On American Appeasement

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Tiassa, Apr 29, 2017.

  1. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,592
    See #8↑ above.

    Well, what does "universal healthcare" mean? And the reason we must ask this question at all is because of identity politics; we have a nasty tendency in this society to carve out exclusions, like the Hyde Amendment, and, hey, remember Mitt Romney and Blunt-Rubio?

    Here's a fun one, though; I call it the Marco Rubio Question, and there are a few such questions, if we let him get to us, but the one I really, really want answered has to do with a voter asking about health care and contraception, since Republicans and especially Sen. Rubio, are constantly coming after women's health care access, and he answered that his religious faith guides how he uses an IUD. What I would like to know is how, exactly, Marco Rubio uses an Intra-Uterine Device. If you watch the politics surrounding IUDs and oral contraception as abortifacients, the idea that Democrats can avoid facing right-wing religious identity politics is not the sort of fantasy we can afford to entertain.

    We need to be watching California; Democrats really want it—

    Readers of The Press Democrat have seen opinion pieces on Senate Bill 562, the “Healthy California Act.” That bill, often called single-payer or Medicare for all, is being held in the state Assembly, and I have been criticized for not doing more to overturn that decision.

    Let me be clear, I have always supported health care for all. I am a health care provider, chairman of the Assembly Health Committee and strongly believe that health care is a right.

    We all know the dangers of empty promises – remember when President Barack Obama said you could keep your doctor? We know that was his intent, but it just didn’t end up that way. So when supporters of this bill say it will eliminate premiums, deductibles and co-pays and guarantee that everyone receives all medically necessary care, including hospitalization, dental, vision, mental health and long-term care, I am skeptical and concerned. More than 60 countries worldwide have universal health care, and while no two are identical, none offer unlimited benefits.


    (Wood↱)

    —but haven't yet figured out how to do it.

    (It is also important to note, as Chairman Wood points out: "Medicare for all has been a term used to describe the bill, and it is a concept I can actually support, but that’s not what SB 562 is.")

    So, here's the thing: You know how politicians often talk about tax reform, and, you know, I mean, President Trump is particularly bad at this sort of dealing, but Congressional Republicans are their own special brand of stupid, but we can fight over how far to the left the Democratic plan should run all we want but nobody has the plan the Democrats are willing to raise for battle colors.

    ([House Democrat]: ... and that's the thing, we need these witnesses to cooperate so that the Committee can move forward with its investigation and, quite frankly the rest of our colleagues can continue with the business of keeping the nation running in a healthy manner, such as the Demcratic Tax Reform Plan my distinguished friends from [here] and [there] are preparing to present. This is a powerful plan aiming to push impact-aware, simplified graduations, margins, and sectors to a growth-sustainably distributed eighteen and a quarter to eighteen and a half percent GDP. They've been working real hard while we've been tumbling through the headlines as we try to attend the societal impacts of Donald Trump's election and presidency. And we're going to be here working on that, but we Democrats also have a tax plan and it's time to fix the tax code.)​

    We hear Democrats rallying 'round Sanders on health care; I figure if they can start sketching the plan during autumn and bring it by spring, they can keep Republicans on their case through the winter as an attempted distraction from Donald Trump, thus keeping the notion of a Democratic plan active in the discourse. And if they can bring it by spring, then they have a new health care plan to commit themselves to, and can run it for the midterm.

    And when conservatives bring identity politics, what will Democrats do? What will Bernie's team be willing to give away in order to assuage who? When Warren and Harris and others say, no, we're not making these trades, what, are we right back to moaning about identity politics?

    Which poor whites who don't need abortions? Say what you want about four word policy summaries, but this is also a society that has spent a lot of effort fretting about the intersectionality of having to suffer poor people in the first place. The most obvious benefits for people who aren't poor or don't need abortions, or both, or, you know, whatever, are the ones not noticed except for their absence.

    Generally speaking, though—

    —the problem with this approach is one of perpetually lowered expectations.

