Oppo Camp The Non-North Footy Discussion & Matchday Chat Thread (NNFD&MCT) VI

[Snake_Baker]

What are you actually talking about?

The political propaganda dressed up as a report in to racism allegations.

Have you actually read it?

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

The political propaganda dressed up as a report in to racism allegations.

Have you actually read it?

Yes. It's only 30 odd pages, including an introduction ans executive summary.
What are your specific issues with it? I also don't understand your reference to academia. It's not an academic paper.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Yes. It's only 30 odd pages, including an introduction ans executive summary.
What are your specific issues with it? I also don't understand your reference to academia. It's not an academic paper.

You should read it again.

It's 99% political gesturing and an appeal to the incorporation of people with the academic credentials of the authors in to AFL ranks. It's considerably self serving.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

You may have posted the link but I think it is telling that you chose to focus on the least relevant aspect of the bloke's qualifications. And you certainly presented it as if it laid doubts to his ability to author such a report.
Whereas, I think more relevant would have been to mention his five years working for PWC's Indigenous Consulting, his position as CEO of the Congress of Australia's First Peoples, and various roles in the senior executive service of the NSW public service.

I couldn't follow your argument there to be honest. You seemed to be conflating systemic racism with unconscious bias. The report also doesn't actually define systemic racism, although it uses the term a few times. It defines "interpersonal racism" and "structural racism". I also don't buy your argument that we should only focus on "overt racism".

This is my final post on the matter as I am tired of arguing about racism and it is only a matter of time before some campaigner calls me a racist without a shred of proof again.

Yet I posted his contemporary's background details with a degree of public admiration just to undermine the report. I will make this very clear as this is the last I will discuss it. I stated in the exact same page that any academic can do it as long as their argument and evidence was sound. My singular issue is with the interchangeable definitional use of the term systemic racism with structural and interpersonal racism.

My original post was not a complete answer to systemic racism, but the flawed concept of unconscious (implicit) bias being a major component of it.

For example, the definition I use is:
It is, instead, the “system” of everything that happens in the social (or political/judicial/legisilative) world and beyond that results in any disparity that works in the favor of “racially privileged” groups (on average) or any “racially oppressed” person claiming they experience racial oppression.

Unconscious (implicit) bias supposedly plays a role in individuals helping preserve the oppressive white supremacist system and they are complicit in upholding white supremacy until they acknowledge and address their white privilege. There are other 'systemic' elements thrown in as well, i.e. laws, politics, economics, etc.

Almost all definitions are only white-centric, which means it is tied to concepts like white privilege, complicity, fragility and supremacy, rather than a universally-applied concept for racism. There lies the first issue. It is not universally applied to all 'races' and has very little in common with universal liberalism or even humanism. It has only fueled tribal obsessions with identity-politics. It is also why you have silly racist terms like multiracial whiteness emerge from this new movement: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...rt-we-must-think-terms-multiracial-whiteness/

It is also why you saw racial segeration with the Chaz movements and the Evergreen saga with Brett Weinstein.

Secondly and most importantly, the description of hidden mythical systems is obscure, muddled and lacks academic clarity. The definition itself muddles and conflates terms like systemic racism, structural racism, and institutional racism. While there is much space to have meaningful conversations and debates around individual racism, racist attitudes, discrimination, ham-fisted policy that results in discrimination (what’s left of institutional racism), and even “cultural racism” and “epistemic injustice,” none of this is served by introducing “systemic racism” as a concept. It only muddies the waters and invites us to confusion and unjustified overreactions. There are far better ways to assign moral responsibility for problems that arise in our world than by blowing them out to vague, pervasive, ubiquitous systems that can barely be defined and that hide genuine contributions to our problems in systemic fog. It is deliberately obscure and conflated so people cannot completely challenge it and people can attack and replace any part of the obscure system. It is no coincidence that the definition has ties to Marxist conflict theory.

