|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law?
I'm going to play Nebuchad here: no, we don't.
|
On May 20 2017 04:03 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 03:58 a_flayer wrote:On May 20 2017 03:52 TheDwf wrote:On May 20 2017 03:48 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 03:47 TheDwf wrote:On May 20 2017 03:46 bardtown wrote:
Meh. I'm not going to reply to a half dozen posts at once. I'm just going to go on treating individuals as individuals and not as colours or genitals. ... in typical white male fashion?  I don't get it. It's much easier to afford neutrality when you're on the good side of the fence—since by definition you're not suffering from some of the structural dominations. I've seen reports that the difference in income between short men vs tall men and men vs women is comparable in size. Same goes for ugly men vs handsome men and men vs women. As a short ugly white male, I demand equality. You had to be that guy.
But seriously, it really doesn't seem beneficial to argue that white males are on the good side of the fence and by definition not suffering from the structural dominations.
What if I said that I identify as genderfluid, does that give me an exception from white penis syndrome?
|
On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? Just for reference, that guy disagrees with absolutely everything I say and has done for the past year in the UK politics thread. So it's not like he's leaping to defend me. I like what the poster above you said, though. I think people who like the colour yellow probably suffer in the dating game. I hope the state will compensate them for their struggle. In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person.
Minorities would prefer that oppression points not even a factor and that all oppression stop. But that doesn’t happen by not complaining about it. No one is saying your concerned do not matter. Of course they matter. Minorities are just asking that you take their concerned in good faith and not dismiss them as identity politics.
On May 20 2017 04:08 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:03 TheDwf wrote:On May 20 2017 03:58 a_flayer wrote:On May 20 2017 03:52 TheDwf wrote:On May 20 2017 03:48 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 03:47 TheDwf wrote:On May 20 2017 03:46 bardtown wrote:
Meh. I'm not going to reply to a half dozen posts at once. I'm just going to go on treating individuals as individuals and not as colours or genitals. ... in typical white male fashion? I don't get it. It's much easier to afford neutrality when you're on the good side of the fence—since by definition you're not suffering from some of the structural dominations. I've seen reports that the difference in income between short men vs tall men and men vs women is comparable in size. Same goes for ugly men vs handsome men and men vs women. As a short ugly white male, I demand equality. You had to be that guy. But seriously, it really doesn't seem beneficial to argue that white males are on the good side of the fence and by definition not suffering from the structural dominations. What if I said that I identify as genderfluid, does that give me an exception from white male penis syndrome?
I am going to let you in on a secret from SJW land, groups with the LGBT community fight all the time and claim others don’t accept them. Gay men and women not accepting bi-men and women. Feminist not accepting Trans-women as women. It is fucking nasty and mean on a level I am not used to.
So if you find out gender fluid is you, you get a whole new set of issues you were never aware of.
|
On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person.
When white people have problems and they bring it up in the west, it's not called identity politics, it's called politics. The fact that your race and gender aren't relevant to your quality of life is a good thing, but it's derived from you being in the favoured group in both of these. Ideally no one would have to qualify themselves using their race or gender because everyone would be treated the same, but the situation, as it stands now, is not ideal; and as long as it isn't, it's just as unhealthy to pretend that it is, cause you can't fix problems when your worldview forbids you from seeing they exist.
|
On May 20 2017 04:16 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person. When white people have problems and they bring it up in the west, it's not called identity politics, it's called politics. The fact that your race and gender aren't relevant to your quality of life is a good thing, but it's derived from you being in the favoured group in both of these. Ideally no one would have to qualify themselves using their race or gender because everyone would be treated the same, but the situation, as it stands now, is not ideal; and as long as it isn't, it's just as unhealthy to pretend that it is, cause you can't fix problems when your worldview forbids you from seeing they exist.
So true. There are huge problems in African American communities but it's a more self affirming world view to blame it on the whites.
