The Few, the Proud, the White

[Dill]

(09-05-2020, 01:08 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: fredtoast Wrote: Marine leaders say they have adiversity problem.  You say they don't.

Actually I don't believe I said either way, other than using your own argument against you.  I did say the claim of having a problem doesn't shock me, given the current climate.

That doesn't surprise me at all.

Just go back and actually read the posts, Fred.  Why are you and your buddies the only ones that have this issue with misquoting people and then asking for endless repetition?

Well you did say in post #45 there is "no diversity problem" in the Marines.

The Marine leadership thinks there is at the very top level. So you did say one way.

One reason why people ask for "endless repetition" is that you speak in contradictions and quips and a kind of short hand that obviates actually giving reasons ("Nothing I could ever write would explain this thread better than this post"). Then you don't take responsibility for the resulting confusion. ("Just go back and actually read the posts"). You don't take time to define terms or provide back ground. (I addressed this problem on the Kamala thread, where you were claiming (without a shred of evidence) that "the left" uses the one-drop rule just like the Klan to determine who is black.)

And now you've spent some time trying to explain away what those Marines say about diversity in the Corps.

It's people like me and "the current climate."

Sounds like there are people out there seeing racism everywhere, when there really is none.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-05-2020, 02:43 PM)Dill Wrote: Well you did say in post #45 there is "no diversity problem" in the Marines.

The Marine leadership thinks there is at the very top level. So you did say one way.

This is why I can't really take you seriously sometimes, you didn't even read that whole sentence.  I stated that while using Fred's own argument against him.  If the percentage of black generals is higher than the percentage of black officers how is there a diversity problem?  Black people are over represented at the general ranks by his own admission.

Quote:One reason why people ask for "endless repetition" is that you speak in contradictions and quips and a kind of short hand that obviates actually giving reasons ("Nothing I could ever write would explain this thread better than this post"). Then you don't take responsibility for the resulting confusion. ("Just go back and actually read the posts"). You don't take time to define terms or provide back ground. (I addressed this problem on the Kamala thread, where you were claiming (without a shred of evidence) that "the left" uses the one-drop rule just like the Klan to determine who is black.)

No, I don't.  See, I know I don't because you and your two friends are the only people who have this issue.  I have many suspicions as to why that is the case, but I'll keep them to myself in the interests of remaining congenial.

Quote:And now you've spent some time trying to explain away what those Marines say about diversity in the Corps.

And using your own data to defeat your position.

Quote:It's people like me and "the current climate."

Yeah, it is.

Quote:Sounds like there are people out there seeing racism everywhere, when there really is none.

Oh, there's certainly racism out there.  Much more than you even state, because you seem to focus only on racism committed by white people.  That being said the people who see it the most, who comment on it endlessly, who make arguments based on it when they shouldn't, oddly enough, those people often turn out to be the racists.  I'm certainly not accusing you of that, but it's very interesting how often that turns out to be the case.

[Dill]

Tempted to go quip mode myself on some of this myself. 

(09-05-2020, 02:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Sure I could.  Your claim of omnipotence are amusing though.
 Sure, Dill.  You got me. 

Is there any subject you aren't an expert at?  It really is quite impressive.
I am, as ever, in awe of the depth and breadth of your knowledge.

LOL indeed I did "get you." You aren't going to provide that explanation. You're satisfied with the "baseless assertion" that you have it.

The guy who has been touting his "greater knowledge of the military" as a substitute for argument--all the while withholding his special credentials-- suddenly sees a "claim of omnipotence" when someone who does know something about the military and how its diversity policies are advanced suggests else he cannot do what he claims he can.

I don't buy "amusement" when it covers deficient argument.  More on that below.

(09-05-2020, 02:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The article decided that.  I didn't prove anything, Fred did when he posted the numbers that the percentage of black generals is higher than the percentage of black officers.

You need to make up your mind about what the article is about.  Is it about a black Colonel being unfailr held black due to his being black or that there hasn't been a black 4 star?

Well in a nutshell, the theme of the article is the line I bolded in post #41. The Marine Corps has never had a Black man in its most senior leadership posts, as those posts are defined in the article, above 3 stars. Hendersen's case is the entry point into this issue, in that it documents how one qualified individual has been passed over when arguably less qualified whites have not. So his case raises a question--is there a problem with the track to the top? You only see an either/or because you don't understand what the Hendersen case is supposed to demonstrate. That's why you keep latching onto pieces of the article and then responding to them piecemeal, through your post-racist prism, deciding ahead of time what the essential points are and ignoring the pieces that don't fit. "either/or," "already black generals," "politics," "no hard evidence," irrelevant mention of 4-stars.

