, that her and all her aids conveniently neglected to mention when being asked.
Great video on it: http://www.c-span.org/video/?406228-4/washington-journal-joseph-digenova-hillary-clintons-emails
>>71699383
But see, it's still not 100%. So liberals should be CONSTANTLY mocking and bashing all muslims and islam just like they do any christian and the idea of christianity as a whole. What's their excuse? Where's all the comedy shows and bits and political rants and so on? Where's the mass, well, HATRED, of that evil backwards stone-age stupid religion holding the world back? Why don't they criticize muslims and Islam exactly the same they do Christians and christianity, when they're often guilty of the exact same liberal sins, sometimes far far FAR worse?
>>71699568
Exactly. Everything they believe always comes down to anti-west. All the hypocrisy and double standards about races and religions and economic ideas etc is unveiled to not actually be hypocrisy at all, it's just that they frame everything into either "anti-west/good" or "pro-west/bad".
>>71698597
Cont.2
Mexicans born in families who impart knowledge of Spanish to their children have an advantage over another candidate (all things held equal).
Even more, Mexicans who lack fluency in spanish can more convincingly bullshit their resume while being insulated from questioning by pc culture.
>>71699541
> "science", which is what the majority of this "climate change" bullshit is
Where is your evidence? If you're not advocating epistemological anarchism, that is.
>even though the very LIMITED studies concerning this matter all point in that direction
Reproducibility is trivial in materials science, molecular biology, geology, chemistry, physics, etc. - the vast majority of non-"social" sciences. This is why they are called 'hard' in the first place. Climate science is not 'soft' by any means, but it is several orders of magnitude more complex because of its interdisciplinary nature and global scope. There are feedback mechanisms that we are only just now finding out about that have been affecting temperature, atmospheric composition, ocean acidification ad infinitum, and every new discovery forces us to rewrite our models.
>>71699568
Ironically muslims themselves do not believe in Adamic original sin, and everybody is born a Muslim.
>>71699412
The dude I am posting this for specifically said he didn't understand.
>>71699872
>Why don't they criticize muslims and Islam exactly the same they do Christians and christianity, when they're often guilty of the exact same liberal sins, sometimes far far FAR worse?
Oh don't get me wrong; I completely agree; the evolution thing is just a curious outlier for whatever reason.
>>71699848
I'm saying the system is so complex there is no way to ever know if your model is predictive even though it 'predicted' the climate from the ancient past through to today - it could seem to be right, but for the wrong reasons.
>>71699872
What a coincidence, jews, blacks, and women are more likely to be pro-collectivist and anti-rational.
>>71699960
>reproducibility is trivial in physics
>complex models don't exist in physics
I can't speak for other fields, but that's a load of horseshit. Have fun looking for rare particles.
>>71691069
if you like that shit go read
vk ( DOT) com (slash) doc-55395457_326364843
If you are a diehard conservative who hates all liberals for being liberals then go watch a football game instead or something.
>>71700206
I didn't mean to include theoretical physics and cosmology in my generalization. Yes it took decades to build the LHC and find the Higgs Boson, but my general point stands, they did indeed find it.
>>71699848
Well we've only been monitoring climate and solar data for a fairly short time. I wouldn't expect someone to cough up a model that could accurately predict every storm from Ancient Greece to the year 5000. I'd just ask for a fairly short period of a few decades.
And of course you're right, it could be getting it right for the wrong reasons. However we're expected to make MAJOR changes in our public policy taking their CO2 and CHC computer models as gospel.
And either those models are good enough for prediction or they're not. If they can't get it right over a span of 10 years (which they haven't in the least) why think it's correct about ANYTHING
>>71699960
>evidence
Brother, they can't even predict the weather for next week. It's on blind faith that you believe they can predict climate change.
>but it is several orders of magnitude more complex because of its interdisciplinary nature and global scope
>and every new discovery forces us to rewrite our models.
