What's so great about diversity?
Previous 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 14 Next
Individualist @ Tue May 08, 2018 6:08 am
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
As a white male myself, I reject any notion that I am inferior or guilty of the sins of other white men. However, as a Canadian I cannot absolve myself of the guilt of my country. Crimes committed by Canada are crimes committed by Canadians, by definition.
So are you saying, by extension all Cambodians are responsible for Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge's reign of terror, all Chinese are responsible for the death of 45 million during the Great Leap forward, all Ugandan's are responsible for the deaths of 300,000 or the French are responsible for the murder of the Catharists?
I could go on and on showing where every country on the planet has caused grief to others but that would be pointless since your "collective" guilt would appear to be fueled more by colour than personal responsibility.
And, please don't use the "we conquered them" excuse because I could create another list of non white countries that visited atrocities on the people they conquered that made what our ancestors did seem like a trip to Disneyland by comparison and yet, none of them feel the same guilt you say we should be feeling or have even tried to make amends. Japan and Korea come to mind.
I'm sorry but this sins of the father attitude is what really prevents progress because it creates victims of people who have long ago stopped being victims and attempts to creates a collective sense of guilt by people who have no reason to feel responsible the actions of their ancestors.
A classic bit of gaslighting on this from the Star’s chief SJW-in-residence...
https://m.thestar.com/opinion/star-colu ... worth.html
“It’s just an academic discussion. Why are you being so defensive about it? Your ‘white fragility’ is showing.” It’s basically a game of academic trolling. Say outrageous things about white people as a collective, wait for individual white people to react negatively, and then make their reaction into the issue.
I think the purveyors of academic identity politics need to be called out on this game. They should be pressed to say exactly what they think white-skinned people need to do or accept being done to them as individuals in order to correct or remedy this injustice. What is their fin...uh, ultimate solution? Do they even want to solve the problem, or are they simply bitter cultural Marxists trying to tear down Western society for rejecting economic Marxism?
BartSimpson @ Tue May 08, 2018 9:56 am
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
However, as a Canadian I cannot absolve myself of the guilt of my country. Crimes committed by Canada are crimes committed by Canadians, by definition.
Just take care not to convict yourself of things that were not crimes when they were carried out.
Individualist @ Sun Jun 03, 2018 11:42 am
Individualist Individualist:
A classic bit of gaslighting on this from the Star’s chief SJW-in-residence...
https://m.thestar.com/opinion/star-colu ... worth.html
“It’s just an academic discussion. Why are you being so defensive about it? Your ‘white fragility’ is showing.” It’s basically a game of academic trolling. Say outrageous things about white people as a collective, wait for individual white people to react negatively, and then make their reaction into the issue.
I think the purveyors of academic identity politics need to be called out on this game. They should be pressed to say exactly what they think white-skinned people need to do or accept being done to them as individuals in order to correct or remedy this injustice. What is their fin...uh, ultimate solution? Do they even want to solve the problem, or are they simply bitter cultural Marxists trying to tear down Western society for rejecting economic Marxism?
https://m.thestar.com/opinion/star-colu ... worth.html
“It’s just an academic discussion. Why are you being so defensive about it? Your ‘white fragility’ is showing.” It’s basically a game of academic trolling. Say outrageous things about white people as a collective, wait for individual white people to react negatively, and then make their reaction into the issue.
I think the purveyors of academic identity politics need to be called out on this game. They should be pressed to say exactly what they think white-skinned people need to do or accept being done to them as individuals in order to correct or remedy this injustice. What is their fin...uh, ultimate solution? Do they even want to solve the problem, or are they simply bitter cultural Marxists trying to tear down Western society for rejecting economic Marxism?
I think the move from economic to cultural Marxism has also been driven by the academic left having felt betrayed by the white working class, who in their view chose racism over class solidarity. Economic Marxists are forced to focus their hatred on rich white people (with "rich" being the more significant descriptor). But rich white people tend to be urbanites who are fond of high culture. They are also often philanthropic and socially liberal, particularly those who inherited rather than earned their wealth. Those on the academic left would much rather have a reason to vilify poor rural whites, and intersectional identity politics gives them a vehicle to express their hatred against this particular group of "racist class traitor" whites without feeling like they're punching down.
Vbeacher @ Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:52 pm
BeaverFever BeaverFever:
Meanwhile ultra-conservatives such as yourself resent the existence of everyone not willing to accept the inherent supremacy of a conservative straight white Christian male.
