/edu/ - Education

>>8763
Are you fucking retarded. In other words a society specifically designed to oppress me, many of my friends, and entire ethnic groups, sexual minorities, neurological minorities, etc. It's materially impossible for me to support your system because it results in my being destroyed. Which proves the psychopathy of you right wingers: that you think this is okay because you think I deserve to die.

>>10665

Why are you entertaining bait

>>10399

Can you provide a source?

>>6659
> The Nazis and killers were punished, but many were rehabilitated. It's a complex ethical and moral question which most people frankly do not want to go into because it is so much easier to say "fascists are subhumans to be killed" rather than to try and stop and save these deluded people.

Reading as I play Wolfenstein. It’s funny, because in this last level I’m trying to beat General Deathshead is trying to guilt B.J.Blaskowics over the families of the Nazis he has killed. Sardonically, it’s noted he must have killed thousands!

>>6659
Ok anon, but fact of the matter is, the resources and bandwidth needed to save and reform any of these people aren't available on the left, or will be in a very long time. For that reason, we can't let the humanity of these people interfere with our goals, even if recognize these things to be true. I am for crushing the fascist, while also recognizing their humanity. I do not shed any tears for them, but rather who they could've become. I hope for the day when the Left can reform reactionaries and the like. Until then, it's a struggle for power.

>>5578
>African Americans and Latinos report lower levels of trust, regardless of where they live.
but what are the reasons for this? is it because they are hated by nonblacks or nonhispanics? "regardless of where they live" includes homogenous societies with large majority black/latino?
>THE DIFFERENCE IN TRUST BETWEEN A 100% WHITE NEIGHBOURHOOD AND A 1% WHITE NEIGHBOURHOOD WHERE NEIGHBOURS SHARE THE SAME LANGUAGE AND CULTURE
you know "diversity" doesn't mean non-white?
>Economy is important in determining trust, materialists proved correct again
in a land of plenty there aren't things to kill over, or steal.

>>5589
>Blacks are genetically predisposed to commit more crimes.
an extension of their lower average IQ
>There is a genetic IQ gap between races.
genetic or not, there is a gap, and if it were entirely environmental, then when things became more equal, the gap should have closed, do you have data proving this? mlk jr got black voting rights in 1965, that's plenty of time.
>single motherhood is another factor which is stronger than race [as a predictor of criminality]
what does that mean, that the women are doing the crime, or the criminal was raised by a single mother? anyone who is a single mother made bad choices, and the partner was a bad choice if he is the kind of scum who leaves his partner, so are you surprised an improperly raised kid born of two lowlifes turns criminal? not to mention they are probably poorer too without a breadwinner.
>if we look at poor countries without any inequality or active conflicts we see that the homicide rate is ridiculously low… rates between 1-3
again, nothing to kill over. wtf does 1-3 mean? 1-3%? 0.1-0.3%?
>citing wikipedia
don't.

>>5601
>A persons IQ can fluctuate by 13 points in a few months thanks to wealth and poverty.
>researchers found stress hinders people's cognitive performance
no shit sherlock

I'm interested in what you leftists think of The Bell Curve by Hernstein and Murray. Mostly the focus isn't specifically on race, but pretty much every single bad thing like single motherhood, low income, low education, low SES, is negeatively correlated with high IQ. Specifically, you should find the section on b/w test bias, in ch13, and in affirmative action in education (where they discuss how the situation looks from the ground) ch19, p252 in this pdf, interesting.

>>6706
>nazi-crossdress.png
doubtful it's real. the nazis hated homos and similar degeneracies. here's some reasons why given by himmler:
they are cowards, delusional
they will have in-group preference which undermines a meritocracy
"our people will die out"
https://nseuropa.org/English/Heinrich%20Himmler%20speech%20-%2018.02.1937.pdf

>>7010
see attached please. they pissed the money away with bloated administration, an enforced black/white ratio (with expensive bussing), plenty of magnet schools. the funding was a strain on the area.

