comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - One man down, One nil up (U21434)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - One man down, One nil up (U21434)
posted 24 seconds ago
Is Sat Nav now speaking for a whole generation?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I speak for myself, thank you. Haven’t you got to put words in someone’s mouth? Go do that you weirdo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then speak for yourself and dont try and justify your opinions by including a whole genreation by saying daft things like my generation blah blah blah
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ll say what I like, thank you. Does Process hate Rashford? Go and tell him he does you freak.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's right though.
comment by Willie Dyer (U1734)
posted 28 minutes ago
I find racism is more of an English thing than Scottish. Why would you dislike people simply due to a characteristic like their skin colour or where they are from? We don't do that in Scotland, much more of an English thing. Which is why I HATE the English.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2q0T7QXETs
I can never not laugh at that simpsons scene
comment by House (U17162)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Willie Dyer (U1734)
posted 28 minutes ago
I find racism is more of an English thing than Scottish. Why would you dislike people simply due to a characteristic like their skin colour or where they are from? We don't do that in Scotland, much more of an English thing. Which is why I HATE the English.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2q0T7QXETs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Mambadamus (U1282)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - One man down, One nil up (U21434)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - One man down, One nil up (U21434)
posted 24 seconds ago
Is Sat Nav now speaking for a whole generation?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I speak for myself, thank you. Haven’t you got to put words in someone’s mouth? Go do that you weirdo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then speak for yourself and dont try and justify your opinions by including a whole genreation by saying daft things like my generation blah blah blah
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ll say what I like, thank you. Does Process hate Rashford? Go and tell him he does you freak.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's right though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok hence forth no-one can speak generally at all. I’m sure you’ll be unerringly precise going forward, forever.
It was plain dream land stuff, not speaking generally.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 34 minutes ago
This appears to be a case of overreach by one particular diversity advocate. It's quite telling how many people see this and launch into an extended riff on how anti-racism *in general* is an empty project and, by the way, white people are the main victims of discrimination in this mixed up world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is an extremely poor summary of the discussion.
1. You seem to think that comment likes this remain isolated and therefore insignificant and as if this discourse has had and will have no impact on society whatsoever other than further diminishing racism from our society
2. I don’t think anyone here has claimed that white people are the main victims of discrimination, unless I’ve missed a post or two which I may have. If not you’ve built a subpar straw man right there.
How many times have you seen, heard or read a statement that if the word white were to be swapped with the word black there would be a national outrage but because it is aimed against the dominant race in this country, good old evil whitey, it’s seen as absolutely acceptable such as
‘Too many white peoples’
‘Terribly white’
‘Not for white people’
‘Black only space or event’
Then when someone points out ‘hey that’s actually not ok either’ we get opinions like
‘Oh it’s only one person it’s not a big deal’
‘Victim’
‘Oh so you now think you have it worse than ethnic minorities?’
In yesteryear, we used to understand that overcoming prejudices did not mean being prejudiced against the other race in retaliation; that is a race (pardon the pun) to the bottom. No-one is being elevated in this scenario and it should be stopped dead in its tracks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course my post was an oversimplification, in the context of having a short time on my phone (while in Melbourne on business). But it's a fact that a lot of people are triggered by this story, so we're already on page 7 of comments, even though it isn't representative of mainstream liberal political thought, and doesn't represent the views of the centre left party likely to come to power. What real-world power does this sentiment actually have? Meanwhile we have people in actual government who are either making objectively racist statements or struggling to describe them as such, and I don't see anything like the same level of distress - I don't see seven pages of comments - about that. You seem to be more of the view that an anti-racist industry that has lost its mind is a more pressing concern than actual racism.
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 7 seconds ago
It was plain dream land stuff, not speaking generally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it wasn’t. Right I’ll explain this clearly, plainly and simply.
When I grew up in the 80s/90s (born in 1983) we were taught not to judge people by the colour of their skin, not to discriminate against skin colour, not to segregate by skin colour.
The vast, vast majority of kids my age got that and lived that way. In my opinion this was the case until very recently where people started to adopt your current way of thinking which believes that discrimination is fine until a time that it isn’t, as it is helping us overcome….discrimination.
Only university intellectuals could come up with such an obviously illogical and stupid theory which only gullible useful idiots would accept as the right thing to do in order to improve race relations.
