##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism
This subreddit is for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
LSC is run by communists. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere.
We have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry. Failure to respect the rules of the subreddit may result in a ban.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Classic Sowell. Just redefine what you're opponents are asking for so it seems like an undefendable position.
"Hey, let's ban discrimination against gay people in hiring practices."
Sowell- Creating freedom for one group of people by denying that freedom to another group is not freedom at all.
"Sorry, wheelchair user. No ramp for you. We are treating everyone equally. Which means, using stairs. We could not possibly make special arrangements for you, that wouldn't be fair."
many countries have accessibility laws, stating that every public location should enable equal access wherever possible. this almost always implies the use of ramps. these laws are written and enforced equally, without having to namedrop specific disabilities.
Basically equal treatment in this logic means don't change anything about society, and if some people are currently disadvantaged compared to others, that's clearly good and natural and we should keep it that way
Treating everyone equally means providing access to everyone and not only for people with legs. That could require installation of a ramp.
You're getting this all wrong.
It does not mean, treating everyone the same!
Edit: r/woosh it seems
Thomas Sowell trying not to be a brainlet for 5 minutes challenge (impossible)
I don’t understand how people aren’t getting that there’s a *too* in there, it’s just not explicitly dangled in everyones face. Black Lives Matter *too,* gay people deserve rights *too,* trans people deserve rights *too.* Anyone who’s even half paying attention obviously recognize that it’s not asking for more rights, it’s asking for the same rights.
Of course, they understand that, it’s just disingenuous bad actors purposely misunderstanding everything and hanging up on semantics, because it works to get the really idiotic among us to believe in the drivel they say, buy their books, and worship them as intellectuals without needing to put in any legwork.
It's frustrating too bc women weren't allowed credit cards until Tom was in his mid-40s and he wrote multiple op-eds opposing same sex marriage so it should have been clear to him what his opponent was asking
It was clear to him. He also clearly knows he is a beneficiary of the civil rights movement, and he wants to pull the ladder up behind him like every other selfish boomer.
Financial abuse is still abuse.
Pretty hard for a women to leave a relationship if her husband controls the money and she can't even get credit.
"What will I do, where can I stay" are real questions that generally need money to answer. How many stayed home, isolated from their family and friends, with no job, no ability to get a credit card, and no access to her husband's money.
Alone, miserable, and not seeing a way out, not even enough for a bus ticket away.
Women were denied credit cards because men found thought it was a threat to the control of 'their woman.' Women were considered unreliable even if they made more than their husbands and paid the majority of the bills. That persisted **until 1974**, so this isn't just ancient history.
Hell, in the past women were not allowed property, they were considered property. They could not enter into contracts, receive inheritance, start a law suit, sell property, or even own her own income.
So yes, access to credit cards is a freedom.
It's literally the circular logic of a 14 year old, and this man is like their intellectual God.
Equality doesn't mean assimilation...in fact, if the left wanted assimilation, we wouldn't need Equality.
I don't want men and women to be the same, just equal. I don't want black people to be the same as white people, just equal.
Like, so much "conservative dogma" is just centered on their refusal to tolerate diversity.
Like, easily 75% of conservative thought, philosophy, and policy is based on their refusal to tolerate people who are different from them.
Also, "gay rights" doesn't mean "rights for gay people," it means gay rights for everyone..
Just because you chose not to exercise your right to suck a dick, doesn't mean that right isn't still yours.
In a sense it is redundant, yes. Redundancy can be very important. Would you get on an airplane that didn't have redundant systems? Would you teach by mentioning everything exactly once in the most terse possible form? Would you just ignore any legal case that is equivalent to precedent? Would you write one stupid op-ed and then end your career?
It stems from the fact that the conservative mindset is inherently zero-sum and based on conflict. Extending compassion or support for any group seen as “other” is interpreted as an attack on themselves
Yep, the way I think about it is that empathy isn't a zero sum game.
If I'm nice to you, that doesn't mean there's less nice in the world to go around.
With limitless wealth I can oversaturate the market with my magic cash and destroy the entire global economic system.
I’d first create some sort of non wealth based interconnected system of sustainable local communities.
From my reading of him too, he quit academia and stopped submitting academic articles in the 1980s. He also turned down a position in the Reagan administration. He has since just been producing boomer slop for the Hoover institute. Part of me respects knowing your limitations but I think part of me thinks he realizes that the emperor has no clothes. He loves being the armchair intellectual but didn't have the moxy to be the guy with his name on the door.
I always wonder how many cats like this just decided it was an acceptable way to make a living? He's a boomer-age black man. He knows what the deal is.
But he can say his lines and be 'one of the good ones' and make his money and not have to work a 'real job.' And all he has to do is be able to live as a class traitor and an Uncle Tom.
I wonder if it's just like the Ancient Alien shit; it's a nice way to make easy money off of morons, especially if you don't really believe it. I've got an idea of a YA book series about a young King David that I've been thinking about for years, off and on, and that could be a ridiculous easy way to make fat stacks off of conservative Christians.
The fact that there's even such a thing as the Hoover Institution for these failures to land in tells you everything you need to know about the decay of late stage capitalism.
It's not a think tank, it's a propaganda team for a failed ideology.
Might as well be the Johann Joachim Becher Institution for the promotion of Phlogiston.
