StoneToss (allegedly, formerly Red Panels)

[George Floyd Sneed]

Yep, during the 2016 Dem primaries, the Bernie Left we was all "Open borders is an insane idea promoted by the Koch Brothers to depress US working class wages!!!"

It was only once they had hyped themselves into terminal TDS, that they started pretending that open borders had always been the "moral consensus" which Orange Hitler was shockingly violating.

Boinie wanted no immigration period. Legal or illegal. Trump was in favor of legal immigration but only after extreeeeeeeme vetting. Of course, that didn’t happen.

 

[Hamsteroid]

Stumbling Block​

You are being legally discriminated against with no end in sight.
re-education

 

[waffle]

View attachment 2321005

Stumbling Block​

You are being legally discriminated against with no end in sight.
re-education

Eh, CRT and critical legal studies literally exist to protect affirmative action, if you read their literature they actually just say it. getting rid of CRT isn't just removing a stumbling block. It's more like poisoning the guard dog. You do it because you're coming for more later.

 

[Lemmingwise]

View attachment 2321005

Stumbling Block​

You are being legally discriminated against with no end in sight.
re-education

I suppose a cloud amogus is better than no amogus.

CRT and critical legal studies literally exist to protect affirmative action, if you read their literature they actually just say it.

I think the point is more that it's like winning one argument with an academic in nazi germany (or name your regime). It's not going to change the regime.

 

[soy_king]

View attachment 2308098
Class Act
dunce.
the proletarian devolution

Sus in the highlights. clever girl.

I suppose a cloud amogus is better than no amogus.



I think the point is more that it's like winning one argument with an academic in nazi germany (or name your regime). It's not going to change the regime.

The amogus is at the top of the first column to the right

 

[Lemmingwise]

Sus sus sus

Spoilsport.

 

[soy_king]

Spoilsport.

I'm sorry I didn't know were playing double cross over here

 

[AnOminous]

It's more like poisoning the guard dog. You do it because you're coming for more later.

There's going to be some genuine rage when AA is overturned 5-4. It only barely won 5-4 last time it came up, and that was with Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor (actually another case decided at the same time seriously curtailed AA of the exact sort some "elite" universities are currently using that explicitly discriminate based on race and effectively were trying to bring back the old pure quota systems used on Jews).

The Court is now considerably more conservative, has at least four members that have said explicitly they would do away with it, with Amy Coney Barrett likely giving them a fifth. The very least they do with such a case is overturn the current Harvard scheme based on the 6-3 ruling throwing out that kind of scheme, and it's entirely possible they overturn the entire regime. The 6-3 case, Gratz, was clear enough even Breyer joined with the majority in a separate concurrence with O'Connor.

O'Connor was the swing vote in the 5-4 case, Grutter, which also involved the University of Michigan. After O'Connor retired, Kennedy had been the swing vote. With the current composition of the Court, it is unlikely Roberts would even get a chance to be a swing vote were he so inclined, but he might try to negotiate a compromise in which AA is otherwise untouched but the overtly illegal schemes currently adopted are struck down.

Here's the docket in the Harvard case. Unless they choose not to hear it (but the fact they have just asked the Acting Solicitor General to file a brief indicates they will, they'll be deciding this:

Issues: (1) Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Grutter v. Bollinger and hold that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions; and (2) whether Harvard College is violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by penalizing Asian-American applicants, engaging in racial balancing, overemphasizing race and rejecting workable race-neutral alternatives.

My spitball guess would be yes, obviously as to (2) and maybe as to (1).

Either way there will be a shitstorm of epic proportions unless they completely cuck and decide not to hear it.

 

[Yamamura]

Powerful......

View attachment 2310039

I think the style of it makes them basically uneditable. Stonetoss's work so well because the strips are mainly one thing: a succinct and mostly visual evocation of a feeling that normal Americans are being purposefully misled and taken advantage of by the powers that be. Putting a text wall cope on top of it about how "the people who are doing this to you are aktually the ones who who are trying to fix it and BTW you're an -ist and a -phobe if you disagree;" only shows people that you have been educated into stupidity, and pisses them off more.