I believe the 80s/90s direction was the right direction, you don’t. That is all.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 34 minutes ago
This appears to be a case of overreach by one particular diversity advocate. It's quite telling how many people see this and launch into an extended riff on how anti-racism *in general* is an empty project and, by the way, white people are the main victims of discrimination in this mixed up world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is an extremely poor summary of the discussion.
1. You seem to think that comment likes this remain isolated and therefore insignificant and as if this discourse has had and will have no impact on society whatsoever other than further diminishing racism from our society
2. I don’t think anyone here has claimed that white people are the main victims of discrimination, unless I’ve missed a post or two which I may have. If not you’ve built a subpar straw man right there.
How many times have you seen, heard or read a statement that if the word white were to be swapped with the word black there would be a national outrage but because it is aimed against the dominant race in this country, good old evil whitey, it’s seen as absolutely acceptable such as
‘Too many white peoples’
‘Terribly white’
‘Not for white people’
‘Black only space or event’
Then when someone points out ‘hey that’s actually not ok either’ we get opinions like
‘Oh it’s only one person it’s not a big deal’
‘Victim’
‘Oh so you now think you have it worse than ethnic minorities?’
In yesteryear, we used to understand that overcoming prejudices did not mean being prejudiced against the other race in retaliation; that is a race (pardon the pun) to the bottom. No-one is being elevated in this scenario and it should be stopped dead in its tracks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course my post was an oversimplification, in the context of having a short time on my phone (while in Melbourne on business). But it's a fact that a lot of people are triggered by this story, so we're already on page 7 of comments, even though it isn't representative of mainstream liberal political thought, and doesn't represent the views of the centre left party likely to come to power. What real-world power does this sentiment actually have? Meanwhile we have people in actual government who are either making objectively racist statements or struggling to describe them as such, and I don't see anything like the same level of distress - I don't see seven pages of comments - about that. You seem to be more of the view that an anti-racist industry that has lost its mind is a more pressing concern than actual racism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On the live thread, Sat Nav has attempted (and failed) to defend those comments from people in government and their donors.
At the same time he is flying off in a rage about this OP and worrying about the future of his children.
You couldn't make it up.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 34 minutes ago
This appears to be a case of overreach by one particular diversity advocate. It's quite telling how many people see this and launch into an extended riff on how anti-racism *in general* is an empty project and, by the way, white people are the main victims of discrimination in this mixed up world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is an extremely poor summary of the discussion.
1. You seem to think that comment likes this remain isolated and therefore insignificant and as if this discourse has had and will have no impact on society whatsoever other than further diminishing racism from our society
2. I don’t think anyone here has claimed that white people are the main victims of discrimination, unless I’ve missed a post or two which I may have. If not you’ve built a subpar straw man right there.
How many times have you seen, heard or read a statement that if the word white were to be swapped with the word black there would be a national outrage but because it is aimed against the dominant race in this country, good old evil whitey, it’s seen as absolutely acceptable such as
‘Too many white peoples’
‘Terribly white’
‘Not for white people’
‘Black only space or event’
Then when someone points out ‘hey that’s actually not ok either’ we get opinions like
‘Oh it’s only one person it’s not a big deal’
‘Victim’
‘Oh so you now think you have it worse than ethnic minorities?’
In yesteryear, we used to understand that overcoming prejudices did not mean being prejudiced against the other race in retaliation; that is a race (pardon the pun) to the bottom. No-one is being elevated in this scenario and it should be stopped dead in its tracks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course my post was an oversimplification, in the context of having a short time on my phone (while in Melbourne on business). But it's a fact that a lot of people are triggered by this story, so we're already on page 7 of comments, even though it isn't representative of mainstream liberal political thought, and doesn't represent the views of the centre left party likely to come to power. What real-world power does this sentiment actually have? Meanwhile we have people in actual government who are either making objectively racist statements or struggling to describe them as such, and I don't see anything like the same level of distress - I don't see seven pages of comments - about that. You seem to be more of the view that an anti-racist industry that has lost its mind is a more pressing concern than actual racism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough didn’t know you were travelling down under, hope you’re having a good time down there.
I don’t want racism nor the racism that comes with the guise of wanting to end racism. I just don’t want any of it, never have, never will.
There’s only so many times one could comment that his comments were disgusting, stupid and racist. But the debate surrounding racism is one that is prevalent in society today intertwined with history, emotion and differing opinions so it’s much more likely to get pages and pages of comments.
If you don’t think that the sentiment behind these comments are generally reflected in the current Labour Party then I don’t know what to say other than reiterating that I hope you have a good trip and a decent flight back!