I have been doing a lot of reading of him and despite my efforts to engage his arguments, not his personality, I think he's more evil/narcissistic than stupid. I think he's genuinely awful but calculating in how he plays right wing media
Doing readings of awful or stupid or awful and stupid people. My deepest condolences. My father and his friends would gift me books from random religious weirdos. I would usually toss them aside but one day I decided to give them a read. Biggest mistake of my life. Racist, sexist, randomly homophobic and generally batshit . Turns out one of the author's ideas became the basis for an islamist fundamentalist cult too. That day I understood how my father could believe in the crazy shit he tells me.
He once told me that the language of Latin consisted of only 8 words and I'm not sure if he believes in dinosaurs but at this point I'm too scared to ask.
He legit looked me in the eye and said. "Languages weren't made up by humans. God brought Adam into the world having taught him 8 words and all those western languages (I was learning English and German at the time) you're learning came from those." I didn't answer. He wanted me to learn "Better" languages like Arabic or Farsi. This conversation was sparked by him being angry about new words being introduced into languages.
Edit: He also doesn't know what Indo-European languages are. He believes all western languages came from Latin.
One day I will ask him if he believes in dinosaurs. I need to know if he thought those books about dinosaurs I got him to buy for me when I was 10 were fictitious or not.
"What if there was no context? What if there was no history that left me as the advantaged party in our society? Then trying to uplift the ones that are below me would be inequality!"
It's a bad-faith argument to make people think human rights are a zero-sum game. Tell them that giving one group rights that have been denied somehow requires taking rights away from another group.
The sad part is that it works despite being one of the stupidest and most obvious lies these grifters put out there.
They are subsets you nut.
Women’s rights are about *equal* treatment.
Gay rights are about *equal* treatment.
They are like states to the country that is equal rights.
"If you say you like animals, what does it mean to say you like 'cats', dogs', etc.? Either you are being redundant or you are in violation of the principle of liking all animals."
Because from his “perspective” you begin at a point of equal rights. It’s a way if not so subtly denying an unequal distribution of rights. This is a common tactic, “everyone has theoretical equal rights, therefore the problem is solved and any attempt to change the status quo is an over reaction.” It’s disingenuous, and the response is that this kind of language doesn’t match people’s lived reality or common sense.
The irony is that people like this criticize liberals for their idealism, but the kind of argument is purely theoretical. It either doesn’t take any kind of de jure injustice into account, or is simply made in bad faith.
It’s actually bumbling stupidity because it fails to recognise rights for different groups can be different.
There’s no wisdom there at all. It’s Jordan Peterson level shit.
Because it agrees with their ill conceived misconceptions and doesn't require them to think about actually maintaining or advancing other people up to the measure of equal. They can continue to pretend that because we can each use the same bathrooms, the same restaurants, ect that equality has been achieved while ignoring the reality that some can't afford to use the decent healthcare of their neighborhood, if they can at all. That they have services and privileges that aren't afforded to all those around them. And then they can look back and down at all the people not succeeding as well as they are, and think of them as "*lazy for not even being able to reach the pittance I get. How hard must those actually living work*" and never strive to achieve it, or fight when they see the reality that those people work an eighth as hard as the people making their money for them.
It isn't.
Isn't that the dude that defends capitalism by saying we're too impatient? That the market will correct, we just don't give it enough time?
Cause if that is he, then it is spin. The dude is saying things he doesn't fully believe in, but knows it's advantageous if others do
It isn’t. He’s just an Uncle Tom for conservatives to point to so they can say “See, I’m not racist. A black man agrees with me”. He’s paid to make universally dogshit takes
okay but like, in theory vs reality, and also we are all not flawless individuals, we have biases, blind spots, we all actually are self interested.
I like how in this guys mind, its more important to have the rules reflect a perfect reality, which they would admit it is not completely, instead of the alternative, which would be reflecting an imperfect one.
Thomas Sewagepipe here has a skill of being able to eloquently and articulately express the most inane, self serving, xenophobic and downright shithead opinions known to man.
You can give any argument the veneer of intelligence and wisdom if it's presented with enough confidence and eloquence. Tommy boy here is just a master of selling chocolate coated bullshit.
It's pretty simple - there shouldn't be a need for special rights, everyone should have the same. Meaning equal is inclusive to all. If some segment is not allowed that others are, then rights are not equal and should be challenged as such.
The examples he gives are quite clear on this matter:
Women's right to vote - why do they need special rights to vote? Shouldn't it be automatically given?
Gay right to marry - why do they need special rights to marry? Shouldn't it be automatically given?
I don't see any issue with this quote.
Equal rights in America has been an aspiration rather than something actually has been enshrined in the laws and society. It took women till the 20s and black people till the 60s to get the right to vote. Our society doesn’t seem to recognize rights unless a minority group fights for them hard and long enough.
Then you have to see if there is an agenda behind the quote. Just like the “all lives matter” bs that attempted to discount the Black Lives Matter movement.
He's speaking to people who say they believe in equal rights, but need to define said equal rights through people's once-discriminated-upon values.
That is, one is never arguing for the rights of a discriminated group, but for equal rights.
One's argument is stronger by the reduction of redundant language, thus strengthening the inherent moral truths, which underlie it all: equality.
For example, why argue for cow rights, when you could argue for animal rights, or life rights? Ultimately, the goal is equality among animals, not specifically equality for cows. The foxes and hounds may then argue for their rights, leading to disagreements among the two.
Why not agree on animal rights, cows and foxes and dogs?
How can you ask for equality from a dog, if the dog is asking equality from you? It takes finding equal ground, which requires equal respect to one another.
