Politics Black Lives Matter

[Gethelred]

No it failed because intelligent, rational people judge others on their character and work ethic... Not their gender.

Uh-huh.

The women I talked to about it at work felt embarrassed that gender quotas were floated.

You're telling me that people told you - someone who disapproves and disparages gender quotas - that they felt embarrassed about them? I'm shocked.

How many women do you think get fulfillment out of reaching a position based on a gender quota? Do you know any professional women?

You're overthinking it. Most people are just happy to be employed.

Here's some not-surprising irony.. The person who was pushing this now works for the State Government.

Do you think Dan Andrews would select a private security company based on racial identity if he had his time again?

I think Andrews has made his fair share of blues. I'd be interested to see how this is relevant to BLM, or even the gender quotas or people fleeing the progressive states in the US.

Don't be so naïve. Rich/poor Dem/Republican, everyone wants to pay less tax and keep more for themselves.

And I'm saying they shouldn't, if they actually love their country. Or does their love only really extend to their mouth, and not their commitment?

Is it naive to point out that someone who professes love/support for something right up until they're asked to contribute to it is nothing more than a virtue signaler?

 

[CatFan79]

Uh-huh.

You're telling me that people told you - someone who disapproves and disparages gender quotas - that they felt embarrassed about them? I'm shocked.

You think I was openly disapproving and disparaging gender quotas at the time? LOL.

Again, you just don't understand professional people.

You're overthinking it. Most people are just happy to be employed.

No offence to those who work these jobs but my workplace isn't a cafe serving coffees or a fast food outlet.

Apples/Oranges.

I think Andrews has made his fair share of blues. I'd be interested to see how this is relevant to BLM, or even the gender quotas or people fleeing the progressive states in the US.

The ridiculous notion of 'giving' contracts out based on racial identity is absolutely relevant to a thread about race and politics.. You probably don't like being reminded of it though, given Andrews has done such a great job of convincing you what a great job he's done.

And I'm saying they shouldn't, if they actually love their country. Or does their love only really extend to their mouth, and not their commitment?

Maybe they shouldn't but human beings are human beings. They look after themselves and their own. Twist or turn it anyway you want, you won't change this.

Is it naive to point out that someone who professes love/support for something right up until they're asked to contribute to it is nothing more than a virtue signaler?

You just described all those Dem supporting Hollywood celebs who preach about social issues from within their gated communities....

 

[Gethelred]

You think I was openly disapproving and disparaging gender quotas at the time? LOL.

Again, you just don't understand professional people.

I think that most people are not capable of hiding what they really think about something, in public and in private.

No offence to those who work these jobs but my workplace isn't a cafe serving coffees or a fast food outlet.

Apples/Oranges.

Says you. When was the last time you actually worked at a cafe or a fast food outlet?

The ridiculous notion of 'giving' contracts out based on racial identity is absolutely relevant to a thread about race and politics.. You probably don't like being reminded of it though, given Andrews has done such a great job of convincing you what a great job he's done.

Huh?

Andrews ****ed up, I've already said that. But this is not a thread solely concerning race and politics. I can see why you'd like it to be, because by generalizing it you think you can make your argument stronger.

This thread and this conversation is - quite specifically - concerning the American context surrounding BLM.

Maybe they shouldn't but human beings are human beings. They look after themselves and their own. Twist or turn it anyway you want, you won't change this.

There we go, mate. That's the difference between the conservative mindset and the progressive mindset.

Y'all think the world can't be changed, in complete defiance of reality. How many times to we - humans, not progressives - have to change the world before you understand that the 'way things are' isn't the way they have to be, and that this point in time is the culmination of all our previous efforts at improvement for our species. Why would we choose to park the caravan here?

You just described all those Dem supporting Hollywood celebs who preach about social issues from within their gated communities....

'Whatabout'.

If people parade their love of their country on one hand but do each and everything to avoid paying their taxes on the other, are they anything more than a virtue signaler? Yes or no.

 

[CatFan79]

I think that most people are not capable of hiding what they really think about something, in public and in private.