    One of the striking aspects of your pitch is the question of simply getting elected versus the effects of getting elected. Quite frankly, if the Democrats have to stoop, in order to get elected, such that it doesn't matter one way or another—("But the parties are just the same!" people used to bawl)—nobody is accomplishing much of anything.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Wood, Jim. "Close to Home: The path to universal health care". The Press Democrat. 25 August 2017. PressDemocrat.com. 9 September 2017. http://bit.ly/2xWLkb9
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    for example, just yesterday, I was the target of both racism and sexism, by some males who work at the complex I reside. They smile stupidly in my face while jeeringly mocking me amongst themselves to the tune of 'hey girl, open your eyes (racist insult), call my name (sexual innuendo), you slut (sexist insult again). Nevermind, I have been alone for the last three fuking years. I would catch them making such stupid comments when they see me and stop just short of getting into real trouble, just enough that I would hear some of it to insult. It is fueled by the unjustified reason that I am not paying them attention that they irrationally believe they deserve, their own sense of entitlement or insecurity or they are just assholes. It doesn't matter if one is just minding their own business. I know the additional reason for this is because I am single and female. When I was with my boyfriend, men wouldn't dare. people are OPPORTUNISTS and assholes come in all flavors and races. these particular ones are not white but white males do the same thing. the saying 'who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men (people in general)', is very apt.

    pay attention to the key concept here: opportunism. but the thing is anyone can be a target, depending on the variables. just because they are not doing that to a married couple, a granny, another male etc can blind you to who is the target of racism and sexism. the most disgusting aspect of sexism among heterosexuals, in particular, is usually the perpetrator finds the target attractive (superficially, since they don't even know you) but the other is not interested so it's turned into an attack. it's a way to make themselves feel better by denigrating another. so just because they are being proper to some people (ironicly, often because there is zero interest/indifference, not actual respect for others), doesn't mean they are to everyone. those who are not targets will not be aware of it.

    And then the larger issues affecting this is inequality itself. People on the bottom are unhappy with their status, pay, have lower self-esteem etc and many will try to undermine or abuse others (within their own reach) so they can feel better. it creates a toxic vicious cycle in society. Do you think people on the bottom compare themselves to people on the top? No, they compare themselves to those within reach and project all their ill will and resentment.

    So, if you think people (whatever race) and of lower socioeconomic status are not capable as well as don't have the same inclinations to oppress, demean or sabotage others or are actually not doing that (because they are not doing that to the white collar upper-middle class strata), that is naïve. The only reason is because, simply, they cannot. So all the frustration, hate, jealousy and ill will of inequality will be expressed to those they feel they are in competition with, even with miserly and petty differences. whoever they are rubbing shoulders with, it doesn't matter. so, in essence, the inequality is breeding more toxicity among the lower classes while the upper classes are smelling of roses and unaffected. it is not those on the upper strata that suffer from this, so the inequality needs to be addressed. I have not known fuking angels of humanity existing in any particular place of society, among any particular race, or social or economic status. Everybody is capable of bigotry, greed, racism and prejudice.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2017
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    I don't see why none of you seem to be able to see that the inequality itself exacerbates racism, prejudice, bigotry and identity politics. Do you think the man who is frustrated with his job or pay is going to take that bottled frustration out on the ceo/fatcat who doesn't give a hoot about those struggling? how? can't be touched. no, he will take it out on those around him like his wife and kids etc, resulting in domestic violence, broken homes, drug or alcohol abuse etc. of course, racism and sexism will always need to be addressed on it's own merits because there are those who will always justify that anyways. sociopaths will always enjoy oppressing or victimizing others for one reason or another.

    this is how trump got elected. the game of playing one oppressed group against another, again, trying to find a scapegoat and pass the buck. anything but to look squarely at where the real problem lies, the great economic divide.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,044
    Nobody assumes that, here.
    Nobody thinks that, here.
    And vice versa. Most significantly, vice versa.
    Yep. That's how Nixon, Reagan, and W got elected, also. That's how the inequality is maintained, in the US. That's what everybody here is saying.

    So what's your point?
     