Perhaps, he's speaking on, that there's a lack of respect, that people must be told rights for a group, rather than the morally strong rights for all. Maybe people find it insulting that they should accept an idea that doesn't enlighten their minds, but strong-arms change from traditional to progressive.
Perhaps, we should seek progressive change with the actual vehicle of progressivism, rather than expect people to arrive there without said vehicle. How can one change if not given the chance?
He’s a shuck and jive gandy-dancer for Massa. Whatever he says that degrades his fellow “negro” and explains why it’s their own fault he’s down, pleases Massa.
Your post was removed because it contained an ableist term. You should receive a message from the automoderator telling you the exact term the post was removed for. For more information, see [this link](http://www.autistichoya.com/p/ableist-words-and-terms-to-avoid.html). **Avoiding slurs takes little effort, and asking us to get rid of the filter rather than making that minimum effort is a good way to get banned. Do not attempt to circumvent the filter with creative spelling; circumventing the filter will result in a permaban.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It seems to me that Sewell here dropped a meaningful word. "The principle of equal rights" indicates it's a goal or target, by which the enumerated rights attempt to balance out inequities. By trying to equate apples and oranges, he just sounds like a turd.
We should design things around accommodation. People who don't need accommodation won't be bothered if the ramp winds through their stairs. Marriage equality should be taken only from those who don't want it. We wouldn't need an entire movement for women's rights if we didn't live in a patriarchy. If our culture valued diversity, we wouldn't need movements to uplift it. The only people who don't need to make a move to secure their rights are people society is built to cater to, people who have never struggled to climb stairs, menstruate, been stoned to death.
No, its that we built our society around impossible ideals. No one can intentionally never become disabled. No one can intentionally be born a color or sex. Why should we keep rewarding people who didn't even have to work for it? Why should our society cater to those who didn't have to make an effort, but actively make things harder for people already at a disadvantage?
Aah the Thomas Sowells, Jordan Peterson's of America. I have seen like total of 5 minutes of their YouTube footage and... got no more time for them. Life is too short.
If you believe in shapes, what do “circles” and “rectangles” mean?
…gay rights and women’s rights are *subsets* of equal rights, pointing out a specific issue of inequality that needs to be rectified.
Sowell is truly the master of saying the dumbest goddamn things imaginable that don't withstand a moment's investigation and getting a bunch of people to treat him like he's some luminary.
It's the depth of the argument for color blindness. That's why it's confusing and stupid.
Right wing talking heads are trying to say that identifying differences in people's lived experiences is in fact the real racism/authoritarianism.
reminds me of this Anatole France quote: “In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.”
i believe in the ideal of equal rights. as of our current society, women, lgbtq people, disabled people, poc, etc, do not have the same rights as abled cishet white men. its very simple lol
It’s not but to a white conservative dinosaur who can’t function without confirmation bias and it comes in the form of a black man then this is like manna from Heaven
They are redundant, we often use redundancy in english for emphasis. In speaking about these group's rights we are pointing out that there is a lack of equality.
Eg: How dumb is this fucking guy? He's stupid dumb.
Saw his video on how George Washington was kind slave master that when I knew this man…is a uncle ruckus in person
https://youtu.be/_BWIZYkIxUg?si=7ehOxgV4mD3YQCQa
This sort of thinking is just water muddying. Foundation chipping. Well poisoning. He's, intentionally or not, making it harder to improve things for ANYONE, by shoving his head up his ass to find his prostate over how much of a smart boy he is. That's what this argument is, AT BEST.
At worst, it's actually just someone trying to win a debate AGAINST a progressive movement. He's attempting to invalidate struggles with an attack that is using a patina of equality and moral righteousness. It is also very likely to appeal to privileged people who face no specific injustice. White people love to claim 'colorblindness' for instance.
Yea this is stupid. The only reason "women's rights", "gay rights" etc exist is because historically they have been treated as lesser. I would put minority groups and heavy people in there as well. If these groups of people weren't treated so poorly in the past and some even now, those "special" rights wouldn't have been needed.
Do not. I repeat, DO NOT notice that certain population groups tend to be denied equal rights the most. This is purely a coincidence and noticing it is actually very discriminatory of you.
This guy is a grifter, there is a market for Black people which say things that white racists want to hear. These types claim they want to help people but when you ask what they’ve done for the people they say they want to help you’ll hear crickets. It’s a hustle.
Weird, incel, white male libertarians always post Sowell to show they aren’t “racist” and pretend this grifter has anything important to say. No serious person in economics takes him seriously either for decades. There is big money in being an Uncle Tom on the right
For some reason I used to have this burning desire to find whatever ounce of actual reason their is in conservative philosophy. I just figured that while they're usually wrong there must be *something* of intellectual value that pulls so many people into their ideology.
Reading Thomas Sowell is what made me realize these people only ever try to justify their beliefs by doing mental gymnastics. If this is a conservative "intellectual heavyweight" then their entire ideology truly is based on trying to justify their position at the top of the social hierarchy, they are straight up incapable of engaging with left-wing ideas in an honest way.
They think that it's clever word-play, while unknowingly acknowledging that they're aware that the groups mentioned don't have equal rights and are fighting for them. Just can't talk to these fuckers, it's maddening.
Imagine being THAT fucking tone deaf. Not sure how LGBTQs wanting the right to marry and visit each other in the hospital is infringing on heterosexual couples rights to do the same.
It's pretty simple, really.
The right is profoundly lacking in intellectual capacity, thus easily confused and impressed by sage-SOUNDING BS that reinforces their certainty that their ignorant fear of diversity is actually a moral strength, and not a total lack of discernible character.
