Citing that Pillsbury doughboy as a source for anything other than critical theory is an epic fail.
Pajeets are "winning" through nepotism, something Whites are legally not allowed to do, and haven't been since 1965. Any time Whites try to do what pajeets do, the entire weight of the Federal government comes down on them.
Strongly disagree. His lectures on Pablo Freire's critical pedology are very good. He's read all the source books for critical theory, and he's able to distill them down to laymen terms.
That stuff is what he made his name with, originally. He's batshit nuts on everything else, though.
Citing that Pillsbury doughboy as a source for anything other than critical theory is an epic fail.
Pajeets are "winning" through nepotism, something Whites are legally not allowed to do, and haven't been since 1965. Any time Whites try to do what pajeets do, the entire weight of the Federal government comes down on them.
I seriously doubt his critical theory theories are actually worth anything.
Strongly disagree. His lectures on Pablo Freire's critical pedology are very good. He's read all the source books for critical theory, and he's able to distill them down to laymen terms.
That stuff is what he made his name with, originally. He's batshit nuts on everything else, though.
And yet he is so wrong about everything else. Therefore he is also probably wrong about critical theory.
Nah, he did a great job dissecting critical theory faggotry.
Kind of like blacks and violence?