Look, we're going round in circles. Explain to me why east Asian males outperform white males. Are they favoured by the system, or do they just work harder and have a more productive culture? Once you've done that, you can explain again why black males perform worse. And before Plansix chimes in with his trope about American racism being different - the same applies in the UK.
|
On May 20 2017 04:23 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:16 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person. When white people have problems and they bring it up in the west, it's not called identity politics, it's called politics. The fact that your race and gender aren't relevant to your quality of life is a good thing, but it's derived from you being in the favoured group in both of these. Ideally no one would have to qualify themselves using their race or gender because everyone would be treated the same, but the situation, as it stands now, is not ideal; and as long as it isn't, it's just as unhealthy to pretend that it is, cause you can't fix problems when your worldview forbids you from seeing they exist. So true. There are huge problems in African American communities but it's a more self affirming world view to blame it on the whites. Look, we're going round in circles. Explain to me why east Asian males outperform white males. Are they favoured by the system, or do they just work harder and have a more productive culture? Once you've done that, you can explain again why black males perform worse. And before Plansix chimes in with his trope about American racism being different - the same applies in the UK.
We live in conservative-capitalist systems. Which family you are born into is the most important trait in your whole life. So basically it's a self-sustaining circle of superiority. Blacks (in the US) come come from slave families and even after the abolishment of slavery were/are discriminated against. For this to converge to an equal status without the help of the society/state will take many, many generations. And even that is an optimistic outlook, there is research on wealthy families in Europe all the way back to the medival age and the correlation on wealthy family names back then and now is pretty high.
|
On May 20 2017 04:23 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:16 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person. When white people have problems and they bring it up in the west, it's not called identity politics, it's called politics. The fact that your race and gender aren't relevant to your quality of life is a good thing, but it's derived from you being in the favoured group in both of these. Ideally no one would have to qualify themselves using their race or gender because everyone would be treated the same, but the situation, as it stands now, is not ideal; and as long as it isn't, it's just as unhealthy to pretend that it is, cause you can't fix problems when your worldview forbids you from seeing they exist. So true. There are huge problems in African American communities but it's a more self affirming world view to blame it on the whites. Look, we're going round in circles. Explain to me why east Asian males outperform white males. Are they favoured by the system, or do they just work harder and have a more productive culture? Once you've done that, you can explain again why black males perform worse. And before Plansix chimes in with his trope about American racism being different - the same applies in the UK.
Our entire nation started with and was nearly destroyed by slavery and systematic repression of blacks. The shadow of slavery can been seen across every aspect of our country, right down to the placement of our capital. Racism defines America the way classism and the aristocracy defines the UK.
Blacks in America perform worse across the board because my nation is actively attempting to repress them. You only need to look at North Carolina and its efforts to prevent blacks from voting, defunding schools and cutting services. Our Supreme Court removed a decades old voters rights protection because “it wasn’t constitutional anymore,” overturning decades old rulings from the civil rights era.
Your ignorance about the racial politics in the US is staggering. But I am glad you have taken in the majority of the Southern state’s talking points when it comes to blacks under performing. Including their favorite “over performing Asians”.
|
On May 20 2017 04:23 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:16 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person. When white people have problems and they bring it up in the west, it's not called identity politics, it's called politics. The fact that your race and gender aren't relevant to your quality of life is a good thing, but it's derived from you being in the favoured group in both of these. Ideally no one would have to qualify themselves using their race or gender because everyone would be treated the same, but the situation, as it stands now, is not ideal; and as long as it isn't, it's just as unhealthy to pretend that it is, cause you can't fix problems when your worldview forbids you from seeing they exist. So true. There are huge problems in African American communities but it's a more self affirming world view to blame it on the whites. Look, we're going round in circles. Explain to me why east Asian males outperform white males. Are they favoured by the system, or do they just work harder and have a more productive culture? Once you've done that, you can explain again why black males perform worse. And before Plansix chimes in with his trope about American racism being different - the same applies in the UK.
