Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Affirmative Action

122 replies to this topic
Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Unknown

#91

Posted 09 May 2013 - 09:07 AM

QUOTE (The Scottish Guy @ Thursday, May 9 2013, 10:57)
It depends on what you consider proportional. If it's what I suspect you consider proportional, then it's because minorities are exactly that - a minority.

Absolute tripe. Go to a university campus and tell me how many whites you see, as opposed to say, a prison. Don't try and tell me that minorities would be proportionately represented in both institutions. Any intellectually honest person knows this isn't the case.

As usual, you make facile comment and then start ranting about how the world has gone mad with asinine, mamby pamby leftism and you are the voice of reason. Try learning to formulate a complex opinion rather than the typical middle class male knee-jerk reactions.

lil weasel
  • lil weasel

    Shoot Looters, Hang Pirates!

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2006
  • None
  • Contribution Award [San Andreas]

#92

Posted 09 May 2013 - 09:22 AM Edited by lil weasel, 10 May 2013 - 01:10 AM.

There was a time when a woman or minority in a professional occupation was considered the best in a field dominated by white males because they had to work harder and be the best to survive in their career.
But, now the worry is that that same person might be a compromise, given the job not because of skill but to fill an Ďunofficialí quota.

The matter of bias in the work place is easily concealed in small business by finding a reason (usually education) to not hire a specific unwanted individual. This would apply to all employment.

The idea that local citizens have influence on preventing or ending bigoted hiring practice isnít necessarily true. Any bias in an area is, as Iíve seen, conducive to bias in hiring. ĎOutsidersí protesting might have an effect but the locals generally rule. Of course when confronted with bigotry the "OMG, I didn't know." or "I'm surprised that it's going on here." will be the vocalized response. The thought still remains, "Them people don't belong here."

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#93

Posted 09 May 2013 - 09:36 AM

QUOTE (lil weasel @ Thursday, May 9 2013, 10:22)
The idea that local citizens have influence on preventing or ending bigoted hiring practice isnít necessarily true. Any bias in an area is, as Iíve seen, conducive to bias in hiring. ĎOutsidersí protesting might have an effect but the locals generally rule. Of course when confronted with bigotry the "OMG, I didn't know." or "I'm surprised that it's going on here." will be the vocalized response. The thought still remains, "Them people don't belong here."

A fair and perfectly reasonable point, but it boils down to the lack of openness and decent disclosure in the US corporate structure. One of the reasons why Europe ranks consistently better in terms of business freedoms than the US is the greater degree of transparency when it comes to corporate practices. It's much harder to keep dirty secrets from the workforce and consumers when you don't have business laws that specifically penalize whistleblowing and business transparency.

hl_world
  • hl_world

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2005

#94

Posted 10 May 2013 - 01:44 AM

QUOTE (sivispacem)

Utter bullsh*t. Don't say something you can't hope to substantiate, it makes you look extremely foolish. You see, loaded, unempirical and unsubstantiated claims like this do nothing to support your view. Kind of ironic that you should chose this as the jumping-off point for your argument given that you critique me for using a sardonic but nonetheless factually accurate framing of the discrepancy between interpreted rights in Europe and the US later in your response.

You think I don't know about the Frankfurt School of Social Research? How those subversives managed to push the West further to the left? You think I'm unaware that they knew how to do it through positions of influence? How about the Cold War or more specifically, the cultural jujutsu KGB agents like Yuri Bezmenov did in the United States? Please. I know it's your job to defend your tyrannical dogma but give me some credit.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
It's the market's, and to a lesser extent society's, right to punish you for running said business in a way the majority of citizens feel is improper. It doesn't really matter who does the punishing, the market or a government- the same principle applies.

So why involve the state if you think it's unnecessary?

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Therefore, the idea of true freedom of speech will never exist, because true freedom requires a state without a society which has no power and no monopoly on violence with which to punish people who disobey the laws and principles of it.

The only thing they need to punish is the infringements of the rights of others. Speech does not infringe the rights of others.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Nice idea in theory. Completely tripe in reality. The consumer has every bit as much of a say in the running of companies in proper competitive free markets as they can dictate the terms on which they wish to purchase goods and services.