I tried to imagine how someone could edit this comic without fundamentally changing it's core elements and it's actually kinda challenging. Let's say you make the guy sitting at the desk wear a MAGA hat or something. Well then it just looks like a glowie leading someone into a honeypot. Whatever you change the text to, it still doesn't change the overall message because the premise is that the man in the suit has malicious intentions to the person they're presenting the information to.

To be honest it will take a week or two at least (maybe when they read this post) until one of them figures out that the glasses and headset imply the teacher is some sort of government agent aka establishment.

I think they probably just think of him as a gamer teacher who went overboard with their fortnite outfit.

For a while I tried to pin point why exactly Stonetoss edits are so ham fisted and awkward. And then I think I narrowed it down. In order to mock or parody something first you have to fundamentally understand what point the original work was trying to make in the first place. I think that whoever is making these edits hasn't passed that point yet. Not because I think they're necessarily stupid. I think it's because they assume whatever Stonetoss says must automatically be incorrect by default because they don't like him. There's a part of their brain that refuses to parse/entertain certain trains thoughts they deem potentially offensive. So that's why all these edits can never really directly refute his point because they don't really understand it to begin with.

Then again if all you're looking for is validation in that subreddit, I imagine all you have to do is toe the line and make it obvious that you think Stonetoss is bad. Otherwise if you try to be too witty or clever someone could misinterpret the edit to be in support of Stonetoss. I see why creating something low effort seems to do the trick. I don't even think the people on the subreddit think the edits are actually funny, they just see it as a way to get back at Stonetoss, like "Ha, I sure showed you".

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

View attachment 2321005

Stumbling Block​

You are being legally discriminated against with no end in sight.
re-education

I might be just uninformed but where exactly is the affirmative action particularly screws whites in the USA? My first thoughts are about unis and workplaces, but the former seems to be filled to the brim by chinks to the point they are in the sights of racial bias. The latter are likely to be affected but then you are entering the question of how to prove it and whether it should be allowed ot not if it's a private company. I guess gibs might be another way for affirmative action to rear it's head but black society is in decay no matter how much money the government throws at it.

In general the problem with affirmative action is that it doesn't "create" change. Your workplace might lower the standards for muslim women to work there, but it doesn't magically makes those women appear from the aether. So the best you get is some useless diversity hire that barely fits the demands.

 

[AnOminous]

In general the problem with affirmative action is that it doesn't "create" change. Your workplace might lower the standards for muslim women to work there, but it doesn't magically makes those women appear from the aether. So the best you get is some useless diversity hire that barely fits the demands.

Harvard's policy is explicitly racially biased against whites and Asians, but it is Asian plaintiffs who are suing in this case because it's actually worse for them and their policies literally target them directly by their racial group (as opposed to indirectly harming whites by favoring other races which is also questionable to say the least).

From the intro to the cert. petition:

But given Harvard’s flagrant violations of Title VI, it fails strict scrutiny even under Grutter. Harvard’s mistreatment of Asian-American applicants is appalling. Harvard penalizes them because, according to its admissions office, they lack leadership and confidence and are less likable and kind. This is reason enough to grant review. That Harvard engages in racial balancing and ignores race-neutral alternatives also proves that Harvard does not use race as a last resort. All of this makes intervention that much more urgent.

They literally base their discrimination against Asians on invidious stereotypes of Asian people, i.e. essentially a quota in drag.

 

[Lemmingwise]

I might be just uninformed but where exactly is the affirmative action particularly screws whites in the USA? My first thoughts are about unis and workplaces, but the former seems to be filled to the brim by chinks to the point they are in the sights of racial bias

If you only look at composition of racial ratios at universities (I've only looked at the high profile ones), then IIRC, blacks are underrepresented, whites are underrepresented, asians are overrepresented and jews are vastly overrepresented. If you account for IQ differences then blacks are overrepresented, whites significantly underrepresented, asians somewhat what you would expect and jews still overrepresented.

In general the problem with affirmative action is that it doesn't "create" change. Your workplace might lower the standards for muslim women to work there, but it doesn't magically makes those women appear from the aether. So the best you get is some useless diversity hire that barely fits the demands.

I think people underplay the hidden costs of not getting the best person for each degree/job. It is mismanagement of resources for what you get in return for the investment. A degree/job is not just about the value to that person, but also what they can contribute. The results aren't very different from corruption/nepotism, where family members get a job they're not as qualified for.

