Today I Learned
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
view the rest of the comments
Literally the only feminism I've heard about for the past 10 years is intersectional feminism.
Very much a just-so story. Imo, a far more reasonable interpretation breaks voting patterns along tribal identity, while most women voting care about more things than the very amorphous "collective welfare of all women". Interesting to note that 38% of latina voters voted for Trump, a statistic strangely absent from your argument...
I have never met a single self-identifying feminist who would not agree with this to some extent.
I think Adam Smith would have a lot to say about this. Specifically, he would probably point out that the slave states really had an awfully small economy compared to the free states, and that most of the wealth generation which occurred in the US occurred due to productivity gains driven by technological innovations which were most aggressively exploited in the north. In the long run, few people could claim to have really benefitted noticeably from american slavery - it was just a shitty thing to do for no reason.
I mean, from the pro-DEI arguments I keep hearing on lemmy, DEI seems to mostly involve removing names from resumes before they are rejected by AI or something. But I wouldn't be surprised if this critique had merit - most people who benefit from adding footholds inside the system are people who know how to work the system.
I really don't have anything to say to this, because it feels like you kind of just shut down in the middle of a rant. Are you okay? Did you have a stroke?
Your comment completely completely proves what white feminism is , that's the lack of accountability and no consideration of rights of minority
Even United Nations acknowledge the need to move beyond white feminism :-
https://www.unwomen.org/en/articles/explainer/intersectional-feminism-what-it-means-and-why-it-matters-right-now
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_feminism
Adam smith point of view won't work here cause black people even after abolishment of slavery were not allowed to participate in economy in efficient way . Productivity of economy benefited only white people for wealth generation .. In case black people if became successful,they were torn downed to the ground Best example would be what happened to black wall street and how it got destroyed during Tulsa massacre
That would be really weird, considering I don't even really consider myself to be a feminist. Sure, on any given policy position I agree with them.... but it's kind of like MtG. Sure, you might think MtG is fun - but you don't want to admit to being an MtG player too early in a relationship, lest you get lumped into all the other MtG players. You know the ones.
Adam Smith literally wrote The Wealth of Nations, in part, to explain why Spain wasn't the richest country in the world after they stole a shit ton of gold from some brown people.
White people today aren't rich because of wealth they accumulated from exploiting brown people, because that wealth doesn't accumulate over time. They are wealthy because they participated in a system with strong, stable institutions which created technological innovation.
Brown people didn't benefit as much from this creation of wealth because they were excluded from the formal and informal social networks and opportunities which would have provided them the means to earn and accumulate wealth, and sometimes had their own wealth, social networks, and social opportunities destroyed. Which was, to be clear, a dick move. But it is not the same dick move that is being described above.
What you said is right , without industrialization there won't be any rise in economic prosperity, but at the same time
if you look at present day Spanish colonies , much of the property , farmlands of high real estate value are majorly owned by descendants of white people over present generation of black people or native Americans tribes .
Another example would be australia, much of the wealthy real estate , farmlands and property are owned by white people , they got this wealth and property from there ancestors. How there ancestors got this were by displacement of aborginal people from fertile , beach side lands
That means present generation of white people in australia benefit from having high net worth properties , fertile farmlands whereas present day descendants of aborginal people only have dried land and have properties of low real estate value .
This is one of the Main thing causing disparity in australia, same thing would be applicable for usa where white people own majority of property, wealthy farmland . Also Black people were curbed via Jim crows law which were made by white supremists to curb rise of black traders eventually leads to more economic inequality .
Jealous white supremists destroyed black wall street during Tulsa massacre