So let the consumer decide.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
On the whole, people don't like bigots.

That depends on what the media and other influences tell them not to like. By default, and even implicitly today, people like to be around those most like themselves. Race is part of that because ethnocentrism is built in.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Therefore, if companies are outed as endemically bigoted, it will impede their ability to operate. Effectively, the free market will perform the same role as a government would in taking a business to task for unfair or improper working practices. At the end of the day, the same conclusion would be reached, with the business being punished for improper behaviour in the eyes of society. I'm wondering if you missed the memo about the rising importance of corporate ethics that went round about 20 years ago.

Okay, you seem confident about that. Unless they're not doing things like dumping nuclear waste in the lake, then let the market decide.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Only for as long as you abide by it's social contract. That's all nationality really is- a voluntary choice to forsake certain rights in order to live inside a society defined by national borders.

You know, this really wouldn't be a problem if your insipid ideology didn't spread like AIDS all over the West. What choice do I have? I didn't ask for this garbage and I want it out of my homeland.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
I'm a firm believer in meritocracy. I question whether anyone has the right to judge another person in any way, least of all from a determining characteristic,

Yeah, I don't think I will ever get through to someone who questions the right to judge without stepping on toes. That seems to be a value judgement on your part and I'm not going to convince someone to not like cheese.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
without first demonstrating adequate knowledge and reasoning behind their opinion.

Oh wow. Letting the state decide what's reasonable about someone's judgement. Because we all know power systems are completely objective and immune from ideology.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
But what you fail to see is that regardless of the system, bigotry will always be punished in one way or another. Absolute freedom of speech may mean theoretical entitlement, but it doesn't work like that in practice because what's deemed acceptable is decided by wider society, and even in an effectively stateless anarcho-capitalist society there would still be societal groups capable of punishing individuals and businesses for behaviour they saw as immoral or discriminatory. There's no real way of escaping that fact.

So let the market decide. What's the matter, scared?

QUOTE (sivispacem)
I'm not a leftist, but whatever helps you sleep at night.

And yet there you are in the feminism topic taking only the pro side.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
No, the citizens own the state insofar as they establish the boundaries for the social contract. You have a stake in that state if you wish to abide by the contract. If you don't wish to abide by, it, you have no real right to complain. The rules that you seem so dead-set again are for all intents and purposes exactly the same under every other system. Society judges what laws it deems to be applicable inside the geographical confined of that society's territory. You can kick and whine and scream about these laws as much as you please but unless the majority of a societal group agrees with you and conspires to change them, you don't really have any recourse other than to leave the society.

Ah, you still think the will of the people translates into the actions of the government just because it parades the same groups of sociopaths for you to choose from every few years. No one voted for multiculturalism. No one voted for mass immigration. They voted for the liars and scam artists behind it.

You know, your argument here is absolutely stunning. "If you don't like it, then GTFO". I wonder if you would have said that to the anti-Vietnam war protesters back in the '60s. The foundation of change comes from a minority of people with an attractive idea. If no one complained, what then?

QUOTE (sivispacem)
No, I advocate a society run on the principle of the least harm caused to the greatest number. Things that cannot be justified under that maxim are harmful for society and therefore generally shunned by it.

You know what I think is harmful to society? Whining about those societies being too homogenous and having "not enough diversity" and then forcing those societies to conform to the ideology of the wider world. Thus, forcing those members of the community to accept people who are less like themselves. That can't be good, now, can it? I suppose special privileges granted by the state on some will create resentment by others, too. I don't think you really care about society. See, now you just come across as trying to hide your Cultural Marxism behind utilitarian sound bites.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
I accept, unlike you, that laws are a product of wider society that are derived from an overriding moral standard present amongst the majority of a social grouping, and that the presiding feeling amongst Western societies in terms of attitude towards discrimination are that it is unacceptable.

See, now you're defending mob rule and its monopoly of violence. And even that's based on your presumption that the will of the people translates into the will of the state. So I should just shut up and take it? Yeah, no thanks.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
I also understand, unlike you, that any societal system will effectively end up enforcing the same or similar moral standards and will find a way of punishing those who break them, because the weight of societal pressure to act in cases of injustice surpasses the legal enshrinement of any man's rights, as principally some individual rights are sacrificed for the maintenance of a working state as per the social contract.