>>12146
>mlk jr got black voting rights in 1965, that's plenty of time.
political equality is not economic equality, this being the main thing liberals cannot get their head around
>the bell curve
lmao

>>12160
>political equality is not economic equality
I avoided referencing the bell curve there as I can see it's well challenged here. but picrel, they get what they work for.
>attached, gould
I've read a few criticisms of them, to find all of them misinterpreted the book, some so wildly you wonder if they had even read the book at all. so I'll read the section "CritiqueofTheBellCurve"
>slashing social programs canbe so abetted byan argument thatbeneficiaries cannotbeaided duetoinborn cognitivelimits ex-pressed as low1Q scores
the point of slashing the programs were to build community and to discourage the stupid from making rash decisions. H&M find it is mostly the low IQ who are on welfare and related
>Intelligence, in their formulation, mustbe depictable as asinglenumber, capableof rankingpeople in linearorder, geneticallybased, and effectively immutable. Ifany ofthese premises arefalse, theentire argument collapses.
There is no requirement of a genetic basis of intelligence to be true.
>Disingenuousness of content
H&M compared differences between groups, including race, but their main focus was intelligence. Unfortunately in almost every criticism there's screeching about race and no solid acknowledgement of anything else.
>the book gets validity from being big and intimidating!
jfc
>no justification for g
while g was mostly given as an assumption, there are sections, including the one he sites about the three schools, in bell curve which show
>tests of the varying in-telligences in his theory seem to be intercorrelated (p19)
Gould admits this himself before going completely offtopic, saying "it isn't indicative of the cause".
>Admittedly, factoranalysis isadifficult andmathematical sub-ject, butitcan beexplained tolayreaders witha geometrical formu-lation [which I used but admit didn't "suffice for adequate explanation"]
lol, lmao
>…so, althoughI offersome sketchyhints below,readers shouldnot question their ownIQ's ifthetopic stillseems arcane.
you don't understand, don't feel bad, it's my fault!
>Inanycase,onecan't graspthe issueatall withouta clear expositionof factoranalysis
>says it again, [proof required]
if he can't explain his evidence it means nothing
ironically, just earlier he accused the bell curve of appearing ofcusicated and the text looking complicated (it isn't).
>V-bias
TBC acknowledges affrimative action and you can see and picrel what they think of it. They dismiss racism as being prominent in denying opportunity to blacks in their time, and anyway, how does blacks being treated socially unfairly by society affect their reaction times when tested?
>they don't show the scatter plot
finally a good criticism
>muh correlationdoesnotimplycause
so propose a different mechanism!
>appendix 4 statement
also good argument, I will check those
Gould writes in a way that suggests TBC promotes "the cessation of Head Start" (TBC notes that Head Start may have other benefits but not increasing intelligence)
>WemustfightthedoctrineofTheBellCurvebothbecauseitiswrongandbecauseitwill,ifactivated,cutoffallpossibilityofpropernurturanceforeveryone'sintelligence.Ofcoursewecannotallberocketscientistsorbrainsurgeons(tousethetwocurrentslangsynecdochesforsmartestofthesmart),but
critiqueofTheBellCurvethosewhocan'tmightberockmusiciansorprofessionalathletes(andgainfarmoresocialprestigeandsalarythereby)—whileotherswillindeedservebystandingandwaiting
>conclusion
>useless irrelevant blurb about TBC suggested policies preventing people from becoming rockstars or athletes
>strawmans TBC as denying an environmental factor like childhood nutrition in intelligence

so the only criticisms worth investigating:
>g is contested
>they don't show a scatter plot and they don't use the conventional goodness of fit, and when they do, the relationships are tiny
big if true

>>12171
you're about 30 years behind on the literature in this debate m8

>>12179
What's the new lit then?

>three weeks
>no replies
>page 2
sure is slow around here.

Playboi Carti skeleton but its Communist




Whole lotta red, uh
Whole lotta red
One shot to the head (One shot to the head)
Bougie, you dead
I don't give a fuck 'bout a roader
Kill a piggie off red
Just bought a new K
That's a brand new leg
Got a brand new org
That's some brand new friends, huh
Got a brand new bag, hold up
And some brand new ends, hold up
Got a brand new troops, uh
That's a brand new cadre, huh
Got a brand new watch, uh
Skeleton, hold up (What?)

>>12258
Very nice!