Those on one side of the political spectrum like to shout their opinion at people... Not so much those on the other side.

Says you. When was the last time you actually worked at a cafe or a fast food outlet?

I worked in retail from age of 15 until I finished Uni. A long time ago but I know how these places operate compared to a professional workplace.

There we go, mate. That's the difference between the conservative mindset and the progressive mindset.

Y'all think the world can't be changed, in complete defiance of reality. How many times to we - humans, not progressives - have to change the world before you understand that the 'way things are' isn't the way they have to be, and that this point in time is the culmination of all our previous efforts at improvement for our species. Why would we choose to park the caravan here?

What are you progressing exactly?

BTW equality of outcome doesn't work.

 

[Gethelred]

Those on one side of the political spectrum like to shout their opinion at people... Not so much those on the other side.

Really? What is Steve Price? What is Alan Jones? What is Ray Hadlee? What is Eric Abetz? How many of these people do I have to list before I've made my point?

Yelling loudly in public about ones political persuasion is not something that is limited to the left, and that is even more true of America than it is here. Or is Rush Limbaugh not a thing?

I worked in retail from age of 15 until I finished Uni. A long time ago but I know how these places operate compared to a professional workplace.

There's a bit of an irony in the comments you've made here coming just after the Coronavirus layoffs. Everyone who kept their jobs were just thankful to have them.

I take your meaning, though.

What are you progressing exactly?

BTW equality of outcome doesn't work.

Of course it ******* doesn't, that is probably one of the most redundant things ever written. Gender/racial quotas are not ever intended to be long term measures; they are intended to shore up the gap in numerical equality in the short term until the graduate levels balance out. This is not aided by organisations further embedding via organisational culture and unofficial rules increased resistance to equality of opportunity on the pretext of opposing equality of outcome. We've not reached equality of opportunity, we're not even close, and this is entrenched in America's social fabric. I don't even need to quote the stats at you, because I'm well aware you've seen them before.

In the paragraph you've quoted, I was responding to your notion that the idea that people should want to pay their taxes to support their country as naive. You do not think the world can be changed, or if it can that said change will result in something better. That is conservatism in a nutshell. The entire idea behind progressivism is to change the world, to gradually improve on what came before. We are trying to improve everything; science, medicine, technology, gender issues and theory, racial equality and income disparity, poverty and homelessness. It's why there's so many different issues, and why we seem to nigh constantly be arguing with each other; there's just so many directions that we can look to to see something that needs to be fixed.

You're welcome to your worldview. I'd sooner die than share it, though.

 

[Chief]

telling everyone they have an 'unconscious bias' (ie. you're racist but don't know it or won't admit it)

OK you've gotten the wrong end of the stick here.

Unconscious Bias: 16 Examples and How to Avoid Them in the Workplace

The best way to reduce unconscious bias is to become aware of it. Start here with 16 examples of unconscious bias and tips to reduce them.

builtin.com

Implicit Bias: What It Is, Examples, & Ways to Reduce It

Implicit bias refers to the beliefs and attitudes that affect our understanding, actions and decisions in an unconscious way.

www.simplypsychology.org

• These biases often arise as a result of trying to find patterns and navigate the overwhelming stimuli in this very complicated world. Culture, media, and upbringing can also contribute to the development of such biases

We prefer the familiar and comfortable and known. It's pretty natural. This can give us a blind spot to the worth of other people and cultures. That's all it really means.

 

[CatFan79]

You're welcome to your worldview. I'd sooner die than share it, though.

Here's the difference between you and me....

I'm content, happy with what I've achieved and where I am in life and I really don't give a s**t what people think.

 

[Gethelred]

Here's the difference between you and me....

I'm content, happy with what I've achieved and where I am in life and I really don't give a sh*t what people think.

With the implication being, I'm not?

It isn't about being content/happy. It's in trying to improve the world for other people. Do you not want to improve the lives of those around you?

 

[CatFan79]

With the implication being, I'm not?

It isn't about being content/happy. It's in trying to improve the world for other people. Do you not want to improve the lives of those around you?

Usually those who want to 'change the world' really only just want to improve their own personal lot in life...