So let them boycott.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
There's a huge difference between entitlement to speak based on empirical evidence, and entitlement to speak based on personal whims and biases.

Wow, just wow. George Orwell was right.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Given that you seem incapable of understanding the fact that laws of this nature that prevent discrimination are a voluntary product of societal discourse, I don't really hold out much hope of you realising the fundamental difference in entitlement to demonstrate theories supported by empiricism, and theories supported by prejudice. Safe to say, though, that society tends to side with me on the issue.

We'll see how long this Orwellian nonsense lasts. People are getting fed up with the status-quo. More and more whites are starting to realize that they have interests too and that speaking out against anti-white discrimination and their own ethnic displacement is not just a moral right but a moral duty. The West did perfectly fine before and we don't need you messing it up. I wish you would have your own diversity land away from the rest of us. There you can continue to discriminate against yourselves and not have to deal with us awful bigots.

bobgtafan
  • bobgtafan

    The last thing you never see

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2009

#95

Posted 10 May 2013 - 02:39 AM

I'm against AA but pro-quota systems in large corporations and all government agencies and institutions. Why are straight white men in the majority of positions of power despite being a minority of the population? It makes no sense that we allow this to continue.

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Unknown

#96

Posted 10 May 2013 - 02:49 AM

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 11:44)
You think I don't know about the Frankfurt School of Social Research? How those subversives managed to push the West further to the left?

Why can't the far-right just accept that they're in the minority? Why do they have to pretend that there's a vast conspiracy trying to create a marxist police state, that every progressive initiative is apart of it, and that anyone who isn't a gun toting militia member is somehow involved or has been brainwashed?

These are inane conspiracy theories, that frankly have no place in political discourse. You are literally claiming that all objection to your fringe beliefs are due to a villainous communist plot.

QUOTE
More and more whites are starting to realize that they have interests too and that speaking out against anti-white discrimination and their own ethnic displacement is not just a moral right but a moral duty.

I've observed no such trend. Despite what you read from crazies on the internet, the white middle classes aren't on the verge of revolution and creating a free market, patriarchal fairly land.

TheIllaDopest
  • TheIllaDopest

    The Bluntmaster Messiah

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 May 2012
  • United-States

#97

Posted 10 May 2013 - 04:58 AM

jez reading thru this thread i really thought someone was gonna pull out the white hood. Anyways it would be great to live in a society where we dont judge people by their race. But here in America it will never happen. Even with AA if someone is racist towards a race, then they are not gonna hire that race or find a reason to get em fired. Only if we could apply for a job and leave a # instead of a full name. Fill out everything else on the app except for Ethnic and Name. Maybe people would be one step closer to being hired because they are qualified. But it would still be pointless if you have someone thats racist doing the hiring.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#98

Posted 10 May 2013 - 07:28 AM

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
You think I don't know about the Frankfurt School of Social Research? How those subversives managed to push the West further to the left? You think I'm unaware that they knew how to do it through positions of influence? How about the Cold War or more specifically, the cultural jujutsu KGB agents like Yuri Bezmenov did in the United States? Please. I know it's your job to defend your tyrannical dogma but give me some credit.

Some credit for what? Your total ignorance and conspiratorial zeal? Okay, then, well done. You've successfully ignored the last 20 years of political history as Europe has- until very recently- gradually drifted right- as you lost yourself in some absurd conspiracy theory. As Melchoir said, give it a rest and accept people with your mentality are in a societal minority. Thank god.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
So why involve the state if you think it's unnecessary?

Because that all a state is is a macro-scale societal grouping in a defined geographical region. Involving society and involving a state are, in technical terns, effectively one and the same.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
The only thing they need to punish is the infringements of the rights of others. Speech does not infringe the rights of others.

Society largely disagrees with your opinion.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
That depends on what the media and other influences tell them not to like. By default, and even implicitly today, people like to be around those most like themselves. Race is part of that because ethnocentrism is built in.