If I asked which specific laws, political policies, judicial decisions or employment policies (of the mythical system) were racist, would you be able to prove that white supremacy was the sole determine factor shaping? Or prove that unconscious bias helped create or reinforce those aspects of the system? Or are they just institutional aspects or individual overt acts?


I may have erred on the earlier overt comments, as I am a little tired with people jumping down my throat on the issue of racism and I am bit lazy, but there are far better ways of dealing with racism. This includes the proper application of universal liberalism and humanism. Long story, short. Systemic racism is conflated bull-dust.

It's a manufactured political activist position designed to keep driving an agenda.

It really has no place in academia.

Not as simple as that, but I am not a fan of the concept. Lindsay tears it apart better than I could ever express or argue.

Why Nobody is Systemically Racist

Given the events of the past few months, it has probably been explained to you at least once that all people who are “white” and “white-adjacent” are allegedly complicit in “systemic racism.”

newdiscourses.com

Eight Big Reasons Critical Race Theory Is Terrible for Dealing with Racism

As unlikely as it seems, a highly obscure academic theory known as Critical Race Theory has completely mainstreamed in society, and now everyone is discussing it.

newdiscourses.com

There’s no such thing as "systematic racism"

“The system” is too vague a term for such an important question, and “racism” is necessarily too much a matter of intention and belief.

www.rocanews.com

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

You should read it again.

It's 99% political gesturing and an appeal to the incorporation of people with the academic credentials of the authors in to AFL ranks. It's considerably self serving.

I'm beginning to doubt that you've actually read it. Can you provide some specific examples - shouldn't be hard from 99% of the report?
We've also had considerable discussion about the academic credentials of the authors - one has a BA, while the other is a distinguished professor with law qualifications out the wazoo. Which are you suggesting?

 

[Snake_Baker]

Secondly and most importantly, the description of hidden mythical systems is obscure, muddled and lacks academic clarity. The definition itself muddles and conflates terms like systemic racism, structural racism, and institutional racism. While there is much space to have meaningful conversations and debates around individual racism, racist attitudes, discrimination, ham-fisted policy that results in discrimination (what’s left of institutional racism), and even “cultural racism” and “epistemic injustice,” none of this is served by introducing “systemic racism” as a concept. It only muddies the waters and invites us to confusion and unjustified overreactions. There are far better ways to assign moral responsibility for problems that arise in our world than by blowing them out to vague, pervasive, ubiquitous systems that can barely be defined and that hide genuine contributions to our problems in systemic fog. It is deliberately obscure and conflated so people cannot completely challenge it and people can attack and replace any part of the obscure system. It is no coincidence that the definition has ties to the mythical systems described in Marxist conflict theory.

Welcome to postmodernism and autoethnography.

They are literally pumping this crap through tertiary education now.

There's going to be generations of people who were never taught to think properly.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

Welcome to postmodernism and autoethnography.

They are literally pumping this crap through tertiary education now.

There's going to be generations of people who were never taught to think properly.

I get frustrated because I cannot articulate my criticisms well enough and I get labeled racist as a result. We actually agree on a lot on the problems, but they are so obsessed with racial identity and collective guilt.

 

[Snake_Baker]

I'm beginning to doubt that you've actually read it. Can you provide some specific examples - shouldn't be hard from 99% of the report?
We've also had considerable discussion about the academic credentials of the authors - one has a BA, while the other is a distinguished professor with law qualifications out the wazoo. Which are you suggesting?

I'll go one better and post the single page that deals with actual racist instances:






That's it. That's the investigation. The other 34 pages consist of socio-political activism and appeals for the professional entrenchment of like minded persons to the authors inside the AFL.

 

[Snake_Baker]

I get frustrated because I cannot articulate my criticisms well enough and I get labeled racist as a result. We actually agree on a lot on the problems, but they are so obsessed with racial identity and collective guilt.

Listen mate, the idiots will do that regardless because their reasoning is rooted in emotion and they are irrational.

