That quote is about race, an unchangeable genetic characteristic. We are talking about clothes, something that can be changed in a matter of minutes. Something that is a conscious form of non-verbal communication used by all humans everywhere, that will never change. Doesn't matter if you're in streetwear or formal business attire. Attention to detail and style = respect. IF that's what you want. If you don't want respect well then F it... Go with the neckbeard.
The quote is not
just about race and you're not addressing my analysis which proceeded it.
I'll cut it down still further, this from the quote since you're directly addressing that.
...believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist.
Racism is a nasty group label, a derogatory form of collectivist categorization. Or put another way it's a prejudicial subscription to stereotypes.
Or put even more bluntly, judging someone based on their superficial characteristics rather than their ideas is, well,
superficial.
Governance isn't, or optimally should not be, about weighing the
who above the
what.
In point of fact one of the current problems with our political situation is that voters judge the quality of
ideas based on who's presenting them and the quality of the person based on their
persona rather than something of greater substance.
Obama is a great speaker, he's also totally dishonest and using his executive power to debase the fundamental aspects of this nation.
So he's well dressed and presents himself nicely, and his
policies are profoundly detrimental and his record is dishonest. So don't vote based on shallow superficial traits UNLESS that's what you want. If you don't want voters and politicians who choose ideas by merit then F it... Go with focusing on the neckbeard.
You can always look at it (dressing up) as camouflage in a combat situation
Actually that's what I do now
it's a good call (IMO) I just look forward to when political discourse is less of a combat situation and more of a mature debate.
You CAN talk foreign policy with older GOP people as long as you keep it out of the middle east. This summer, a lot of us went to a straw poll. There were a couple of women taking up a collection for a firend with an unfortunate medical situation. Talking, I mentioned where I worked and they were interested in what it was like to live "abroad".
This opened the door for me to talk about local politics, with several parties, and local issues. I got them on board about the election up the island where a guy won whose main issue was keeping the US Marines from building a base just off their coast. He won in a landslide. Then, I told how the US government approached Japan's PM to override the local citizens' decision. I asked them what they thought about a foreign nation negating a local election issue. I think they got the idea. If they are strong into small gov't local choices, stories like this can't help but hit a nerve.
By the way, it's been a long haul, but I think the Okinawans have won this one. Last I heard, the base is not going to be built.
+rep
At least in NH, you have a lot of company at GOP functions. At first it was interesting, with lots of Beck 9/12ers around. Seemed very sincere but not as knowledgeable. It was fun to share websites for education with them. I have no idea how they are doing now. Are they still around? Or have they been absorbed by the establishment or other groups?
I personally have no idea on this but I'd be interested to find out
