Policing Is Hard Work

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, Bodigger said:

The bias is showing.  This is not a conservative statement.  It is, as Biden would say, "fact over truth".

I’m not saying it’s a conservative statement. I wrote:

”In one context, this has truth. For minds that are paradigm-locked in a conservative mindset, this partial truth will be easily to see and will be contextualized within a conservative framework.”

I am not pointing to the accuracy of the statement. I am pointing to the contextualization of the statement within one’s larger worldview. A mind with a conservative mindset will contextualize that statement within a larger conservative framework. A mind with a progressive mindset will contextualize that statement within a progressive mindset.

Notice how your mind keeps interpreting statements to maintain a conservative ideology. It’s not the statement itself, it’s how you are using the statement to re-enforce the conservative ideology you hold.

1 hour ago, Bodigger said:

Isn't this statement telling us what we need to work on?  Educating police is great, but educating the people and helping them with gains of integrity will make immense improvement.

Again. . . I’m not saying that this point doesn’t have value. I’m saying that you are not seeing this within a larger picture.

In the decathlon training example. . . You keep saying that it’s important to practice jumping over hurdles. OF COURSE that’s important!!! It’s one of the events!!! Yet you are not seeing how it relates to the bigger picture because you don’t want to acknowledge some of those elements. For example, imagine you are coaching a decathlete and are encouraging him to have a strong work ethic and to practice jumping over the hurdles each day. Yet one day you realize that he has 10 pound weights locked to his ankles that he cannot remove. This will interfere with developing proper hurdling form and could cause injury. Is it important that he practices jumping over hurdles? Of course. Yet it’s also important to remove the weights from his ankles. As well, it’s important to identify all your athletes that have weights locked to their ankles, who/what is locking those weights to their ankles and how to correct the system locking those weights to some athletes’ ankles.

One problem with the conservative view is that they refuse to see the weights on some of their athletes. They refuse to see that there is a system locking weights to some of the athletes ankles. They hold tightly to a false belief that all athletes have equal opportunity and they just need to train hard to be successful.

You can say 1 million times that it is important to practice jumping over hurdles to be a successful decathlete and I will agree with you every time. And each time, I will point out that that is necessary, yet insufficient.  It is also necessary to unlock and remove weights locked to some athletes’ ankles. 

The belief that “things were better back in the 1950s” is a great example. It myopically focuses on a narrow subset of societal dynamics and turns a blind eye to the 10 pound weights strapped to minorities ankles (such as Jim Crow laws).

Now imagine you have 10 pound weights locked to your ankles and your competitors do not. How motivated would you be to train? And imagine when you say it’s not fair that you have 10 pound weights locked to your ankles and others without those weights tell you that you are “playing the victim and just being lazy”. . . Do some athletes with 10 lb weights exagerrate and complain they are carrying 30 lb weights? Of course, yet this does not nullify the 10 lb weights they are actually burdened with. . . You will not be able to have a broad understanding if you cannot see and acknowledge these biased weights. Yet to see these biased weights, you would need to let go of certain conservative beliefs that you are attached/identified with. 

[Onemanwolfpac]

3 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

I don’t disagree with everything you write. Yet you seem to be locked into some conservative ideology. You can dwell within that ideology if you like or you can expand beyond it. If you want to expand beyond it, arguing for the ideology won’t help. As I previously suggested, I think listening to Giridharadas speak about economics and social structures would help to expand your view. 

Also, you might be interested in reading up on the impacts of UBI programs around the world. 

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/2/19/21112570/universal-basic-income-ubi-map

Such UBI programs could be integrated with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. For example, the lowest level is meeting one’s survival needs such as food, water and shelter. If these needs are met, would most people become lazy and avoid work? Or would most people move up to the next level up and actually be more productive? . . . As well, the question of wealth inequality arises. Is it best to store wealth in a billionaires 3rd yacht that he doesn’t even use? Or would it be better to inject that wealth into raising minimum wage for people struggling to get buy on two jobs?

I don't necessarily agree with conservatives entirely either. I'll steal JBP line and say, "British Liberal," or more moderate but, in the era of sjw, victim card, and simping to blm by businesses or Democrats kneeling. There's no proof but a leak of Bill Clinton saying Obama will be getting him his coffee. No doubt, there's racism in the party and yet, it is the party to always play that hand of cards. Its gross. Its something that pisses me off about the party because it eliminates conversation despite a lack of a argument. Its lazy. 