You should stand up to them anyway. The day that persons of lesser intelligence set all the agendas solely due to fabricated emotional blackmail stunts, is the day that civilisation collapses. It's over. This garbage cannot be sustained, but it can create a hell of a lot of damage before it's done.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

This is my final post on the matter as I am tired of arguing about racism and it is only a matter of time before some campaigner calls me a racist without a shred of proof again.

Yet I posted his contemporary's background details with a degree of public admiration just to undermine the report. I will make this very clear as this is the last I will discuss it. I stated in the exact same page that any academic can do it as long as their argument and evidence was sound. My singular issue is with the interchangeable definitional use of the term systemic racism with structural and interpersonal racism.

My original post was not a complete answer to systemic racism, but the flawed concept of unconscious (implicit) bias being a major component of it.

For example, the definition I use is:
It is, instead, the “system” of everything that happens in the social (or political/judicial/legisilative) world and beyond that results in any disparity that works in the favor of “racially privileged” groups (on average) or any “racially oppressed” person claiming they experience racial oppression.

Unconscious (implicit) bias supposedly plays a role in individuals helping preserve the oppressive white supremacist system and they are complicit in upholding white supremacy until they acknowledge and address their white privilege. There are other 'systemic' elements thrown in as well, i.e. laws, politics, economics, etc.

Almost all definitions are only white-centric, which means it is tied to concepts like white privilege, complicity, fragility and supremacy, rather than a universally-applied concept for racism. There lies the first issue. It is not universally applied to all 'races' and has very little in common with universal liberalism or even humanism. It has only fueled tribal obsessions with identity-politics. It is also why you have silly racist terms like multiracial whiteness emerge from this new movement: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...rt-we-must-think-terms-multiracial-whiteness/

It is also why you saw racial segeration with the Chaz movements and the Evergreen saga with Brett Weinstein.

Secondly and most importantly, the description of hidden mythical systems is obscure, muddled and lacks academic clarity. The definition itself muddles and conflates terms like systemic racism, structural racism, and institutional racism. While there is much space to have meaningful conversations and debates around individual racism, racist attitudes, discrimination, ham-fisted policy that results in discrimination (what’s left of institutional racism), and even “cultural racism” and “epistemic injustice,” none of this is served by introducing “systemic racism” as a concept. It only muddies the waters and invites us to confusion and unjustified overreactions. There are far better ways to assign moral responsibility for problems that arise in our world than by blowing them out to vague, pervasive, ubiquitous systems that can barely be defined and that hide genuine contributions to our problems in systemic fog. It is deliberately obscure and conflated so people cannot completely challenge it and people can attack and replace any part of the obscure system. It is no coincidence that the definition has ties to the mythical systems described in Marxist conflict theory.

If I asked which specific laws, political policies, judicial decisions or employment policies (of the mythical system) were racist, would you be able to prove that white supremacy was the sole determine factor shaping? Or prove that unconscious bias helped create or reinforce those aspects of the system? Or are they just institutional aspects or individual overt acts?


I may have erred on the earlier overt comments, as I am a little tired with people jumping down my throat on the issue of racism and I am bit lazy, but there are far better ways of dealing with racism. This includes the proper application of universal liberalism and humanism. Long story, short. Systemic racism is conflated bull-dust.


Not as simple as that, but I am not a fan of the concept. Lindsay tears it apart better than I could ever express or argue.

Why Nobody is Systemically Racist

Given the events of the past few months, it has probably been explained to you at least once that all people who are “white” and “white-adjacent” are allegedly complicit in “systemic racism.”

newdiscourses.com

Eight Big Reasons Critical Race Theory Is Terrible for Dealing with Racism

As unlikely as it seems, a highly obscure academic theory known as Critical Race Theory has completely mainstreamed in society, and now everyone is discussing it.

newdiscourses.com

There’s no such thing as "systematic racism"

“The system” is too vague a term for such an important question, and “racism” is necessarily too much a matter of intention and belief.

www.rocanews.com

I don't think you're racist but your apparently uncritical view of liberalism explains a lot.
I think you are reading more into the term systemic racism then the report intends. I don't believe they intended it to be interchangeable with their defined term of structural racism, but inclusive of both defined terms - structural and interpersonal racism.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

I don't think you're racist but your apparently uncritical view of liberalism explains a lot.
I think you are reading more into the term systemic racism then the report intends. I don't believe they intended it to be interchangeable with their defined term of structural racism, but inclusive of both defined terms - structural and interpersonal racism.

