User Controls
Thanked Posts by Obbe
-
2020-07-30 at 3:42 AM UTC in I just asked a guy in the park for his meatThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-07-30 at 1:41 AM UTC in Word play with slogans - a case study in progressivismWhen someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights activists, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities and about anything that is said concerning minorities. The terms “negro,” “oriental,” “handicapped” or “chick” for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. “Broad” and “chick” were merely the feminine equivalents of “guy,” “dude” or “fellow.” The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights activists have gone so far as to reject the word “pet” and insist on its replacement by “animal companion.” Progressive anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the world “primitive” by “nonliterate.” They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (Do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. Merely pointing out the hypersensitivity of progressive anthropologists.)
Those who are most sensitive about “politically incorrect” terminology are not the average black ghetto- dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any “oppressed” group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual white males from middle- to upper-middle-class families.
Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior. The progressive's themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (Do not mean to suggest that women, Indians, etc. ARE inferior; only making a point about progressive psychology.)
Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong and as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.
Progessives tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist’s real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.
Words like “self-confidence,” “self-reliance,” “initiative,” “enterprise,” “optimism,” etc., play little role in the liberal and progressive vocabulary. The progressive is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone’s problems for them, satisfy everyone’s needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-07-28 at 11:25 PM UTC in China sending Americans seeds??? WTF
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-07-25 at 2:13 PM UTC in No one likes blacks, regardless of species.
Originally posted by aldra yeah it's kind of sad actually, I've heard of people intentionally running them down because they think they're bad luck
also some places will not allow you to adopt on the week of halloween because there are so many retards that adopt a black cat as a party decoration then release it or try to return it afterwards
People are awful.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-07-25 at 1:22 AM UTC in Technologist: let's have a 'constructive conversation about systemic racism'
Originally posted by rabbitweed That would be a huge factor, yes. Would occams razor not suggest that the reason black people are less successful is also because they're less educated? And if you counter back with "they're less educated because of evil-whitey-magic-X", then you have to come up with a reason why "evil-whitey-magic-X" has failed to work on jedis and hindus.
When did I ever say anything about evil white magic? You appear to be incable of having a normal conversation without making up nonsense.
Originally posted by rabbitweed Say what you will about the conditions of african americans in 1940, they were better than the conditions of hindus or jedis. Yet the latter two groups value hard work, and here we are.
I was talking about indigenous people. Were the conditions of African Americans actually better than the conditions for jedis and Hindus? Any data you can point to on that? I provided some data about the conditions blacks had to endure, and those conditions seem to fit the definition of systemic racism you were provided.
Originally posted by rabbitweed My viewpoint on systemic racism is simple - systemic racism is a conspiracy theory which infatilises black people and makes a certain kind of white people feel a righteous tingle in their nipples because it's all their races fault but they can totally help. Hence the religious devotion we see in this thread. I see blacks as human beings fully capable of their own successes and failures, not an ethnicity of helpless children.
The argument I presented never portrayed anyone of any ethnicity as helpless children who require help from white people. You don't seem to actually understand what the argument was, I suggest you read it before you continue to lie about it.
You were requested a definition of systemic racism and examples with sources to back that definition up. I did exactly that. You have to admit the examples fit the definition perfectly, unless you can demonstrate they are incorrect.
How does "conspiracy" enter the picture? Why do you believe this is a conspiracy? Any objective information you can show us that supports your theory?
Originally posted by rabbitweed Is it not high time to relieve yourself of this burden? I believe he can walk up the hill un-assisted.
Systemic racism has had a serious impact on generations of certain groups of people, for example the indigenous people of Canada, leading to their struggles with systems of governance, justice, education, and livelihood. I have already provided the objective data on this if you care to take a look for yourself.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-07-24 at 5:44 PM UTC in Technologist: let's have a 'constructive conversation about systemic racism'The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-07-23 at 3:29 AM UTC in Technologist: let's have a 'constructive conversation about systemic racism'
Originally posted by rabbitweed Great, thanks for outlining your theory.
Is there anything you might point to as evidence? (Canadian statistics are fine). For example, the rate of black arrests in Canada being higher than the white arrest rate. You might know where to find this info better than me.