Human nature evolved to preserve energy. UBI is sloth. Do nothing. Free money. The Ramsey Vid shows people making more than going to work. Clearly not a stem degree. If AI happened, doctors, surgeons, CPAs, engineers, tech and trades all got decimated, UBI would be a alternative to the new world. Not now. 

You must acknowledge that, stressors like weight lifting, learning to code and others HELP build new pathways in the Brain. The alternative leads to sloth. 

Inequality is a weak argument. How do you compensate competing with Lebron in NBA? How about sexual attractiveness? Talent or skill set? There's always going to be unfair comparisons? Should i hunch on dates because i am taller to it fair? 

There's a tech lead manager at my gym. At gunpoint, he is forced to hire women regardless of whether or not they can code. This is stupid. When too much of the diversity and affirmative action despite lack of skill, talent or ability happens, you abandon ship. He is looking elsewhere for work a career because this is a sinking ship. It goes back into the wage gap myth. 

 

My problem with the articles around the world for ubi is, its a globalist agenda. It is always a good indication of power and the narratives being sold. We don't get news. We get political ideology. If AI, i bring on UBI. Till then, it promotes sloth as the vid with Ramsey suggested. 

[Bodigger]

51 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Yet to see these weights, you would need to let go of certain conservative beliefs that you are attached/identified with. 

I understand what you are illustrating and I am working on this awareness.  Thank you for pointing out these defects.  However, I have witnessed the Left saying and advocating for things like gay marriage, and turning the other way on family matters for decades.  Religion gets bashed as well, and they are advocates for family values.  I am not religious, but I see value in what they support.

[Onemanwolfpac]

1 hour ago, Bodigger said:

 

The bias is showing.  This is not a conservative statement.  It is, as Biden would say, "fact over truth".

Isn't this statement telling us what we need to work on?  Educating police is great, but educating the people and helping them with gains of integrity will make immense improvement.

Great post. 

The narrative is lazy. Orange man bad. Now, cops bad. Not, how about reform in crime areas? Its been over 60yrs of government freebies. And how's it working out? 

When Japan had fucking atom bombs dropped, i didn't recall Japanese going craxy, flipping cars, and burning down their cities. Oh wait, they were in concentration camps. They lost land. They had lives ruined. 

Has the government repaid these fuck ups in history? Irrelevant because of Asian socio-economic and academic excellence. Its not even a talking point. 

How about the Chinese and historical racism and work on the railway? Historical racism in Hollywood which is hard left btw. 

Education is key. The victim card is not. Imho, the government would have destroyed the Asian community by pumping in more intervention and money. 

[Forestluv]

7 minutes ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

You must acknowledge that, stressors like weight lifting, learning to code and others HELP build new pathways in the Brain. The alternative leads to sloth. 

Inequality is a weak argument. How do you compensate competing with Lebron in NBA? How about sexual attractiveness? Talent or skill set? There's always going to be unfair comparisons? Should i hunch on dates because i am taller to it fair? 

You are over-estimating meritocracy and under-estimating inequality. 

If we have a bag of seeds and half the seeds go into high quality fertile soil and half the seeds go into low quality clay soil, that inequality will have a profound impact on the growth of the plants. The seeds in the low quality clay soil are at a disadvantage. A system of meritocracy will give an advantage to the seeds in the high quality fertile soil.

 

[Onemanwolfpac]

3 minutes ago, Bodigger said:

I understand what you are illustrating and I am working on this awareness.  Thank you for pointing out these defects.  However, I have witnessed the Left saying and advocating for things like gay marriage, and turning the other way on family matters for decades.  Religion gets bashed as well, and they are advocates for family values.  I am not religious, but I see value in what they support.

Imho, its worse. The amount of pushing it on children is disgusting. The weaponized false accusations of metoo who Biebs called out most recently, tranny story time with children, putting tran ideas onto children and or hormones? Government education slinging drugs on little boys before they had a chance to fully develop. 

The intervention of affirmative action, status quo hiring, diversity hirings isn't helpful. It plays into the sense that someone is incapable with a lack of capacity otherwise which is racist. The bar being lowered for one community and raised for the Asian community. Blatant racism. How these institutions get away with it is appalling. 

