ITT: people literally complaining about black actors in Shakespeare
ITT: people literally complaining about black actors in Shakespeare
Elfdude, discrimination is not the absolute cause. In Britain, we didn’t have a sizeable non-white population until the last 60 years or so. They came from places like the Caribbean, Pakistan, India, and some from Eastern Europe. They came over to do low paying jobs like working in the mills in the north of England. That’s why so many Pakistanis went to live there, since milling was a trade many Pakistanis had experience in.Originally Posted by Elfdude
This is not America, where there’s been a sizeable non-white population for hundreds of years. If being black is the only arbitrator for whether or not someone receives affirmative action, then how is that not making the assumption that all black people are poor?
Its racism by low expectations, you seem to think these groups, which willingly came here to do low pay, unskilled labour are unable to better themselves without free money.
You want to fix a perceived problem of discrimination with more discrimination. You guessed it - that just creates more discrimination in society.
Its already illegal to discriminate against non-white people.
Black people tend to Ben worse off because their families came over to do low pay work. Equality of outcome is not inevitable. And discrimination is not the default cause. It has been illegal to discriminate against non-whites since the 70s. Unfortunately, it’s perfectly legal to discriminate against whites.That's not true unless you're presuming that the capacity of a black man is less than that of the capacity of a white man. Equality of outcome when we're talking about macro-scale socio-economic trends is expected. Any basic research class will teach you that. Deviation from that norm is the result of discrimination in some form or fashion. Some of that discrimination may be warranted but it's absolutely ridiculous to assert that a black man is twice as deserving of being unemployed when their qualifications are the same.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...ve-action.html
Its ridiculous, and what happens when you have a black man and a white woman, who is more ‘oppressed’ there? Sorry, but this oppressor/oppressed rhetoric reeks of Marxism. Same with the thought that inequality is something to be corrected, it isn’t. It’s a natural result of a meritocracy. People like you probably accuse conservatives etc of being divisive blah blah blah, yet you’re perfectly happy to engage in intersectionality politics whenever you want. Because it’s ok when you do it, I guess...A manager will be able lawfully to hire a black man over a white man, a woman over a man, or homosexual man over a heterosexual man, if they have the same skill set.
Equality under the law requires everyone to be treated the same, under the law. That is demonstratively not what you want, and it has nothing do with ‘correcting’ a wealth disparity.The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. Equality under the law requires disparity between racial groups to also be erased which affirmative action and quotas have proven to be effective at doing. Otherwise you risk institutionalizing population and selection bias which will still result in an disequity of law.
Last edited by Aexodus; May 21, 2018 at 08:05 AM.
Demonstrate that is not what I want, the rest of your post is garbage where you ignore statistics and assert your own world views in place of data. Bravo good sir. We call that racism.
How the hell is he racist from what he wrote? You call that racism. Why do you use the word we. You are not talking for the people. A lot of you people nowadays need to step down from that moral superiority pedestal you've put your selves on. You can't have a discussion like that.
Equality and fairness under the law is not what you want Elfdude, because you want extra resources going to certain people because of their skin colour.
Equality and fairness under the law is not what you want, because you are in favour of laws that favour a black man of equal skills to a white man to be employed in the same job.
Instead of the freedom to be rich, or to be poor, you want an oppressive state where being well-off is ridiculed, because somehow if someone else is poor, that is your fault, and you need to give them your money. This is a half-step away from socialism, except between classes, it’s between races.
Why Elfdude, are you so determined to absolutely equalise everything in life?
Jews have an average of 115 IQ points more than the general white population, Jews as a population are always going to be better off than white people, but that’s fine. As a white person, I have no problem being part of a group that is as over-represented in business, or in Hollywood (a fifth of Hollywood execs are Jewish) because I don’t think in intersectional, racially collectivist terms. The only exception I take to this, is perhaps the integrity of nation states around the world. While I don’t mind what races have what wealth in my country, for example, I do think that for instance in Pakistan, it’s preferable for the majority to be ‘Pakistani’, and the equivalent in all other old world countries.
So, is it worse to be white?Originally Posted by AexodusOriginally Posted by Elfdude
DNA doesn’t indicate your ancestry? Well that’s firstOriginally Posted by Elfdude
Seriously though, by ‘black’ you knew I meant ‘African’ as in the normal use of the word, right?
You see, this response betrays your mentality. I meant, should the settlers, the newcomers of that time, have integrated into Native American society, and you replied ‘the natives assimilated brilliantly’It took us less than one generation to assimilate natives in the US. We could do it even faster if our (admittedly rather shaky at the time) ethical concerns would allow us to do so. The dominant culture is the culture which tends to be assimilated towards, just like a pebble between the moon and the earth would likely fall towards the earth even if the moon does have a noticeable impact on its trajectory.
You see, no-one is ever going to really want to give up the customs of their old country if they can get away with it. The settlers of America didn’t.
You might say ‘oh, it’s inevitable, it’s diversity etc etc’
But, it didn’t exactly end well for the natives, did it?
You probably think it’s ‘natives’ of Britain that have to integrate into a new country.