East asians outperform the whites because the type of east asians that immigrate to the west are already well off and have assets that they can parlay into a good life in the west, and a good education for their children. See the 1965 immigration act for America where they specifically target this type of immigrants. The east asians that would underperform against the whites are not here. Take some other types of immigration from East Asia, for example the Cambodgians that are in France because of the civil war or the Lao Hmong war refugees that resettled in America, and tell me if they outperform the whites.
|
On May 20 2017 04:45 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:23 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:16 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person. When white people have problems and they bring it up in the west, it's not called identity politics, it's called politics. The fact that your race and gender aren't relevant to your quality of life is a good thing, but it's derived from you being in the favoured group in both of these. Ideally no one would have to qualify themselves using their race or gender because everyone would be treated the same, but the situation, as it stands now, is not ideal; and as long as it isn't, it's just as unhealthy to pretend that it is, cause you can't fix problems when your worldview forbids you from seeing they exist. So true. There are huge problems in African American communities but it's a more self affirming world view to blame it on the whites. Look, we're going round in circles. Explain to me why east Asian males outperform white males. Are they favoured by the system, or do they just work harder and have a more productive culture? Once you've done that, you can explain again why black males perform worse. And before Plansix chimes in with his trope about American racism being different - the same applies in the UK. East asians outperform the whites because the type of east asians that immigrate to the west are already well off and have assets that they can parlay into a good life in the west, and a good education for their children. See the 1965 immigration act for America where they specifically target this type of immigrants. The east asians that would underperform against the whites are not here. Take some other types of immigration from East Asia, for example the Cambodgians that are in France because of the civil war or the Lao Hmong war refugees that resettled in America, and tell me if they outperform the whites.
I'm sure it's a factor, but in the UK the situation for black immigrants is the same as for Asians. That is to say, before the 1950s we had very few non-whites in the UK, and when that changed the same boundaries to immigration applied across the board. All suffered from racism.
|
On May 20 2017 04:56 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:45 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 04:23 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:16 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person. When white people have problems and they bring it up in the west, it's not called identity politics, it's called politics. The fact that your race and gender aren't relevant to your quality of life is a good thing, but it's derived from you being in the favoured group in both of these. Ideally no one would have to qualify themselves using their race or gender because everyone would be treated the same, but the situation, as it stands now, is not ideal; and as long as it isn't, it's just as unhealthy to pretend that it is, cause you can't fix problems when your worldview forbids you from seeing they exist. So true. There are huge problems in African American communities but it's a more self affirming world view to blame it on the whites. Look, we're going round in circles. Explain to me why east Asian males outperform white males. Are they favoured by the system, or do they just work harder and have a more productive culture? Once you've done that, you can explain again why black males perform worse. And before Plansix chimes in with his trope about American racism being different - the same applies in the UK. East asians outperform the whites because the type of east asians that immigrate to the west are already well off and have assets that they can parlay into a good life in the west, and a good education for their children. See the 1965 immigration act for America where they specifically target this type of immigrants. The east asians that would underperform against the whites are not here. Take some other types of immigration from East Asia, for example the Cambodgians that are in France because of the civil war or the Lao Hmong war refugees that resettled in America, and tell me if they outperform the whites. I'm sure it's a factor, but in the UK the situation for black immigrants is the same as for Asians. That is to say, before the 1950s we had very few non-whites in the UK, and when that changed the same boundaries to immigration applied across the board. All suffered from racism.
The context of the UK is not something I'm massively familiar with, but I spent like seven seconds on wikipedia and found this:
"In the 1960s, civil and political unrest in Nigeria contributed to many refugees migrating to Britain, along with skilled workers.
Nigerians immigrated in larger numbers in the 1980s, following the collapse of the petroleum boom."