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 34 minutes ago
This appears to be a case of overreach by one particular diversity advocate. It's quite telling how many people see this and launch into an extended riff on how anti-racism *in general* is an empty project and, by the way, white people are the main victims of discrimination in this mixed up world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is an extremely poor summary of the discussion.
1. You seem to think that comment likes this remain isolated and therefore insignificant and as if this discourse has had and will have no impact on society whatsoever other than further diminishing racism from our society
2. I don’t think anyone here has claimed that white people are the main victims of discrimination, unless I’ve missed a post or two which I may have. If not you’ve built a subpar straw man right there.
How many times have you seen, heard or read a statement that if the word white were to be swapped with the word black there would be a national outrage but because it is aimed against the dominant race in this country, good old evil whitey, it’s seen as absolutely acceptable such as
‘Too many white peoples’
‘Terribly white’
‘Not for white people’
‘Black only space or event’
Then when someone points out ‘hey that’s actually not ok either’ we get opinions like
‘Oh it’s only one person it’s not a big deal’
‘Victim’
‘Oh so you now think you have it worse than ethnic minorities?’
In yesteryear, we used to understand that overcoming prejudices did not mean being prejudiced against the other race in retaliation; that is a race (pardon the pun) to the bottom. No-one is being elevated in this scenario and it should be stopped dead in its tracks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course my post was an oversimplification, in the context of having a short time on my phone (while in Melbourne on business). But it's a fact that a lot of people are triggered by this story, so we're already on page 7 of comments, even though it isn't representative of mainstream liberal political thought, and doesn't represent the views of the centre left party likely to come to power. What real-world power does this sentiment actually have? Meanwhile we have people in actual government who are either making objectively racist statements or struggling to describe them as such, and I don't see anything like the same level of distress - I don't see seven pages of comments - about that. You seem to be more of the view that an anti-racist industry that has lost its mind is a more pressing concern than actual racism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On the live thread, Sat Nav has attempted (and failed) to defend those comments from people in government and their donors.
At the same time he is flying off in a rage about this OP and worrying about the future of his children.
You couldn't make it up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying off in a rage? You numpty
I’m on my sofa riddled with fluvid just passing time back and frothing with you and others. Once I’m better I’ll be focusing on my company and other interests far more attractive than debating you.
It's not designed to end racism. It's doing what we can and what's possible in an attempt to redress some of the imbalance created by an injustice. It's how it works in every other scenario where an injustices has occurred.
Big difference between the two, but again, you can make up facts to suit your opinion if you want.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 34 minutes ago
This appears to be a case of overreach by one particular diversity advocate. It's quite telling how many people see this and launch into an extended riff on how anti-racism *in general* is an empty project and, by the way, white people are the main victims of discrimination in this mixed up world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is an extremely poor summary of the discussion.
1. You seem to think that comment likes this remain isolated and therefore insignificant and as if this discourse has had and will have no impact on society whatsoever other than further diminishing racism from our society
2. I don’t think anyone here has claimed that white people are the main victims of discrimination, unless I’ve missed a post or two which I may have. If not you’ve built a subpar straw man right there.
How many times have you seen, heard or read a statement that if the word white were to be swapped with the word black there would be a national outrage but because it is aimed against the dominant race in this country, good old evil whitey, it’s seen as absolutely acceptable such as
‘Too many white peoples’
‘Terribly white’
‘Not for white people’
‘Black only space or event’
Then when someone points out ‘hey that’s actually not ok either’ we get opinions like
‘Oh it’s only one person it’s not a big deal’
‘Victim’
‘Oh so you now think you have it worse than ethnic minorities?’
In yesteryear, we used to understand that overcoming prejudices did not mean being prejudiced against the other race in retaliation; that is a race (pardon the pun) to the bottom. No-one is being elevated in this scenario and it should be stopped dead in its tracks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course my post was an oversimplification, in the context of having a short time on my phone (while in Melbourne on business). But it's a fact that a lot of people are triggered by this story, so we're already on page 7 of comments, even though it isn't representative of mainstream liberal political thought, and doesn't represent the views of the centre left party likely to come to power. What real-world power does this sentiment actually have? Meanwhile we have people in actual government who are either making objectively racist statements or struggling to describe them as such, and I don't see anything like the same level of distress - I don't see seven pages of comments - about that. You seem to be more of the view that an anti-racist industry that has lost its mind is a more pressing concern than actual racism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On the live thread, Sat Nav has attempted (and failed) to defend those comments from people in government and their donors.