My bias is a bit obvious, but I’ve never hidden my bias or stopped critiquing my own biases in an effort to become a better person. There are better anti-racism methods. I just worry about the systemic racism proponents.

Fair enough, happy to agree to disagree.

In any case, have a lovely night and weekend.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

I'll go one better and post the single page that deals with actual racist instances:

View attachment 1052194
View attachment 1052197
View attachment 1052199
View attachment 1052201

That's it. That's the investigation. The other 34 pages consist of socio-political activism and appeals for the professional entrenchment of like minded persons to the authors inside the AFL.

Might I suggest you take your own advice and read the report again, noting this:

The methodology used to assess these claims was a mix of desktop research (including both review
of the Collingwood Football Club’s documentation and policies) and a series of structured interviews.
We undertook thirty interviews with people across the Club — including the Club’s executive staff,
Board members, First Nations members of Collingwood’s Reconciliation Action Group, former
players, coaching staff and people who work in AFL external to Collingwood. We undertook these
interviews in a confidential manner to ensure that people felt comfortable speaking frankly and
sharing their stories. The information that was shared with us allowed us to assess what was on the
public record and what was contained or missing in Club policies and processes. This allowed for the
honest conversations that have formed the feedback in this report. This in turn allowed us to form the
recommendations contained in this review. We are grateful to all of those who shared their insights.
This has allowed us to feel confident about the recommendations we are making.

If you had read the rest of the report and even skipped the above, you might have inferred it from the many references to various interviews throughout the report, in addition to all the "socio-political activism".
Which of the 18 recommendations do you think calls for the "entrenchment of like minded persons to the authors"? The closest I can see is:

9. That the Collingwood Football Club Board ensure the development and implementation of
an employment strategy that values diversity and reports against KPIs. This includes the
player group and the coaching staff; ...
11. That, in its processes for the recruitment of Board members and the recruitment of staff
(including the playing group and coaches), the Collingwood Football Club ensures that it
assesses candidates against key criteria including genuine support of the Club’s values
and anti-racism.

It is hardly surprising or controversial that Collingwood going forward should make an effort to recruit people opposed to racism.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

My bias is a bit obvious, but I’ve never hidden my bias or stopped critiquing my own biases in an effort to become a better person. There are better anti-racism methods. I just worry about the systemic racism proponents.

Fair enough, happy to agree to disagree.

In any case, have a lovely night and weekend.

Thank you, you too.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Might I suggest you take your own advice and read the report again, noting this:

If you had read the rest of the report and even skipped the above, you might have inferred it from the many references to various interviews throughout the report, in addition to all the "socio-political activism".
Which of the 18 recommendations do you think calls for the "entrenchment of like minded persons to the authors"? The closest I can see is:

It is hardly surprising or controversial that Collingwood going forward should make an effort to recruit people opposed to racism.

It's pure spin.

It doesn't name names and provide quotes.

You're so invested in this bullshit, that you can't see that it's bullshit.

 

[D23D]

Good luck to him. But can't see any dramatic happening. Happy to be wrong.

I suspect he’ll look like Aaron Black did at Freo.

 

[Mav]

Might I suggest you take your own advice and read the report again, noting this:

If you had read the rest of the report and even skipped the above, you might have inferred it from the many references to various interviews throughout the report, in addition to all the "socio-political activism".
Which of the 18 recommendations do you think calls for the "entrenchment of like minded persons to the authors"? The closest I can see is:

It is hardly surprising or controversial that Collingwood going forward should make an effort to recruit people opposed to racism.