Which contradicts your narrative that you get the same type of immigrants from East Asia and from Africa. What other african nationalities do you have a lot of in the UK? Kenyans?
|
That does not contradict my 'narrative'. All you have shown is that world events lead to large movements of people. The same applies to Asian migrations.
|
On May 20 2017 05:27 bardtown wrote:
That does not contradict my 'narrative'. All you have shown is that world events lead to large movements of people. The same applies to Asian migrations.
Does it apply to Asian migration, specifically for the UK? I haven't seen that. You appear to have mostly people from the former colonies who have been there a long time, plus a spike of Japanese from the 1960s and a spike of Korean from the 1980s. No mention of large groups flying bad conditions as far as I could tell.
|
On May 20 2017 05:41 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 05:27 bardtown wrote:
That does not contradict my 'narrative'. All you have shown is that world events lead to large movements of people. The same applies to Asian migrations. Does it apply to Asian migration, specifically for the UK? I haven't seen that. You appear to have mostly people from the former colonies who have been there a long time, plus a spike of Japanese from the 1960s and a spike of Korean from the 1980s. No mention of large groups flying bad conditions as far as I could tell.
I wouldn't call them refugees exactly, but there was a situation where all the Indians living in Uganda were expelled and most moved to the UK. The initial bulk of Asian immigration to the UK consisted primarily of manual labourers needed to rebuild after WW2, likewise with 'African' immigration from Jamaica, etc.
|
On May 20 2017 05:47 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 05:41 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 05:27 bardtown wrote:
That does not contradict my 'narrative'. All you have shown is that world events lead to large movements of people. The same applies to Asian migrations. Does it apply to Asian migration, specifically for the UK? I haven't seen that. You appear to have mostly people from the former colonies who have been there a long time, plus a spike of Japanese from the 1960s and a spike of Korean from the 1980s. No mention of large groups flying bad conditions as far as I could tell. I wouldn't call them refugees exactly, but there was a situation where all the Indians living in Uganda were expelled and most moved to the UK. The initial bulk of Asian immigration to the UK consisted primarily of manual labourers needed to rebuild after WW2, likewise with 'African' immigration from Jamaica, etc.
Damn it I got sidetracked to East asian immigrants, forgot asians were south asians in the UK.
Now here's a fun one, if you're of south asian descent from Uganda, do you count as african or south asian in the stat?
|
|
|
On May 20 2017 01:12 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 01:07 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 00:58 Plansix wrote:On May 20 2017 00:45 nitram wrote:On May 19 2017 23:46 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
To be fair to bardtown there are worrying aspects to BLM that should be reported, but in this case you can hardly infer that the video shown is representative. Thats blm in a nutshell. Here in Canada, they were calling Trudeau a white supremacist. That is likely the only way they will ever make headlines in Canada. You see more varied coverage of BLM protests in local papers and news network. They are community protests that are trying to address specific problems within their specific communities in the US. Much like the civil rights movement in the US, it is a large number of factions with a common theme spread across the country. On May 20 2017 00:46 bardtown wrote:On May 19 2017 23:56 TheDwf wrote:On May 19 2017 23:33 bardtown wrote:On May 19 2017 23:25 Simberto wrote:
It is easy to find the stupidest person who supports something, and claim that they are representatitve of the whole thing.
Should i now look for the stupidest brexiter that i can find, and from that conclude that everyone who supports brexit is stupid?
