What is the point that I should be getting? I assume "white", in this instance means those with relatively light skin complexion.
If I knew how to insert the slap-hand-on-head icon I would.
Consider. If a child is brutally murdered, and someone calls it euthanasia, or just says the child "died", they might both be technically correct.
Consider. I walk into a china shop and cast all the vases and pots to the ground smashing each one to smithereens. I report the event as "All the pots fell off the shelf". I'd not be lying. They did all indeed fall off the shelfs.
Consider. I call Bernie Sanders an angry old Jew. Am I technically correct.
White, or Black or Hispanic, are terms which reify racism. Do you know what that is?
Hobbes' Choice wrote:If I knew how to insert the slap-hand-on-head icon I would.
Consider. If a child is brutally murdered, and someone calls it euthanasia, or just says the child "died", they might both be technically correct.
Consider. I walk into a china shop and cast all the vases and pots to the ground smashing each one to smithereens. I report the event as "All the pots fell off the shelf". I'd not be lying. They did all indeed fall off the shelfs.
Consider. I call Bernie Sanders an angry old Jew. Am I technically correct.
White, or Black or Hispanic, are terms which reify racism. Do you know what that is?
Hobbes' Choice wrote:If I knew how to insert the slap-hand-on-head icon I would.
Consider. If a child is brutally murdered, and someone calls it euthanasia, or just says the child "died", they might both be technically correct.
Consider. I walk into a china shop and cast all the vases and pots to the ground smashing each one to smithereens. I report the event as "All the pots fell off the shelf". I'd not be lying. They did all indeed fall off the shelfs.
Consider. I call Bernie Sanders an angry old Jew. Am I technically correct.
White, or Black or Hispanic, are terms which reify racism. Do you know what that is?
OK. Apologies for the faux pas. You are right.
I figured you were onside with this one really.
Racism is insidious and tragically promoted unintentionally by those most effected by its worst aspects; its an unless circle whereby evil is fed by the good of those trying to bring equality.
It's refreshing to see an angry politician, or in fact see any kind of human emotion in them at all. A politician who isn't a psychopath. That must be a first. He doesn't have a hope in hell though.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:It's refreshing to see an angry politician, or in fact see any kind of human emotion in them at all. A politician who isn't a psychopath. That must be a first. He doesn't have a hope in hell though.
The media is controlled in the USA by the same bunch of morons that control the media in the UK.
One day the likes of Corbyn and Sanders; Podemos, Syriza et al, will win the argument through mass movements of social media. The change is coming.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:It's refreshing to see an angry politician, or in fact see any kind of human emotion in them at all. A politician who isn't a psychopath. That must be a first. He doesn't have a hope in hell though.
The media is controlled in the USA by the same bunch of morons that control the media in the UK.
One day the likes of Corbyn and Sanders; Podemos, Syriza et al, will win the argument through mass movements of social media. The change is coming.
Oh yes. Corbyn. Two old-school politicians who are anti-war. An anti-war US President? That's never going to happen.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:It's refreshing to see an angry politician, or in fact see any kind of human emotion in them at all. A politician who isn't a psychopath. That must be a first. He doesn't have a hope in hell though.
The media is controlled in the USA by the same bunch of morons that control the media in the UK.
One day the likes of Corbyn and Sanders; Podemos, Syriza et al, will win the argument through mass movements of social media. The change is coming.
Oh yes. Corbyn. Two old-school politicians who are anti-war. An anti-war US President? That's never going to happen.
Harbal wrote:I imagine such demonstrations are motivated by the feeling of being oppressed and discriminated against. So, if you are white and being treated unfairly by some other dominant ethnic group, I would say yes, it's OK to protest about it.
'Those fucking rich white c***s are oppressing me' says white working-class man, bring back Marxism Today.
People are becoming MORE pro-war, not less. Look at the 'troop-worship' we see now. That's a recent thing. You have to wonder if most people are just empty vessels with no real mind of their own; who simply go whichever way the media blows them. In fact, it's obvious that really is the case.