>>5589
>A: There are two types of diversity
Making a hard distinction between race and culture is meaningless. A race creates a culture and the culture shapes the race. It's called gene-environment interaction. So by controlling for culture you also control for racial effects and vise versa.
>B: single motherhood is another factor which is stronger than race.
See A. There is no reason to assume that the genetic proclivity for single motherhood is the same for all races.
>The famous IQ map of the world I posted Is wrong.
Lynn's IQ map has been replicated. There is also no real reason to assume Africa has an average IQ equivalent with Europe or Asia considering their lack of historic achievements.
>Another famous IQ researcher Eysenck has had his papers retracted or accepting money from tobacco companies I think.
Grasping at straws.

>>12370
>See A. There is no reason to assume that the genetic proclivity for single motherhood is the same for all races.
Deboonked by the presence of sub-saharans who don't have this specific problem.
But sure, keep it up with the circular reasoning where everything is 100% inherent.
>Lynn's IQ map has been replicated
Did you forget the sentence below the one that you're responding to? Lynn's methodology was complete shit. On top of the fact that most non-Western figures were estimates and not based on tests, the few cases when it was the latter was sampled from unrepresentative subsets of a population.

>>12373
>Deboonked
Your position ultimatetly requires that humans living in Europe, Asia and Africa underwent the exact same selection pressures for thousands of years. The existance of divergent evolution practically guarantees that any trait frequency with a non-zero heritability differs between racial groups. Keep in mind that there was enough time for nature to create the racial variance in humans we see today so unless *somehow*, *for some reason* a trait like procilivity to single motherhood is immune to natural selection what you're saying is simply absurd.
>circular reasoning where everything is 100% inherent
Retard i literally said "and the culture shapes the race." Absolutetly fucking no one believes in your strawmen. Environment matters, just not as much as you'd like it to.
>Lynn's methodology was complete shit.
That's just a thing you say. Maybe it's true or maybe not, but either way it's still a fact of the matter that Lynn's numbers were replicated (https://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/12/overall-pisa-rankings-include-america.html).
>Inb4 "but that's not the same"
Every global metric you could think of that correlates with IQ also overlaps with Europe, Asia and Africa exactly in the way you'd expect if Lynn's IQ numbers were valid. You can take potshots at the methodology, but there is no practical reason to doubt the validity.

>>12370
Areas closer to the equator have higher parasite loads which lowers 'tism quotient if a person grows up in that area

Furthermore Iodine deficiency which is common in many regions of Africa and south America among other areas cause cretinism

>>12376
Your first paragraph misses the entire point, which is that the specific trait of single motherhood doesn't seem to be that genetically determined based on the fact that two genetically related groups have different rates of it.
Also, the highest rates of single parenthood are in the US, Russia and Western Europe. Are European-descended people genetically prone to single parenthood? No, because other European groups don't have that high of a rate.

>isteve
>.blogspot
Lol.

>>12378
>the specific trait of single motherhood doesn't seem to be that genetically determined based on the fact that two genetically related groups have different rates of it.
Do you even know how genetic predispositions even work?
<"An increased chance or likelihood of developing a particular disease based on the presence of one or more genetic variants and/or a family history suggestive of an increased risk of the disease. Having a genetic predisposition does not mean an individual will develop the disease. Lifestyle and environmental factors can also affect an individual's risk of disease. Also called genetic susceptibility, hereditary predisposition, and inherited predisposition."
THe fact that technology or culture shapes a trait doesn't mean you can throw genetics out the window and everyone is equal. Fuck this is so dumb.
>.blogspot
you aren't even on the level of 15 second google searches you dumb uyghur. blogposts are 3 leagues above you.
>Also, the highest rates of single parenthood are in the US, Russia and Western Europe. Are European-descended people genetically prone to single parenthood? No
You don't actually know that. And the original point was that you can't just point to an environmental factor to disprove race as a cause if the environmental factor can be partially racial in origin.

>>12379
> doesn't mean you can throw genetics out the window and everyone is equal. Fuck this is so dumb.
But genetics tells us that in general societies are pretty much genetically equal.