  8. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    No, that is not what everybody is saying here. The racism and sexism is just another ruse to justify inequality as well as a distraction. just do away with racism and sexism and people can put food on the table; not the same thing. the economic divide will still exist. ask yourself why this has existed in almost every society, again, regardless of race? let me think: oh feudalism? the oppressed were a minority "race", right?

    what got trump elected is that whites are still the largest voting bloc and so were the predominantly middle class. as they became squeezed out of the better paying jobs due to competition from more minorities (obvious superficial difference), it led to them making a fuss and dissatisfaction since the only jobs left were the crappy ones that barely afford a living. welcome to the plight of the lower-class.

    well, how do you think people will define their identity politics around? what is most obvious and that is race or ethnicity, first.

    before it was just bourgheosie vs peasant class. what is the fundamental difference now? that's right: money and nothing really else.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2017
  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,044
    And it works - has been working since 1968 to elect Republican Congressmen and Presidents and Governors and the like, and before that to elect Democrats, and before that to motivate outright secession and other dramatic political conflicts.

    It works because the people it is designed for are racist and sexist, and it acts to maintain that status. That's a major - probably the major - means or mechanism by which economic injustice and excessive inequality has been maintained in the US.
    Yeah, it pretty much is. It's certainly and repeatedly what I'm saying, at least - so responses to my posting should accord.
    And the whites voted Republican, as they did with Nixon, Reagan, and W, because the Republicans appealed to their racism and sexism - that overrode their economic interests.
    That never happened.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2017
  10. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    yes, it did. the middle class were no longer happy campers. not that they gave a crap about the lower class but when more of them became laid off or had to resort to lesser paying jobs, it led to the appeal of racist and class rhetoric being more attractive to them.
     
  11. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,053
    Oh I know you aren't black Birch. You made that point earlier about being from China, wasn't it?

    I take it you missed the fairly open sarcasm of my post. You see, Birch, I am not denying the racism you have been unfortunate enough to experience in your lifetime and will sadly be made to face at various points in the future.

    My point was that you don't get to diminish and literally deny what other minorities experience and face.

    You aren't black. So for you to come out and claim that racism against blacks is not existent anymore, despite the many obvious ways in which it does exist and has been documented fairly thoroughly, well, it is racism. Right wing racists often use that excuse to deny racism exists. Just like racists will often come out with "I'm not racist, I have a black friend" as an excuse for their racism.

    Do you know what one of the most racist things a person can do? Demean and diminish the discrimination and racism they experience as being nothing, something non-existent, something "hyped up". You don't get to make that determination, just as we do not get to demean or diminish the various instances of racism you have faced and will face in the future because you are a minority.

    One other thing, had you bothered to pay attention to this discussion, you would have seen that I and others were saying "minorities", which encompasses all ethnic groups who face racism and bigotry in the US. The links I provide show instances of racism against various groups. Perhaps you are upset that African Americans get to experience such a large chunk and perhaps you feel that how Asians are treated in American society is not getting enough attention, and perhaps that is your excuse for denying racism against African Americans.. Trust me, you don't want to do that because it just makes you look like a racist bigot and a stupid one at that. Take for example:
    No one here has denied that other minority groups have faced racism and discrimination. You are the only one who has tried to deny that African Americans face racism by declaring it is non-existent for them. Which is frankly one of those stupidly staggering claims that was easily shown to be false. To claim that they are the least of all the ones targeted with racism is another one of those stupidly wrong claims, as links to studies have shown.

    Most people recognise them as being Americans and human beings? Well, then it's all good then, eh Birch? Means they do not face racism and discrimination on a daily basis. Unfortunately, a large portion of the population never got that memo.

    It might surprise you to understand and know that just because other groups face racism and discrimination does not mean that African Americans no longer do so. And it is also why I have been repeatedly saying that if the Democrats appease the right by ignoring racism and discrimination against minorities, then minorities will continue to fall behind in this push for economic equality. Because it is racism and discrimination that is a direct cause of economic inequality for more than half of the American population.
    No, really? No one here would have known that without you pointing it out to us. What the hell do you think I and others have been pointing out to EF for all of these pages, Birch? And you enter the fray, clearly without a clue and declare that he is the one on point.
    You want to know why it is so common to identify blacks with police bias and brutality? Keep in mind that the black person(s) on the receiving end of it usually ends up dead. So I'm sorry if you feel that shit is getting waaayy too much attention for your liking. Believe me, everyone, particular "blacks" would prefer that it wasn't the case. "Blacks" would prefer that they not be gunned down by police for holding a phone, wallet, toy and taking up so much attention and being such "flagrant examples".