At the same time he is flying off in a rage about this OP and worrying about the future of his children.
You couldn't make it up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying off in a rage? You numpty
I’m on my sofa riddled with fluvid just passing time back and frothing with you and others. Once I’m better I’ll be focusing on my company and other interests far more attractive than debating you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
It's not designed to end racism. It's doing what we can and what's possible in an attempt to redress some of the imbalance created by an injustice. It's how it works in every other scenario where an injustices has occurred.
Big difference between the two, but again, you can make up facts to suit your opinion if you want.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok so racist segregation against whites to atone for the historical racism by white people onto others.
So you’re advocating for affirmative action, yes? You agree with it for job hiring quotas, universities and such yes?
To give a leg up to make everyone equal now in 2024 given that some are starting off in a less fortunate position.
Equity, not equality - yes?
I am for affirmative action, yes. I would have though that's clear over the last few years of saying so.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 21 seconds ago
To give a leg up to make everyone equal now in 2024 given that some are starting off in a less fortunate position.
Equity, not equality - yes?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not to make everyone equal. That's impossible. It's to do what we can where something can be done and help create inclusivity and a good spirit of togetherness in society after admitting we were wrong in the past. Nothing wrong with that.
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 2 minutes ago
I am for affirmative action, yes. I would have though that's clear over the last few years of saying so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was and is clear. Yes.
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 21 seconds ago
To give a leg up to make everyone equal now in 2024 given that some are starting off in a less fortunate position.
Equity, not equality - yes?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not to make everyone equal. That's impossible. It's to do what we can where something can be done and help create inclusivity and a good spirit of togetherness in society after admitting we were wrong in the past. Nothing wrong with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Equity or your spirit sheet? Or both?
Both with your spirit and inclusivity points - sure. Every fugger is welcome at Sat Nav’s. Togetherness yaaaaay, all sounds good to me.
But as for affirmative action - who gets the leg up? Black people? Poor people? Gingers? Women? Trans? Asians?
This is the problem with a solution such as hiring by quotas and affirmative action plans. One set of people ‘benefit’ whilst others, sometimes others who weren’t even part of the even white male patriarchy such as Asians, suffer.
Is that fair? Is that inclusive and putting togetherness into practice?
Yeah it is. Obvious you frame it differently from the truth. It's not like the quota excludes anyone. Most quotas are majority white with provisions that a percentage must be not white to stop the practice of hiring or admitting only whites.
As for who gets a leg up it's anyone that needs to get a leg up. Look at your view of this issue. It's stoic and you refuse to use common sense. Must we say beforehand who benefits? It's whoever needs to benefit.
Also, how does anyone suffer from affirmative action?
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 10 seconds ago
Yeah it is. Obvious you frame it differently from the truth. It's not like the quota excludes anyone. Most quotas are majority white with provisions that a percentage must be not white to stop the practice of hiring or admitting only whites.
As for who gets a leg up it's anyone that needs to get a leg up. Look at your view of this issue. It's stoic and you refuse to use common sense. Must we say beforehand who benefits? It's whoever needs to benefit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course quotas exclude people, how can you say this and then say I’m not using common sense.
10 job openings with a quota of say one ginge, one black person and one Asian, that leaves 7 spots open.
100 applications for said job - what happens to the non gingers, not black or not Asian people that could have had the job offer if quotas were not in place? This is plain to see in the US with their university affirmative action admission process - less successful candidates above people with more impressive exam results say. So they lose out. Asians over there lose out all the time because of quotas from affirmative action.
Not hiring someone because they are x y and z is what needs to be eradicated. Like not having your name, age etc on CVs. That is a much more equitable solution than AA.
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 5 minutes ago
Also, how does anyone suffer from affirmative action?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the above which clearly demonstrates how people can suffer from affirmative action. It has also been posited that AA harms those who benefit from it initially but this is still up for debate as to the empirical data.
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
It's whoever needs to benefit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So how do we judge who needs to benefit? What are the criteria? How is it measured? Who measures it? Who decides whom is more deserving than others?
