Chat Forum
It is currently Sun Aug 09, 2020 3:35 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1753 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 40, 41, 42, 43, 44  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4832
kiwinoz wrote:
LinkedIn now joining the fun. Removing posts critical of the CCP or pro Uigur and removing outspoken black conservatives who criticise BLM.


Really?

That seems strange. Who has been removed? What did they say?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 28681
Nieghorn wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
A guardian article that males much sense. How BAME is an unhelpful, inaccurate and basically useless term.

Quote:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... l-language

The term BAME isn't fit for use. We need a new political language
Kenan Malik

We can’t analyse society without categorising people. But we need precision in the categories used

“I hate being described” as one, tweeted Channel 4’s Krishnan Guru-Murthy. Sunder Katwala, founder of the thinktank British Future, doesn’t identify as one. And last week Coventry’s Belgrade theatre promised never to use the description again.

What they are all talking about is “BAME”, that soulless acronym to describe black, Asian and minority ethnic people that is creeping into fashion in policy circles and journalism. It has been around for a while, but the Covid-19 pandemic and the discussions around Black Lives Matter protests have given the term a higher visibility. The majority of people, though, have no idea what it means. And most people who might be described as BAME loathe the term.

The problem is not simply that BAME is a clunky description. The debate also points to deeper questions about how people are categorised and what such categories tell us.


It’s impossible to analyse society or the impact of social policies without distinguishing between categories of people. In France, the nation’s universalist ethos means that ethnic and religious data is rarely collected. The resolve to treat everyone as citizens, not as bearers of specific racial or cultural histories, is valuable. In practice, though, many people are denied equal treatment and racism is deep seated, but the lack of data makes it difficult to gauge discriminatory practices.

In Britain, there has been much debate about the unequal impact of Covid-19 on ethnic minorities. Not so in France, largely because there’s little information in which to root a debate. But if lack of statistics is a problem, possessing data is no panacea. Decisions on what data to collect and how to interpret it may themselves mislead.

Take the question of street violence. Twenty years ago, the major issue of concern was not knife crime but street robbery. Then, as now, black people were over-represented in the statistics, leading to the claim that there is something about black culture leading to criminality.

The criminologists Marian FitzGerald, Jan Stockdale and Chris Hale analysed the data. They showed that street crime was much more likely in areas with a high population turnover and a combination of young people living in poverty alongside others who were both more affluent and trendy enough to own gadgets such as mobile phones. Young black people lived disproportionately in such areas. But where such areas included large numbers of poor white people, they, too, were involved in robberies.

Over time, as identities have become less political, the meaning of 'black' has changed
The category “lives in an area of high population turnover with a mixture of poor people and affluent trendies” is not politically salient. “Black” is. So street robbery became associated with black people. The result is what FitzGerald calls “statistical racism”.

People belong to many categories and categories overlap. African Caribbeans and Bangladeshis in Britain, for instance, are disproportionately working class, compared not just with white people but with other minority groups, such as Indians, Chinese and black Africans. But while discussion of the white population routinely takes class into account, discussions of minorities rarely do.

Consider school exclusions. Black pupils are disproportionately excluded from school. Look more closely and you see the problem is in particular with those of Caribbean descent. Pupils of black African descent are less likely to be excluded than their white peers.

Figures also show that pupils claiming free school meals (FSM) – a proxy for poverty – are three times more likely to be excluded than the average pupil; 40% of all school exclusions are of FSM pupils.

School exclusion, then, is a major issue facing white working-class pupils, too, and class as well as race may play a role in the disproportionate exclusion of black pupils. But to say so is to invite the accusation that one is downplaying the significance of racism. And so, more nuanced accounts of discrimination are often ignored.

When I was growing up, I saw myself, and was seen as, “black”. In the 1980s, it was a political term, denoting a sense of a common struggle against racism. Over time, as identities have become less political, more ethnic or cultural, so the meaning of “black” has changed.