I do love how the default response amongst far-right sympathisers is to blame the media for the fact very few other people are as extremist as themselves.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
Unless they're not doing things like dumping nuclear waste in the lake, then let the market decide.

In order for the market to play a role in deciding, you must have reasonable business transparency. The US actively punishes business transparency, especially in sectors where human health is at theoretical risk. Particularly, to my knowledge, pharma and food production, which have specific laws against whistleblowing and protections from reasonable disclosure. The US doesn't even require companies limited by share capital to publicly disclose their financial status. Hence why Europe- particularly Northern Europe- frequently ranks significantly higher in business freedoms despite having more regulation- they also have more market interaction.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
You know, this really wouldn't be a problem if your insipid ideology didn't spread like AIDS all over the West.

What ideology? I don't have a defined political ideology that can be pigeon-holed, especially by someone as clearly political ignorant as yourself. Economically I'm an Ordoliberal, in terms of social policy I straddle the middle ground, in foreign and defence policy I'm firmly centre-right. I can't really be held responsible for the fact that you think the political centrism likes somewhere between McCarthyism and Mussolini. For someone who seems to portray themself as a bastion of freedom, defending the rights of all, you sure do have a great deal of prejudice when it comes to the political views of anyone who isn't a right wing extremist.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
Yeah, I don't think I will ever get through to someone who questions the right to judge without stepping on toes.
Oh wow. Letting the state decide what's reasonable about someone's judgement. Because we all know power systems are completely objective and immune from ideology.

Nothing to do with stepping on toes. Everything to do with merit. If you aren't knowledgeable or reasonably experienced in a subject, and can't rationalise your views, then speaking them publicly serves no societal purpose. If doing so serves no societal purpose, why should it be encouraged? The very principles of meritocracy dictate a direct correlation between the knowledge of the state apparatus and the power to legislate on issues. What are you so afraid of in meritocracy, other than the fact that bigoted views like your own will be open to even further ridicule?

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
And yet there you are in the feminism topic taking only the pro side.

Because, in that case, the "pro side" is the rational side supported with empirical evidence.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
The foundation of change comes from a minority of people with an attractive idea.

A minority of people whose idea has a clear positive cost-benefit and don't impede the rights of others. The caveats for wide-ranging societal change prevent it being a completely free choice regardless of the society.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
You know what I think is harmful to society?

Frankly, I don't care given that your bigoted diatribe has done little other than demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge. If you can substantiate your views with something vaguely passing for empiricism, then go ahead, but I sincerely doubt that you can empirically justify your chauvinism.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
See, now you're defending mob rule and its monopoly of violence.

I'm defending monopolies of violence because I believe in the principles of statehood. As for the principle of "mob rule", hardly. The fact I champion negative preference utilitarianism means that the actions of a major societal grouping holding political power cannot be fundamentally harmful for society. I also don't really engage in demagoguery, unlike yourself.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Friday, May 10 2013, 02:44)
People are getting fed up with the status-quo. More and more whites are starting to realize that they have interests too and that speaking out against anti-white discrimination and their own ethnic displacement is not just a moral right but a moral duty. The West did perfectly fine before and we don't need you messing it up. I wish you would have your own diversity land away from the rest of us. There you can continue to discriminate against yourselves and not have to deal with us awful bigots.

Wow, this could have come straight from The Turner Diaries.

hl_world
  • hl_world

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2005

#99

Posted 13 May 2013 - 12:22 AM

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Some credit for what? Your total ignorance and conspiratorial zeal?

I invite everyone to look this stuff up. Yuri Bezmenov even talks about it to his classes. People fight wars, people have agendas. Guess what? Some people act on those agendas. If you believe in "white privilege", you believe in conspiracies, if you believe in "the patriarchy", you believe in conspiracies. They happen. Deal with it.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Okay, then, well done. You've successfully ignored the last 20 years of political history as Europe has- until very recently- gradually drifted right- as you lost yourself in some absurd conspiracy theory. As Melchoir said, give it a rest and accept people with your mentality are in a societal minority. Thank god.