Also, anything with a Fox News Logo on it should be an instant no go in any intelligent discussion. I don't think there has been a single case so far where they didn't misrepresent and distort the truth. They are crowds of people, not individuals. And your attitude towards Fox is pitiable. I do not like their political stance, but this is an undoctored video clip they just so happen to be showing. They are probably the only network in the US that will show it. It is an absolute necessity to get your news from multiple sources because there is no unbiased source. There's nothing even close to being unbiased. The left wing networks in the US are just as bad as Fox. As for police killing black people: they kill white people too, including innocent and compliant white people. More whites than blacks, actually. You will never hear about that, though. Yes, the number of black people shot relative to the proportion of the population they make up is higher, but that correlates with crime in the communities and areas where these people tend to be. If you have a country where every nutter has a gun, the police are going to be twitchy and more aggressive. That is the price you inevitably pay for your liberal gun laws. They also need better training. None of this has anything to do with race. There is no force more corrupting for modern society than identity politics. Really? Then why can we observe similar things all around the world, where cop violence is particularly intense towards the groups which endure racism? Gun laws are much stricter in France and “only” 10-15 people die to cops every year, yet most of them are young people of color. Many of them, who live in suburbs, face pointless harassment, insults (including racial slurs, but it has nothing to do with race right?), humiliating body searches, etc. while their white friends don't—must be a coincidence... Oddly enough, this mysterious over-aggressivity from cops happens to disproportionately fall on non-white people. We also happen to live in a racist society where people of color are discriminated when it comes to school, jobs, housing, etc. but this racism would miraculously disappear in cop activity? An ideology whose very role is to justify the dehumanisation of certain groups so that they can be treated rougher would result in no more violence? Tell me, are those the suburbs that tourists are strongly advised to avoid? And please don't give me that 'people of colour' nonsense. They don't tell people to steer clear of Chinatown, do they? This is about the failure of people from certain cultures to integrate, not about a dislike of non-whites. Chinatown, really? A community within the US specifically created to appeal to whites, avoid racism and attract tourism? Sanitized and filled with orientalist with the specific goal of making a sustainable area where Chinese could live unmolested by whites? An feature of the US that only existed because long ago the Chinese government pressure our federal government to stop the harassment of Chinese immigrants in America and allow them to buy land? http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/pagodas-dragon-gates/If you are going to comment on something in the US, please make a mild attempt understand the complex history behind it. Just leave me alone, for fucks sake. Every major city in the western world has a Chinatown. Yeah, because America racism forced them to create the concept and the creation of those neighborhoods have historically been supported by China. The first China town was created because the government of LA let the Chinese neighborhood burn down and then passed laws to prevent them from buying new land or rebuilding. There is a very interesting history on the subject and why those neighborhoods exist across the world if you took the time to understand it. Rather than trying to slot it into some argument about some people being willing to assimilate and some being unwilling to do so. Comparing the Chinese Americans to black Americans as examples of people willing and unwilling to assimilate is some truly uninformed shit. There are sections of this country that are still, to this day, actively attempting to suppress the voting rights of blacks. And they are doing it openly within state governments. The Chinatown in London is a very popular tourist destination. It wasn't created due to some discriminatory measure. On the other hand there aren't any truly no go zones in London either.
On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? Just for reference, that guy disagrees with absolutely everything I say and has done for the past year in the UK politics thread. So it's not like he's leaping to defend me. I like what the poster above you said, though. I think people who like the colour yellow probably suffer in the dating game. I hope the state will compensate them for their struggle. In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person.
Hey, I dont disagree with absolutely everything you say. There was that one time I agreed that UK shouldn't descend into a totalitarian state. I also agree that there are failures to integrate from certain groups in the UK due to their culture.
On May 20 2017 04:34 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:23 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:16 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person. When white people have problems and they bring it up in the west, it's not called identity politics, it's called politics. The fact that your race and gender aren't relevant to your quality of life is a good thing, but it's derived from you being in the favoured group in both of these. Ideally no one would have to qualify themselves using their race or gender because everyone would be treated the same, but the situation, as it stands now, is not ideal; and as long as it isn't, it's just as unhealthy to pretend that it is, cause you can't fix problems when your worldview forbids you from seeing they exist. So true. There are huge problems in African American communities but it's a more self affirming world view to blame it on the whites. Look, we're going round in circles. Explain to me why east Asian males outperform white males. Are they favoured by the system, or do they just work harder and have a more productive culture? Once you've done that, you can explain again why black males perform worse. And before Plansix chimes in with his trope about American racism being different - the same applies in the UK. We live in conservative-capitalist systems. Which family you are born into is the most important trait in your whole life. So basically it's a self-sustaining circle of superiority. Blacks (in the US) come come from slave families and even after the abolishment of slavery were/are discriminated against. For this to converge to an equal status without the help of the society/state will take many, many generations. And even that is an optimistic outlook, there is research on wealthy families in Europe all the way back to the medival age and the correlation on wealthy family names back then and now is pretty high. Actually many studies in the US have shown that the wealth of the family you are born in are much more important than race. Rich black children grow up rich, and poor white children grow up poor. Social status is a much better indicator than race in the US.