Some see BAME as a means of articulating that feeling of commonality that “black” once denoted. It’s not. It’s an administrative, not a political, term. What we still lack is a political language that can both encompass the varied experiences of particular groups and imbue a sense of solidarity to struggles for social change.

• Kenan Malik is an Observer columnist



I've wondered about this as I'm a bit of a language geek (i.e. trying to learn more, definitely not an expert). I generally detest acronyms and jargon that dilute the meaning of something. Throughout the media coverage of the protests I wondered about BAME (and BIPOC here in Canada - Black, Indigenous, Person/People of Colour) ... was it lazy journalists who came up with this? Do you call someone a 'bame' or do you say B.A.M.E.s?

BIPOC I find especially annoying (so can only imagine how people included in it might feel!) because it identifies two groups and then shoves everyone else into 'the rest'. Funny that 'marginalized people' are further marginalized by the term used to describe them.


I agree BAME was always a horribly contrived and lazy term. You may as well go NWP 'Not white People'. It serves very little practical or scientific purpose.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4492
BAME to me has always felt like a PC way of saying "darkies". I know it's used with good intentions but I really hate it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 806
People of Colour is also a bit too similar to Coloured

It’s an absolute minefield


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 9:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14267
I think NW (not white) is fine. That's what BAME and POC mean.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 9:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 28681
my 2 cents wrote:
People of Colour is also a bit too similar to Coloured

It’s an absolute minefield


Which one is the racist one again?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6891
4071 wrote:
kiwinoz wrote:
LinkedIn now joining the fun. Removing posts critical of the CCP or pro Uigur and removing outspoken black conservatives who criticise BLM.


Really?

That seems strange. Who has been removed? What did they say?


Just two African American businessmen on my network who are outspoken on BLM and using facts to unravel the narrative. Things like pointing out 70% of African American kids dont have father. Or that black gun violence is such a huge issue it should not and can not be ignored but they do. Its like catnip to some liberal whites whose feelings have been hurt but cant play the obvious racist card against a non white. Apparently you can report it and if LI 's thinks their feelings have been hurt too....

I've had posts critical of the CCP and treatment of Uigurs removed within 2 minutes. The author of the thread was an Aussie who has significant business in China.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4832
kiwinoz wrote:
4071 wrote:
kiwinoz wrote:
LinkedIn now joining the fun. Removing posts critical of the CCP or pro Uigur and removing outspoken black conservatives who criticise BLM.


Really?

That seems strange. Who has been removed? What did they say?


Just two African American businessmen on my network who are outspoken on BLM and using facts to unravel the narrative. Things like pointing out 70% of African American kids dont have father. Or that black gun violence is such a huge issue it should not and can not be ignored but they do. Its like catnip to some liberal whites whose feelings have been hurt but cant play the obvious racist card against a non white. Apparently you can report it and if LI 's thinks their feelings have been hurt too....

I've had posts critical of the CCP and treatment of Uigurs removed within 2 minutes. The author of the thread was an Aussie who has significant business in China.


I'm not in the least bit surprised that posts critical of the CCP get removed. It's a professional networking site and obviously they don't want to upset China. And the Chinese government get very upset about the smallest things, as would Chinese professionals on the site.

I'm a little surprised at the removal of people who criticise BLM. Though I didn't even know that LinkedIn was a place for discussion of politics. I don't really spend much time on there. Was the removal of those two guys explicitly linked to their posts about BLM and their diversions/digressions into some of the other social issues affecting back people in the US?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 2:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6891
Its white liberals with their own version of racist vitriol to any one who upsets their view of the world. As far as I could see he only pointed out inconsistencies in the BLM narrative and showed support for his local police force. They never engaged in a discussion of the facts or why he felt the way he did just the usual personal attacks. Its just like here!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 2:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2667
eldanielfire wrote:
my 2 cents wrote:
People of Colour is also a bit too similar to Coloured

It’s an absolute minefield


Which one is the racist one again?

