- Joined
- Aug 22, 2017
- Messages
- 4,950
- Reaction score
- 1,134
Outrageous!
I agree, not because she is "indocrinating" (absolutely nobody will change their mind in their class) but because its a waste of money.
Since when did Karl Marx said that there are 1000 genders?
He didn't but its the same objective via conflict theory. Instead of separating people by way of economic classes (e.g. the proletariate and the boug), the new trend (since total economic centralization isn't convincing anymore) is the conflict created around race.
Same shit, different tact.
So what is the "seizing the means of production" endgame in this new communism?
You got a source for that? Not that its hard to believe, I just like having a source for fun facts like that.Lesbian couples normally stop even attempting a simulacra of sexual activity after six months.
Long term lesbian couples are almost all completely celibate.
Tangent coming:
It's interesting to see how short form media actually makes these types of things more problematic. Whether you agree with her or not (I don't), the point she's trying to make is probably extremely deep and complex and impossible to properly articulate with 140 character blurbs, yet here she is doing so. And destroying whatever larger point she thinks is important.
Why any educated individual would try to communicate intelligently via a forum designed to curtail full expression is beyond me.
You can reach far more people via social media outlets like Twitter than through traditional means available to a professor. I agree with you that the limited character count makes it a doomed endeavor, just saying I can understand why some might want to take that risk to try and spread their message.Tangent coming:
It's interesting to see how short form media actually makes these types of things more problematic. Whether you agree with her or not (I don't), the point she's trying to make is probably extremely deep and complex and impossible to properly articulate with 140 character blurbs, yet here she is doing so. And destroying whatever larger point she thinks is important.
Why any educated individual would try to communicate intelligently via a forum designed to curtail full expression is beyond me.
So why didnt the alt-right popped up then if leftist lunacy has been going on forever?
Because the ideas of Richard Spencer can be traced back decades, to people like David Lane and the Order the ideas of white nationalism, the ZOG CT, Holocaust denial and the such.
Because it has been something like a 3 generation process as the academic leftists of the 1960's bred a slightly larger generation of academic leftists in the 80's-90's who bred an even larger generation of academic leftists in the 2010's who now have near-total control of academia. The alt-right movement only caught on once the tipping point of this process was reached.
If she had a larger point why'd she choose to write it out on a platform that only allows 140 characters?
You can each far more people via social media outlets like Twitter than through traditional means available to a professor. I agree with you that the limited character count makes it a doomed endeavor, just saying I can understand why some might want to take that risk to try and spread their message.
Why is regular conservatism not good enough for that?
Because conservatism depends on a common culture.
Sure but she is somewhat important, she is a professor at a respected university.Foxnews must have a few interns who scowl the internet and twitter for every crazy left loon in order to make it out to be a fair representation of liberals. This is an example of how the news media feeds cultural dissension.
Fat ugly and undesirable menopausal white lady comes to terms with never having children or a family by arguing that having children and a family is evil and racist if you're white.
Why is regular conservatism not good enough for that?