So what you’re saying is racism is good?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
So what you’re saying is racism is good?
Rascal
El Presidente
What groups do not have a stake in society in Britain?
Travellers and the homeless? Can’t think of any more whatsoever.
The jobless, the disabled, the 99%, the old, the young, the working class, the middle class, the Asian community, the black community,
Jean Jacques Rousseau in Social Contract thought that their was a fine balance between democracy, protection and obedience to the state, so for a democracy to function and fulfil the idea of a Social contract, all sections of society must have a stake in the contract. At the moment that does not happen and if not all sections of society have a stake then democracy itself is threatened.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
Black people should forever remain unequal and be subject to racism? Good luck with that ending well.
He has at no point said that Bob has he?
No one has.
Black Lives Matter, fact.
BLM UK dont as a political organisation and the sooner they slink off to try and change the world behind the next opportunity they see the better.
Perfectly fair points, not really considered it from that perspective before. On the first point I did randomly pick trans rights to highlight the point I was trying to make rather than meaning it to be specificly about trans rights,(1) my point being the deflection from what is happening with the Covid crisis being turned into a cultural war (2) in order to silence the left with the usual right wing slurs of SJW, Cultural Marxist, Virtue signaller, Trot, etc etc
And of course you are right, I am a bloke and the subject does seem trivial to me because I am a bloke and I am a person who would normally stand up for women's rights in every area where I believe inequality to be an issue. Obviously trans rights and its effects on women is an area where I need to educate myself an awful lot more. Thanks for pointing it out.
2 issues about the bolded above;
1. Who turned it into a cultural war? The Right for claiming it's an attempt to cause economic harm? Or the left for thinking it highlights racism as it adversely affects people of color... What I believe you call BAME - Sorry just learned that. And wanted to put my new knowledge to use :)
2.
I'm sorry Rascal but I have to challenge your failure to recognize that the second part of the bolded above is a projection:
SJW ( i.e. I fight for Social Justice) is something people on the left proudly proclaim... It's not an accusation. It's a proud proclamation... "Snowflake" on the other hand is a legitimate accusatory slur. But SJW is not. Matter if fact it is itself a virtue Signal.
Virtue Signaling is also a real thing: The art of making public gestures that have no real effect on the issue at hand, perhaps sometimes even harmful to the issue, but signals to others what side you are on is virtue signaling. I believe in fighting for Social Justice is an example of it.
I identify as she/her is a useless Virus Signal by straight people. Does nothing to improve the lives of Trans people. Defund the Police is a harmful virtue signal by those who want black lives to matter more. As defunding the police makes Black Lives Matter less.
You yourself just exhibited a virtue signal about Trans people without recognizing or considering the overall impact. This too is an another hallmark of virtue signaling. I.e. holding a moral sounding position with little regard or recognition of the consequences of such a position. It just so happens that on this particular issue the consequences negatively impacted another left collective group, women.
Its why some left Royals of yesteryears are now shocked to find themselves on the shit end of the oppressor stick. Germaine Greer, JK Rowling etc. They are still fighting the women are oppressed war. Not recognizing there is a newer and higher on the heirarchy of victimhood group, Trans! And they are all shocked by the predictable counterpunch.
This is hard for these women, as Trans (And by trans, we really mean transwomen) are in the minds of these Feminists, actual biological men and the historical administrators of women's oppression. How can they now view themselves as oppressors of a sliver of the oppressors? It's a tough one.
Some have chosen to die on that hill. Those who have, now find themselves allies with the very men they vilified in the past. You know, the ones who were called sexist by Greer and her ilk in the 80s for stating the obvious that there were general differences btw men and women.
Anyway, I'm off on a different tangent now. And I know the blaming cultural war on the right wasn't your main point. But it was worth noting that this belief that underpins your overall claim here,, needs review.
Sidebar: What's a Trot? Another learning opportunity seems afoot :)
Apologies for not responding to your original post to me. But here it goes:Black people should forever remain unequal and be subject to racism? Good luck with that ending well.
Does it occur to you that if we dealt with the racism and especially the institutional racism, both passive and aggressive, and the inequality, you wouldn’t have protests on the streets demanding all those things that terrify you so?
Give all groups a stake in society and they will protect that society.
No, I'm telling her in spite of what she and the rest of us have been taught in Critical Race Theory classes, the facts simply don't bare out those claims. She is NOT a victim.