Mate, he doesn’t even realise his bias influences his analysis. It’s not a report about specific instances, this has been made clear but it’s all he can hang his hat on. Cause he spent a bit of time studying on a mountain top he thinks he’s the only judge of everything.

 

[koshari]

I suspect he’ll look like Aaron Black did at Freo.

You mean Geelong? Freo touted Black earlier where he ultimately decided to not go. In the end it was Geelong threw him a lifeline. At the end of the day its a low risk low reward venture throwing a lifeline to a delisted player, we are prolly in the same boat with Menadue as we were with Hall (Hall wasnt delisted but recycled just the same). You just have to not get carried away and waste a heap of sports on them.

Butler to st kilda a good example of when it comes off,

 

[Snake_Baker]

I suspect he’ll look like Aaron Black did at Freo.

Black was played out of position.

 

[Keith Ape]

Listen mate, the idiots will do that regardless because their reasoning is rooted in emotion and they are irrational.

You should stand up to them anyway. The day that persons of lesser intelligence set all the agendas solely due to fabricated emotional blackmail stunts, is the day that civilisation collapses. It's over. This garbage cannot be sustained, but it can create a hell of a lot of damage before it's done.

Snake, for all the flak you cop from some other posters, I love your work. Sensible, logical and reasonable.

Keep up the good fight. This insanity surely can't continue much longer.

There was a string of racist incidents, but to say it was/is SYSTEMIC is a real stretch.

 

[D23D]

Black was played out of position.

Maybe so. And Mase didn’t always get a go as the 3rd banana.
I hope he turns it on and maybe he will as he knows this is his last chance at AFL level.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

Maybe so. And Mase didn’t always get a go as the 3rd banana.
I hope he turns it on and maybe he will as he knows this is his last chance at AFL level.

To be fair, he had more last chances with us than any player in history. But yeah, I also wish him well at the Saints.

I can see Mason being a similar story to Jasper Pittard. Most Port posters genuinely wished him well and hoped it would work, but cautioned against the overall flaws in his game. One great season, then it fell in a heap.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

To be fair, he had more last chances with us than any player in history. But yeah, I also wish him well at the Saints.

I can see Mason being a similar story to Jasper Pittard. Most Port posters genuinely wished him well and hoped it would work, but cautioned against the overall flaws in his game. One great season, then it fell in a heap.

His biggest flaws were that he simply ran to the wrong positions far too often, wasn’t a strong contested mark, wasn’t super nimble at ground level and some of his willingness to put his body on the line was questionable at times. Basically a typical tweener.

 

[DrZaius]

Mate, he doesn’t even realise his bias influences his analysis. It’s not a report about specific instances, this has been made clear but it’s all he can hang his hat on. Cause he spent a bit of time studying on a mountain top he thinks he’s the only judge of everything.

Some people are just so invested in pushing back against anything they perceive as 'woke' or 'politically correct' that they will do mental gymnastics to justify any opposing point of view, regardless of the actual issue being discussed.

I get it, constant discussion of progressive issues can get tiring sometimes, and there definitely are people that can be beyond obnoxious about it. But to fully push the other way as a result and discount any actual merit to be had in any singular issue without thinking critically, simply because of "those bloody lefties etc." is foolish.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Mate, he doesn’t even realise his bias influences his analysis. It’s not a report about specific instances, this has been made clear but it’s all he can hang his hat on. Cause he spent a bit of time studying on a mountain top he thinks he’s the only judge of everything.

He had decided what the report would be before he read it.

 

[D23D]

You mean Geelong? Freo touted Black earlier where he ultimately decided to not go. In the end it was Geelong threw him a lifeline. At the end of the day its a low risk low reward venture throwing a lifeline to a delisted player, we are prolly in the same boat with Menadue as we were with Hall (Hall wasnt delisted but recycled just the same). You just have to not get carried away and waste a heap of sports on them.

Butler to st kilda a good example of when it comes off,

Sorry about that. My f$&@ up!
But it still kind of make my point that he wasn’t overly memorable.