Jocko nailed a solution. More training. More time on scenarios something activists could do besides crying and rioting. I don't ever remember hearing Asians play the victim card regarding a long history of racism. 

[Onemanwolfpac]

3 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

You are over-estimating meritocracy and under-estimating inequality. 

If we have a bag of seeds and half the seeds go into high quality fertile soil and half the seeds go into low quality clay soil, that inequality will have a profound impact on the growth of the plants. The seeds in the low quality clay soil are at a disadvantage. A system of meritocracy will give an advantage to the seeds in the high quality fertile soil.

 

Whats the alternative? Should we all be cut off by the knees so, we're all short? This is Darwin. Survival of the fittest. Mother nature doesn't give a shit. The fact we are here means, our genes won throughout history and replicated. Its not to say, things are perfect. My city is not burning down. I am not cheering on riots. 

The onus is on the individual to stand on their two feet and make something of oneself. Run to the government and more of the same will happen. WHY? INTERVENTION IS THE PROBLEM. It coincides with victim cards. 

Winners focus on winning. 

[Forestluv]

8 minutes ago, Bodigger said:

I understand what you are illustrating and I am working on this awareness.  Thank you for pointing out these defects.  However, I have witnessed the Left saying and advocating for things like gay marriage, and turning the other way on family matters for decades.  Religion gets bashed as well, and they are advocates for family values.  I am not religious, but I see value in what they support.

We could have a discussion on what “family values” are. To me, “family values” include things like having loving parents that support the children. They help the children with their homework. They encourage their children to explore their interests in pursue their passions. They don’t abuse their children. To me, “family values” has very little to do with wether one parent sticks his penis into a vagina of another parent. Using “family values” in that context would be disingenuous, imo. A heterosexual couple can have “family values” and a gay couple can have “family values”.

I think it’s fine if parents decide that they want to participate in a particular religion and live by the values of that religion. Yet it’s not ok for those parents to force other parents to live by their religious values. If a couple believes that homosexuality is unnatural and immoral, that is fine - they can be a heterosexual couple and live in the righteousness of their natural and moral life. However, they don’t get to tell me that I must love and marry someone from the opposite sex. They don’t get to create a two-tiered social system in which heterosexuals are at a higher tier than homosexuals. 

[Forestluv]

21 minutes ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

Whats the alternative? Should we all be cut off by the knees so, we're all short? This is Darwin. Survival of the fittest. Mother nature doesn't give a shit. The fact we are here means, our genes won throughout history and replicated. Its not to say, things are perfect. My city is not burning down. I am not cheering on riots. 

The onus is on the individual to stand on their two feet and make something of oneself. Run to the government and more of the same will happen. WHY? INTERVENTION IS THE PROBLEM. It coincides with victim cards. 

Winners focus on winning. 

Again, you are over-estimating meritocracy and under-estimating inequality. By “inequality”, I am not referring to differences in genetics. I am referring to inequalities imposed by society.

You seem to like imagery of competition and winning. Consider this scenario. Imagine we have a running race of 20 kilometers. Of course some people will have certain advantages. Some people may be a good height for running. People that are super short or super tall will be at a disadvantage. As well, some people will have an advantage because they had a healthier diet and exercised regularly. People that are overweight will be at a disadvantage. . . I’m not talking about those inequalities. Now imagine that we say “Anyone who has a name starting with the letter ‘R’ will have to carry a 10 kilo backpack during the race. That is unequal discrimination. If the people with names starting with the letter ‘R’ say “This isn’t fair. Why should I have to carry this burden and not the others?”. That is NOT playing the victim. Of course they could exaggerate and say “It’s not fair I have to carry a 30 kilo backpack” - yet that exaggeration does not nullify that they have to carry a 10 kilo backpack. 

The “alternative” is that we create a fairer system by removing systemic biased weights AND encouraging people to take individual responsibility, work hard etc. I agree with you regarding certain aspects of meritocracy. Yet we cannot have a fair meritocracy when there are underlying systemic / institutional biases. If people whose names start with ‘R’ are burdened with extra weight, that is not fair. Are some people with ‘R’ names lazy, stupid and irresponsible? Of course!! Just like people with names starting with any other letter can be lazy, stupid and irresponsible. The unfair part is adding an extra 10 kilo backpack to people with ‘R’ names. 