Sign in if you want to comment
Racist task force
Page 7 of 17
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
posted on 13/3/24
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - One man down, One nil up (U21434)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - One man down, One nil up (U21434)
posted 24 seconds ago
Is Sat Nav now speaking for a whole generation?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I speak for myself, thank you. Haven’t you got to put words in someone’s mouth? Go do that you weirdo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then speak for yourself and dont try and justify your opinions by including a whole genreation by saying daft things like my generation blah blah blah
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ll say what I like, thank you. Does Process hate Rashford? Go and tell him he does you freak.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's right though.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by Willie Dyer (U1734)
posted 28 minutes ago
I find racism is more of an English thing than Scottish. Why would you dislike people simply due to a characteristic like their skin colour or where they are from? We don't do that in Scotland, much more of an English thing. Which is why I HATE the English.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2q0T7QXETs
posted on 13/3/24
I can never not laugh at that simpsons scene
posted on 13/3/24
comment by House (U17162)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Willie Dyer (U1734)
posted 28 minutes ago
I find racism is more of an English thing than Scottish. Why would you dislike people simply due to a characteristic like their skin colour or where they are from? We don't do that in Scotland, much more of an English thing. Which is why I HATE the English.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2q0T7QXETs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 13/3/24
comment by Mambadamus (U1282)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - One man down, One nil up (U21434)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - One man down, One nil up (U21434)
posted 24 seconds ago
Is Sat Nav now speaking for a whole generation?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I speak for myself, thank you. Haven’t you got to put words in someone’s mouth? Go do that you weirdo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then speak for yourself and dont try and justify your opinions by including a whole genreation by saying daft things like my generation blah blah blah
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ll say what I like, thank you. Does Process hate Rashford? Go and tell him he does you freak.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's right though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok hence forth no-one can speak generally at all. I’m sure you’ll be unerringly precise going forward, forever.
posted on 13/3/24
It was plain dream land stuff, not speaking generally.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 34 minutes ago
This appears to be a case of overreach by one particular diversity advocate. It's quite telling how many people see this and launch into an extended riff on how anti-racism *in general* is an empty project and, by the way, white people are the main victims of discrimination in this mixed up world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is an extremely poor summary of the discussion.
1. You seem to think that comment likes this remain isolated and therefore insignificant and as if this discourse has had and will have no impact on society whatsoever other than further diminishing racism from our society
2. I don’t think anyone here has claimed that white people are the main victims of discrimination, unless I’ve missed a post or two which I may have. If not you’ve built a subpar straw man right there.
How many times have you seen, heard or read a statement that if the word white were to be swapped with the word black there would be a national outrage but because it is aimed against the dominant race in this country, good old evil whitey, it’s seen as absolutely acceptable such as
‘Too many white peoples’
‘Terribly white’
‘Not for white people’
‘Black only space or event’
Then when someone points out ‘hey that’s actually not ok either’ we get opinions like
‘Oh it’s only one person it’s not a big deal’
‘Victim’
‘Oh so you now think you have it worse than ethnic minorities?’
In yesteryear, we used to understand that overcoming prejudices did not mean being prejudiced against the other race in retaliation; that is a race (pardon the pun) to the bottom. No-one is being elevated in this scenario and it should be stopped dead in its tracks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course my post was an oversimplification, in the context of having a short time on my phone (while in Melbourne on business). But it's a fact that a lot of people are triggered by this story, so we're already on page 7 of comments, even though it isn't representative of mainstream liberal political thought, and doesn't represent the views of the centre left party likely to come to power. What real-world power does this sentiment actually have? Meanwhile we have people in actual government who are either making objectively racist statements or struggling to describe them as such, and I don't see anything like the same level of distress - I don't see seven pages of comments - about that. You seem to be more of the view that an anti-racist industry that has lost its mind is a more pressing concern than actual racism.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 7 seconds ago
It was plain dream land stuff, not speaking generally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it wasn’t. Right I’ll explain this clearly, plainly and simply.
When I grew up in the 80s/90s (born in 1983) we were taught not to judge people by the colour of their skin, not to discriminate against skin colour, not to segregate by skin colour.
The vast, vast majority of kids my age got that and lived that way. In my opinion this was the case until very recently where people started to adopt your current way of thinking which believes that discrimination is fine until a time that it isn’t, as it is helping us overcome….discrimination.
Only university intellectuals could come up with such an obviously illogical and stupid theory which only gullible useful idiots would accept as the right thing to do in order to improve race relations.
I believe the 80s/90s direction was the right direction, you don’t. That is all.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 34 minutes ago
This appears to be a case of overreach by one particular diversity advocate. It's quite telling how many people see this and launch into an extended riff on how anti-racism *in general* is an empty project and, by the way, white people are the main victims of discrimination in this mixed up world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is an extremely poor summary of the discussion.