Yeah, so your models were wrong. They'll be wrong next week too because of "several orders of magnitude of complexity" you mention. And they'll be wrong the week after that too.
>>71700303
There's a ton of things in cosmology that we can't find right now. Shit is hard.
>>71691811
>muh Koch Brothers
Meanwhile, the left has Bloomberg, Soros, Microsoft, Apple, Google, and more.
>economic interests
One could argue the validity of how wealth is best obtained. The right says you can earn it and keep it. The left says it has to be given to you by state mandates and you have to give 30% or more back, so the idiots that work less than you can get free luxuries.
There are many strata to markets and jobs within the "lower" and "middle" classes themselves; in which right-wing economic principles could be of more benefit; and many different situations too. For instance, leftists shut-down an oil field, and the oil rig workers go from making exorbitant salaries (for blue collar workers, oil rig jobs are high-paying) to having to live on minimum wage. It's also true in many cases that taxation in return for public services, calculated throughout a person's lifetime, is often more of a wealth drain than the cost of said services if they were privately bought. Also, people don't always need certain government services.
>>71699960
Actually I really don't give two shits what Muslims do or don't believe. Honestly in a way I really don't blame most of whats going on with them at all. Their actions in the West are just a symptom, the disease is a Ruling Class that hates its own proletariat and it's own predecessors. That sees anything thats like them but NOT them as being evil.
Elite Republicans and Elite Democrats HATE middle and working class whites. Same shit across the Atlantic.
Muslims can believe whatever they want and cut clitorises off of 10 year olds if they want to stay in North Africa and Arabia
>>71699872
And I say this as an atheist by the way. The double standards is really what gets me fucking pissed.
"imam kills infidel gay" or whatever should be the immediate go-to PC-accepted joke just like "priest molests boy" is. Let's see the jon stewarts and john olivers of the world do that if they aren't just gutter hypocritical ideologues
A few dozen member church PROTESTING is seen as more horrific and more damning of the entire religion and Bible, enough to regularly constantly bring it up to harangue any normal christian for years and years, then let's say, the majority-muslim countries and communities EXECUTING gays, of which they can only ever provide some pathetic "oh well hmm it's a real pity, but not muslims fault buhhh" comment.
>>71698792
I don't care about the current evolution debate; but the current Pope is clearly a globalist cuck. He invites Marxist dicators to the Vatican, kisses Muslim feet, and demands more brown people in white countries constantly.
At least Protestants haven't fallen prey to such degeneracy. They're also more likely to be nationalist.
>>71689185
tl;dr smug liberal shits on other smug liberals for being smug liberals
>GOD if only those RETARDS would stop watching the daily show! FUCK!!
>If trump gets elected it's ALL YOUR FAULT!
>Conservatives are right to be mad, but they're only mad because they're poor! If us noble democrats give them jobs, they'll realize immigration and multiculturalism are just fine!
l m a o
>>71700419
I have never said that they can predict anything more than the fact that the earth will continue to warm if we continue to add CO2, methane, etc. to the atmosphere. My entire point is that models that point to a specific future can never be more than provisional and tenuous at best.
However, our scientific ability to determine the causes of the current state of the climate from the past is much more reliable. The evidence for AGW is overwhelming and has been understood in at least general terms for many decades. I remember reading about it in books published in the 60s and 70s.
>>71700435
Hence, hard science. Cosmology is badass but there are plenty of (currently) nonfalsifiable things lurking in the shadows - dark energy, string theory, gravitons etc. On the bright side these enigmas will inspire people like you for the forseeable future.
>>71700303
EVERY discipline is interconnected and complex, if you want to measure and observe something you have to break it down to a simple interaction.
In chemistry and microbiology for example (what I know) you can't just smear your test sample across a nutrient agar plate or throw it in an uncalibrated spec and expect you'll find out everything there is to know about what's in it.