Coloured, because coloured is an adjective, and referring to people by adjectives is broadly a way of depersonalising them.
So, black people is broadly better than blacks. And likewise for white people.
Indigenous Australians is broadly better then aboriginals [and definitely better than aborigines, which is a mild slur].
Of course there are exceptions, such as when the group in question isn't being discriminated against, like Canadians, or hotties.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 3:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4492
https://youtu.be/AcB0YAyFlyg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 5:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 488
4071 wrote:
kiwinoz wrote:
LinkedIn now joining the fun. Removing posts critical of the CCP or pro Uigur and removing outspoken black conservatives who criticise BLM.


Really?

That seems strange. Who has been removed? What did they say?


Most or all of the so called outspoken blacks are really commercial conservatives. They don't actually believe in conservative values. But they realize that trolling black people is very lucrative. If you are black and you want to make easy money, you can make a ton of money selling books or as a radio host or giving speeches saying stuff like : "Racism against blacks doesn't exist, Police brutality doesn't exist, slavery was a good thing" etc etc. Because there is a large audience of people willing to pay you to say that. They desperately want to hear that message no matter how false.

Larry Elder will brazenly go on TV and declare that racism against blacks doesn't exist. But he will not dare say that antisemitism doesn't exist because he will lose his radio show.

So basically the issues affecting black people are fair play for the entertainment. But issues affecting Jews cannot be touched. So if true, its great that Linkedin and others are taking a stand against modern day minstrelsy.

Also some of those posts being removed from Linkedin are likely to be russian trolls. They troll on both sides. They make what look like ridiculous pro-BLM posts and harshly critical anti BLM posts to stoke hostility on both sides.


Last edited by free_safety on Tue Jul 28, 2020 5:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 5:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 488
kiwinoz wrote:
Just two African American businessmen on my network who are outspoken on BLM and using facts to unravel the narrative. Things like pointing out 70% of African American kids dont have father. Or that black gun violence is such a huge issue it should not and can not be ignored but they do. Its like catnip to some liberal whites whose feelings have been hurt but cant play the obvious racist card against a non white. Apparently you can report it and if LI 's thinks their feelings have been hurt too....

I've had posts critical of the CCP and treatment of Uigurs removed within 2 minutes. The author of the thread was an Aussie who has significant business in China.


Those are just cynical tactics that conservatives use when they want to change the topic. So does the fact that 70% of blacks don't have a father supposed to excuse police brutality?

Listen to Giuliani for example. When asked about police brutality, he says that blacks should not complain because there is violence in black neighbourhoods which is not being resolved and far more blacks die from gang warfare than from police brutality. Well by that logic then Giuliani should never have complained about 9-11 or any terrorism. After all far more Americans die from domestic violence than from terrorism. Yet Giuliani milked 9-11 and tried to parlay it into a presidential run.

But this is typical of many conservatives. They are uncomfortable discussing real issues pertaining to racism so they try to conveniently change the subject.

And with regard to gang violence in black neighbourhoods, what have conservatives ever done to resolve the issue? Giuliani was mayor of New York. He did nothing. Trump bragged that he could end Chicago violence. he has done nothing. Instead he has sent federal troops to protect racist statues.

Conseravtives arent interested in actually fixing Issues like blacks being 70% fatherless. They just want to use it to rev up resentment from their base. Ronald Reagan used it effectively to create the impression that white conservatives were working hard while black people were the ones benefiting from welfare


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 5:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 488
The violence in black Chicago neighbourhoods is due to lax gun laws in neighboring Indiana counties. The Chicago police have said as much. Funny that conservatives will fight against gun control laws even when the police want such laws. But they will quickly bring up the issue of gun violence in black neighbourhoods, pretending to be concerned about it and yet doing nothing. Everyone can see through their cynicism. If such cynical views are being blocked from Linkedin then I say good riddance.

One thing conservatives like to do is engage is cynical culture wars against minorities. A favourite one during the Ronald Reagan era was the issue of Affirmative action. Reagan and his ilk railed against it constantly and created the impression that black people were taking jobs from deserving whites. Jesse Helms famously created a TV commercial showing a white man losing a job to a black man who was less qualified. Such things never happened but they were effective in rallying the conservative vote.

