Home Politics and Debate
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Define White

1235711

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    barkmoss wrote: »
    I feel badgered by your posts; is that how you want me to feel?

    How you feel doesn't really matter to me.

    The fact that you come back with something like that reply suggests that you are trying to avoid the question.

    It's not often that happens in any thread, usually it's in a race thread and usually it's someone trying to hide the fact that they are racist. Not that I am suggesting that those steroetypes fit you at all, of course.

    So, why do you suggest that the term "racist" is meaningless now?
    barkmoss wrote: »
    WE FREED THE SLAVES, BECAUSE WE ROCK!

    We did? Perhaps we should take a closer look at our world then, because I see the descendants of those slaves in little better position than their forfathers.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    We did? Perhaps we should take a closer look at our world then, because I see the descendants of those slaves in little better position than their forfathers.

    ???? There in a lot better position... Being free and all.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How you feel doesn't really matter to me.

    Most of the participants here are being civil; they show a degree of consideration for the feelings of others; they care.

    White Christian Europeans CARED about the FEELINGS of Slaves, regardless of their skin color.

    When you talk to people like that it makes them feel like they are, "INVISIBLE."

    Hillary Clinton just gave a speech at Rutgers University and used the word "invisible" over and over again, in regards to Black and Female Americans.

    She didn't mention White Americans, Male Americans or Christian Americans and I'm not surprised, because Hillary is a hypocrite and so are you.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ???? There in a lot better position... Being free and all.

    Sure we don't treat them as slaves any more but they are still second class citizens in the UK and US. Lower avaerage wage, lower average living standards, higher conviction rate etc etc etc

    They aren't really "free" from slavery yet
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    barkmoss wrote: »
    Most of the participants here are being civil;

    Most participants answer questions too.
    The fact that you come back with something like that reply suggests that you are trying to avoid the question...

    So, why do you suggest that the term "racist" is meaningless now?

    Any chance you can join in with this etiquette.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sure we don't treat them as slaves any more but they are still second class citizens in the UK and US. Lower avaerage wage, lower average living standards, higher conviction rate etc etc etc

    They aren't really "free" from slavery yet

    I'd say you're better off looking at the black Africans rather than black people in America and the UK (who in most cases have it no worse than working class people of any other race) for evidence of what you're looking for tbh. I mean it's still happening, it's just now that we can do it from a distance, without the need to bring them over in giant boats. And not just African people either.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sure we don't treat them as slaves any more but they are still second class citizens in the UK and US. Lower avaerage wage, lower average living standards, higher conviction rate etc etc etc

    They aren't really "free" from slavery yet

    Still a hell of a lot better and whilst there may be problems to suggest that they're treated as second class citizens is wide of the mark...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    but they are still second class citizens in the UK and US.

    No they're not.
    They aren't really "free" from slavery yet

    The legacy is still here, hopefully in time they'll not feel resentful for the society they live in.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote: »
    Your premise is that the differences people perceive between races are socially determined rather than genetic, and then you conclude that race is therefore "socially-constructed". This is your point, yes?

    No. My point is that the meanings people attach to the visible differences they perceive are socially constructed.
    Spliffie wrote: »
    My point, which you certainly are missing, is that race in its most basic, established meaning - that of 'breed' and 'stock', undeniable to any biologist or animal-breeder, has got sweet FA to do with "social construction" or any other marxist gobbledegook. That much IS established - although the extent to which behaviour etc is determined by genetics is a source of contention.

    There is not a scientific consensus as to what race means when it comes to human beings - so your point is nonsensical. I'm not denying that there are genetic differences - of course there are. Whether these constitute "races", and what the exact defintion of "race" means? That's a different matter...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote: »
    Hardly an unbiased source, considering the AAA is rabidly left-wing.

    Construct an argument refuting their historical analysis if you like.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    barkmoss wrote: »
    What it seems to come down to is that our forefathers noticed race because it was real


    Real in what way? No one can agree on a defintion.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ShyBoy wrote: »
    Blagsta, in my post Dr. Leroi did say that whilst race previously had broadly been regarded as a purely social construct based on physical appearance that now there is real evidence that biological differences exist.