You say "hmm, does this sample have E. faecalis? Does it have organic nitrogen?" and narrow down your search to specfic wavelengths and growth conditions. If we had no tools to zero down on simple straight forward questions those fields wouldn't be of much value.
If "climate science" is unable to provide concrete answers to specific interactions its really of little use
>>71700581
Yup
I wish more Whites thought like you or were open about it. The establishment has gotten too big for its britches and unrest fueled by the multikulti experiment will hopefully be its downfall.
>>71700939
Agreed, it's vitally important to isolate the variables you are testing.
Unfortunately with the world climate this is impossible. One cannot simply take the seasons in Bangladesh as an isolated system and squish it onto a slide. Moisture evaporates from other areas and is carried there to precipitate and the rate of this depends on pressure and temperature there and other places. Urban heat islands confounded results for years, and airplane contrails affect cloud formation. Shit's a god damn mess.
>>71700655
Once again, do they rationally believe a couple dozen Westboro idiots protesting are equal to tens of thousands dead per year of muslim deaths? On one level of course not, but on another it simply doesn't matter, the end result is all that matters. Muslims could do ANYTHING and be blameless (except admit what was Western lifestyles and culture was superior to theirs) traditional Christians will ALWAYS be wrong, no matter what they do. If Westboro didn't exist they'd simple get someone else to blame. Like the gay "pastor" that hoaxed "fag" onto his own fucking cake
Jews and cryptojews running the DNC. Well, they run the RNC too, and for the first time in a long time they have someone who isn't under their thumb tearing them a new one (the God-Emperor) and it makes them fightin' mad.
Jim Webb seemed like a sane, rational candidate for the blue team, but he got kicked out early but "Free Stuff" and "Who Even Cares About All These Crimes?"
I had an argument with my libtard sister about recycling and the environment after she saw me tossing plastic bottles in the trash. I didn't see the huge problem with sending chemically inert plastic to be buried in a landfill that'll eventually be filled and then covered in sod earth or something.
Apparently sending the bottles to a processing plant that uses caustic chemicals to repurpose the plastic to be reused which will in the end wind up in a landfill in the future is hugely better?
From there it went to energy and I was saying how solar and wind are stupid (for Canada) and how guys like Elon Musk are pushing tech onto the markets that'll reduce pollution in the long term so we shouldn't worry so much.
In a smug liberal tone she proceeds to educate me "you don't understand you need to read ______ by this liberal dipshit." And I'm just there thinking if I'm supposed to know this random bitch book writer is? These people are so isolated in their own groups they don't understand any differing opinions.
>>71700789
>I have never said that they can predict anything more than the fact that the earth will continue to warm if we continue to add CO2, methane, etc. to the atmosphere.
>My entire point is that models that point to a specific future can never be more than provisional and tenuous at best.
>the fact that
>can never be more than provisional and tenuous at best
You're just straight up contradicting yourself now. Like I said, you can't reason with a zealot concerning his fanatical devotion to his religion. You said yourself you were wrong last week. You'll be wrong next week too. And the week after that.
>>71697190
It was written by an actual unashamed communist, which is interesting - they have a long and rich history of internal dialogue and factionalism, they're "ascendant" in visibility with this primary but they're still obviously on the outs, they have next to no stake in the organizational framework of the Democratic party
I thought the piece was strongest by not resorting to immediate whataboutism about "conservative smugness." Of course conservatives are resistant to difference in their own spheres - most churches, most local governments, their own media (Sean Hannity is, uh, not easy to look at). But liberal smugness is more pseudo-academic, while conservative smugness is more of an appeal to authority.
This is the way where /pol/ reminds me more of liberals - the muslim graphs, the "based" youtube losers etc are more Rachel Maddow than megachurch
>>71700789
>I have never said that they can predict anything more than the fact that the earth will continue to warm if we continue to add CO2, methane
Yet there are geological epochs wherein concentrations of these compounds were many orders of magnitude higher than today and there was no runaway greenhouse effect.