[Leo Gura]

14 hours ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

My point is that, the nuclear family was intact better in the 50s than the present day.

By that logic you would really love it in Saudi Arabia.

It's easy to maintain a strong nuclear family with force and oppression. When a woman cannot even get a credit card or passport without her husband's approval, yeah, she will stay in the nuclear family. She has no viable alternative.

[Consept]

Meritocracy is really a myth, not a complete myth but a myth in terms of how its portrayed. Here is a real world example - In the UK, 7% of the population go to private schools (Eton, Harrow etc), these are schools in which entry is gained via fee paying so essentially anyone can go if they have the money, there is an entrance test but theres also one at state schools. These schools cost an average £15k a year for a day pupil or £33k for boarding. So most people will not be able to afford this. The number of people who went to private schools, where the prime minister Johnson also attended, and are current members of the prime ministers cabinet is 64%. Hugely over represented and literally only because their parents had the money, there are many people that have higher IQs as well as better understanding of social issues and want to get into politics, but it is very difficult if you arent privately educated. Now of course this is an advantage and is nothing to do with meritocracy, when you go to school at somewhere like Eton the chances are your parents are very well connected, these connections are not available to your average state school attendee. 

So where is the meritocracy in this scenario?

[Forestluv]

@Consept Unequal access to education and skill development is an issue. I also have an issue with who gets to decide what counts as “skill” and “achievement”. For example, in an academic institution hiring new faculty, who gets to decide what counts as “skill” and “achievement” In the hiring process? Ime, a committee of white men aged 60+ have a very different idea of “skill” and “achievement” than a committee with diverse ages, ethnicities and genders. 

During one of our hires, there was actually a committee of old white crusty men that evaluated job candidates in the biology department. For one candidate, they spent about 30 minutes with her and didn’t even go to her job talk. In their written report, they recommended that we do not hire her because she was “too motherly”. In their meritocratic ideology, “fatherly” attributes count as skills and “motherly” attributes count as unskilled and disqualify an applicant. 

[Consept]

8 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

@Consept Unequal access to education and skill development is an issue. I also have an issue with who gets to decide what counts as “skill” and “achievement”. For example, in an academic institution hiring new faculty, who gets to decide what counts as “skill” and “achievement” In the hiring process? Ime, a committee of white men aged 60+ have a very different idea of “skill” and “achievement” than a committee with diverse ages, ethnicities and genders. 

During one of our hires, there was actually a committee of old white crusty men that evaluated job candidates in the biology department. For one candidate, they spent about 30 minutes with her and didn’t even go to her job talk. In their written report, they recommended that we do not hire her because she was “too motherly”. In their meritocratic ideology, “fatherly” attributes count as skills and “motherly” attributes count as unskilled and disqualify an applicant. We actually hired her and it turns out she is more “fatherly” than I am! She is “tougher” than I am on students and sometimes kids me about how I’m a sucker and how easily students can take advantage of me. 

Exactly, thats a good point, 'someone' is deciding what has merit. Another example is that you could make the argument that those who provide the most value to society should be paid the most ie doctors, nurses, scientists, whoever. But who gets paid the most are top of the tree sports people and actors. Now of course this is based on 'market value' as in these industries generate a lot of money, but its arguable that even within these industries people that make films happen ie director of photography or screen writers, are actually under paid compared to actors. They do of course provide value to society but do the provide 10,000 times plus compared to a doctor? 

 

[Onemanwolfpac]

4 hours ago, Consept said:

I see this point a lot that things were better for black people in the 50s, i think its come about from Trump and maga, but its a ridiculous statement, how could it be better for black people if there was segregation, redlining, no civil rights. You cant really have it both ways and assert that racism is better than before but then in the same breath say that we should go back to more racist times 

Reading comprehension isn't your strength. Let me use bold. 

 

NUCLEAR FAMILY WAS STRONGER IN THE 50S.

[Consept]

13 minutes ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

Reading comprehension isn't your strength. Let me use bold. 

 

NUCLEAR FAMILY WAS STRONGER IN THE 50S.

So is your point that we should go back to how it was in the 50s? Please show a bit of respect when you post replies to me even if you think im dumb or whatever, i havent disrespected you 

[Forestluv]

14 minutes ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

NUCLEAR FAMILY WAS STRONGER IN THE 50S.

In the 1950s:

Inter-racial marriage was illegal.