It helped him win by creating resentment towards black people. What he and his people neglected to tell his base is that in America, white women are the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action. An inconvenient truth worth hiding.

Reagan often railed against issues like welfare. It was he who created the image of the welfare queen. A black woman who supposedly got rich from welfare benefits. But Reagan never did anything to end welfare. It was just a convenient tool he could use to win elections by creating anto black resentment


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2020 4:26 pm
Posts: 393
free_safety wrote:
The violence in black Chicago neighbourhoods is due to lax gun laws in neighboring Indiana counties.

Those laws are even more lax elsewhere, and yet Chicago is the worst. Indiana is as close to other Chicago burbs, and yet they do not have the problem.

An old pic this but from what I have read it is much the same pattern.

Spoiler: show
Image


It is not lax guns laws causing the violence, its something else.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 488
AnkleTap wrote:
Those laws are even more lax elsewhere, and yet Chicago is the worst.

Give me an example of a city larger than Chicago that that is close an area with such lax gun laws.
For example New York is denser in population than Chicago. But New York is surrounded by states that have stricter gun laws. So gun violence in New York is far less prevalent than in Chicago.

Quote:
Indiana is as close to other Chicago burbs, and yet they do not have the problem.

Are you seriously comparing suburbs to the inner city when it comes to gun violence? If so you are clueless. Dense cities in America have always had gun violence issues. There used to be Jewish gangs. Then Irish and Italian gangs, Now its black and Latino gangs

Quote:
It is not lax guns laws causing the violence, its something else.

I bet you have one of those simplistic right wing explanations.
The reality is that it is not one simple factor. There are numerous factors: Drugs from Latin America are fuelling much of the violence. Another is breakdown in family structures. Another is lack of opportunity, lack of education, culture , racism (denial of jobs), and so forth

My point being that republicans like to harp on these issues, give simplistic explanations and offer no proposals to remedy the situation. They just want to use these issues as fodder to create resentment towards blak people


Last edited by free_safety on Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 488
I've given one example of right wing hypocrisy on the issue of reducing inner city violence. Let me give another.

About 10 years back, Pres Obama proposed free community college for everyone. The idea is to train young people especially those in inner cities to learn trades like plumbing, carpentry, electrical technology, basic accounting etc. Free education would likely entice many of these gang types off the streets.

But republicans were apopleptic at the idea. I spoke to some republicans at work and they could not understand why anyone should get a free education. They reminded me that they worked hard to put themselves through college.

I told them that by giving people a free education, the tax payer would spend perhaps $5000 per year on each student which is paltry. On the other hand, if these people werent educated, they would end up on welfare for the rest of their lives and perhaps cost the taxpayer 10 times that much every year.

Furthermore free community college would prevent many from ending up in prison. The cost of a federal prison in America is $65,000 per inmate per year. I said it is better for the taxpayer to spend $5000 per year giving someone a free education instead of spending $65,000 a year housing them in a federal prison. They would not listen. Their solution is to throw as many people in prison as possible especially minorities.

When people are thrown in prison for petty drug offences like possessing a few grams of weed, it ruins their job prospects forever, makes it difficult to find a job, which makes it more likely that they will end up on welfare or back in prison.

My larger point is as follows: Yes there are issues that need to be addressed among AAs. But conservatives don't offer any valid solutions. They just want to use these issues in the culture wars so they can get out the white vote in the deep south. So good on Linkedin for banning conservative cynicism from their site

Its called the Southern Strategy


Last edited by free_safety on Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:41 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 488
One of the architects of the Southern Strategy was Lee Atwater. Here are his words describing how republicans use cultural issues to create resentment against black people.