On May 20 2017 04:45 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:23 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:16 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person. When white people have problems and they bring it up in the west, it's not called identity politics, it's called politics. The fact that your race and gender aren't relevant to your quality of life is a good thing, but it's derived from you being in the favoured group in both of these. Ideally no one would have to qualify themselves using their race or gender because everyone would be treated the same, but the situation, as it stands now, is not ideal; and as long as it isn't, it's just as unhealthy to pretend that it is, cause you can't fix problems when your worldview forbids you from seeing they exist. So true. There are huge problems in African American communities but it's a more self affirming world view to blame it on the whites. Look, we're going round in circles. Explain to me why east Asian males outperform white males. Are they favoured by the system, or do they just work harder and have a more productive culture? Once you've done that, you can explain again why black males perform worse. And before Plansix chimes in with his trope about American racism being different - the same applies in the UK. East asians outperform the whites because the type of east asians that immigrate to the west are already well off and have assets that they can parlay into a good life in the west, and a good education for their children. See the 1965 immigration act for America where they specifically target this type of immigrants. The east asians that would underperform against the whites are not here. Take some other types of immigration from East Asia, for example the Cambodgians that are in France because of the civil war or the Lao Hmong war refugees that resettled in America, and tell me if they outperform the whites. This may be true in USA, but it isn't true for UK. The majority of Chinese immigration into UK were poorer Cantonese immigrants from Hong Kong. Most of the richer, educated Pakistanis migrated to USA, and the poorer uneducated ones to UK. Almost all the various Africans are poor and uneducated on arrival, whether Nigerian, Somalia or Kenyan or any one of a hundred groups, yet they still manage to do better than those from the West Indies, in my experience. Then there are those from the middle east and they universally do better than those from the West indies, though in this case, there are usually better educated. I think the only the Indians can claim to be better educated, but they were poor as well.
On May 20 2017 05:54 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 05:47 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 05:41 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 05:27 bardtown wrote:
That does not contradict my 'narrative'. All you have shown is that world events lead to large movements of people. The same applies to Asian migrations. Does it apply to Asian migration, specifically for the UK? I haven't seen that. You appear to have mostly people from the former colonies who have been there a long time, plus a spike of Japanese from the 1960s and a spike of Korean from the 1980s. No mention of large groups flying bad conditions as far as I could tell. I wouldn't call them refugees exactly, but there was a situation where all the Indians living in Uganda were expelled and most moved to the UK. The initial bulk of Asian immigration to the UK consisted primarily of manual labourers needed to rebuild after WW2, likewise with 'African' immigration from Jamaica, etc. Damn it I got sidetracked to East asian immigrants, forgot asians were south asians in the UK. Now here's a fun one, if you're of south asian descent from Uganda, do you count as african or south asian in the stat? In the census you would most likely put down your ethnicity as Indian. I think British Asian is also an option.
|
If you break down US graduation rates and the like by Asian subgenres you find that some perform relatively worse than the average. pretty interesting stuff actually. I think there was a push in California that was successful to stop using Asian as a category. It's not like national news but it's a big deal to communities and activists. Also not sure about rich but race is at least somewhat important. they've done studies with identical resumes and have found that if you have a more African sounding name you get a lot less responses.
|
If I recall correctly they used ghetto sounding names. I think those names aren't popular among successful African Americans.