    My point, Birch, is that as an Asian woman, you do not get to deny that African Americans experience racism. I mean, why do you think I worded those comments as I did in response to your denying that "blacks" face racism in the US and in the South no less? I wasn't diminishing the racism you experienced, nor was I denying it. My sarcasm, Birch, was a not so gentle reminder to not be a bigot and racist yourself in denying what other minority groups experience.
    And you think this makes it acceptable to declare that racism is non-existent for "blacks" in the US in today's climate? Really? And it is even more astonishing (and repulsive!) that you would agree with the guy who is arguing that Democrats should be pushing back against fighting for equality for minorities when pushing for economic equality. Social progressiveness without addressing racism and bigotry will not benefit minorities. It will just ensure the economic divide continue to grow.
    Which is appalling and which is why the Democrats and the left should never ever appease to the right for votes. So instead of declaring that the guy arguing that they should appease to get the white male votes is "right on point", you should keep the daughter of your friend in mind. Because fighting against discrimination is to fight for that girl to be protected and free from racial abuse and discrimination. Appeasing means that the left turns a blind eye and denies it is happening, which is essentially what you did and what EF has been pushing for, to not offend the racist people he thinks the Democrats should court to win the next election.
    No one has said that it is not exercised by various groups and people, Birch. Which begs the question, why the hell are you throwing down for the guy who has been arguing that the left and Democrats in particular, should not make ending discrimination as one of their platforms?
    And if the left pushes for economic equality without also addressing how racism and discrimination ensures economic inequality for women, minorities and LGBT, then inequality will continue and the gap will continue to widen. That is what the rest of us have been arguing for. What a shame you did not bother to pause and take note of it before denying racism against "blacks" and then going on a fairly bigoted rant yourself in doing so and throwing down for the guy who is trying to appease to the racists in society just to win the next election.
     
  12. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,044
    No, it did not. The white middle class in the US did not lose their high paid jobs to black or brown people squeezing them out.

    This isn't rocket science.
    That racist rhetoric was lies and bs, organized and promulgated over the years by the faction taking over the Republican Party in 1968. It was designed to attract racial bigots to the Republican Party, and gather electoral support for class victory by the rightwing authoritarian rich. The people who believed those lies were racially bigoted white people, largely Christian, less educated and more authoritarian than average. They became Republican, and have been voting Republican ever since, based on racist and sexist lies fed to them - and apparently you - by organized propaganda sources pandering to their bigotries.

    It was called the "Southern Strategy", originally, and after a glitch or two it worked. Fifty years later, it's still working - that's how Trump came along.
     
  13. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    ironicly, I don't. I have even had African-americans assume that I have never experienced racism and discrimination. It's not because of their race, it's because people tend to just focus on their issues and are unaware that discrimination and racism affects everyone. Of course, there are African-americans who are more aware but I've known this to be the norm. I have also had African-americans easily discriminate against me as well as call me racial slurs no different than racist whites because that is what happens when society doesn't make it clear that racism is just that: racist. it is not about just racism against a particular minority and that it's okay to be racist against anyone else. As if other minority groups are not a target of racism from white racists etc as well or other minority groups. This is why I point out that racism is not gender or race specific. anyone is capable of it, sometimes gratuitously, sometimes due to backlash as hate or ill treatment begets the same reaction. it's an unfortunate vicious cycle.

    as a matter of fact, I grew up with predominantly African-American friends which growing up have said all types of could-be-construed as racist stereotypes and insults but I just shrugged it off for the most part and because that is the racist rhetoric they have known from upbringing. I am not racist. I can dish it out just like I can take it. We would joke around back and forth, sometimes it could get mean but overall, it was okay because we knew where we were coming from but definitely not something you could say to total strangers. chopstick and fried chicken jokes are not something you do among any type of company. Even my ex and I would throw around racial slurs when in heated arguments and it got ugly but all's fair when you hit below the belt. Not that I would recommend this type of rapport. But in truth, neither one of us are really racist. Also, my son is mixed as his father is bi-racial (half white/black). didn't know that, did ya?