    I haven't denied that biological differences exist.
    ShyBoy wrote: »
    This doesn't mean racism doesn't exist or the social issues don't exist, but it does mean that race isn't just an invented term for the purpose or prejudice etc.

    You're missing the point. Biological differences are not the same as "race".
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yerascrote wrote: »
    No they're not.

    Well, I guess that explains that the whole "racism" debate is bunkum then.

    What do you think that the roots of racism are?

    How about we look at the UK for starters - what percentage of "menial jobs (aka the Tube) are held by people from ethnic minorities and what percentage of City jobs...?

    Let's look at the US and draw parallels between what happened in New Orleans...
    The legacy is still here, hopefully in time they'll not feel resentful for the society they live in.

    Of course the legacy is still here, you can see it so easily if you look.

    Sure we do not have "slaves" in this country any more but we certainly don't treat their descentadnat like equals and to me that really shows how we neverreally freed them at all. We still treat people like second class whether overtly or not.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta,

    You said, "...the meanings people attach to the visible differences they perceive are socially constructed."

    How do you know they aren't just seeing what is there?

    Man of Kent,

    #1 It is unrealistic to expect people to give you attention when you are rude.

    #2 I have already addressed your question in this thread.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    barkmoss wrote: »
    Blagsta,

    You said, "...the meanings people attach to the visible differences they perceive are socially constructed."

    How do you know they aren't just seeing what is there?


    Meanings are not "just there". Meaning is something that is contingent on cultural, historical, social and economic context.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    barkmoss wrote: »
    #1 It is unrealistic to expect people to give you attention when you are rude.

    #2 I have already addressed your question in this thread.

    1. You think I have been rude? :lol: You really have a thin skin, don't you? I haven't even come close to rude, perhaps you can show me where you think I have overstepped the mark.

    2. Perhaps you'd be so kind to point out your response to that question too...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote: »
    Meanings are not "just there". Meaning is something that is contingent on cultural, historical, social and economic context.

    How do you know that?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How about we look at the UK for starters - what percentage of "menial jobs (aka the Tube) are held by people from ethnic minorities and what percentage of City jobs...?

    What's this got to do with race? A lot of the people who do menial work are ethnic minorities because they are immigrants. They can't expect to go to the UK and start of with £60,000 a year job. It don't work like that.

    Sure we do not have "slaves" in this country any more but we certainly don't treat their descentadnat like equals and to me that really shows how we neverreally freed them at all. We still treat people like second class whether overtly or not.


    Who's "we"? You're not talking on my behalf.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    barkmoss wrote: »
    How do you know that?

    :rolleyes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yerascrote wrote: »
    What's this got to do with race? A lot of the people who do menial work are ethnic minorities because they are immigrants.

    An easy excuse, don't you think. So what proportion do you think are first generation immigrants?
    They can't expect to go to the UK and start of with £60,000 a year job. It don't work like that.

    Why not, if you are good enough...?
    Who's "we"? You're not talking on my behalf.

    "We" are is the UK society. To suggest otherwise is blind to the reality.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Barkmoss
    #1 It is unrealistic to expect people to give you attention when you are rude.

    #2 I have already addressed your question in this thread.

    Reply from Man of Kent
    1. You think I have been rude? You really have a thin skin, don't you? I haven't even come close to rude, perhaps you can show me where you think I have overstepped the mark.

    2. Perhaps you'd be so kind to point out your response to that question too...

    Reply from Barkmoss
    Just keep re-reading and replying to the post of mine that you just quoted, but do it in your head. :thumb:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well, I guess that explains that the whole "racism" debate is bunkum then.

    What do you think that the roots of racism are?

    How about we look at the UK for starters - what percentage of "menial jobs (aka the Tube) are held by people from ethnic minorities and what percentage of City jobs...?

    You could equally ask what percentage are held by working class brummies and what percentage by the Home Counties middle class. (and the idea that tube jobs are menial is a bit off the mark - there not massive salaries, but they're certainly not poverty
    http://www.tubelines.com/careers/vacancies/)
    Let's look at the US and draw parallels between what happened in New Orleans

    I'm not sure New Orleans was racism. Much of the problem wasn't only due to Federal mismanagement, but mismanagement at the City level (who's Mayor was black, so probably no racism there).