“You start out in 1954 by saying, Nigger, nigger, nigger. By 1968 you can’t say nigger—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a by product of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites and subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But, I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract and that coded, uh that we’re doing away with the racial problem one way or another you follow me cause obviously saying we want to cut this, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than nigger, nigger, you know? So, any way you look at it race is coming in on the back burner”

https://publicaffairsdigest.com/identit ... ay-nigger/

Remember Lee Atwater was the architect of the Willie Horton TV advertisments that tied Dukakis to a violent black criminal before the 1988 election. He basically created the impression that if Dukakis was elected, violent black gangs would come to white neighborhoods to rape, maim , burglarize and and rob everything in site. And of course Dukakis lost the 1988 election in a landslide. He was actually ahead in the polls by July. But the Willie Horton advertisments sent his poll numbers plummetting.

Funny how people say that identity politics is only bad when it comes from the left.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4690
Location: Straya c**ts.
kiwinoz wrote:
4071 wrote:
kiwinoz wrote:
LinkedIn now joining the fun. Removing posts critical of the CCP or pro Uigur and removing outspoken black conservatives who criticise BLM.
Really?

That seems strange. Who has been removed? What did they say?

Just two African American businessmen on my network who are outspoken on BLM and using facts to unravel the narrative. Things like pointing out 70% of African American kids dont have father..

It's far from clear how the number of single parent black families unravels the BLM narrative.

Given the plain outcomes of systemic racism & consequent disparity in relative poverty, household incomes, educational opportunity, judicial inequality (sentencing outcomes for similar crimes) life expectancy, and the associated rates of domestic violence, drug abuse and incarceration, surely this is precisely the narrative of BLM.

Does anyone imagine that disproportionate rates of search, arrest or police killings can be divorced from all of the above? The two black gentlemen in your Linkedin group sound a little like the (white) guy I argued with recently who dismissed everyone on unemployment benefits as workshy bludgers who'd prefer to live on $250 per week supplemented with drug dealing and stealing rather than work. Which is, of course, absolute garbage.

His view was that because he had once fallen on hard times and worked his way out of it, that everyone else should be able to do the same, taking no account of their backgrounds & circumstances. A few black people who've overcome their inherent disadvantages, or aren't representative of broader racial disadvantage in the first place, are just as misguided.

Whether or not this justifies removing their Linkedin comments is debatable. As 4071 suggests, it might just be a case of Linkedin's attitude towards that sort of discussion and/or their view of the legitimacy of those comments. But it's hard to see how those comment 'unravel the BLM narrative'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2020 4:26 pm
Posts: 393
free_safety wrote:
I bet you have one of those simplistic right wing explanations.


It is the poverty cycle trap. Blacks earn 10 times less in the US on average. The worst neighbourhoods are going to be insane. Hopelessness of the general situation leads to depression, which causes a lot of drug abuse. The unregulated drug problem creates a massive criminal problem. This criminal lifestyle the residents of those particular neighbourhoods lead is what leads to the murders.

Ill concede that readily available weapons inflates the body count. I do not think they cause the trigger to be pulled.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 488
AnkleTap wrote:
free_safety wrote:
I bet you have one of those simplistic right wing explanations.


It is the poverty cycle trap. Blacks earn 10 times less in the US on average. The worst neighbourhoods are going to be insane. Hopelessness of the general situation leads to depression, which causes a lot of drug abuse. The unregulated drug problem creates a massive criminal problem. This criminal lifestyle the residents of those particular neighbourhoods lead is what leads to the murders.

Ill concede that readily available weapons inflates the body count. I do not think they cause the trigger to be pulled.


As I said above, the issue is complex and therefore the solution must be multi-faceted. Restricting the number of guns in circulation by making it harder for people to own guns must be part of the solution. Yet republicans will fight this to the very end. It is much harder to get a drivers license than to get a gun which is ridiculous.

The larger point is that republicans like to harp on the issue of gun violence because it helps them change the subject or rev up their base during elections. But they never offer any valid solutions.

Remember that trump bragged that he could end Chicago violence in a short time. Where the heck is he? Instead he is sending federal troops to fight elderly protesters in Portland or protect racist statues elsewhere


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2020 4:26 pm
Posts: 393
free_safety wrote:
Remember that trump bragged that he could end Chicago violence in a short time.