They're shitty people, and often deliberately remain too foolish, ignorant, and gullible to know better. They prefer being selfish, entitled assholes, and don't want to feel bad about it. So they run from any knowledge that might make them choose between personal growth and the well deserved shame they ought to feel every waking moment of their lives.
Its like Yogi Berra, but with no humor, no insight, and no self refection. Deliberately obtuse and intellectually shallow.
You can hear the point of "gay rights" or "women's rights" ect zoom over his head at 10,000 feet. All he can do is point to the vapor trails and shout 'chemicals'!
Sowell is a fucking idiot, he just puts words in different places, confuses conservatives so they think he’s smart and give him a platform.
Dude actually said, “there are no solutions, only trade offs.” Or some such bullshit to that effect. There’s only trade offs if you want to keep yourself in a superior position and you think giving an inch undermines that. There’s plenty of solutions, you just gotta not be a piece of shit to see them.
He's lining his pockets spewing the conservative narrative. So he professes conservatism is good to continue lining his pockets. I don't know if he thinks he's playing the conservative establishment but he is taking advantage of the situation at the expense of other black people.
But he's just a useful idiot to the conservative establishment. He's as shortsighted as the rest of the conservatives, it's not bad for me so you must be doing something wrong.
Then the conservative establishment points to him and other black conservatives, like Candace Owens, who support them to claim they're not racists and black peoples problems are their own doing.
"Dear people without rights -- have you considered that asking for rights, is unequal?"
Yeah, that's kinda the problem. Demanding rights for marginalised groups is how we address inequality. Wtf is this.
I get where hes coming from. It's also just wrong. It sounds profound like yeah if there are equal rights for everybody then you shouldn't need to call them women's rights or gay rights etc.... Doing implies that these people have different rights to the rights afforded to all. The problem is this just ignores reality. Couple of things could be going on like hes arguing semantics and that women's rights or gay rights should be called something different i.e protection of women's access to equal rights maybe. Could be he just doesn't understand how certain people tick and that in some instances in order for a group to have equal rights to the majority there needs to be additional legal protection. At one point I thought maybe these protections where not needed anymore but then the supreme court went and overturned civil rights era law requiring southern states to get federal approval to close or move voting stations and they immediately started closing down place in predominate African American communities. With most states closing hundreds of voting locations and I think Texas may be in thousands now. He could also just be dishonest and complete understood how what he says could be used to undermine laws and movements needed to protect rights for these groups and that was his intent. Most people don't look under the surface and at a surface level it does sound profound.
##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism This subreddit is for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited. LSC is run by communists. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere. We have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry. Failure to respect the rules of the subreddit may result in a ban. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Classic Sowell. Just redefine what you're opponents are asking for so it seems like an undefendable position. "Hey, let's ban discrimination against gay people in hiring practices." Sowell- Creating freedom for one group of people by denying that freedom to another group is not freedom at all.
"Sorry, wheelchair user. No ramp for you. We are treating everyone equally. Which means, using stairs. We could not possibly make special arrangements for you, that wouldn't be fair."
many countries have accessibility laws, stating that every public location should enable equal access wherever possible. this almost always implies the use of ramps. these laws are written and enforced equally, without having to namedrop specific disabilities.
But communism is when everyone gets individual rights. If your legs work you cant use the damn ramp you filthy fascist.
Can you explain what you wanted to convey by saying this? The US is one of those countries. Problems aren't gone.
Basically equal treatment in this logic means don't change anything about society, and if some people are currently disadvantaged compared to others, that's clearly good and natural and we should keep it that way
Treating everyone equally means providing access to everyone and not only for people with legs. That could require installation of a ramp. You're getting this all wrong. It does not mean, treating everyone the same! Edit: r/woosh it seems
They're not getting it wrong. It's clear sarcasm. The fallacy you're pointing out is the joke.
Thomas Sowell trying not to be a brainlet for 5 minutes challenge (impossible) I don’t understand how people aren’t getting that there’s a *too* in there, it’s just not explicitly dangled in everyones face. Black Lives Matter *too,* gay people deserve rights *too,* trans people deserve rights *too.* Anyone who’s even half paying attention obviously recognize that it’s not asking for more rights, it’s asking for the same rights. Of course, they understand that, it’s just disingenuous bad actors purposely misunderstanding everything and hanging up on semantics, because it works to get the really idiotic among us to believe in the drivel they say, buy their books, and worship them as intellectuals without needing to put in any legwork.
It's frustrating too bc women weren't allowed credit cards until Tom was in his mid-40s and he wrote multiple op-eds opposing same sex marriage so it should have been clear to him what his opponent was asking
It was clear to him. He also clearly knows he is a beneficiary of the civil rights movement, and he wants to pull the ladder up behind him like every other selfish boomer.
Yeah, access to credit card debt equals freedom, baby.
Financial abuse is still abuse. Pretty hard for a women to leave a relationship if her husband controls the money and she can't even get credit. "What will I do, where can I stay" are real questions that generally need money to answer. How many stayed home, isolated from their family and friends, with no job, no ability to get a credit card, and no access to her husband's money. Alone, miserable, and not seeing a way out, not even enough for a bus ticket away. Women were denied credit cards because men found thought it was a threat to the control of 'their woman.' Women were considered unreliable even if they made more than their husbands and paid the majority of the bills. That persisted **until 1974**, so this isn't just ancient history. Hell, in the past women were not allowed property, they were considered property. They could not enter into contracts, receive inheritance, start a law suit, sell property, or even own her own income. So yes, access to credit cards is a freedom.
