Society/Culture Christchurch Mosque mass shooting

[its free real estate]

Post some evidence to support this claim.
The right are constantly claiming the left are as bad if not worse than they are.
Firstly that is an express admission the right are "bad" even in their own minds.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/unmournable-bodies

Imagine, just imagine, the reaction from the effete liberal left (Socrates2) if some right winger had penned an article in response to the dead in Christchurch titled “Unmournable Bodies”. One of our very own moderators here (Gough) repeatedly celebrates the 3000 dead on September 11 as just deserts.

 

[A Cut Above]

Dude, I'm not saying race and belonging dont exist.

I'm just saying they're socially constructed.

Objectively speaking no one is really 'from' anywhere. Anglo saxons are french, Celtic viking and Anglo. With some Roman thrown in. Collectively we all came from the indo Europeans (a shared group with the Indians) and before that we all came from a group of black guys that emigrated out of Africa not long before that.

And of course there is the billions of species we belonged to (the first few of which were hominids) before that.

Its easy to say 'I belong to these people and that's my homeland'.

I'm just saying that its objectively false (well... more like objectively socially constructed).

Encapsulating a truth inside a larger truth doesn't render the smaller truth false. My very distant ancestors lived in Africa 100,000 years ago, but that does not render many generations of my immediate relations living in Europe a falsehood. You may argue being European is a social construct, but I would suggest the locations of their births & deaths are provable historical facts. Of course you may counter by saying history itself is a social construct.

I'm not sure where debating semantics gets us. Although people shouldn't be encouraged to allow their perceived racial identity to override their ability to think & act for themselves, it is basic human nature to assign value and weight to our cultural heritage, social construct or not.
Though our primitive instinct towards tribalism creates enormous problems the question must be asked - is it possible to live healthy lives without some form of group identity and accompanying sense of belonging? We saw what happened in the 20th century when Communists tried stripping humanity of all forms of group identity except membership to the Communist Party.... catastrophic disaster.

 

[its free real estate]

He's not correct.

"Far left" has a specific meaning, left in the Jacobin sense had a different meaning. Not all of the "left" of that period were republican Jacobins. It applied to all political independents and non-monarchists.

Marx for example recognised the contribution of bourgeois revolutionaries, but they were by no means proletarian. "Far left" has a specific rooting in class politics.

They have the same meaning you dildo.

 

[Malifice]

Encapsulating a truth inside a larger truth doesn't render the smaller truth false. My very distant ancestors lived in Africa 100,000 years ago, but that does not render many generations of my immediate relations living in Europe a falsehood. You may argue being European is a social construct, but I would suggest the locations of their births & deaths are provable historical facts. Of course you may counter by saying history itself is a social construct.

I'm not sure where debating semantics gets us. Although people shouldn't be encouraged to allow their perceived racial identity to override their ability to think & act for themselves, it is basic human nature to assign value and weight to our cultural heritage, social construct or not.
Though our primitive instinct towards tribalism creates enormous problems the question must be asked - is it possible to live healthy lives without some form of group identity and accompanying sense of belonging? We saw what happened in the 20th century when Communists tried stripping humanity of all forms of group identity except membership to the Communist Party.... catastrophic disaster.

Dude.

I didn't say it was a falsehood. I said it was a social construct.

Do you understand the difference?

I'm not saying it's not a perception you have or that that perception isnt real. Pardon the double negatives.

I'm just saying its constructed via social agreement.

You come from the sun (in the form of carbon, hydrogen and so forth). You come from a hot spring in the Pacific where those elements combined to form life. You come from wherever the mollusc that formed millions of years after came from.

You deciding to draw the line at a bit of the map called 'Europe' a few thousand years ago when that molluscs descendants started talking to each other and using tools, is arbitrary and socially constructed.

 

[its free real estate]

No it's not. The accepted science is that 'race' is a social construct and it holds no taxonomic meaning in science.

That might make you sad, but its the accepted science.