>>12379
Obviously if a group is more predisposed to single parenthood it doesn't mean that 100% of them will live under single parents, but the group should similar rates across different places and have it higher than other groups. We don't see that with single parenthood for any group and they all internally have wildly different rates of it.
>You don't actually know that
Uh, so whites/europeans are more prone to it? Wait, wasn't it blacks? Or is it both? You're acting more schizo right now.
I know Euros aren't genetically predisposed to it because even though western europe has a higher rate than sub-saharan Africa, in the US the situation is reversed with European-descended people having less rates of it than African-descended people. Therefore its cause is more environmental than genetic.
>And the original point was that you can't just point to an environmental factor to disprove race as a cause if the environmental factor can be partially racial in origin.
So why didn't Africans reproduce the same environment that African-Americans did that caused them to have a higher rate of single parenthood? Why did Europeans in Europe reproduce the environment that American blacks did but Europeans in America didn't? What you're doing right now is unfalsifiable ad-hoc shit where the evidence against what you're saying is hand-waved.

>>12380
>But genetics tells us that in general societies are pretty much genetically equal.
We share like 99.8% of our DNA with apes so i guess we are mostly the same with them also.
>>12381
>Uh, so whites/europeans are more prone to it? Wait, wasn't it blacks? Or is it both? You're acting more schizo right now.
Your error is that you as a leftoid are physically incapable of just taking a statement at face value and must always read intentions and secret dogwhistles into everything. My stance is evolution doesn't care about equality. Whatever the genetic rate of single motherhood or crime is for Europens won't be exactly the same as that for Asia or Africa. Maybe it's lower, maybe it's higher, maybe it's roughly the same with different variance or whatever. Those are ultimatetly an empirical questions that have to be measured to be answered. In practice when you DO measure stuff like the results are usually Europe/Asia > Africa.
>So why didn't Africans reproduce the same environment that African-Americans did that caused them to have a higher rate of single parenthood?
>Why did Europeans in Europe reproduce the environment that American blacks did but Europeans in America didn't?
The environmental factor for single motherhood are things like access to modern technology, the welfare state or birth control. Western culture was historically dictates by Europeans so Africans had little to no influence of norms in the first place. Besides that i really have no clue what you're asking for.
>What you're doing right now is unfalsifiable ad-hoc shit
Name one thing i said that can't be falsified. 1.

>>12382
>Whatever the genetic rate of single motherhood or crime is for Europens won't be exactly the same as that for Asia or Africa
Well in that case it's higher among whites in Europe and lower among blacks in Africa. But also lower among whites in America but higher among blacks in there. The point is that since the two races have different rates in 4 different environments then it's mostly environmental.
>The environmental factor for single motherhood are things like access to modern technology, the welfare state or birth control
So why do American whites suffer from less single motherhood than European whites even though both of the genetic and your personal environmental variables are in both places are the same?
>Name one thing i said that can't be falsified. 1.
The fact that I pointed out that the rates are inconsistent across races and you just said "this actually only proves my point further!!!!!!!!!11".

>>12382
Oh also
>blacks suffer from a high rate of single parenthood in america
<this is because of their genes bro
>whites suffer from a high rate of single parenthood in Europe
<this is because of the environment bro
Nice double standard.

>>12383
>The point is that since the two races have different rates in 4 different environments then it's mostly environmental.
I'd say the shithole conditions of Africa just pull things out of proportions. Look at the difference in single motherhood rates within countries and that will give you much better estimate.
>So why do American whites suffer from less single motherhood than European whites even though both of the genetic and your personal environmental variables are in both places are the same?
Do they? At any rate it doesn't matter because none of my core arguments are disproven either way.
>The fact that I pointed out that the rates are inconsistent across races
What answer are you even expecting here? First off there are ethnic differences between whites in America and whites in Europe so you can't simply equate the two, second i already listed environmental factors that impact single motherhood and third the world is complex. "You said race matters but why then can't i reduce everything in life down to this one variable, clearly race is totally 100% meaningless". That's retarded. Bottom line is nature doesn't care about equality and blacks are more predisposed towards criminality. Tough luck.

>>12385
Also addendum how the fuck can you say that America and Europe are the same environment? Fuck me that's dumb.

Could somebody debunk this video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GThbANBaX68

>>12377
How can this impact be measured? Keeping in mind that emigrants to america are cream of the crop in their former country, and (American) blacks started retarded.

>>12399
Not really. No.

>>12399
if a lesbian is convicted of raping women would he have the same complaint?
he brings up a valid issue with the prison system but he seems to ignore that sexual assault happens in prisons regardless.
maybe rapists should be housed away from other inmates?

>>6530
That pic kind of annoys me. Sure, there are activists like this, but there are also many people who legit do not realize they're being oppressed and exploited, like a lot of workers in the West.