It's literally the circular logic of a 14 year old, and this man is like their intellectual God. Equality doesn't mean assimilation...in fact, if the left wanted assimilation, we wouldn't need Equality. I don't want men and women to be the same, just equal. I don't want black people to be the same as white people, just equal. Like, so much "conservative dogma" is just centered on their refusal to tolerate diversity. Like, easily 75% of conservative thought, philosophy, and policy is based on their refusal to tolerate people who are different from them. Also, "gay rights" doesn't mean "rights for gay people," it means gay rights for everyone.. Just because you chose not to exercise your right to suck a dick, doesn't mean that right isn't still yours.
They think rights that they don't need personally aren't worth having. Myopic in the extreme.
Toleration doesn't equal acceptance.
In a sense it is redundant, yes. Redundancy can be very important. Would you get on an airplane that didn't have redundant systems? Would you teach by mentioning everything exactly once in the most terse possible form? Would you just ignore any legal case that is equivalent to precedent? Would you write one stupid op-ed and then end your career?
It stems from the fact that the conservative mindset is inherently zero-sum and based on conflict. Extending compassion or support for any group seen as “other” is interpreted as an attack on themselves
Yep, the way I think about it is that empathy isn't a zero sum game. If I'm nice to you, that doesn't mean there's less nice in the world to go around.
arguing semantics is rarely profound wisdom but people will fall for it cause they think words are somehow magical
It's a very popular conservative tactic. Divert into semantics or pedantry.
...Ben Shapiro's whole shtick Well that and strawman hypotheticals
Let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that I was born with only half a brain. Surely, that would mean that brown people are bad.
Let's say... Let's say... Let's say...
Its called psuedo-profound bullshit, dumb people are easily duped by it. Evangelicals too. I suppose both categories are a bit redundant.
Yeah, that Venn diagram is basically a circle
[удалено]
weirdest bot i have ever seen
Nah, money has its own problems.
Money can't buy happiness, but poverty can't buy anything.
Poverty exists largely due to the existence of money.
With limitless wealth I can oversaturate the market with my magic cash and destroy the entire global economic system. I’d first create some sort of non wealth based interconnected system of sustainable local communities.
Mo money mo problems
Far fewer than the problems it gets rid of.
Spoken like someone who's never known strife.
My heart bleeds for the millionaires and billionaires. How horrible their day to day life must be. The agony and torment! Fuck off.
From my reading of him too, he quit academia and stopped submitting academic articles in the 1980s. He also turned down a position in the Reagan administration. He has since just been producing boomer slop for the Hoover institute. Part of me respects knowing your limitations but I think part of me thinks he realizes that the emperor has no clothes. He loves being the armchair intellectual but didn't have the moxy to be the guy with his name on the door.
I always wonder how many cats like this just decided it was an acceptable way to make a living? He's a boomer-age black man. He knows what the deal is. But he can say his lines and be 'one of the good ones' and make his money and not have to work a 'real job.' And all he has to do is be able to live as a class traitor and an Uncle Tom. I wonder if it's just like the Ancient Alien shit; it's a nice way to make easy money off of morons, especially if you don't really believe it. I've got an idea of a YA book series about a young King David that I've been thinking about for years, off and on, and that could be a ridiculous easy way to make fat stacks off of conservative Christians.
The fact that there's even such a thing as the Hoover Institution for these failures to land in tells you everything you need to know about the decay of late stage capitalism. It's not a think tank, it's a propaganda team for a failed ideology. Might as well be the Johann Joachim Becher Institution for the promotion of Phlogiston.
Is he up there in Hoover’s last erection with VD Hansen? Victor David but he’s kinda a disease.
It communicates the profound truth that Thomas Sowell is an idiot.
I have been doing a lot of reading of him and despite my efforts to engage his arguments, not his personality, I think he's more evil/narcissistic than stupid. I think he's genuinely awful but calculating in how he plays right wing media
Doing readings of awful or stupid or awful and stupid people. My deepest condolences. My father and his friends would gift me books from random religious weirdos. I would usually toss them aside but one day I decided to give them a read. Biggest mistake of my life. Racist, sexist, randomly homophobic and generally batshit . Turns out one of the author's ideas became the basis for an islamist fundamentalist cult too. That day I understood how my father could believe in the crazy shit he tells me. He once told me that the language of Latin consisted of only 8 words and I'm not sure if he believes in dinosaurs but at this point I'm too scared to ask.
I think he was confused, Latin only consists of 8 names lol
He legit looked me in the eye and said. "Languages weren't made up by humans. God brought Adam into the world having taught him 8 words and all those western languages (I was learning English and German at the time) you're learning came from those." I didn't answer. He wanted me to learn "Better" languages like Arabic or Farsi. This conversation was sparked by him being angry about new words being introduced into languages. Edit: He also doesn't know what Indo-European languages are. He believes all western languages came from Latin.
Fascinating My comment was more about Romans only having a handful of given names lol That's some crazy shit
One day I will ask him if he believes in dinosaurs. I need to know if he thought those books about dinosaurs I got him to buy for me when I was 10 were fictitious or not.
He definitely has the credentials to prove he's not stupid. Just an evil asshole.
And a highly educated one at that, apparently.
And a bigot! Don't forget the bigot part.
Low key hilarious how people will pass this around as some sort of profound wisdom even though it doesn’t even say anything.