It’s not the accepted science. Race is biological. You can trace people’s lineage with DNA markers, what percentage of their ancestry is European, Asian, African etc. the genetic testing for this is getting better all the time.

What that means is another matter.

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

I've actually cringed reading your posts in this thread and you're coming across as being unstable. I hope for your sake you've merely had a few too many.

Enjoy.

No offence but I'm still waiting for your concession that Geelong will not finish top 4 in 2018 and that WCE will miss finals.

Scotland

 

[megatiger]

What did that milo person say about this that got him banned from coming to Australia I can’t find anything

 

[Malifice]

It’s not the accepted science.

it is accepted science. Consensus is clear.

Feel free to argue otherwise, just dont claim it's not.

 

[madmug]

I don't even know what group identity politics is, it's just another right wing grab phrase to me.What's yr point here mate.If you want an eco chamber ,go talk to yr mates.I can't recall using cliches either.My main point is that there is a definate lurch to the right in politics driven by anti -Muslim anti-immigration and using minority groups like Afican Gangs to win votes.You can't argue with that because it's true.Now when these policies are implemented, it can be a catalyst for some nut to use extremist action like in NZ. Things need to be cleaned up ,like internet forums, far right wing media like sky news, herald sun(esp Bolt,Panahi),the Australian ect They are spreading intolerance which can turn to hate.Society deserves better.

You're not actually trying to talk sense or reason with ol' slithering snake oil are ya?

He has no point except RWNJ rubbish. All predicated on xenophobia & intolerance of people who want a peaceful existence.

He'd & a lot of that sort would be better off accepting the power of demographics. Either get some acceptance of reality & tolerance or suffer the brutal future that type are headed for.

 

[its free real estate]

it is accepted science. Consensus is clear.

Feel free to argue otherwise, just dont claim it's not.

No it isn’t clear. If race was a social construct it wouldn’t have genetic markers. Except it does

 

[A Cut Above]

Dude.

I didn't say it was a falsehood. I said it was a social construct.

Do you understand the difference?

I'm not saying it's not a perception you have or that that perception isnt real. Pardon the double negatives.

I'm just saying its constructed via social agreement.

You come from the sun (in the form of carbon, hydrogen and so forth). You come from a hot spring in the Pacific where those elements combined to form life. You come from wherever the mollusc that formed millions of years after came from.

You deciding to draw the line at a bit of the map called 'Europe' a few thousand years ago when that molluscs descendants started talking to each other and using tools, is arbitrary and socially constructed.

Its a very abstract way of looking at things. Perhaps its a shame only a small percentage of the population is capable of embracing this viewpoint. Most are far too grounded in social construct "realities" to be able to step back and see this bigger picture.

 

[evo]

For this reason, I've never understood 'The Left's' identification with and defence of Muslim radicalism. Right and Left are nearly identical at their extremities. See Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mussolini & Mao, i.e. all fascists.

Yes.

Horseshoe Theory

 

[Cooldude]

You're adapting your argument to suit like I'm playing whack a croc.

Damn, that argument about needing gun laws really backfired on me, ya know the bit about gun laws working and the examples showing that they do

Source?

His ass

 

[Taylor]

Source?

https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/3#14

I was wrong. It was the CDC and it put the number at 500,000

 

[Richard Pryor]

What did that milo person say about this that got him banned from coming to Australia I can’t find anything

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/milo-yiannopoulos-banned-from-australia-over-christchurch-comment

"People aren't radicalised by their own side. They get pushed to the far-right by the left, not by others on the right," Yiannopoulos wrote in the post.

"Attacks like this happen because the establishment panders to and mollycoddles extremist leftism and barbaric, alien religious cultures. Not when someone dares to point it out."

For what it's worth I'm pretty sure he was already blocked entry based on his debt and the fact he owed Victoria police $50,000, but the rejection was successfully appealed.

 

[maryjames]

The hand gesture the shooter did today in court I know as a satanic hand sign.