Harbal wrote:I imagine such demonstrations are motivated by the feeling of being oppressed and discriminated against. So, if you are white and being treated unfairly by some other dominant ethnic group, I would say yes, it's OK to protest about it.
'Those fucking rich white c***s are oppressing me' says white working-class man, bring back Marxism Today.
Much better withouth those pesky unions. We are so much better off beholden to corporate termite hills of sociopathic energy.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Much better withouth those pesky unions. We are so much better off beholden to corporate termite hills of sociopathic energy.
Tell me about it, became a bus-driver a while back and missed the 'golden' Union period of proper dossing and good-money and the free-forall of privatization where I could have worked like a loon for more money. Instead I fell into this ridiculous carve-up between private enterprise, the political class and the union's, all administered at the top by, as you say, by sociopaths, time to re-nationalise as a not-for-profit public benefit as we're still paying the subs!!
People are becoming MORE pro-war, not less. Look at the 'troop-worship' we see now. That's a recent thing. You have to wonder if most people are just empty vessels with no real mind of their own; who simply go whichever way the media blows them. In fact, it's obvious that really is the case.
Many people wrongly think that being against a war is the same as being "against" those in the military, however, there's a difference between "troop worship" and recognizing that some young people who join the military sometimes do so because they are being duped into thinking they are serving lofty causes. Not all young people jeopardize their lives because they're evil "war mongers". Some do so because they think it's for a good cause and don't know better.
People are becoming MORE pro-war, not less. Look at the 'troop-worship' we see now. That's a recent thing. You have to wonder if most people are just empty vessels with no real mind of their own; who simply go whichever way the media blows them. In fact, it's obvious that really is the case.
Many people wrongly think that being against a war is the same as being "against" those in the military, however, there's a difference between "troop worship" and recognizing that some young people who join the military sometimes do so because they are being duped into thinking they are serving lofty causes. Not all young people jeopardize their lives because they're evil "war mongers". Some do so because they think it's for a good cause and don't know better.
Yes, but the whole 'troop-worship' mentality encourages young people to join the military and glamorises it. I mean, they automatically get labelled as 'heroes' instead of as young people who can't get a job anywhere else. That makes it instantly appealing to certain people. The warmongers are the ones who glorify war. Remember the white feathers of WW1? Conscientious objectors were often tortured and murdered. As it stands now, all of your military are there because they want to be.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
People are becoming MORE pro-war, not less. Look at the 'troop-worship' we see now. That's a recent thing. You have to wonder if most people are just empty vessels with no real mind of their own; who simply go whichever way the media blows them. In fact, it's obvious that really is the case.
Many people wrongly think that being against a war is the same as being "against" those in the military, however, there's a difference between "troop worship" and recognizing that some young people who join the military sometimes do so because they are being duped into thinking they are serving lofty causes. Not all young people jeopardize their lives because they're evil "war mongers". Some do so because they think it's for a good cause and don't know better.
Yes, but the whole 'troop-worship' mentality encourages young people to join the military and glamorises it. I mean, they automatically get labelled as 'heroes' instead of as young people who can't get a job anywhere else. That makes it instantly appealing to certain people. The warmongers are the ones who glorify war. Remember the white feathers of WW1? Conscientious objectors were often tortured and murdered. As it stands now, all of your military are there because they want to be.
OK. I see your point. It can encourage young people to join if they are glorified as "heroes." However, calling some by what they are, idealistic young people who are being duped by their government, makes for more of a chance of winning hearts and minds to the cause of peace. Saying, "you're just a warmongering monster who has mercilessly killed people unjustly," just puts them on the defensive and it's not a fair description of everyone who joins the military. Few people (dare I hope?) are [insert serial killer name here] who kill others because they just want to kill people. When people kill others it's usually because they think they are somehow justified in doing so. Many Americans join the military because they think they are preventing psychopathic wahhabists from knocking on their door someday and killing their families and loved ones. Yes it's absurd but considering things like the recent shooting in Orlando, USA it's something that can be sold to the public.
The shooter in Orlando probably did more to endanger other Muslims than he did to effectively oppose US foreign policy, because he just ensured that warmongers have all that much more ammunition to sell us on the alleged dangers of the enemy.