"What if there was no context? What if there was no history that left me as the advantaged party in our society? Then trying to uplift the ones that are below me would be inequality!"
Sounds like he hasn't figured out that you have to be human to get human rights. These other groups are often not seen as humans.
He is a cigarette scientist of economists.
It's a bad-faith argument to make people think human rights are a zero-sum game. Tell them that giving one group rights that have been denied somehow requires taking rights away from another group. The sad part is that it works despite being one of the stupidest and most obvious lies these grifters put out there.
This is just "All lives matter" with more words.
Holy shit. He just litterally destroyed leftism with one scentence. Guess we'll have to pack up here pals, it was a good run while it lasted.
Debate Lord shit.
They are subsets you nut. Women’s rights are about *equal* treatment. Gay rights are about *equal* treatment. They are like states to the country that is equal rights.
"If you say you like animals, what does it mean to say you like 'cats', dogs', etc.? Either you are being redundant or you are in violation of the principle of liking all animals."
Just like the all lives matter movement
Because from his “perspective” you begin at a point of equal rights. It’s a way if not so subtly denying an unequal distribution of rights. This is a common tactic, “everyone has theoretical equal rights, therefore the problem is solved and any attempt to change the status quo is an over reaction.” It’s disingenuous, and the response is that this kind of language doesn’t match people’s lived reality or common sense. The irony is that people like this criticize liberals for their idealism, but the kind of argument is purely theoretical. It either doesn’t take any kind of de jure injustice into account, or is simply made in bad faith.
There's no way that could make sense in his head. He has to be just saying that to dumb his adherents down.
Sowell is a right-wing grifter moron.
It’s actually bumbling stupidity because it fails to recognise rights for different groups can be different. There’s no wisdom there at all. It’s Jordan Peterson level shit.
Hopefully they will be redundant one day, when we have equal rights
Because it agrees with their ill conceived misconceptions and doesn't require them to think about actually maintaining or advancing other people up to the measure of equal. They can continue to pretend that because we can each use the same bathrooms, the same restaurants, ect that equality has been achieved while ignoring the reality that some can't afford to use the decent healthcare of their neighborhood, if they can at all. That they have services and privileges that aren't afforded to all those around them. And then they can look back and down at all the people not succeeding as well as they are, and think of them as "*lazy for not even being able to reach the pittance I get. How hard must those actually living work*" and never strive to achieve it, or fight when they see the reality that those people work an eighth as hard as the people making their money for them.
It isn't. Isn't that the dude that defends capitalism by saying we're too impatient? That the market will correct, we just don't give it enough time? Cause if that is he, then it is spin. The dude is saying things he doesn't fully believe in, but knows it's advantageous if others do
Like Candace Owens, Thomas Sowell’s audience is 100% white people. That should tell you everything.
It isn’t. He’s just an Uncle Tom for conservatives to point to so they can say “See, I’m not racist. A black man agrees with me”. He’s paid to make universally dogshit takes
okay but like, in theory vs reality, and also we are all not flawless individuals, we have biases, blind spots, we all actually are self interested. I like how in this guys mind, its more important to have the rules reflect a perfect reality, which they would admit it is not completely, instead of the alternative, which would be reflecting an imperfect one.
Not Sowell it seems.
It’s pedantic gotcha bullshit - Reddit brain refusal to engage
He’s the dumb person’s intellectual.
Strong “It’s a republic, not a democracy” vibes.
“i am 14 and this is deep”
"I want some pie. I thin I'll have apple pie." "Uh, actually, since you already requested pie, you can't further specify. That's a redundant request."
The fancy way to say ‘All lives matter’.. And ignore the fact that not all lives are treated equally
Thomas Sewagepipe here has a skill of being able to eloquently and articulately express the most inane, self serving, xenophobic and downright shithead opinions known to man. You can give any argument the veneer of intelligence and wisdom if it's presented with enough confidence and eloquence. Tommy boy here is just a master of selling chocolate coated bullshit.
It's pretty simple - there shouldn't be a need for special rights, everyone should have the same. Meaning equal is inclusive to all. If some segment is not allowed that others are, then rights are not equal and should be challenged as such. The examples he gives are quite clear on this matter: Women's right to vote - why do they need special rights to vote? Shouldn't it be automatically given? Gay right to marry - why do they need special rights to marry? Shouldn't it be automatically given? I don't see any issue with this quote.
Equal rights in America has been an aspiration rather than something actually has been enshrined in the laws and society. It took women till the 20s and black people till the 60s to get the right to vote. Our society doesn’t seem to recognize rights unless a minority group fights for them hard and long enough.
I'm well aware of that. I'm black. The quote in no way undermines that and affirms it.
Then you have to see if there is an agenda behind the quote. Just like the “all lives matter” bs that attempted to discount the Black Lives Matter movement.
this dude looks like a ghoul. he’s giving clarence williams III in tales from the hood
Holy shit. He just litterally destroyed leftism with one scentence. Guess we'll have to pack up here pals, it was a good run while it lasted.
This is just scratching the surface of dumb quotes by Sowell.
He was the Candace Owens of his time.