No they didn’t. I can trace my family history back almost a 1000 years in the country I live in.Well everyone immigrated from somewhere at some point.
Last edited by Aexodus; May 21, 2018 at 12:34 PM.
There are no net more resources going to people because of their skin color unless you want to say white people get more resources because of their skin color.
Equality and fairness is what I want, I just am not an idiot and know that the white guy will get the job 9/10. The law you highlighted merely allows someone to do so. It doesn't mandate that they do so.
Society is an inter-related structure in which my wealth is dependent upon those around me.
Controlling for bias is not the same as equalizing.
There's little evidence of an IQ differentiation between race mostly because of lurking variables which can't be controlled for.
White's a culture now?
No one said that except you.
So then a large portion of "black" people in the UK are not in fact black then. Do you know the DNA markers of the actor playing achilles?
lol. Yes, when a militarily superior immigrant comes to a new nation, refuses to integrate with it and enforces integration through conquering the aforementioned native the natives are assimilated by said culture.
Future settlers did because military superiority became moot.
It is inevitable.
Depends on how you measure well. The truth of the matter is we can trace all lineages back to singular individuals because this is the natural process of evolution. Lineages manage to dominate for one reason or another.
No I don't?
https://www.nature.com/news/most-eur...estors-1.12950
lol
What would have made sense, and would have been both fair and actually popular, would be to make it easier for people with low income (regardless of "race") to have more job opportunities. Cause poor people who are "white" aren't having a priviliged status either, let alone that no one can throw away a couple of decades for the good of others, as if we live here for 200 years in bliss.
It's part of why Bernie Sanders is so popular; he doesn't play the race card, and actually says sensible things about economic inequality.
Poor white people have less unemployment than poor black people. Even when we control for the same attributes they're hired about twice as often. So no, sorry doesn't work. This is why Oxford and Harvard which have had the choice to do things in specific ways for centuries still give racial priority in addition to class priority. Also bernie sanders doesn't "play" the race card, but he's stated on numerous occasions that black unemployment, incarceration and wealth inequality is nothing more than racism. This isn't unknown, it's well known.
Black people also commit half the murders despite being 15% of the population. Guess that’s racism too?
Maybe it’s because of self-inflicted structural problems in black communities, like absent fathers, crime, and a disdain for education. Every single disparity isn’t to do with racism.
Then Elfdude, for white people that are poor, is that not racism too? How about you judge people as individuals for once, not on their skin tone.
In the end of the day, if one is poor, they won't (and neither would it make sense at all for them to) just support being played in a divide et impera manner due to race-baiting. It would all be well if there was more time, or if society was fair in other ways, but as things stand it is creating even more polarization (and with it tension, and poor arguments/trolling/not needed polemics) to persist in being myopic in this manner, ie to treat the poor of one "race" differently to the poor of another "race", when both are citizens of the same country.
Yay. More racism to deflect from your prior racism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_a...United_Kingdom
For the record, when you control for relevant socio-economic issues criminality is about the same as other racial groups.
The fact of the matter is that the snowball rolls down hill, and the one which is larger will pick up more snow. If you want a equitable society at some point you've got to either give one ball snow or slow the other one down, since we don't like harming folks to give others a chance the best we can do is remove barriers which bias the outcomes.
What i am saying is that such should be done at the expense of people with wealth, and not arbitrarily, cause the latter is at the expense of other people who are poor (and just happen to be "white"). Which not only doesn't solve a problem, but in the process creates its own social polemics and tension, which surely is not the way to go if the powers that be actually meant to help.
Achilles main theme is his Greek identity and how it conflicts with the foreign culture which seems more suited for him. Last time I checked there are no Africans in Greece or Anatolia. Black Panther is just a drawing. There is no reason you cannot re-purpose him as a white man fighting anti-white racism.
It is stunning how some people can justify the rewriting of a millennia old epic while protesting any alterations to a 1950s cartoon character.
Last edited by Sir Adrian; May 22, 2018 at 06:50 AM.
Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!
Somebody has keep to pushing that rock up the hill.
Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!
Yeah... no... it just isn't. The theme of Achilles is rage:
"Sing, Goddess, of the rage of Peleus' son Achilles,
the accursed rage that brought great suffering to the Achaeans."
That's literally the opening of the Iliad. His motives in the poem, his character traits, literally nothing about him is driven from his Greekness.
Is Black Panther's motivations driven by his blackness, and the context of American race relations? Yes, that's why he was created.
But you all know this already. We all know your real motivations too.
That is really intelligent. I wonder why no one else thought to quote the first line of the poem to prove this before.
..
Found the forum exchange on this worth looking at as it reminded me of the bell curve fiasco in the 90s.
http://aristocratsofthesoul.com/aver...and-ethnicity/
Average IQ by Race, Ethnicity, and Career . . . And Why It Matters
https://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/04/26/Race-differences-in-average-IQ-are-largely-genetic.aspx
http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/iqs-of-races-in-the-united-states/
Last edited by Hanny; May 23, 2018 at 10:15 AM.