 

[Gethelred]

Usually those who want to 'change the world' really only just want to improve their own personal lot in life...

I'm content enough with my lot. I don't really want to take money or position or fame from the wealthy, the influential or the famous, either. I want people fed and clothed, provided shelter, education and opportunity. I want this, because that is how we progress as a species.

Look upon our works in the 1900's, when we ceased ignoring the opinions and voices of women and brown people, and see how quickly we went from strength to strength. If we provide equality of opportunity, it means that we move closer to a true meritocracy. That should be the goal of civilization.

Also, does the fact that Martin Luther King was black and thus self-interested when he campaigned for civil rights in America mean that he was wrong, or incorrect in his criticisms of America? Does the fact that the Suffragettes were women and thus campaigning in their own interests make their society less patriarchial?

If you will not get off your own arse for yourself, why would/should other people?

 

[CatFan79]

I'm content enough with my lot. I don't really want to take money or position or fame from the wealthy, the influential or the famous, either. I want people fed and clothed, provided shelter, education and opportunity. I want this, because that is how we progress as a species.

Look upon our works in the 1900's, when we ceased ignoring the opinions and voices of women and brown people, and see how quickly we went from strength to strength. If we provide equality of opportunity, it means that we move closer to a true meritocracy. That should be the goal of civilization.

With you 100% on equal opportunity...

 

[Verdun]

Yes, there's plenty of racist white, hispanic and black people.

But telling everyone they have an 'unconscious bias' (ie. you're racist but don't know it or won't admit it) is just a tool used to sneakily indoctrinate and push a political agenda.

People won't and don't put up with that sh*t.. as I said I've seen it first hand.

Do you believe white suffer more from racism than hispanic or black people?

A political agenda / ideology also includes those who get offended when racism get's called out.

Poor people having their racism called out must be hard.

 

[CatFan79]

Do you believe white suffer more from racism than hispanic or black people?

Define 'suffer from racism'.

Do I believe whites in general are better off? Yes.. Do I think in 2020 that's due to racism? In most cases, no.

A political agenda / ideology also includes those who get offended when racism get's called out.

Being called racist when you aren't is offensive. That's an political agenda is it? Sure mate.

Poor people having their racism called out must be hard.

I'm sure they have bigger problems to worry about.

 

[Verdun]

Define 'suffer from racism'.

Do I believe whites in general are better off? Yes.. Do I think in 2020 that's due to racism? In most cases, no.

Fairly self explanatory, people who suffer from racism do so because of a set of discriminatory or derogatory attitudes based on assumptions deriving from perceptions about race and/or skin color. Racial prejudice can indeed be directed at white people (e.g., white people can’t dance) but is not considered racism because of the systemic relationship of power. When backed with power, prejudice results in acts of discrimination and oppression against groups or individuals. It is a political belief to believe that this does not exist. Hence for the discussion on black lives matter.

I'm sure they have bigger problems to worry about.

Yep they should, no doubt.

Being called racist when you aren't is offensive. That's an political agenda is it? Sure mate.

The new political correctness - do not call out racism as you may offend a racist. Yep it is a political agenda mate, every time racism is called out it is shut down due to the fear of offending the racist.

 

[Gethelred]

Fairly self explanatory, people who suffer from racism do so because of a set of discriminatory or derogatory attitudes based on assumptions deriving from perceptions about race and/or skin color. Racial prejudice can indeed be directed at white people (e.g., white people can’t dance) but is not considered racism because of the systemic relationship of power. When backed with power, prejudice results in acts of discrimination and oppression against groups or individuals. It is a political belief to believe that this does not exist. Hence for the discussion on black lives matter.

My issue is, I am uncertain how useful this distinction is to make. The traditional systemic relationships of power affect everyone; the patriarchy is bad for men as well as women, and the systems of unconscious prejudice and systemic racism are also bad for those who are not the immediate target, if that makes sense. It might not be as detrimental to men/white people as it is for women/people of colour, but it is detrimental to everyone contained within the system.