The city of Rotterdam was strongarmed into anonymizing CVs before deciding who to interview. Because they were racist. They did. The end result was that they now invited almost zero non-whites. Not only did it prove the anti-white bias, they immediately buckled under the pressure to remove this new "racist" anonymising.

 

[waffle]

They literally base their discrimination against Asians on invidious stereotypes of Asian people, i.e. essentially a quota in drag.

Oh man, I hadn't followed the affirmative action stuff that close and I had no idea that they essentially just put in writing that Asians are bugmen and they don't want them.

Its seemed to me for a while that the antifa types have been trying to start a race war in the US because they think the can trick black people into supporting them (Herbert Marcuse did literally say they should do that after all...), but I'm amazed that they are fracturing off the other racial groups so fast.

 

[AnOminous]

Oh man, I hadn't followed the affirmative action stuff that close and I had no idea that they essentially just put in writing that Asians are bugmen and they don't want them.

Its seemed to me for a while that the antifa types have been trying to start a race war in the US because they think the can trick black people into supporting them (Herbert Marcuse did literally say they should do that after all...), but I'm amazed that they are fracturing off the other racial groups so fast.

The numbers also speak for themselves. The method they're using is a gigantic penalty for Asians.

App.179-80; JA.6008-09. For example, an Asian
American in the fourth-lowest decile has virtually no
chance of being admitted to Harvard (0.9%); but an
African American in that decile has a higher chance of
admission (12.8%) than an Asian American in the top
decile (12.7%).

This isn't the top 10% of people in general, but of applicants specifically.

From the cert. petition.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

If you only look at composition of racial ratios at universities (I've only looked at the high profile ones), then IIRC, blacks are underrepresented, whites are underrepresented, asians are overrepresented and jews are vastly overrepresented. If you account for IQ differences then blacks are overrepresented, whites significantly underrepresented, asians somewhat what you would expect and jews still overrepresented.

I'd be interested in seeing how it's divided by subject, since every time I look a department of STEM studies it was literally 99% chinks and a single white professor. I'd hazard a guess that humane studies are still ruled by jews despite only being good burning money.
Anyways, universities today are a joke and debt traps. I think the most pressing issue is the transfer of USA jobs overseas.

I think people underplay the hidden costs of not getting the best person for each degree/job. It is mismanagement of resources for what you get in return for the investment. A degree/job is not just about the value to that person, but also what they can contribute. The results aren't very different from corruption/nepotism, where family members get a job they're not as qualified for.

The city of Rotterdam was strongarmed into anonymizing CVs before deciding who to interview. Because they were racist. They did. The end result was that they now invited almost zero non-whites. Not only did it prove the anti-white bias, they immediately buckled under the pressure to remove this new "racist" anonymising.

I write it a lot in the Multimedia forum, what we have today is a war against meritocracy that uses the ideas of diversity to justify getting untalented hacks to do jobs instead of whoever can do the best work. Though with monopolies they can keep burning money because they have no competition that could topple them.

 

[Lemmingwise]

I'd be interested in seeing how it's divided by subject

Interesting question. No idea.

ps. for the people waiting for the gaystats, I haven't forgotten, just been a little more busy than expected.

 

[awoo]

Without racial biases it would be like 80% Asians

Look at the UC systems where systems are race-blind due to prop 209

Unfortunately this stunning queen Shirley Weber put forth an amendment to end that, but the vote failed with 57% voting against, probably due to campaigning by two Republican Korean American Representatives

 

[robobobo]

I suppose a cloud amogus is better than no amogus.

It's not in the cloud.

 

[Waifuwars]

Without racial biases it would be like 80% Asians

Look at the UC systems where systems are race-blind due to prop 209

Unfortunately this stunning queen Shirley Weber put forth an amendment to end that, but the vote failed with 57% voting against, probably due to campaigning by two Republican Korean American Representatives

Why are her eyes so red? Did she stay up all night coping and seething that her shitty proposition didn't get approved? Good on the Koreans for getting this blocked though. It's about time Asians grew a spine and fought against a system so adamant on screwing them over. Imagine immigrating to the US for a better life for you and your children only to see a nog like Shirley in a position of power.

 

[Neo-Holstien]

she looks like an abo