He could. So could sharia law.

For me I am soooo bored of this racism stuff all the time. If I could directly address my conservative leaders it would be to say, "sort this shit out would you, ffs". Somehow or other the black vote needs to get money and property and be converted to the cause.

The cause, in case you wonder, is to defeat commie socialist scum. x(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4690
Location: Straya c**ts.
AnkleTap wrote:
free_safety wrote:
Remember that trump bragged that he could end Chicago violence in a short time.

He could. So could sharia law.

For me I am soooo bored of this racism stuff all the time. If I could directly address my conservative leaders it would be to say, "sort this shit out would you, ffs". Somehow or other the black vote needs to get money and property and be converted to the cause.

The cause, in case you wonder, is to defeat commie socialist scum. x(

Your prior post on the poverty trap, leaving out the last sentence, was actually quite sensible. Then you followed it up with this shite.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2020 4:26 pm
Posts: 393
Waratah wrote:
AnkleTap wrote:
free_safety wrote:
Remember that trump bragged that he could end Chicago violence in a short time.

He could. So could sharia law.

For me I am soooo bored of this racism stuff all the time. If I could directly address my conservative leaders it would be to say, "sort this shit out would you, ffs". Somehow or other the black vote needs to get money and property and be converted to the cause.

The cause, in case you wonder, is to defeat commie socialist scum. x(

Your prior post on the poverty trap, leaving out the last sentence, was actually quite sensible. Then you followed it up with this shite.

:yawn: Commie.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12879
Location: Coalfalls
6.Jones wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
my 2 cents wrote:
People of Colour is also a bit too similar to Coloured

It’s an absolute minefield


Which one is the racist one again?

Coloured, because coloured is an adjective, and referring to people by adjectives is broadly a way of depersonalising them.
So, black people is broadly better than blacks. And likewise for white people.
Indigenous Australians is broadly better then aboriginals [and definitely better than aborigines, which is a mild slur].
Of course there are exceptions, such as when the group in question isn't being discriminated against, like Canadians, or hotties.

Indigenous Australians has the advantage of including Torres Strait Island peoples.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 12:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14267
free_safety wrote:

Most or all of the so called outspoken blacks are really commercial conservatives. They don't actually believe in conservative values. But they realize that trolling black people is very lucrative.


Sounds like you're saying that all black people share the same values.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 3:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9914
Absolutely awesome thread on the growing split between BLM and Wall of Moms.

Must be read to be believed.

https://mobile.twitter.com/WallOfMoms/s ... 2174571521


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 5:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9914
The Renaissance Society of America has finally come out against the Renaissance. :thumbup:

https://www.rsa.org/general/custom.asp? ... -june-2020


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 5:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9914
Here's a funny old debate. Should English history be about English history or someone else's history. Like Benin.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... curriculum


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 28681
Santa wrote:
Here's a funny old debate. Should English history be about English history or someone else's history. Like Benin.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... curriculum


Kids already learn about Rosa Parks and Martin Luthor King. It's weird. The focus of history should be the big factors that directly shaped our country. But a lot of the BAME addition stuff appears to be nothing more than "you know there was probably the odd black roman solider as well".

History shouldn't matter about skin colour (except where that is the part that shapes history) and British history should be taught as all our history, who cares if Britain was whiter when Roman's invaded, they invaded our country. Tokenism for tokenism sake isn't a progressive or helpful move forward and the school curriculum.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9914
eldanielfire wrote:
Santa wrote:
Here's a funny old debate. Should English history be about English history or someone else's history. Like Benin.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... curriculum


Kids already learn about Rosa Parks and Martin Luthor King. It's weird. The focus of history should be the big factors that directly shaped our country. But a lot of the BAME addition stuff appears to be nothing more than "you know there was probably the odd black roman solider as well".