|
On May 20 2017 07:38 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 04:34 Big J wrote:On May 20 2017 04:23 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:16 Nebuchad wrote:On May 20 2017 04:05 bardtown wrote:On May 20 2017 04:01 Sent. wrote:
I'm going to play Dangermousecatdog here and interpret posts disagreeing with bardtown in the most evil way possible: so you want to discriminate against white males because they happen to do the best in a system where all people are equal before law? In all seriousness: white people have problems too. My race and gender are rather less relevant to my quality of life than my health, and yet nobody gives me any oppression points for that. It's really unhealthy to assume that these factors in particular define the status of a person. When white people have problems and they bring it up in the west, it's not called identity politics, it's called politics. The fact that your race and gender aren't relevant to your quality of life is a good thing, but it's derived from you being in the favoured group in both of these. Ideally no one would have to qualify themselves using their race or gender because everyone would be treated the same, but the situation, as it stands now, is not ideal; and as long as it isn't, it's just as unhealthy to pretend that it is, cause you can't fix problems when your worldview forbids you from seeing they exist. So true. There are huge problems in African American communities but it's a more self affirming world view to blame it on the whites. Look, we're going round in circles. Explain to me why east Asian males outperform white males. Are they favoured by the system, or do they just work harder and have a more productive culture? Once you've done that, you can explain again why black males perform worse. And before Plansix chimes in with his trope about American racism being different - the same applies in the UK. We live in conservative-capitalist systems. Which family you are born into is the most important trait in your whole life. So basically it's a self-sustaining circle of superiority. Blacks (in the US) come come from slave families and even after the abolishment of slavery were/are discriminated against. For this to converge to an equal status without the help of the society/state will take many, many generations. And even that is an optimistic outlook, there is research on wealthy families in Europe all the way back to the medival age and the correlation on wealthy family names back then and now is pretty high. Actually many studies in the US have shown that the wealth of the family you are born in are much more important than race. Rich black children grow up rich, and poor white children grow up poor. Social status is a much better indicator than race in the US.
Yeah. Thing is, we have some fundamental system issues. Now we can either acknowledge that, which too many can't - funny enough exactly those, who believe to be pushing values of freedom - or we can try to mend them, which often just creates new problems with privileges.
|
On May 20 2017 03:04 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2017 02:52 Plansix wrote:
Identity politics is just the phrase that people throw around because they can't say "They are catering the Chinese/black/Italians/Germans" any more. It is an attempt to co-opt the idea of inclusion, while also placing the burden on the minority group to conform without debate. The very act of invoking identity politics increases the divide between the two side. It states that the the dominant group's identity is the base line for political discourse and other identities seeking inclusion must completely conform to that base line as set forth by the dominant group. It is an overly broad and vague term used to discredit the political views of minorities. And we know this because it is used in both the EU and US, where our issues with racism and minority groups could not be more different. Welcome to 2017 where those who don't want politics divided along racial lines are racists. Reminds me of that famous racist, Martin Luther King Jr., dreaming of a time when people wouldn't be judged by their skin colour. What a colossal bigot.
What lines do you recommend we divide along? If you go with "economic" you're gonna get pretty much the same problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FrSzVhV.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://images.washingtonpost.com/?url=http://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2013/12/gay-marriage-1.jpg&w=1484&op=resize&opt=1&filter=antialias)
![[image loading]](http://www.larevuetoudi.org/en/sites/default/files/imagecache/large/lynchage.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://unefillevege.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/auschwitz.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Cicatrices_de_flagellation_sur_un_esclave.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.f1g.fr/media/ext/1900x1900/madame.lefigaro.fr/sites/default/files/img/2015/03/le-second-cliche-de-la-campagne-de-larmee-du-salut.png)
![[image loading]](http://static.azteca.com/crop/crop.php?width=750&height=&img=http://static.azteca.com/imagenes/2015/48/kendall-jenner-golpeada-2026775.jpg&coordinates=50,50)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zAlo96T.jpg)