As it relates to BLM, my point is that from where I stand they are more interested in guilt tripping white people than they are in saving black lives. It's not a matter of "know your place" rather, it's that 1) the evidence so far does not bare out your claims and 2) more importantly your solutions often have no relationship with the stated issue. PC has highlighted some of the BLM solutions that have no relationship to making black lives matter or better.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 17,542
- Team supported
- FC Zurich (and city of course)
Not sure I'm all that comfortable with signing open letters and all the 'signing up' to causes that seems to be the thing at present. I've just been asked to 'like' a fb anti discrimination page connected to an amateur musical hobby. Clicked on the link, and there is an open letter to 'sign' by posting 'agree' and then your name is added to the list of the virtuous for all to see. This invites the question of where those of us who don't wish to be on a list, but already thought discrimination was bad now stand? Do we end up on another list?
BobKowalski
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2007
- Messages
- 20,218
Apologies for not responding to your original post to me. But here it goes:
No, I'm telling her in spite of what she and the rest of us have been taught in Critical Race Theory classes, the facts simply don't bare out those claims. She is NOT a victim.
As it relates to BLM, my point is that from where I stand they are more interested in guilt tripping white people than they are in saving black lives. It's not a matter of "know your place" rather, it's that 1) the evidence so far does not bare out your claims and 2) more importantly your solutions often have no relationship with the stated issue. PC has highlighted some of the BLM solutions that have no relationship to making black lives matter or better.
So you say and keep saying. There are a lot of people firmly declaring that women/black/minorities are not victims. Yet their personal experience, their histories say otherwise.
Civil Rights movement in the sixties, Rosa Parks, Jim Crow, Slavery. I wonder how many people then were firmly declaring that black people were not victims, I mean how could they be? Slavery after all was ordained by God and in the Bible.
Now I know you are not going to listen to any of this because you have no intention of listening, so we can call it quits and move on.
The perfect fumble
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 24,284
No, black people should not forever remain unequal and be subject to racism. You’ve just done exactly what this thread is talking about, right there.
Yes, it does occur to me and I want racism and especially institutional racism (which still hasn’t been proven to exist in this country in six weeks of asking for proof, outside stop+search figures that still don’t particularly show institutional racism!) and inequality to be dealt with and ended; just not lead by the BLM organisation.
What groups do not have a stake in society in Britain?
Travellers and the homeless? Can’t think of any more whatsoever.
This as a very old chestnut.
Think on this, the campaign for nuclear disarmament wants this country to abandon nuclear weapons, the "reasonable" folk say that's foolish, they prefer multilateral nuclear disarmament, which will never happen, therefore we continue to have nuclear weapons. The multilateral nuclear disarmers, in any practical sense, might as well be pro nuclear for all the good they do, because the end result is we continue to have nuclear weapons. It gets to a point where pro nuclear folk and multilateral disarmers are, to all extents and purposes indistinguishable, because despite their differences the outcome is the same.
Discrimination exists, you accept that. If we discount rich white blokes, I'm sure you and I can think of any number of groups with a legitimate axe to grind. What I cannot think of is any discriminated group that has not had to engage in some form of protest to get what they want and I struggle to think of any group that succeeded by widening their grievance net to encompass every downtrodden group in society. In fact those that oppose the aims of a particular discriminated group deliberately widen the grievance pot to confuse the issue to ensure nothing gets done. So Black Lives Matter becomes All Lives Matter, the motives of the movement are questioned, us and them lines drawn, culture wars stoked and no brainer basic assumptions questioned. Initial sympathy begins to slowly drain away, momentum lost and the issue fizzles out, usually with a prolonged enquiry, delivered quietly long after the fire has burned out.
So with all this distrust and noises off, it's important to see things for what they are.
The BLM movement has exposed two major players. Racists in our society who want racist and discriminatory practices to continue. And reasonable, predominately white folk, who don't consider themselves racist and do not display racism in their daily lives, but feel uneasy about BLM and their motives. These reasonable folk feel uncomfortable about some of the changes that BLM are demanding, they question the assumptions that BLM are making and suspect this might end up as a zero sum game, with them losing out.
So these reasonable non racist folk muddy the waters, obfuscate, engage in whataboutery, all with the best intentions you understand, and just like the multilateral nuclear disarmers being indistinguishable, in any practical sense, from the pro nuclear crowd, the non racist reasonable folk might as well be Tommy Robinson for all the good they do, because nothing changes.
Last edited:
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
This is the state of UK society in the 21st century.
Fascism and cancel culture are on the rise and they're beginning to defeat the right to the peaceful expression of ideas.
.
BobKowalski
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2007
- Messages
- 20,218
This is the state of UK society in the 21st century.
Fascism and cancel culture are on the rise and they're beginning to defeat the right to the peaceful expression of ideas.
Reminded me of Die Hard 3 where Bruce is wandering around with a less than diplomatic sign.
I digress. Battle of Cable Street it was not.