1. You seem to think that comment likes this remain isolated and therefore insignificant and as if this discourse has had and will have no impact on society whatsoever other than further diminishing racism from our society
2. I don’t think anyone here has claimed that white people are the main victims of discrimination, unless I’ve missed a post or two which I may have. If not you’ve built a subpar straw man right there.
How many times have you seen, heard or read a statement that if the word white were to be swapped with the word black there would be a national outrage but because it is aimed against the dominant race in this country, good old evil whitey, it’s seen as absolutely acceptable such as
‘Too many white peoples’
‘Terribly white’
‘Not for white people’
‘Black only space or event’
Then when someone points out ‘hey that’s actually not ok either’ we get opinions like
‘Oh it’s only one person it’s not a big deal’
‘Victim’
‘Oh so you now think you have it worse than ethnic minorities?’
In yesteryear, we used to understand that overcoming prejudices did not mean being prejudiced against the other race in retaliation; that is a race (pardon the pun) to the bottom. No-one is being elevated in this scenario and it should be stopped dead in its tracks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course my post was an oversimplification, in the context of having a short time on my phone (while in Melbourne on business). But it's a fact that a lot of people are triggered by this story, so we're already on page 7 of comments, even though it isn't representative of mainstream liberal political thought, and doesn't represent the views of the centre left party likely to come to power. What real-world power does this sentiment actually have? Meanwhile we have people in actual government who are either making objectively racist statements or struggling to describe them as such, and I don't see anything like the same level of distress - I don't see seven pages of comments - about that. You seem to be more of the view that an anti-racist industry that has lost its mind is a more pressing concern than actual racism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On the live thread, Sat Nav has attempted (and failed) to defend those comments from people in government and their donors.
At the same time he is flying off in a rage about this OP and worrying about the future of his children.
You couldn't make it up.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 34 minutes ago
This appears to be a case of overreach by one particular diversity advocate. It's quite telling how many people see this and launch into an extended riff on how anti-racism *in general* is an empty project and, by the way, white people are the main victims of discrimination in this mixed up world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is an extremely poor summary of the discussion.
1. You seem to think that comment likes this remain isolated and therefore insignificant and as if this discourse has had and will have no impact on society whatsoever other than further diminishing racism from our society
2. I don’t think anyone here has claimed that white people are the main victims of discrimination, unless I’ve missed a post or two which I may have. If not you’ve built a subpar straw man right there.
How many times have you seen, heard or read a statement that if the word white were to be swapped with the word black there would be a national outrage but because it is aimed against the dominant race in this country, good old evil whitey, it’s seen as absolutely acceptable such as
‘Too many white peoples’
‘Terribly white’
‘Not for white people’
‘Black only space or event’
Then when someone points out ‘hey that’s actually not ok either’ we get opinions like
‘Oh it’s only one person it’s not a big deal’
‘Victim’
‘Oh so you now think you have it worse than ethnic minorities?’
In yesteryear, we used to understand that overcoming prejudices did not mean being prejudiced against the other race in retaliation; that is a race (pardon the pun) to the bottom. No-one is being elevated in this scenario and it should be stopped dead in its tracks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course my post was an oversimplification, in the context of having a short time on my phone (while in Melbourne on business). But it's a fact that a lot of people are triggered by this story, so we're already on page 7 of comments, even though it isn't representative of mainstream liberal political thought, and doesn't represent the views of the centre left party likely to come to power. What real-world power does this sentiment actually have? Meanwhile we have people in actual government who are either making objectively racist statements or struggling to describe them as such, and I don't see anything like the same level of distress - I don't see seven pages of comments - about that. You seem to be more of the view that an anti-racist industry that has lost its mind is a more pressing concern than actual racism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough didn’t know you were travelling down under, hope you’re having a good time down there.
I don’t want racism nor the racism that comes with the guise of wanting to end racism. I just don’t want any of it, never have, never will.
There’s only so many times one could comment that his comments were disgusting, stupid and racist. But the debate surrounding racism is one that is prevalent in society today intertwined with history, emotion and differing opinions so it’s much more likely to get pages and pages of comments.