    I never said they or any group doesn't, just that it's leveled off to a point that discrimination is based on certain stereotypes to all minorities and even if the perpetrators know better, it is a way to discriminate.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2017
  14. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,053
    Oh?

    You don't?

    Was this you not denying, while denying, but not denying?

    And because of that, you decided to argue and declare that racism against black people in the US is not even an issue anymore?

    Oh, I think they know it affects everyone. Most thinking human beings can figure that out.
    Which makes it bad, birch. Again, no one is denying that racism affects all minorities negatively. You do get that, yes?

    No one has said it was.

    Again, no one has argued differently.

    This thread has been about the left appeasing to the racist right and EF has been arguing that the Democrats should try to woo the predominately white voters who voted for Trump by taking the fight against racial and sexual discrimination out of their platform because he does not think it is a) important enough and b) will scare away white males who are racist, so he believes the Democrats should be appeasing them first and foremost and he expects everyone to just fall in line. That is what this thread has been about. You did get that, yes?
    Do you see the contradiction in that sentence? You are either racist or you are not. Claiming you can "dish it out just as you can take it", gives the impression that you also use racist slurs as well as you have taken it. You do realise that using those slurs or 'dishing it out' in the context that you are applying in your comments, means that you can be racist when you need to be and dish it back to those who are racist against you..

    I have never, not once, used a racist slur. Even when I had people hiss "petite negresse" at me as a child, I never responded in kind. I have had Asian store keepers literally hiss that at me as a child when going into their shop to buy lollies, white people say it at me with that same repulsive hiss of disgust. Not once did I ever respond in kind. And petite negresse means 'little nigger' in French. That was usually accompanied with being asked to wait outside if there was a white person being served or an Asian in the store, even the corner store that sold stuff like lollies and soft drinks.. My treat for getting good grades, or being good as a small child. And not once, ever, did I respond in kind or dish it out as I was taking it.. Not when it was racism. Because even as a small kid, I knew how bad it was because I remember how it felt, how demeaning it felt. It's not something one responds in kind with.
    That was never something I ever did. Ever. Because even in jest, you can lose something of yourself, it becomes normalised.
    To be perfectly honest with you, no I did not and it is not something that actually affects or changes my views about what you have said in this thread.
    But in reality, it has not. Instances of racist attacks have gone up over the past year or so. Political climate and a general view that it is now acceptable and whatnot. And it isn't just a way to discriminate. It is also a way to kill others or cause them harm.
     
  15. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    Okay, Bells, you are a saint, then. I'm not saying that to be facetious. It's great that you could hold yourself back but to me, sometimes, some backlash works. I am not condoning that or excusing myself and I have had my bad moments. I would never recommend that anyone follow my example. lord knows, no one, should be following my example on 'anything.' I did start out as an angel, though?

    I, also, once almost got 'shot.' No, that was the first time, there was a second time but that's another story. Back in the day when I was in the military, as well as young and foolhardy, I was taken to an all black club by my 'homegirls' and yep, a particular guy made some careless racist comments and I went up to him and pretty much let him have the same. Well, he and his 'boys' came around to our car and pointed a gun at the girl's head, who was driving, and kept yelling/asking why I said what I did. well, it's clear to anyone why I would say such. if you are going to be racist, expect racism back. if you want respect, give respect. it's simple as that to me. otherwise, it's condoning an unconscious racist 'priviledge', (in my book) not dispelling racism itself. Well, it's probably not the best tactic to be racist towards those who are racist to you but if you let them get away with it, I think it's letting them know it's okay, unless you are going to make a speech that it's wrong period while they laugh at you and don't take you seriously, unless they feel some heat themselves or the pinch they just dished out. I guess that's why there are different people for different avenues of expression. But I do admit, it's not the best course of action or the most appropriate, most of the time. Being racist towards those who are racist towards you is definitely not an act of maturity, mostly momentary anger.

    I also remember, one time, this white female was in the restroom and she made a comment to me that 'you've got to expect that,' referring to the cattiness and racist hostility from other black women that she was experiencing (that whole 'taking our men' stereotype). I am so glad I don't deal with any of this nonsense anymore. lol
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2017
  16. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,044
    It doesn't affect everyone the same in the US. Not nearly the same. And claiming that it does is Republican propaganda, political bs, calculated to get the white bigot vote.