THE VIDEO OF HILLARY CLINTON COMPLAINING ABOUT CHINA BEING A TOP-DOWN CONTROLLED ECONOMY PLEASE

I'm not sure if it's already in this thread or not but can anyone point to an argument on why Hitler specifically chose the term "Socialist" in "national socialist"

>>25395
because nationalism is inherently socialist and socialism is inherently nationalist (the latter does not apply if you are a retard)

>>25403
nationalism begins as a liberal movement with the french revolution, but has its prehistory in the reformation, where kings would claim sovereignty against the catholic church and so establish independence. it has since been appropriated by both the far left and far right as means of self-determination.
>>25395
national socialism was an existing movement which hitler became part of; he did not create it. the earliest mention of "national socialism" is in 1898, but it becomes official with rudolf jung's "der nationale sozialismus" (1919). in the book, anticapitalism and volkism is specified, with a special interest on fighting usury. there were of course internal divisions in NS, most notably the "socialist" wing in people like strasser, while hitler took the side of the industrialists.

>>6530
A post with this much strawmanning might as well be called a wicker man

>>25637
>replies to a literal 5 year old post with a baseless claim
What a fallacious post.

>>20073
> there are also many people who legit do not realize they're being oppressed and exploited, like a lot of workers in the West.
2 year old post but worth addressing; class consciousness and helping proletariat understand the position they are in is necessary but it's not what the majority of these "activists" do. These people are lifestylists no different from twitter NAFO-tards and the preceding /pol/fags. They don't truly believe in what they shill, they don't even care about the people they claim to be fighting for and would gladly attack members of the groups they claim to represent. I have seen this shit happen. These people are usually terminally online and very vocal, making themselves the 'face' of such things. /pol/'s memes about feminists in 2016 weren't generated AI video, they were thousands of radlibs making idiots of themselves and subsequently making anyone they claimed to represent look like idiots too.

>>25802
You responded to the 5 year old response just as well, retard

I saw someone post a quote accusing George Orwell of raping an indian boy and I need it sauced because if that's true I can shut up 1984 libs forever.

>>25917
Stupid idea, the fact that Orwell did some bad thing it doesnt mean that his book was shit or something, same thing Michael Facoault was implicated of raping little boys (he was gay) too.

>The labor theory of value fails to account for subjective valuation
Marx's theory of value is focused on how value operates on an aggregate level. It is concerned with what, under specific circumstances, makes one object worth a certain quantity of another. What Marx observes is that on a market level, competing firms will see their profit rates diminished until the exchange value (the price) becomes equivalent to the socially necessary labor time that it took to produce it. Thus, over time, the price of a product will come to reflect its production costs.

>Mises's economic calculation problem demonstrates that without price signals generated by private ownership, rational allocation of capital goods is mathematically impossible
Mises mistakes price signals derived from money with means to assess preferences within scarcity. We could imagine a society where money is simply non-accumulable. This society would be qualitatively different from ours as money would "disappear" after each transaction performed yet remain a powerful tool to aggregate preferences amongst situational scarcity. Furthermore, the socialist mode of production seeks to abolish scarcity, it does not claim that it can immediatly abolish scarcity and be done with preferences signal. Engels himself advocated for the usage of labor-vouchers as a mean to replace money.

>Marx's base-superstructure model is too deterministic
Marx's base/superstructure model is not meant to be a deterministic one. Engels in his letter to Joseph Bloch argued precisely the opposite claiming that neither he or Marx advocated for a linear deterministic relation but that rather the base should be seen as the most important in the last instance, as it is through which that man produce his life. That said, he admits that the the base and the superstructure interact with one another in a reciprocal way through the concept of wechselwirkung

>the rate of profit has not fallen
The rate of profit has been continuously falling since the end of ww1 in commodity-producing sectors. There has been a slight adjustment which enabled further profit with the arrival of neoliberal economic policies. However, the profit rate has now fallen to the same level as it was preceding this adjustment period without the extensive tax schemes that used to be implemented. As a result, most companies producing these commodities have shifted towards pooling their profits in finance, leading to financiarization.