If you don’t think that the sentiment behind these comments are generally reflected in the current Labour Party then I don’t know what to say other than reiterating that I hope you have a good trip and a decent flight back!
posted on 13/3/24
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 34 minutes ago
This appears to be a case of overreach by one particular diversity advocate. It's quite telling how many people see this and launch into an extended riff on how anti-racism *in general* is an empty project and, by the way, white people are the main victims of discrimination in this mixed up world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is an extremely poor summary of the discussion.
1. You seem to think that comment likes this remain isolated and therefore insignificant and as if this discourse has had and will have no impact on society whatsoever other than further diminishing racism from our society
2. I don’t think anyone here has claimed that white people are the main victims of discrimination, unless I’ve missed a post or two which I may have. If not you’ve built a subpar straw man right there.
How many times have you seen, heard or read a statement that if the word white were to be swapped with the word black there would be a national outrage but because it is aimed against the dominant race in this country, good old evil whitey, it’s seen as absolutely acceptable such as
‘Too many white peoples’
‘Terribly white’
‘Not for white people’
‘Black only space or event’
Then when someone points out ‘hey that’s actually not ok either’ we get opinions like
‘Oh it’s only one person it’s not a big deal’
‘Victim’
‘Oh so you now think you have it worse than ethnic minorities?’
In yesteryear, we used to understand that overcoming prejudices did not mean being prejudiced against the other race in retaliation; that is a race (pardon the pun) to the bottom. No-one is being elevated in this scenario and it should be stopped dead in its tracks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course my post was an oversimplification, in the context of having a short time on my phone (while in Melbourne on business). But it's a fact that a lot of people are triggered by this story, so we're already on page 7 of comments, even though it isn't representative of mainstream liberal political thought, and doesn't represent the views of the centre left party likely to come to power. What real-world power does this sentiment actually have? Meanwhile we have people in actual government who are either making objectively racist statements or struggling to describe them as such, and I don't see anything like the same level of distress - I don't see seven pages of comments - about that. You seem to be more of the view that an anti-racist industry that has lost its mind is a more pressing concern than actual racism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On the live thread, Sat Nav has attempted (and failed) to defend those comments from people in government and their donors.
At the same time he is flying off in a rage about this OP and worrying about the future of his children.
You couldn't make it up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying off in a rage? You numpty
I’m on my sofa riddled with fluvid just passing time back and frothing with you and others. Once I’m better I’ll be focusing on my company and other interests far more attractive than debating you.
posted on 13/3/24
It's not designed to end racism. It's doing what we can and what's possible in an attempt to redress some of the imbalance created by an injustice. It's how it works in every other scenario where an injustices has occurred.
Big difference between the two, but again, you can make up facts to suit your opinion if you want.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 34 minutes ago
This appears to be a case of overreach by one particular diversity advocate. It's quite telling how many people see this and launch into an extended riff on how anti-racism *in general* is an empty project and, by the way, white people are the main victims of discrimination in this mixed up world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is an extremely poor summary of the discussion.
1. You seem to think that comment likes this remain isolated and therefore insignificant and as if this discourse has had and will have no impact on society whatsoever other than further diminishing racism from our society
2. I don’t think anyone here has claimed that white people are the main victims of discrimination, unless I’ve missed a post or two which I may have. If not you’ve built a subpar straw man right there.
How many times have you seen, heard or read a statement that if the word white were to be swapped with the word black there would be a national outrage but because it is aimed against the dominant race in this country, good old evil whitey, it’s seen as absolutely acceptable such as
‘Too many white peoples’
‘Terribly white’
‘Not for white people’
‘Black only space or event’
Then when someone points out ‘hey that’s actually not ok either’ we get opinions like
‘Oh it’s only one person it’s not a big deal’
‘Victim’
‘Oh so you now think you have it worse than ethnic minorities?’
In yesteryear, we used to understand that overcoming prejudices did not mean being prejudiced against the other race in retaliation; that is a race (pardon the pun) to the bottom. No-one is being elevated in this scenario and it should be stopped dead in its tracks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course my post was an oversimplification, in the context of having a short time on my phone (while in Melbourne on business). But it's a fact that a lot of people are triggered by this story, so we're already on page 7 of comments, even though it isn't representative of mainstream liberal political thought, and doesn't represent the views of the centre left party likely to come to power. What real-world power does this sentiment actually have? Meanwhile we have people in actual government who are either making objectively racist statements or struggling to describe them as such, and I don't see anything like the same level of distress - I don't see seven pages of comments - about that. You seem to be more of the view that an anti-racist industry that has lost its mind is a more pressing concern than actual racism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On the live thread, Sat Nav has attempted (and failed) to defend those comments from people in government and their donors.