    Consider: Why do you post obviously false and deeply racist items of Republican propaganda on this thread? You even posted the old campaign schtick about the white guy getting squeezed out of his high paid middle class job by "minorities".

    Possible explanation, as somebody put it: it's because people tend to just focus on their issues and are unaware {how} discrimination and racism affects everyone.
     
  17. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    Really? Please tell me then how African-americans are being oppressed more so than other minorities in America, as of now. What jobs, education, housing, benefits etc are they being excluded from?

    If you want to be race specific, then be race specific.
     
  18. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,044
    Why are you comparing black people only with other "minorities"? The comparison in the thread is with white men, especially Trump voters.

    So staying on topic - For example: All of the jobs, education, housing, benefits, etc, that one is excluded from by being detained, arrested, convicted of crime, and/or jailed, by the police. Black people are disproportionately detained, arrested and jailed (disproportionate to their crime rate, as well as racial fraction).

    Meanwhile, the more interesting question relative to appeasing Republicans is one you did not answer:
    It's a serious question: where did you get that picture or image of white guys getting angry because they were being squeezed out of their high paying jobs by black people? Because that's the kind of thing that has to be dealt with if we want to appease Trump voters. That kind of bs is their entire political world.
     
  19. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    I didn't 'get' it from anywhere. That's their perception. Evidently, some whites (trump voters) don't like sharing or feel they should have a greater share of the wealth.

    So, how can you fix a problem where the larger population is white and so therefore, will be biased in favor of whites? that is what you are essentially saying and the reason for racial and economic inequality, besides gender inequality.

    Unless, you have strict guidelines, where no human being can factor in race or gender in the equation (meaning an actual person making decisions), then you will have the same recurring problem. Or, raise income (a rising tide raises all boats?) to a satisfactory level so that most people just don't even care about race or gender (lesser squeaky wheels) or create more well-paying jobs. What other solution is there, when people are inherently biased or when you can't control the actual hiring, promotion and firing process, since it is actually done by the discretion of an actual fallible human being? How can you enforce law where there is a grey zone inherently? It's a futile and contradictory process.

    It's pretty simple, iceaura. this is where the example of the military works well to illustrate. you take a test, it spits out your results and it tells you what you are qualified for. there is no 'human' in this process to ascertain subjective critieria about you to determine eligibility. that would almost always result in bias and prejudice, would it not? But that's not how the larger economy actually works. It's pretty easy to conclude why the inequality exists, besides the legitimate factors.

    So, unless economic inequality is addressed seriously itself, it is just screaming at kids to get along, be fair and play nice with no real avenue or tools to enforce it.

    Truly, the stupidity of it all is expecting fairness, equality and perfection when the employment and promotion process hinges or influenced also by office politics and judgement in the hands of a 'person.' who the hell are they to do so and why? oh, that's right, everyone is supposed to ignore the big pink elephant and pretend it's a straight and narrow road. interesting that one can't just look at an application, confirm the qualifications, and check references and then decide based on the actual qualifications. oh, but a person needs to 'meet' another person to decide such. hmm..here comes the door flung wide open for bias, discrimination and possible racism, and usually undetectable to the poor victim too. but society is supposed to pretend that actual "people" are trustworthy to make such decisions with perfection, equality, fairness and with no bias or prejudice. Same issue with promotions, let's pretend that everything else subjective and arbitrary, besides the actual qualifications don't play any part in it at all. After all, a human being must have a say so. what this really means is that a human being wants to subject their bias into the equation. LMFAO.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2017
  20. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,044
    You posted it as something that happened. You insisted that it happened, when corrected. You posted it as an event, not a perception. That's a central issue - you have your facts wrong, and in a particular way.
    That's how you came to post several examples of bizarre and delusional bs here, like this
    Which led to this question
    And it's a serious question - do you even know where you get that crap from?
    "Therefore"?
    "Is white"?
    "Biased"?
    Hello?

    Meanwhile: We probably don't need to "fix" anything: The scale of propaganda operation necessary to establish the Trump voter's delusions and maintain them, the effort involved in organizing the Republican Party's electoral base around racial bigotry and misogyny, points to the likelihood that "fixing" people's racial bigotry is not necessary: that merely refusing to cooperate with the massive Republican media efforts involved would be enough to beat it politically, the main concern at the moment.

