Dilbert is cancelled...

[vetran]

The 26% is low enough that they can be regarded as hardened in their view. Nothing is likely change that view. As it stands there are 74% who think the opposite, that is enough of a "safe buffer".

What percentage of people are extreme right? Or what percentage are extreme nutty versions of religion motivated? Clue its very small. Yet we see terrorist activity on a regular basis.

[Zigenare]

What percentage of people are extreme right? Or what percentage are extreme nutty versions of religion motivated? Clue its very small. Yet we see terrorist activity on a regular basis.

So you think we should be wary of the 26% of blacks who think it's not OK to be white? To what extent? Do we round 'em up, put 'em in a field and bomb the bastards? Do we avoid them?

[WTFH]

What percentage of people are extreme right? Or what percentage are extreme nutty versions of religion motivated? Clue its very small. Yet we see terrorist activity on a regular basis.

Exactly.

26% is taking a chunk of "normal" people in with the extremists.
5% or less might be where things are considered "extreme"


...or the other way to look at it, if we say 50% of people lean to the right and 50% lean to the left, then 26% means that over half of all right leaning people are hardened racists who will never change and believe they are right in their actions. (which would be a cause for concern in my opinion)

[WTFH]

So you think we should be wary of the 26% of blacks who think it's not OK to be white? To what extent? Do we round 'em up, put 'em in a field and bomb the bastards? Do we avoid them?

Ah, your typical argument.
Rather than looking at what has been said, let's project what hasn't been said as a reason to do nothing, and blame "the others".

[Zigenare]

Ah, your typical argument.
Rather than looking at what has been said, let's project what hasn't been said as a reason to do nothing, and blame "the others".

And that is *your* typical argument?

How would you *cure* the "problem" as you see it?

I hasten to add that I don't see it as a problem.

[woohoo]

So you think we should be wary of the 26% of blacks who think it's not OK to be white? To what extent? Do we round 'em up, put 'em in a field and bomb the bastards? Do we avoid them?

If it's true I would want to know why. Espcially at a time when the US is pushing inclusivity, DE&I more than ever. Is one of the side affects of these policies that it stokes division. Is it white policemen beating black men, though you could argue it's wrong for one group to judge another based on the actions of a few.

Again, if its true then I would want to find out if its a trend are racial divisions are increasing.

Once you know the cause then you can at least decide if its something that can be addressed.

But saying crap like put em in a field and bomb the bastards is just designed to stop the conversation.

[Zigenare]

If it's true I would want to know why. Espcially at a time when the US is pushing inclusivity, DE&I more than ever. Is one of the side affects of these policies that it stokes division. Is it white policemen beating black men, though you could argue it's wrong for one group to judge another based on the actions of a few.

Again, if its true then I would want to find out if its a trend are racial divisions are increasing.

Once you know the cause then you can at least decide if its something that can be addressed.

But saying crap like put em in a field and bomb the bastards is just designed to stop the conversation.

Interesting that you chose to focus on that part of my response. If you have a way to sway the opinion of 26% of a group of people then I suggest you get a job in advertising.

[WTFH]

And that is *your* typical argument?

How would you *cure* the "problem" as you see it?

I hasten to add that I don't see it as a problem.

To address the problem, the racists need to understand that it is a problem.

Why do so many people feel that there is no problem?
How do we educate those who don't want to be educated?
How do we reduce hatred?

It's difficult questions to answer, particularly as the country lurches further to the right, driven by politicians and media who are more interested in profiting by appealing to the 26% rather than in tackling the difficult issues that affect the 74%

[d000hg]

The 26% is low enough that they can be regarded as hardened in their view. Nothing is likely change that view. .

26% is not a tiny minority. It's a very sizable proportion.

What Scott Adams said, targetting all blacks, was over the top, hardly the same as objecting to the biased views of some black organisations. However, when people get angry, they do sometimes say things that are more extreme than what they generally think. Don't think anyone should be cancelled forever for a single comment.

I am generally with you on that (depending on the comment of course) although I would make a distinction on live vs written comments and if you're a public figure I cut you less slack because you should know how to behave.
There's some similarity to Dr. David Starkey here in my view "so many damn blacks".

[woohoo]

Interesting that you chose to focus on that part of my response. If you have a way to sway the opinion of 26% of a group of people then I suggest you get a job in advertising.

Sounds like you think we should only discuss topics that we can individually influence.