At the same time he is flying off in a rage about this OP and worrying about the future of his children.
You couldn't make it up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying off in a rage? You numpty
I’m on my sofa riddled with fluvid just passing time back and frothing with you and others. Once I’m better I’ll be focusing on my company and other interests far more attractive than debating you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 13/3/24
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
It's not designed to end racism. It's doing what we can and what's possible in an attempt to redress some of the imbalance created by an injustice. It's how it works in every other scenario where an injustices has occurred.
Big difference between the two, but again, you can make up facts to suit your opinion if you want.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok so racist segregation against whites to atone for the historical racism by white people onto others.
So you’re advocating for affirmative action, yes? You agree with it for job hiring quotas, universities and such yes?
posted on 13/3/24
To give a leg up to make everyone equal now in 2024 given that some are starting off in a less fortunate position.
Equity, not equality - yes?
posted on 13/3/24
I am for affirmative action, yes. I would have though that's clear over the last few years of saying so.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 21 seconds ago
To give a leg up to make everyone equal now in 2024 given that some are starting off in a less fortunate position.
Equity, not equality - yes?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not to make everyone equal. That's impossible. It's to do what we can where something can be done and help create inclusivity and a good spirit of togetherness in society after admitting we were wrong in the past. Nothing wrong with that.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 2 minutes ago
I am for affirmative action, yes. I would have though that's clear over the last few years of saying so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was and is clear. Yes.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 21 seconds ago
To give a leg up to make everyone equal now in 2024 given that some are starting off in a less fortunate position.
Equity, not equality - yes?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not to make everyone equal. That's impossible. It's to do what we can where something can be done and help create inclusivity and a good spirit of togetherness in society after admitting we were wrong in the past. Nothing wrong with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Equity or your spirit sheet? Or both?
posted on 13/3/24
Both with your spirit and inclusivity points - sure. Every fugger is welcome at Sat Nav’s. Togetherness yaaaaay, all sounds good to me.
But as for affirmative action - who gets the leg up? Black people? Poor people? Gingers? Women? Trans? Asians?
This is the problem with a solution such as hiring by quotas and affirmative action plans. One set of people ‘benefit’ whilst others, sometimes others who weren’t even part of the even white male patriarchy such as Asians, suffer.
Is that fair? Is that inclusive and putting togetherness into practice?
posted on 13/3/24
Yeah it is. Obvious you frame it differently from the truth. It's not like the quota excludes anyone. Most quotas are majority white with provisions that a percentage must be not white to stop the practice of hiring or admitting only whites.
As for who gets a leg up it's anyone that needs to get a leg up. Look at your view of this issue. It's stoic and you refuse to use common sense. Must we say beforehand who benefits? It's whoever needs to benefit.
posted on 13/3/24
Also, how does anyone suffer from affirmative action?
posted on 13/3/24
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 10 seconds ago
Yeah it is. Obvious you frame it differently from the truth. It's not like the quota excludes anyone. Most quotas are majority white with provisions that a percentage must be not white to stop the practice of hiring or admitting only whites.
As for who gets a leg up it's anyone that needs to get a leg up. Look at your view of this issue. It's stoic and you refuse to use common sense. Must we say beforehand who benefits? It's whoever needs to benefit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course quotas exclude people, how can you say this and then say I’m not using common sense.
10 job openings with a quota of say one ginge, one black person and one Asian, that leaves 7 spots open.
100 applications for said job - what happens to the non gingers, not black or not Asian people that could have had the job offer if quotas were not in place? This is plain to see in the US with their university affirmative action admission process - less successful candidates above people with more impressive exam results say. So they lose out. Asians over there lose out all the time because of quotas from affirmative action.
Not hiring someone because they are x y and z is what needs to be eradicated. Like not having your name, age etc on CVs. That is a much more equitable solution than AA.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 5 minutes ago
Also, how does anyone suffer from affirmative action?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the above which clearly demonstrates how people can suffer from affirmative action. It has also been posited that AA harms those who benefit from it initially but this is still up for debate as to the empirical data.
posted on 13/3/24
comment by The Mamba School of Genius (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
It's whoever needs to benefit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So how do we judge who needs to benefit? What are the criteria? How is it measured? Who measures it? Who decides whom is more deserving than others?
Page 7 of 17
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12