The difference is that liberal belief in diversity means they tolerate even the people they resent; whereas conservatives believe the people they hate should be marginalized and eradicated and due to their zero-sum logic they believe that by not persecuting these groups the government persecutes conservatives.
The difference is that liberal belief in diversity means they tolerate even the people they resent; whereas conservatives believe the people they hate should be marginalized and eradicated and due to their zero-sum logic they believe that by not persecuting these groups the government persecutes conservatives.
I haven't noticed much of this liberal 'tolerance' lately, except to people who think exactly as they do. No wait, I lie. Liberals will tolerate racism, misogyny and homophobia as long as the people involved aren't white or Christian.
Vbeacher @ Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:58 pm
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Identity politics were invented by white males at a time when they ruled pretty much absolutely. They decided that people with black skin were inferior and could be own as chattel.
Uhm, no. Actually it was the Arabs who were treating people with Black skin as inferior chattel to be owned as slaves. They started to sell them to Europeans and thus the slave trade was born. But don't worry, the Arabs treated white people as inferior chattel to be owned as slaves too.
$1:
They decided that the Indians were savages and that laws and rights for other men did not apply to them.
Indians? Are you talking about Europeans or Arabs? Because the Arabs decided Indians were savages and that laws and rights of other men did not apply to them. That was why they started slaughtering them by the millions and then tens of millions and then hundreds of millions. But you don't know anything about Indian or Middle East history, do you, except insofar as you can slander Europeans for doing something politically unacceptable. Btw, the Muslim world refers to this period of time in their history as Islam's Golden era. No guilt there whatsoever. Only nostalgia.
$1:
They decided that homosexuality was a moral and criminal offence. They decided that weaker sex could be subjugated by force and denied suffrage.
Again, it seems like you ought to be talking about Arabs, since they did this earlier, and they never have changed their minds about it. Homosexuality is still a criminal offense throughout the Muslim world, subject to the death penalty in many places. And women are, by law, unequal everywhere in the Muslim world. In ALL Muslim nations.
$1:
As a white male myself, I reject any notion that I am inferior
Another error on your part.
herbie @ Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:58 pm
$1:
Liberals won't tolerate racism, misogyny and homophobia when the people involved are proud of being white or pretend to be Christian.
FTFY
MeganC @ Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:31 pm
herbie herbie:
$1:
Liberals won't tolerate racism, misogyny and homophobia when the people involved are proud of being white or pretend to be Christian.
FTFY
What's wrong with being proud of being white or European?
herbie @ Sun Jun 03, 2018 4:36 pm
Because it's as stupid as being proud you were born. You didn't accomplish that, didn't even have a choice in the matter.
Nobody ever told you or treated you like you were less than anyone else because of your colour so you have no need of it. You'd only need to profess pride in your skin colour out of racism or sheer assholiness.
Individualist @ Mon Jun 04, 2018 4:17 am
herbie herbie:
Because it's as stupid as being proud you were born. You didn't accomplish that, didn't even have a choice in the matter.
Nobody ever told you or treated you like you were less than anyone else because of your colour so you have no need of it. You'd only need to profess pride in your skin colour out of racism or sheer assholiness.
Nobody ever told you or treated you like you were less than anyone else because of your colour so you have no need of it. You'd only need to profess pride in your skin colour out of racism or sheer assholiness.
Yet white people are supposed to feel shame about the crimes of their ancestors or about privilege they didn’t ask for nor have any control over? The argument works both ways.
Zipperfish @ Mon Jun 04, 2018 7:26 am
Vbeacher Vbeacher:
Uhm, no. Actually it was the Arabs who were treating people with Black skin as inferior chattel to be owned as slaves. They started to sell them to Europeans and thus the slave trade was born. But don't worry, the Arabs treated white people as inferior chattel to be owned as slaves too.
Slavery itself has been around since history was first written. But the idea of actually legislating around skin colour was a more recent development. It seems the Arabs pretty much enslaved anyone; colour was not a factor. Or am I wrong there? Was slavery, by law, a matter of skin colour? If so I stand corrected.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that for western Europe in the last few hundred years, slaves were defined by their blackness. By their race, not by their class. Slaves were blacks and blacks were slaves. By law. That was the genesis of identity politics.