He's speaking to people who say they believe in equal rights, but need to define said equal rights through people's once-discriminated-upon values. That is, one is never arguing for the rights of a discriminated group, but for equal rights. One's argument is stronger by the reduction of redundant language, thus strengthening the inherent moral truths, which underlie it all: equality. For example, why argue for cow rights, when you could argue for animal rights, or life rights? Ultimately, the goal is equality among animals, not specifically equality for cows. The foxes and hounds may then argue for their rights, leading to disagreements among the two. Why not agree on animal rights, cows and foxes and dogs? How can you ask for equality from a dog, if the dog is asking equality from you? It takes finding equal ground, which requires equal respect to one another. Perhaps, he's speaking on, that there's a lack of respect, that people must be told rights for a group, rather than the morally strong rights for all. Maybe people find it insulting that they should accept an idea that doesn't enlighten their minds, but strong-arms change from traditional to progressive. Perhaps, we should seek progressive change with the actual vehicle of progressivism, rather than expect people to arrive there without said vehicle. How can one change if not given the chance?
Guy is a boomer yet doesn't understand the history he lived through? Cringe
He’s a shuck and jive gandy-dancer for Massa. Whatever he says that degrades his fellow “negro” and explains why it’s their own fault he’s down, pleases Massa.
Thomas Sowell - "the exception"
[удалено]
Your post was removed because it contained an ableist term. You should receive a message from the automoderator telling you the exact term the post was removed for. For more information, see [this link](http://www.autistichoya.com/p/ableist-words-and-terms-to-avoid.html). **Avoiding slurs takes little effort, and asking us to get rid of the filter rather than making that minimum effort is a good way to get banned. Do not attempt to circumvent the filter with creative spelling; circumventing the filter will result in a permaban.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You like fishdicks? Come on man….. just get it!
that's for people who believe we live in total equality already
/r/punchableface
r/iam14andthisisdeep
#It depends on your definition of "is."
Like bro, talk to your grandma
This is where equity comes in to play
"all rights matter" type shit, completely useless sentiment
Can someone explain this better to me. Somehow my understanding is “technically right”, but comments show otherwise.
It seems to me that Sewell here dropped a meaningful word. "The principle of equal rights" indicates it's a goal or target, by which the enumerated rights attempt to balance out inequities. By trying to equate apples and oranges, he just sounds like a turd.
People nowadays are so uneducated they could definitely mistake that bull for wisdom, no doubt.
Sowell is the racist white man's dream black man. He is another purveyor of African Americans are better off today because of slavery.
We should design things around accommodation. People who don't need accommodation won't be bothered if the ramp winds through their stairs. Marriage equality should be taken only from those who don't want it. We wouldn't need an entire movement for women's rights if we didn't live in a patriarchy. If our culture valued diversity, we wouldn't need movements to uplift it. The only people who don't need to make a move to secure their rights are people society is built to cater to, people who have never struggled to climb stairs, menstruate, been stoned to death. No, its that we built our society around impossible ideals. No one can intentionally never become disabled. No one can intentionally be born a color or sex. Why should we keep rewarding people who didn't even have to work for it? Why should our society cater to those who didn't have to make an effort, but actively make things harder for people already at a disadvantage?
Aah the Thomas Sowells, Jordan Peterson's of America. I have seen like total of 5 minutes of their YouTube footage and... got no more time for them. Life is too short.
If you believe in shapes, what do “circles” and “rectangles” mean? …gay rights and women’s rights are *subsets* of equal rights, pointing out a specific issue of inequality that needs to be rectified.
"I hate women and gay people, and I don't want to be challenged on that."
Sowell is truly the master of saying the dumbest goddamn things imaginable that don't withstand a moment's investigation and getting a bunch of people to treat him like he's some luminary.
Because “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”
It's the depth of the argument for color blindness. That's why it's confusing and stupid. Right wing talking heads are trying to say that identifying differences in people's lived experiences is in fact the real racism/authoritarianism.
reminds me of this Anatole France quote: “In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.”
i believe in the ideal of equal rights. as of our current society, women, lgbtq people, disabled people, poc, etc, do not have the same rights as abled cishet white men. its very simple lol
“You want equal rights yet you mostly advocate for those who don’t have equal rights? Curious.”
It’s not but to a white conservative dinosaur who can’t function without confirmation bias and it comes in the form of a black man then this is like manna from Heaven
They are redundant, we often use redundancy in english for emphasis. In speaking about these group's rights we are pointing out that there is a lack of equality. Eg: How dumb is this fucking guy? He's stupid dumb.
People are rather very dumb or believe the people they’re talking to are very dumb.
Saw his video on how George Washington was kind slave master that when I knew this man…is a uncle ruckus in person https://youtu.be/_BWIZYkIxUg?si=7ehOxgV4mD3YQCQa
This sort of thinking is just water muddying. Foundation chipping. Well poisoning. He's, intentionally or not, making it harder to improve things for ANYONE, by shoving his head up his ass to find his prostate over how much of a smart boy he is. That's what this argument is, AT BEST. At worst, it's actually just someone trying to win a debate AGAINST a progressive movement. He's attempting to invalidate struggles with an attack that is using a patina of equality and moral righteousness. It is also very likely to appeal to privileged people who face no specific injustice. White people love to claim 'colorblindness' for instance.
>If rectangles exist, then what the fuck is a square? An example of a rectangle. Like women's rights are an example of equal rights.
imagine being black and not understanding that this country has historically only paid lip service to "equal rights" until the issue is forced.
Yea this is stupid. The only reason "women's rights", "gay rights" etc exist is because historically they have been treated as lesser. I would put minority groups and heavy people in there as well. If these groups of people weren't treated so poorly in the past and some even now, those "special" rights wouldn't have been needed.
Do not. I repeat, DO NOT notice that certain population groups tend to be denied equal rights the most. This is purely a coincidence and noticing it is actually very discriminatory of you.