>>71701180
Yep, the Left's entire existence is predicated on anti-White, anti-male, anti-rationalism.
Muslims are only worshipped because they are perceived (rightly so) as antagonistic to the West. Fossil fuel use and pollution by shitskins is overlooked.
On some level Leftists worship death.
Article was spot-on
t. left-libertarian from a poor family attending Skidmore college, one of the richest and furthest left schools in America
>>71696180
Bravo to you and OP. All these conjectures spark minds like mine to think for ourselves and to question everything, even arrogance of political parties.
People like you give me the foresight, strategy and ammunition to BTFO both sides esp. Liberals
T. Classical liberal
>pic related: pic I took today; /pol/ was always right
ITT
>hapless rubes
>anthropogenic climate alarmism
>use of the descriptor
>meta-analyses
>cognitive dissonance
>an infallible cabal
>whataboutism
>>71701283
No contradiction, the qualifier is a 'specific future'.
Like, "the earth will be 2.75C warmer by 2100". It can't be done with our current level of knowledge. It would be fine to talk about trends in warming and a range of possible temperatures based on our current knowledge.
Our current knowledge however notably does not include the possibility that warming trends will reverse in our lifetimes, barring a supervolcano or meteor event of some kind.
>>71700789
...except for the elephant in the living room, global temperatures have been basically static for a decade and nobody could predict that. That nobody knows if there might be some process of sequestration we know jack shit about, how much the planets climate is effected by atmospheric composition VS solar radiation.
As someone else said in this thread, the whole topic could be discussed rationally and without baggage if AGW wasn't used as just another hammer to extort more money out of the first world. If people who were convinced by the data that AGW is a real threat they'd TREAT it like one.
If an asteroid were going to pulverize the planet experts would be discussing ways to divert or destroy it using engineering. We'd do something about it or die. if AGW is that compelling, why do it's proponents jet from one multi-million dollar retreat to another sipping champagne and eating caviar while discussing how the little people of the first world are going to have to give up their cars, international travel, and imported foods. (not the policy makers though obviously, never them)
>>71694016
>Anthropogenic climate change is happening. That is flatly, settled, proved, scientific fact.
Anyone who claims that science is "settled" is promoting dogma; that's religious territory.
Science is a process, not a belief.
>>71689394
>"Finding comfort in the notion that their former allies were disdainful, hapless rubes, smug liberals created a culture animated by that contempt"
Most of the white working class are hapless rubes.
Think of all the coffins that came back from the Japanese islands, Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq. Of all the guys who got their leg(s) blown off. Why? Because some rich people flew the flag, and they got killed or maimed for nothing.
Look how many goy fools study the Torah, and worship some Jew from 2000 years ago, and believe all that bullshit is real.
No shit the leadership of the Democratic party does not listen to or support the US working class. Who does? The Republican party leadership, which fucks over working class Americans even more, since they're the even stupider ones who believe that Jesus has magic powers bullshit?
American workers are less skeptical than their (great-)grandparents who distrusted rich heirs and their children will pay the price of that. They are much less organized than 3-4 generations back as well. This gullibility and disorganization has left both political parties leaderships completely ignoring them.
Do you know who politicians respond to? Homosexuals and transexuals. Why? Because they're organized and politically educated.
>>71701415
Exactly, that only underscores how little we know. What we perceive as homeostatic feedback systems may not have existed at that time (oxygen in the atmosphere was not always there, landmasses all on one side of the planet, etc).
Some pretty wild things have happened in the Earth's past.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian%E2%80%93Triassic_extinction_event
>>71695638
Modern liberals are smug assholes who are completely out of touch with their historical working class foundation and hide behind shallow neologisms to shy away from the fact they care more about they are perceived by other liberals than solving any real issues with the country. A cult of smugness and self-aggrandizement.
They then bitch and moan about how the working class are abandoning them for Trump.
>>71701557
keep browsing, son