$1:
Indians? Are you talking about Europeans or Arabs? Because the Arabs decided Indians were savages and that laws and rights of other men did not apply to them. That was why they started slaughtering them by the millions and then tens of millions and then hundreds of millions. But you don't know anything about Indian or Middle East history, do you, except insofar as you can slander Europeans for doing something politically unacceptable. Btw, the Muslim world refers to this period of time in their history as Islam's Golden era. No guilt there whatsoever. Only nostalgia.
I'm talking about indigenous Americans. And I am not slandering Europeans. I'm sorry if you think that Europeans have always been bastions of sweetness and virtue, and all evil can be laid at the feet of the Arabs. If that's the way you want to interpret history, fine.
I am trying to find context for current left-wing identity politics. And where I have landed is that maybe the reason they are obsessed with skin colour is because they developed in a society that was legislated rights according to skin colour. Social Justice/identity politics is a legacy of that.
Zipperfish @ Mon Jun 04, 2018 7:33 am
Individualist Individualist:
Yet white people are supposed to feel shame about the crimes of their ancestors or about privilege they didn’t ask for nor have any control over? The argument works both ways.
I agree. Shame and pride are opposite sides of the same coin. As Herbie alludes to, why should I feel pride, or shame, in my height or my colour.
To some, white privilege means that white people should feel shame for the history. Which is garbage; it's not like any race has the market cornered on iniquity. To me white privilege means that the social context I am in presents several advantages to me, as a white, and that I should be aware of that, and that is something we should eventually seek to eliminate.
BartSimpson @ Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:35 am
$1:
What's wrong with being proud of being white or European?
herbie herbie:
Because it's as stupid as being proud you were born. You didn't accomplish that, didn't even have a choice in the matter.
Be sure to repeat that little mantra of yours at the next gay pride parade.
Individualist @ Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:37 am
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Individualist Individualist:
Yet white people are supposed to feel shame about the crimes of their ancestors or about privilege they didn’t ask for nor have any control over? The argument works both ways.
I agree. Shame and pride are opposite sides of the same coin. As Herbie alludes to, why should I feel pride, or shame, in my height or my colour.
To some, white privilege means that white people should feel shame for the history. Which is garbage; it's not like any race has the market cornered on iniquity. To me white privilege means that the social context I am in presents several advantages to me, as a white, and that I should be aware of that, and that is something we should eventually seek to eliminate.
I agree to a point, but skin colour, sexual orientation and gender are far from the only factors that can accord someone privilege. Extraverts are highly privileged in this society in relation to introverts. Conventional physical attractiveness is also a signficant source of unearned advantage. Right-handed people are privileged in a society who physical infrastructure is designed around them. Greater physical strength or superior intellect can provide privilege people over and above the natural functional advantages they represent.
One source of unearned advantage the left (both in Canada and the US) tends to be blind to is geography of origin. In Canada, regional bigotry was at the very centre of the Laurentian Consensus and the very formation of Canada. In the US, the term “flyover country” has been used to delegitimize an entire segment of the population. In the new polarized environment in the US, someone with an accent like Bill Clinton’s (even coming out of the mouth of a Rhodes Scholar) would be looked upon with suspicion or disdain by liberal Democrats. In Canada, Stephen Harper would have had an even greater struggle to become Prime Minister if he had been an Albertan by birth and upbringing instead of just self-identification.
herbie @ Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:19 am
So one who admits an undeserved privilege is arguing we should be proud of it?
And another says someone who has suffered discrimination should accept a lesser self-esteem?
$1:
In Canada, Stephen Harper would have had an even greater struggle to become PrimeMinister if he had been an Albertan by birth
And I don't even want to know what warped, convoluted, inside-out dogmatic path of reasoning led to that statement... there's a Jethro Tull tune blasting in my head right now
Thanos @ Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:30 am
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
To some, white privilege means that white people should feel shame for the history. Which is garbage; it's not like any race has the market cornered on iniquity. To me white privilege means that the social context I am in presents several advantages to me, as a white, and that I should be aware of that, and that is something we should eventually seek to eliminate.
You're trying too hard to split hairs here. And, as the wise Cylon once said, no matter how hard you try to be an enlightened ally to them the SJW types are still going to hate you simply for what you are. They will, and they absolutely do, hate and blame you for everything that's ever happened in this world or happened to them personally. Their failures aren't theirs to accept, in their view it's all the responsibility of you and the rest that have the same skin colour that you do. In identity politics there is no peace to be had.
Previous 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 14 Next