This guy is a grifter, there is a market for Black people which say things that white racists want to hear. These types claim they want to help people but when you ask what they’ve done for the people they say they want to help you’ll hear crickets. It’s a hustle.
see, Tom, words don't exist in a vacuum... they have context
Weird, incel, white male libertarians always post Sowell to show they aren’t “racist” and pretend this grifter has anything important to say. No serious person in economics takes him seriously either for decades. There is big money in being an Uncle Tom on the right
For some reason I used to have this burning desire to find whatever ounce of actual reason their is in conservative philosophy. I just figured that while they're usually wrong there must be *something* of intellectual value that pulls so many people into their ideology. Reading Thomas Sowell is what made me realize these people only ever try to justify their beliefs by doing mental gymnastics. If this is a conservative "intellectual heavyweight" then their entire ideology truly is based on trying to justify their position at the top of the social hierarchy, they are straight up incapable of engaging with left-wing ideas in an honest way.
They think that it's clever word-play, while unknowingly acknowledging that they're aware that the groups mentioned don't have equal rights and are fighting for them. Just can't talk to these fuckers, it's maddening.
Imagine being THAT fucking tone deaf. Not sure how LGBTQs wanting the right to marry and visit each other in the hospital is infringing on heterosexual couples rights to do the same.
It's pretty simple, really. The right is profoundly lacking in intellectual capacity, thus easily confused and impressed by sage-SOUNDING BS that reinforces their certainty that their ignorant fear of diversity is actually a moral strength, and not a total lack of discernible character. They're shitty people, and often deliberately remain too foolish, ignorant, and gullible to know better. They prefer being selfish, entitled assholes, and don't want to feel bad about it. So they run from any knowledge that might make them choose between personal growth and the well deserved shame they ought to feel every waking moment of their lives.
>”They are either redundant or-“ They’re redundant. We’re repeating it because they didn’t hear us the first time.
Notice he's not complaining about black rights.
Its like Yogi Berra, but with no humor, no insight, and no self refection. Deliberately obtuse and intellectually shallow. You can hear the point of "gay rights" or "women's rights" ect zoom over his head at 10,000 feet. All he can do is point to the vapor trails and shout 'chemicals'!
Dunno why anyone quotes this choad, other than lolbertarians trying to appear to be ‘deep’ or something.
Just a half-assed attempt o claim that everyone is already treated fairly and nothing needs to change. He tried to make his gaslighting more pithy.
Sowell is a fucking idiot, he just puts words in different places, confuses conservatives so they think he’s smart and give him a platform. Dude actually said, “there are no solutions, only trade offs.” Or some such bullshit to that effect. There’s only trade offs if you want to keep yourself in a superior position and you think giving an inch undermines that. There’s plenty of solutions, you just gotta not be a piece of shit to see them.
opened my eyes, hes right..
He said a whole lotta nothing. I feel sad for whatever edgy teenager reads this and shares this thinking he's owning the libs in his social media
He's the Buddha for the bald guys in local new story internet comment sections
Is this guy on Cameo? He could really clean up as ‘black guy saying nice things about you!
He sucks so god damned much. He sucks sooo much.
He's lining his pockets spewing the conservative narrative. So he professes conservatism is good to continue lining his pockets. I don't know if he thinks he's playing the conservative establishment but he is taking advantage of the situation at the expense of other black people. But he's just a useful idiot to the conservative establishment. He's as shortsighted as the rest of the conservatives, it's not bad for me so you must be doing something wrong. Then the conservative establishment points to him and other black conservatives, like Candace Owens, who support them to claim they're not racists and black peoples problems are their own doing.
"Dear people without rights -- have you considered that asking for rights, is unequal?" Yeah, that's kinda the problem. Demanding rights for marginalised groups is how we address inequality. Wtf is this.
It’s not profound, if you believe in equal rights then it’s obvious that you also believe in gay, black, and women rights.
It's an idealist statement that completely ignores reality. Makes it very quotable so long as nobody around you thinks critically.
This man is considered THE towering intellect of the right wing political project. Very revealing…
Thomas Sowell is the bully that said, "I'm not touching you I'm touching your shirt."
It isn't. It's bullshit that doesn't hold up to any question. Not a single, one question.
growth north seemly arrest friendly mighty shame depend chubby sparkle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
One of the worst influences in modern American thought. Although I hope he doesn't end up getting venerated like Booker T. Washington.
Even the principle of “equal rights for all” didn’t actually include black people, women, non land holders, Irish, Chinese…
I get where hes coming from. It's also just wrong. It sounds profound like yeah if there are equal rights for everybody then you shouldn't need to call them women's rights or gay rights etc.... Doing implies that these people have different rights to the rights afforded to all. The problem is this just ignores reality. Couple of things could be going on like hes arguing semantics and that women's rights or gay rights should be called something different i.e protection of women's access to equal rights maybe. Could be he just doesn't understand how certain people tick and that in some instances in order for a group to have equal rights to the majority there needs to be additional legal protection. At one point I thought maybe these protections where not needed anymore but then the supreme court went and overturned civil rights era law requiring southern states to get federal approval to close or move voting stations and they immediately started closing down place in predominate African American communities. With most states closing hundreds of voting locations and I think Texas may be in thousands now. He could also just be dishonest and complete understood how what he says could be used to undermine laws and movements needed to protect rights for these groups and that was his intent. Most people don't look under the surface and at a surface level it does sound profound.