    Also the current Federal Government was has had the first black secretary of state (and the second) and the first Spanish speaking President. Whatever Bush's flaws I'm pretty sure racism isn't one of them

    Of course the legacy is still here, you can see it so easily if you look.

    Sure we do not have "slaves" in this country any more but we certainly don't treat their descentadnat like equals and to me that really shows how we neverreally freed them at all. We still treat people like second class whether overtly or not

    You may treat people like second class, I don't and most of the people I know don't.

    Of course its a lot harder for a poor black lad to get a decent job. Its also harder for a poor white lad than those who come from the skilled working class or the middles classes...

    And the poor black lad is much, much better off than he was under slavery. For example, try and legally hang one of your workers or sell of his children and you may find it a tad more difficult.

    Now of course there's racism in the UK, but your original argument was that blacks aren't that much better of than when they were slaves - whereas of course they are.

    You could make a more convincing case that the descendants of the black slavers are worse off than the descendants of their slaves...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    barkmoss wrote: »
    Most of the participants here are being civil; they show a degree of consideration for the feelings of others; they care.

    White Christian Europeans CARED about the FEELINGS of Slaves, regardless of their skin color.
    Presumably in the same way as a farmer cares about the beasts he keeps to work his land with.

    True colours for this poster showing up nicely, too.

    Do you and XXXX come from the same message board, perchance? :chin:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You could equally ask what percentage are held by working class brummies and what percentage by the Home Counties middle class. (and the idea that tube jobs are menial is a bit off the mark - there not massive salaries, but they're certainly not poverty
    http://www.tubelines.com/careers/vacancies/)

    £19k for a van driver! That's what an accountant earns in Leicester :lol:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    White

    michael-jackson-mugshot.jpg


    Black

    jackson5.gif

    Simple :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What's wrong with a job on the tube??? Talk about snobbery!

    My sister's bf works on the tube, it's not an easy job to get into, there's lots of tests involved in the recruitment. And the pay and conditions are all right!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't think it was intended to be snobbery, more an example of menial labour vs. a high paid city job. Although it appears to be a bad example, seriously I can't believe the sums there.

    I might just have to work in London for that kind of cash.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Define white? How i dance. You'll never see anything whiter. :D
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally Posted by barkmoss
    Most of the participants here are being civil; they show a degree of consideration for the feelings of others; they care.

    White Christian Europeans CARED about the FEELINGS of Slaves, regardless of their skin color.
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Presumably in the same way as a farmer cares about the beasts he keeps to work his land with.

    You appear to have honestly misunderstood me. My goodness, how many needless conflicts have erupted because of miscommunication.

    Only six posts prior to that I had said: "What it seems to come down to is that our forefathers noticed race because it was real and attached significance to it, because it was significant. However, over time what changed was not our beliefs on race, but rather our beliefs on morality; we decided that slavery of any people was wrong and so much so that we would go to great lengths to end it/prevent it. White Christian Europe, Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand and America decided that slavery sucked. So, WE FREED THE SLAVES, BECAUSE WE ROCK!"
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    barkmoss wrote: »
    Originally Posted by barkmoss
    Most of the participants here are being civil; they show a degree of consideration for the feelings of others; they care.

    White Christian Europeans CARED about the FEELINGS of Slaves, regardless of their skin color.



    You appear to have honestly misunderstood me. My goodness, how many needless conflicts have erupted because of miscommunication.

    Only six posts prior to that I had said: "What it seems to come down to is that our forefathers noticed race because it was real and attached significance to it, because it was significant. However, over time what changed was not our beliefs on race, but rather our beliefs on morality; we decided that slavery of any people was wrong and so much so that we would go to great lengths to end it/prevent it. White Christian Europe, Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand and America decided that slavery sucked. So, WE FREED THE SLAVES, BECAUSE WE ROCK!"

    Still a bit unsure about taking so much pride in stopping doing something that white Christians themselves turned into an industry. Of course those are the same white Christians that took children away from their parents in forced adoption in Australia, fought a war to maintain slavery and enforced segregation in America, used military rule to maintain apartheid in South Africa, and instituted practices in New Zealand that killed nearly one third of the Máori population between 1840 and 1896.

    Love thy neighbor indeed...
Sign In or Register to comment.