Same-sex marriage was illegal.

Children were segregated into different schools based on race.

Do you think it’s a good idea to return to those aspects of the 1950s?

[Onemanwolfpac]

55 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

By that logic you would really love it in Saudi Arabia.

It's easy to maintain a strong nuclear family with force and oppression. When a woman cannot even get a credit card or passport without her husband's approval, yeah, she will stay in the nuclear family. She has no viable alternative.

And Government replacing the fatherless homes and promote "proud single mother" rhetoric is a better alternative? No dice. The alternative now is to run to the state and we get more high crime democratic states. We have leaders here kneeling in cowardly fashion to blm. I guarantee sooner or later, racism is going to be leaked likely before the election. Jesus called out these frauds thousands of years ago. Virtue signaling isn't new. 

How many looting and rioting are from single mom households? Since no fault divorce its been a abysmal nightmare for these communities but a huge cash grab. The same ones championing for minorities are out for personal gain and power. 

Imagine, someone in office who was financially responsible? Can pay for rent. God forbid, learned to code. Started say, a tech company and donated THEIR MONEY to said charities. 

Forced oppression has flipped. What's the divorce stats? How about when looking at gender? College educated? When we look at crime, the single biggest determining factor is fathers in homes. Talk about oppression. 

You see these tall, physically (dare i say) masculine looking fellas but they act like women. No fathers. They have hissy fits. They throw tantrums. Entitled for give me. Not, do the work. Oppression in the form of servitude. Not ownership or responsibility ie pick a ideal mate, father, husband etc. Nit dead beat then cling to victim clout. No, run to the state. Print of resources. 

 The dave ramsey vid shows that example of sloth. Why work? Free money. When employers start to fire and hire new employees who will work, its more victim card. 

 

There's ownership 8n police force agreeing to better service and training but the crime rate in the communities mostly democratic btw are pointing the finger. Victim status. 

 

 

Welcome to the matrix. Champion the same people who will exploit you. You got cancel culture and fired for pointing out that truth. 

That being, the individual not the state will fix things. Again, people won't do the work. 

[TrustTheProcess]

@Onemanwolfpac

Lol, you have no idea how complex the issues you have brought up are. I don't think you are ready to seriously dissect and understand them. Good luck on your journey brother. 

[Onemanwolfpac]

1 minute ago, Serotoninluv said:

In the 1950s:

Inter-racial marriage was illegal.

Same-sex marriage was illegal.

Children were segregated into different schools based on race.

Do you think it’s a good idea to return to those aspects of the 1950s?

Your missing the forest for the trees. 

Nuclear family was better off than before government handouts. More free money isn't the solution. 

Better cops is great. You think more money fixes these communities? Move to Chicago or Detroit. 

The longer people rely on the state, things won't change. Daddy government isn't your or my father. The Dems will not fix life for you or i nor republicans. The responsibility and sole ownership is on the individual to step up. 

You went to the equality argument which is short of hitler and the nazis. Blonde hair and blue eyes. The nonsense about equality is a fallacy but it is that same authoritarian crap only more malevolent. It is combined with fuzzy bunnies and good feels. At what cost? 

Should you be chop down from the knees so someone short can compete with you in the dating world? How do you fix iq? There's no metric or scientific data that shows how to. Mitigate being clinically retarded. How about sexual attractiveness? Should you or i be made to look the same in the argument of "fairness?" 

AOC is a classic example. Can't pay rent but is in office. Something should be done by someone else. Not, she learned to code and risks everything in a tech startup. Steal other people's money by running to the government. There's no doing the work or playing to win. Its all. Handouts. Its parasitic. 

Its not the solution. Life goes on. I don't and won't live on those areas. If i start a business, do i do so in a America that is promoting socialism and communist talking points? I take 100x the consequences or taxed into oblivion? Obv not. 

More business is going elsewhere. And can you blame them? 

[Onemanwolfpac]

7 minutes ago, louhad said:

@Onemanwolfpac

Lol, you have no idea how complex the issues you have brought up are. I don't think you are ready to seriously dissect and understand them. Good luck on your journey brother. 

At least i have the balls to come at it head on. 

Let's fix police but i hear radio silence regarding the issues i listed. BLM isn't talking about it. 

UBI. Free money. Privilege. = lazy! 

I do think the Asians are doing it right. 

You too bro. Good luck on your path.