Tako wrote:
> >
> It's like you take joy in being a devil's advocate. I sense you are
> reveling in the intellectualism of arguing, and that you actually have no
> deep emotional investment in anything you are saying.
Emotional investment in THINKING about something?????????? I prefet to
invest my emotions in personal relationship, not in thinking. BTW, that's
certainly where emotions shouldn't be.
> I am an ethnic
> minority in the US, so my survival depends on subverting many of the
> paradigms you are promoting.
Which ones?
> We're not on the same level here -
> imperialism, capitalism, academic elitism and ethnocentric intelligence
> criteria require no champions - they are doing quite well without your
> help. Who benefits from your defending them?
Political correction, the basis to the 'new left', is the same basis to
imperialism and capitalism nowadays. who are Clinton and Blair and all the
'new left' leaders but the representatives of the 'new left' AND the New
World Order? BTW, intelligence is intelligence. Ethnocentric intelligence is
completely meaningful to me. What does it mean?
>
> I only argue because every little thing you say erodes the hard earned
> freedoms so-called 'leftists' have gained for me and other people who
> traditionally have little power.
What have they gained for you? They have eroded the sense of a nation in
order to promote intl capitalism. The new left is just the academic arm of
globalization, in the US and all over the world.
>You seem to argue simply because you
> can and you like the negative attention, and I resent it.
I agree: I argue because I can. If I couldn't, I wouldn't.
Concerning attention, I like the truth and I don't think the fact that I'm
South American should get in the way of seeing the truth as it is, as you
suggested above and in another post. BTW, 'YOUR" POINT OF VIEW IS
ETHNOCENTRIC, since all you said to support your perspective is that it is
good for you ethnic group.
Bye,
Caio Rossi
|