 

[Badesumofu]

No it isn’t clear. If race was a social construct it wouldn’t have genetic markers. Except it does

That is an obvious non-sequitur. The existence of heritable genetic markers doesn’t prove biological race and I have no idea why you’d think otherwise.

 

[ep2018]

Wasnt there a black church in the US a year or two ago that was shot up by a white extremist with 30+ fatalities? Where was all the worldwide grief for that? I find it very odd that attacks against Muslims get this much attention where church attacks happen and are glossed over.

 

[Cooldude]

https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/3#14

I was wrong. It was the CDC and it put the number at 500,000

You do know how to read, don't you?

Defensive Use of Guns
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field. The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.

A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual



defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Effectiveness of defensive tactics, however, is likely to vary across types of victims, types of offenders, and circumstances of the crime, so further research is needed both to explore these contingencies and to confirm or discount earlier findings.
Even when defensive use of guns is effective in averting death or injury for the gun user in cases of crime, it is still possible that keeping a gun in the home or carrying a gun in public—concealed or open carry—may have a different net effect on the rate of injury. For example, if gun ownership raises the risk of suicide, homicide, or the use of weapons by those who invade the homes of gun owners, this could cancel or outweigh the beneficial effects of defensive gun use (Kellermann et al., 1992, 1993, 1995). Although some early studies were published that relate to this issue, they were not conclusive, and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration.

Even the study you cited basically said those stats aren't conclusive, yet you still cited it to suit your own view point, interesting

The entire study is basically damning on US's state of fire arm deaths

 

[Present Not Past]

No it isn’t clear. If race was a social construct it wouldn’t have genetic markers. Except it does

Scientific Racism is no longer considered scientific.
Hitler didn't mind it though.

 

[Richard Pryor]

Wasnt there a black church in the US a year or two ago that was shot up by a white extremist with 30+ fatalities? Where was all the worldwide grief for that? I find it very odd that attacks against Muslims get this much attention where church attacks happen and are glossed over.

I think it received more coverage than you're remembering, however people are sadly more accustomed to mass shootings in the U.S.

IIRC this event has outstripped New Zealand's average annual murder rate in one day.

 

[its free real estate]

That is an obvious non-sequitur. The existence of heritable genetic markers doesn’t prove biological race and I have no idea why you’d think otherwise.

If you can pinpoint the “race” a person belongs to using their genes, then it isn’t a social construct is it?

 

[biggiemediums]

What did that milo person say about this that got him banned from coming to Australia I can’t find anything

I'm an idiot. I glanced at your message and got a shock thinking they were taking Milo off the shelves at supermarkets or something!

 

[FredLeDeux]

You do know how to read, don't you?

Defensive Use of Guns
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field. The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.

A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual



defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Effectiveness of defensive tactics, however, is likely to vary across types of victims, types of offenders, and circumstances of the crime, so further research is needed both to explore these contingencies and to confirm or discount earlier findings.
Even when defensive use of guns is effective in averting death or injury for the gun user in cases of crime, it is still possible that keeping a gun in the home or carrying a gun in public—concealed or open carry—may have a different net effect on the rate of injury. For example, if gun ownership raises the risk of suicide, homicide, or the use of weapons by those who invade the homes of gun owners, this could cancel or outweigh the beneficial effects of defensive gun use (Kellermann et al., 1992, 1993, 1995). Although some early studies were published that relate to this issue, they were not conclusive, and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration.

Even the study you cited basically said those stats aren't conclusive, yet you still cited it to suit your own view point, interesting

The entire study is basically damning on US's state of fire arm deaths

Beat me to it, Dude.
Cool.

 

[Badesumofu]

If you can pinpoint the “race” a person belongs to using their genes, then it isn’t a social construct is it?

Firstly, it’s not actually anywhere near as precise as the word ‘pinpoint’ suggests. Secondly, it doesn’t pinpoint what ‘race’ people belonged to, it estimates what proportion of a persons ancestors lived in what places at what times. You’re the one putting the construction of ‘race’ onto that. It’s got nothing to do with the actual science.