History shouldn't matter about skin colour (except where that is the part that shapes history) and British history should be taught as all our history, who cares if Britain was whiter when Roman's invaded, they invaded our country. Tokenism for tokenism sake isn't a progressive or helpful move forward and the school curriculum.


I agree with you there. Black history starts as a substantive feature with the slave trade but even there it is a relatively minor strand from the pov of British history. Then there's India, again relatively minor from the pov of British history. Both are worth learning something about for sure but must be balanced against the more important things that were happening at home and in Europe. The next major intersection is essentially Windrush and other post colonial migration.

This crusade from David Olusoga to teach about every single black person ever to turn up is idiotic. It could equally apply to any ethnic group, not that he argues for that as it's not his agenda.

Given that teaching must fit into a finite number of hours every minute spent teaching about someone's favourite historical ethnic individual is a minute spent not teaching about the important big stuff. So teaching that stuff has to be proportionate to historical impact (not current population), and thus relatively small.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9914
Anyway what is actually going on there is a power play for legitimacy. Because by promulgating this nonsense about a deep black history in the UK, Olusoga and co are seeking to strengthen their claim to Britishness/Englishness whatever.

It is a classic strategy to undermine 'indigenous' claims to cultural and political priority, which are essentially based on the length of time that a piece of land is occupied. So the power play is to make a competing claim of long occupation and thereby claim equal priority. This has happened throughout the colonies (e.g. the claim that Maori took NZ off a prior population called Moriori, which is a variation that claims since Maori stole it they are not indigenous therefore we can steal it as they have no moral case).

The assertion of priority based on time occupied is something we all tacitly acknowledge and slightly agree with. In fact Olusogo agrees with it so much it is why he's is making his specious historical claims. Western liberals have got themselves in a bit of a bind on this because they explicitly support indigenous claims in non-western countries including post-colonies, but explicitly don't support indigenous claims in Europe, where they are seen as racist.

The model of high migration, multicultural superiority and the evils of ethnic majorities are thus sins at home but not away. It is classic western liberal cognitive dissonance, and it has been noticed and is now causing some ructions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9914
Following from all of that a major point is that a significant proportion of the claims of systemic racism etc. are actually just features of being a minority population. It's demography and the accumulated benefit of longer occupation.


Last edited by Santa on Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9914
How thiangs get worked out I don't know. My instinct is to not force it too hard. I think if you look at all countries across history, absent invasion and conquest, migrant populations in the US and UK have achieved greater social and economic penetration faster than anywhere else ever. But liberal multiculturalism has created an expectation of integration, equality and speed that is slightly beyond human psychology.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2019 11:06 pm
Posts: 669
The Washington post focusing on the important issues

https://twitter.com/KarenAttiah/status/ ... 8671949825


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9914
Harvey2.0 wrote:
The Washington post focusing on the important issues

https://twitter.com/KarenAttiah/status/ ... 8671949825


Wait are there races or aren't there? :?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2019 11:06 pm
Posts: 669
Santa wrote:
Harvey2.0 wrote:
The Washington post focusing on the important issues

https://twitter.com/KarenAttiah/status/ ... 8671949825


Wait are there races or aren't there? :?


Probably posted before but still worth watching


https://twitter.com/ryanlongcomedy/stat ... 7517473793


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6891
How do New Zealanders fit into the US description? All Pacific Islanders or only if you are clearly Polynesian? Do the rest get chucked in the white bucket?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19578
kiwinoz wrote:
How do New Zealanders fit into the US description? All Pacific Islanders or only if you are clearly Polynesian? Do the rest get chucked in the white bucket?

While not 100%, ... mostly yes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2667
Santa wrote:
Harvey2.0 wrote:
The Washington post focusing on the important issues

https://twitter.com/KarenAttiah/status/ ... 8671949825


Wait are there races or aren't there? :?

Yes, as a cultural construct.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1753 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 40, 41, 42, 43, 44  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AlanBengio, EverReady, La soule, Mog The Almighty, Mr Mike, Nieghorn, OB.., Oxbow, Rinkals, RodneyRegis, towny, ZappaMan and 65 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group