>The proletariat in advanced capitalist countries has consistently failed to develop revolutionary class consciousness
The emergence of class consciousness is not a spontaneous and self-organizing phenomena which must mechanically derive from the emergence of capitalism. In the west, class consciousness has emerged many times at different levels and in different places. Lenin assessed that the development of class consciousness could not happen on a broad societal level spontaneously as the worker could not realistically gather all of the information about the various other workers and factories in his country. As such, local conditions could lead to the emergence of class consciousness, but only in the specific constraints of the geographic environment. This is something that has been empirically validated : most workers are capable of understanding the needs for unions and local organization, but don't develop spontaneously awareness about broader movements and trends within capitalism.

>The Hayekian critique goes beyond calculation: dispersed, tacit knowledge embedded in local practices and traditions cannot be aggregated by any central authority
The advent of modern computing has rendered the information problem obsolete. It is now very well possible to aggregate billions upon billions of information to correctly determine and predict certain trends. Big companies have, presumably, modern states have been doing so for years. Your modern smartphone could probably calculate by itself the entire prices of the soviet economy in the 70s, and this very same phone sends everyday an enormous amount of data showing every bit of your "local preferences". Hayek's critique has been empirically refuted

>The withering away of the state is not a theory but a promissory note, and history suggests it never does
Marx's vision of the state is founded upon the idea that the state as an apparatus serves class interests despite whatever it might call itself. The western states, despite calling themselves republican democracies, are ripe with lobbying, corruption, unrepresentative elected officials etc.
When Marx talks about the dissolution of the state, he is pointing out the withering of the mechanism meant to enforce one class' rule. He points towards this because he believes that the proletariat will constitute a universal class after the dissolution of the bourgeoisie, leading to the end of one particular class' interest.
This has been empirically verified in the few times that the proletariat did seize power. The Paris Commune for instance saw the establishment of a local and semi-direct democracy where one class did not hold the monopoly of political power

>Rawlsian liberalism can justify significant redistribution and social provision without requiring the abolition of private property or markets
Rawlsian liberalism rests on the presupposition that the state will accept whatever standard it is held up to be by the masses and supposes that ethical concepts and ideas can become reality by mere rationality. This isn't the case. While Rawls' critique is already highly debatable, it is fundamentally an ethical perception of the State should behave and be, it does not aim to analyze class relations and their roles within society. As such, Rawls doesn't contradict Marx, he only advocates for what a State should be, whilst Marx operates on what the State is and what generates its instability

>Marx's concept of alienation presupposes a fixed, essential human nature oriented toward creative self-realization
Marx's notion of alienation does not rest on a human nature in the same way that we describe a Leopard or Lion's "nature". Marx's human conception rests on "species-being" which is more of a defining characteristic of individuals rather than a fixed behavior lead by instincts. As such, Marx theorizes that human activity serves a purpose and is done so within a certain context. Alienation occurs when an individual is deprived of a better outcome by external factors which he does not have control over. The human nature that Marx speaks of ressembles more of a human potential constrained by alienation than a fixed essence negated under specific circumstances. For instance, a worker could produce for his needs, creatively and in conjunction with the other workers' needs, but is deprived of so by capitalist relations of property.

>The USSR was socialist according to Marx
Okay let's look at what he said. Marx had the Paris Communes as his main inspiration of the dictatorship of the proletariat. We can see this here :
<"Of late, the social-democratic philistine has once more been filled with wholesome terror at the words: Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Well and good, gentlemen, do you want to know what this dictatorship looks like? Look at the Paris Commune. That was the Dictatorship of the Proletariat." - Engels, in the introduction of 1891 to the Civil War in France
<"It was essentially a working class government, the product of the struggle of the producing against the appropriating class, the political form at last discovered under which to work out the economical emancipation of labor." - Marx, in the same book
Now, the Commune had : representative delegates, repossession of the means of productions to give to the workers in the forms of co-ops, democractic assemblies to decide on how to govern. Again, this for Marx was meant to be an intermediate state of repossession of the political and economic power.

Now, let's look at the soviets : no representatives in the soviets, bureaucratic management by the Party of the economy, 70 years of "transition"
That's quite a lot of differences. It is true that originally, Lenin had set out to give the soviets (i.e. the local democratic councils) the political power, which would've indeed ressembled closer to the Commune. However, this did not come to be due to a plurality of factors, hence making the USSR a bureaucratic Party-State with peculiar productive relations.