By limiting the argument, by declaring that racial prejudice without a systemic power relationship at play is not racism, you limit your capacity for support and you limit the wrong you're correcting.

The problem I have with BLM is that they have allowed themselves to get painted into their very specific corner, that Black Lives Matter. They do and certainly should, but the police murdering of innocents and higher incarceration rates for non-anglo people in America encompasses more than just black people. This is not an ALM rant, either; ostensibly, I support the broad goals of BLM. Just, I wish that their language and social movement was broader, and more inclusive.

 

[CatFan79]

Fairly self explanatory, people who suffer from racism do so because of a set of discriminatory or derogatory attitudes based on assumptions deriving from perceptions about race and/or skin color. Racial prejudice can indeed be directed at white people (e.g., white people can’t dance) but is not considered racism because of the systemic relationship of power. When backed with power, prejudice results in acts of discrimination and oppression against groups or individuals. It is a political belief to believe that this does not exist. Hence for the discussion on black lives matter.

But can you build a case these days there's 'white people with power' oppressing people based purely on race?

For starters it's breaking the law but what do they have to gain by doing this?

The new political correctness - do not call out racism as you may offend a racist. Yep it is a political agenda mate, every time racism is called out it is shut down due to the fear of offending the racist.

Sounds like a real problem, you must have a heap of examples of this?

 

[Verdun]

But can you build a case these days there's 'white people with power' oppressing people based purely on race?

For starters it's breaking the law but what do they have to gain by doing this?



Sounds like a real problem, you must have a heap of examples of this?

That's your job!

 

[Verdun]

My issue is, I am uncertain how useful this distinction is to make. The traditional systemic relationships of power affect everyone; the patriarchy is bad for men as well as women, and the systems of unconscious prejudice and systemic racism are also bad for those who are not the immediate target, if that makes sense. It might not be as detrimental to men/white people as it is for women/people of colour, but it is detrimental to everyone contained within the system.

By limiting the argument, by declaring that racial prejudice without a systemic power relationship at play is not racism, you limit your capacity for support and you limit the wrong you're correcting.

The problem I have with BLM is that they have allowed themselves to get painted into their very specific corner, that Black Lives Matter. They do and certainly should, but the police murdering of innocents and higher incarceration rates for non-anglo people in America encompasses more than just black people. This is not an ALM rant, either; ostensibly, I support the broad goals of BLM. Just, I wish that their language and social movement was broader, and more inclusive.

Good post, although I do not believe it Black Lives Matter who are painted themselves into a corner it is those who oppose them. Their point is that more blacks per capita fall into the categories you cite.

Yep agree the social movement should be broader but the people who started BLM can not be blamed for that.

 

[Krane]

Kyle Rittenhouse released on 2 million $ bail:

“For people who say ‘systemic racism doesn’t exist,’ this is what it looks like: protection of white supremacy baked deep into our carceral systems,” -“Law and disorder.”

“violent people will be let out of jail to roam free.”

“rarely ever acknowledge that’s actually the current system we have today for the privileged,”

Stop drinking the BLM kool-aid. Rittenhouse was released after shooting in self defence and it took a $2 million bail. Meanwhile this black male was arrested for attempted murder after shooting and seriously injuring someone, and then released on the same day without bail. After he was released, he went straight back to shooting people. Crime has exploded across major liberal cities in the US since the BLM protests and riots due to weak law and order and liberal mayors.

Gang member carries out three shootings after being freed without bail: prosecutors

He was set free and allegedly went right back to shooting. A Brooklyn gang member, released without bail in May on an attempted murder charge, participated in at least three drive-by shootings afte…

nypost.com

 

[Verdun]

Stop drinking the BLM kool-aid. Rittenhouse was released after shooting in self defence and it took a $2 million bail. Meanwhile this black male was arrested for attempted murder after shooting and seriously injuring someone, and then released on the same day without bail. After he was released, he went straight back to shooting people. Crime has exploded across major liberal cities in the US since the BLM protests and riots due to weak law and order and liberal mayors.