The living standard of indigenous peoples in Canada falls far short of those of the non-indigenous, and they, along with other 'visible minorities' remain, as a group, the poorest in Canada. There continue to be barriers to gaining equality with other Canadians of European ancestry. The life expectancy of First Nations people is lower; they have less high school graduates, much higher unemployment rates, nearly double the number of infant deaths and significantly greater contact with law enforcement. Their incomes are lower, they enjoy fewer promotions in the workplace and as a group the younger members are more likely to work reduced hours or weeks each year.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140227153229/http://www.esdc.gc.ca/eng/communities/reports/poverty_profile/snapshot.shtml
https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/csp/index.php/csp/article/view/15961
https://doi.org/10.25336/P6KK7S
Many in Europe during the 19th century, (as reflected in the Imperial Report of the Select Committee on Aborigines), supported the goal put forth by colonial imperialists of 'civilizing' the Native populations. This led to an emphasis on the acquisition of Aboriginal lands in exchange for the putative benefits of European society and their associated Christian religions. British control of Canada (the Crown) began when they exercised jurisdiction over the first nations and it was by Royal Proclamation that the first piece of legislation the British government passed over First Nations citizens assumed control of their lives. It gave recognition to the Indians tribes as First Nations living under Crown protection.
https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0719060036
In 1867, the British North America Act made land reserved for Indians a Crown responsibility. In 1876 the first of many Indian Acts passed, each successive one leeched more from the rights of the indigenous as was stated in the first. The sundry revised Indian Acts (22 times by 2002) solidified the position of Natives as wards of the state, and Indian agents were given discretionary power to control almost every aspect of the lives of the indigenous. It then became necessary to have permission from an Indian agent if Native people wanted to sell crops they had grown and harvested, or wear traditional clothes off the reserves. The Indian Act was also used to deny Indians the right to vote until 1960, and they could not sit on juries.
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/
http://firstpeoplesofcanada.com/fp_treaties/john_fp33_indianact.html
In 1885 General Middleton after defeating the Metis rebellion introduced the Pass System in western Canada, under which Natives could not leave their reserves without first obtaining a pass from their farming instructors permitting them to do so. While the Indian Act did not give him such powers, and no other legislation allowed the Department of Indian Affairs to institute such a system, and it was known by crown lawyers to be illegal as early as 1892, the Pass System remained in place and was enforced until the early 1930s. As Natives were not permitted at that time to become lawyers, they could not fight it in the courts. Thus was institutional racism externalized as official policy.
http://www.rupertsland.org/metis-homeland/
https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/non-linked/The-Metis-question-291731281.html
https://books.google.com/books?id=PJK85K3WjsAC&pg=PA255
https://books.google.com/books?id=STR1AwAAQBAJ&pg=PT1496
When Aboriginals began to press for recognition of their rights and to complain of corruption and abuses of power within the Indian department, the Act was amended to make it an offence for an Aboriginal person to retain a lawyer for the purpose of advancing any claims against the crown.
http://www.bloorstreet.com/200block/sindact.htmThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-07-24 at 3:32 AM UTC in Technologist: let's have a 'constructive conversation about systemic racism'
Originally posted by rabbitweed When you see a racial group under-perform, why is your automatic assumption that this is 100% determined by "systemic racism"?
Have you considered alternatives, and if so, why have you dismissed them?
For example, in the United States, jedi whites are much wealthier than non-jedi whites. By your logic, this would have to be the result of systemic racism against non-jedi white people, if you considered no other alternatives for group differences.
It's not an automatic assumption, you idiot, it is a summary of everything else I already posted.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-07-23 at 3:22 PM UTC in Technologist: let's have a 'constructive conversation about systemic racism'The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-07-23 at 7:09 PM UTC in Technologist: let's have a 'constructive conversation about systemic racism'
Originally posted by Greek Style Since you guys basically admit you don't have the intellectual capacity to evaluate the expert witness' testimony, how exactly do you know that it is honest?
Do you think it is a safe thing to trust people just because they are smarter than you?
Do you think it is intellectually honest to say you want to have a real discussion on a topic, and then ignore the facts presented?The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-07-23 at 12:34 PM UTC in Technologist: let's have a 'constructive conversation about systemic racism'The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-07-23 at 11:50 AM UTC in NEET niggas on NISThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-07-22 at 10:51 PM UTC in Technologist: let's have a 'constructive conversation about systemic racism'Institutional racism (also known as systemic racism) is a form of racism that is embedded as normal practice within society or an organisation. It can lead to such issues as discrimination in criminal justice, employment, housing, health care, political power, and education, among other issues.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-07-19 at 11:29 PM UTC in TRUMP 2020!!!> 140,120 COVID-19 deaths
To put this in perspective, this is:
* 9/11 happening once a day, every day for over a month and a half.
* The Oklahoma City bombing happening once a day, every day, for over two years and 3 months.
* More American deaths than from World War I
And that's just the official, confirmed totals, which we know the administration is actively working to lower artificially.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-07-19 at 3:35 AM UTC in Yes psychos, all the ¡Science! shows masks do help stop viruses
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-07-18 at 1:26 PM UTC in TRUMP 2020!!!
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-02-17 at 5:55 PM UTC in The internet has become very gayIt was cool while it lasted, glad I was around to see it.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-07-17 at 12:57 PM UTC in Why You Should Return to Work Even If Unemployment Pays More
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-07-15 at 11:18 PM UTC in "Race is just a social construct"The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-07-15 at 12:31 PM UTC in new haircut - what do you guys think?Your face suits your personality.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