(09-05-2020, 02:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote:No "hard evidence" Hendersen was discriminated against (as if "no hard evidence" wasn't central to the journalist's argument). That was the case so case closed.

Yeah, I have this weird thing about needing some evidence for sweeping claims.  Silly me. 

You don't have a weird thing about needing some evidence for YOUR OWN sweeping claims. (Sorry, the Kamala thread is still fresh in mind.) Marines don't genuinely see or have a diversity problem at the top. Liberal whiners outside the Corps created that. "The way of the current world." "Politics." Everybody knows.

But to repeat--to understand what evidence is needed and what counts as evidence in this case, you have to understand the point of the article.  

The difficulty with the kind of discrimination which the article addresses is that it is rarely accompanied by "hard evidence." Equally or almost equally qualified officers are up for promotion. Each promotion is decided on a case by case basis, year after year. Then after years, and dozens of decisions, turns out no Black officer ever made the grade.  Probably no "hard evidence" in any of those cases. You apparently mistook the article as a claim that one guy who was discriminated against, but the article could offer no "proof" he was, so the matter was settled for you.

(09-05-2020, 02:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Everyone has to "see a problem" until complete proportional parity is reached.  That's the way of the current world.

I said politics have a lot to do with who makes general rank, because it does.  

I didn't have to denigrate either position, neither is based on any solid evidence, just your opinions btw.  You can't decide what the article is about and Fred knows so little he's not aware that enlisted personnel can't be promoted to General.

"Politics have a lot to do" is just the kind of sweeping claim that you cannot make specific or provide evidence for. It explains everything and nothing. It is a causal chain with no specific links. You can project anything you want into "politics."  When I am talking about DOD research and directives and metrics for measuring diversity, that's a far cry from vagaries like "everyone has to 'see a problem.'" The less people know in this case, the less likely they are to see a problem for sure.

And we are back to "opinions" here, as if my "opinion" of what the article says is no better than yours, not based on better evidence, demonstrably more accurate reading. And as if understanding how and why the DOD wants diversity were beside the point, not evidence of anything. Standing outside the Marine leadership YOU don't see the point of diversity in the very top ranks. But you know who drives these faux issues (cough cough "leftists) into the media.

But Fred . . . . lol

(09-05-2020, 02:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I've used your own hard data against you.  When your points are proven wrong you ignore them.  If anyone is engaging in deflection in this thread it would be you. 

I am, as ever, in awe of the depth and breadth of your knowledge.

I don't recall any "hard data" used successfully against me, mine or anyone else's. Are you referring to post #48, where you argue the Marine Corps was not yet integrated in '42 (shaving off a few points from the 72 number), and then that Blacks make general rank in higher proportion to their numbers in the officer corps? YOUR standard of achieved diversity at the top, not the Marine Corps?

Jeezus, the first paragraph of post #51 addresses that. You have to know what the point of the article was before you can assert what "data" does or does not refute.

Or are you referring to some other post?

[fredtoast]

(09-05-2020, 03:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: the people who see it the most, who comment on it endlessly, who make arguments based on it when they shouldn't, oddly enough, those people often turn out to be the racists.  I'm certainly not accusing you of that, but it's very interesting how often that turns out to be the case.

I don't find this to be true at all.  From what I can see the victims of racisim are usually the ones who see it the most and comment on it the most.  

And I would not use such a blanket statement to accuse the victims of racism to be the racists.

There are racists of all color, but here in America white people afre not "victims" of racism because they control a disproportionately high percentage of the wealth and power in this country.  Minorities do not have the power to oppress white people except potential rap/hip hop artists.  That is the only industry in this country that they control.

And what difference does it make if some people who point out racism are racists themselves?  Does that make racism okay?  Think of when the police use a serial killer to help them profile and catch another serial killer.  Does the guy they catch get to whine becuause the guy that pointed him out was also a killer?  No.  But he usually gets killed by the police in a dramatic shoot out anyway.  So it doesn't really matter.  But statistics almost absolutely show that white people catch more serial killers than black people  And that is why white people don't get to scream about being victims of racism.  Instead they have to just grumble under their breath.

And the Steelers stink like a box of farts gone bad in the basement under a pile of Christmas lights, spiked heels, and moldy nipple clamps.