    We're not trying to "fix" people's screwed up psychology - we're trying to govern the place better.
    But you don't have the same recurring problem with everybody (most white people are not Trump voters, for example), and you don't have it all the time and everywhere the same (even different cities in the US vary) - regardless of "guidelines".
    Meanwhile, adopting such guidelines when they are a good idea is exactly what you oppose, when you try to insist on addressing "inequality" and "economic justice" without addressing its support and mechanism.
    We're expecting improvements through better governance. We've seen it before, we can see it some more.
     
  21. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    i'll let ya'll in on a secret as well. Do you know why Asians value education so much or tend to open their own business, especially in america? First of all, there tends to be less petty bullshit and prejudice amongst professionals and when you have your own business, you don't need to hold your breath to hit any glass ceiling.

    Actually, Asians are discriminated in the workplace much more than other minorities, especially in lower-level job sector. It tends to force them to pursue higher education or open their own business. This is simply because those who are less educated tend to be more prejudicial, bigoted and lack more judicial critical thinking skills and that would include those in charge such as managers and supervisors in this strata.

    For instance, when I was in the south, I signed up with a temp agency and took their tests for word processing, spreadsheets etc and scored highest in their databank, according to them. So, they figured I would have no problem with filling a temp position they sent me out for and neither did I. As soon as I saw and met the "interviewer" though, I knew that hell would freeze over before I got this job. Some people you can just read like as a stereotype and she was a straight-up, racist bitch. Just as I had predicted, she was derisive, nasty, gave dirty looks etc with no justification and I could tell she was just going through the motions and was not going to hire me. It didn't matter that I was technically even more qualified than most of those who were hired, this is where the bullshit comes in and the very reason why people should not be the personal determinant of another's qualifications. They can out-rightly even violate the law but do so protected by it as well because the hiring process is so subjective. Most people do not report such incidents to Eeo, because it is hard to prove and much hassle. When I passed by the cubicles on the way out, they were all whites or African-americans. Yeah, the same people the same temp agency sent out but were hired and not anymore qualified. This turned out okay as I found a better position elsewhere anyways but that was an example of pure racism.

    It's not as bad as it used to be but examples like this is one of the reasons why you would mostly see Asians either in school, working at a family business or in a professional position. Asians, in general, are notoriously discriminated against (quietly) in America and this is what is not usually known or talked about because Asians tend to just go another route or find another way.

    Essentially, asians in America are not allowed to 'float', I have found to be the case. I was in another lower level temp-to-hire position at a company and even though I was working harder than others, it reflected negatively on me in the end. this is a two-fold process: it makes others look bad even if your co-workers are taking longer breaks or bs-ing. but you will also get into trouble if you do the same thing because that is just the type of reasoning to fire you. so, in the end, you will still get shafted, either way. I didn't get the job and part of that politics is since you are an Asian who is obviously not in the upper echelons, you are a fish out of water and so screw you, this is our turf, yada yada. This is why Asians try to reach higher, away from 'average' people. Because 'average' actually translates to being accepted as the majority, ironicly. The easier but lesser paying (but still decent) are not for you. How dare you try to take that from born and bred americans who have earned the right to 'float'. lmao.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2017
  22. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    what 'new' guidelines? good luck with that.

    you mean how more and more next gen is mixed so there is less room for racism? you mean how the racist redneck may now have a gay or transgender offspring or biracial grandchildren? besides those changes which tend to result in less racism, for obvious reasons, what new guidelines? oh, that's right, you still need to address economic inequality, regardless of race.
     
  23. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,044
    One's like those that have worked in the past, including maybe a few like the military ones you think work.
    Why do you post bullshit ravings like that? Is it too much to ask that you address the posting you quote, at least?

    No one can address economic inequality regardless of race, in the US. There is no such thing as economic inequality "regardless of race" in the US.
    In the US economic inequality is established, structured, defended, maintained, and distributed, on the basis of race and gender. That's how it's done, here, and has been done for 250 years.

    The question:
    Seriously: where do you think you get that stuff from?
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2017

Share This Page