Gang member carries out three shootings after being freed without bail: prosecutors

He was set free and allegedly went right back to shooting. A Brooklyn gang member, released without bail in May on an attempted murder charge, participated in at least three drive-by shootings afte…

nypost.com

Wow - totally disagree!

Rittenhouse killed two people, if you are ok with that.....actually think 'it was in self defence' that is all kinds of drinking the Trump kool-aid. Why was he there?

He was acting as a vigilante??

Where do you reckon he got the $2 million bail??

 

[Krane]

Wow - totally disagree!

Rittenhouse killed two people, if you are ok with that.....actually think 'it was in self defence' that is all kinds of drinking the Trump kool-aid. Why was he there?

He was acting as a vigilante??

Where do you reckon he got the $2 million bail??

I'm okay with it as long as it was self defence, which it evidently was after watching the videos. He was there to protect the neighbourhood from Antifa and BLM looting and rioting.

He got the $2m from people who support the right to defend yourself if your life is in danger.

Do you care to comment about he black male who was arrested for attempted murder after shooting and seriously injuring someone, and then released on the same day without bail, only to shoot at people again on his release? Or does that kind of destroy your whole 'white supremacy' agenda? FWIW, the people who Rittenhouse killed in self defence were white (both were involved with Antifa, one was a paedo).

 

[Verdun]

I'm okay with it as long as it was self defence, which it evidently was after watching the videos. He was there to protect the neighbourhood from Antifa and BLM looting and rioting.

He got the $2m from people who support the right to defend yourself if your life is in danger.

Do you care to comment about he black male who was arrested for attempted murder after shooting and seriously injuring someone, and then released on the same day without bail, only to shoot at people again on his release? Or does that kind of destroy your whole 'white supremacy' agenda? FWIW, the people who Rittenhouse killed in self defence were white (both were involved with Antifa, one was a paedo).

Bit emotional there mate, no need to get all fired up.


Your moral equivalence does not work - someone allegedly getting out for another alleged crime does not prove a point, I do not believe Rittenhouse acted in self defence. Grabbing at straws re them supposed to be part of something else is just amusing, was up to him who he could kill?

Again - why was he there? Was he a vigilante??? Where is the law and order - when you are letting criminals like Rittenhouse back on the streets - he should be locked up.

I do not have a 'white supremacy' agenda......that's a bit of a misinterpretation.

 

[Krane]

Bit emotional there mate, no need to get all fired up.


Your moral equivalence does not work - someone allegedly getting out for another alleged crime does not prove a point, I do not believe Rittenhouse acted in self defence. Grabbing at straws re them supposed to be part of something else is just amusing, was up to him who he could kill?

Again - why was he there? Was he a vigilante??? Where is the law and order - when you are letting criminals like Rittenhouse back on the streets - he should be locked up.

I do not have a 'white supremacy' agenda......that's a bit of a misinterpretation.

There has been a lack of law and order in liberal cities since the BLM riots kicked off earlier this year. Rittenhouse clearly felt his presence with a weapon would help to deter criminal activities from BLM and Antifa. Unfortunately he was attacked by Antifa and shot in self defence, as anyone would do.

You were insinuating earlier that 'white supremacy' exists because Rittenhouse was bailed for $2m. Had Rittenhouse been any other colour, the bail conditions would have been the same

 

[CatFan79]

That's your job!

To tell you you're full of it? Ok, done.

 

[Verdun]

There has been a lack of law and order in liberal cities since the BLM riots kicked off earlier this year. Rittenhouse clearly felt his presence with a weapon would help to deter criminal activities from BLM and Antifa. Unfortunately he was attacked by Antifa and shot in self defence, as anyone would do.

You were insinuating earlier that 'white supremacy' exists because Rittenhouse was bailed for $2m. Had Rittenhouse been any other colour, the bail conditions would have been the same
[/QUOTE/

No mate - I pointed out that law and order exists for some but not others. If you really believe blacks are treated the same way by the law in the US all good.

Also very happy we have gun laws here in Australia. He was not acting in self defence - he did not need to be there, he travelled from inter state.


Again - why was Rittenhouse there with a gun?


Yup all about those scary anti fascists