How many decades are you ignoring? How has the world changed in the past 50, 60, 100 years? The idea of equality as a moral absolute is today enforced by law. The left have won. Your 20 years mean nothing in the larger context.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Because that all a state is is a macro-scale societal grouping in a defined geographical region. Involving society and involving a state are, in technical terns, effectively one and the same.

Nope. That's not how it actually works. I've told you before the will of the people do not translate into the actions of government.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Society largely disagrees with your opinion.

Well, whether or not that's actually true is questionable. Even if it were, I'm working to change minds.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
I do love how the default response amongst far-right sympathisers is to blame the media for the fact very few other people are as extremist as themselves.

The media IS both biased AND influential AND universal; that's just how it is. People got a bitter taste of that during it's covering of Tray-Tray's death. That was just the tip of the iceberg.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
In order for the market to play a role in deciding, you must have reasonable business transparency. The US actively punishes business transparency, especially in sectors where human health is at theoretical risk. Particularly, to my knowledge, pharma and food production, which have specific laws against whistleblowing and protections from reasonable disclosure. The US doesn't even require companies limited by share capital to publicly disclose their financial status. Hence why Europe- particularly Northern Europe- frequently ranks significantly higher in business freedoms despite having more regulation- they also have more market interaction.

If laws enforcing anti-white preferences were abolished, there would be no need to hide pro-white recruitment policies from the outside world.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
What ideology? I don't have a defined political ideology that can be pigeon-holed, especially by someone as clearly political ignorant as yourself. Economically I'm an Ordoliberal, in terms of social policy I straddle the middle ground, in foreign and defence policy I'm firmly centre-right. I can't really be held responsible for the fact that you think the political centrism likes somewhere between McCarthyism and Mussolini.

Well, you are promoting discrimination and its enforcement by the state against the founding stock in light of leftist ideology. You are also stepping on personal liberties for the sake of some larger, artificial collective. I should also point out that the political spectrum has been continually been redefined thanks to decades of leftist cultural hegemony. I take your claim of neutrality with a pinch of salt.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
For someone who seems to portray themself as a bastion of freedom, defending the rights of all, you sure do have a great deal of prejudice when it comes to the political views of anyone who isn't a right wing extremist.

I don't prejudge, I deduce and compare against the bigger picture. I don't want to see my race discriminated against and reduced to a minority it its own countries and I certainly don't want it to go extinct. I believe it has the right to self-determination as with all other races. If that makes me a right-wing extremist in your book then so be it.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Nothing to do with stepping on toes. Everything to do with merit. If you aren't knowledgeable or reasonably experienced in a subject, and can't rationalise your views, then speaking them publicly serves no societal purpose. If doing so serves no societal purpose, why should it be encouraged? The very principles of meritocracy dictate a direct correlation between the knowledge of the state apparatus and the power to legislate on issues. What are you so afraid of in meritocracy, other than the fact that bigoted views like your own will be open to even further ridicule?

Well, for one thing, the violation of personal rights especially for heresy by an ideologically corrupt power. Hey, that's just me. Your meritocracy by force of violence, I find, is laughable. The whole idea that you can be penalised for speech or attempting debate on subjects the public happens to find touchy, to me, flies in the face of the free market of ideas. If someone espouses views you don't like, too bad. You can choose to disassociate but that's not good enough, is it? You want more because you are petty and small minded.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Because, in that case, the "pro side" is the rational side supported with empirical evidence.

I suppose to you that includes sound bites like "rape culture" and "slut shaming" or the idea that "gender [I think he means "sex"] is antiquated"? Yep, a very small pinch of salt.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
A minority of people whose idea has a clear positive cost-benefit and don't impede the rights of others. The caveats for wide-ranging societal change prevent it being a completely free choice regardless of the society.

LMAO!!! As if people are actually that rational. They'll follow what their friends believe or what TV says or whatever celebrity endorses; and that's if they ever break out of what they've grown up with. It has to appeal to them (you know, actual human beings) emotionally; it's only rationalised afterwards. That's how it works in the real world. You really couldn't have sounded more laughably out of touch with reality there.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
I'm defending monopolies of violence because I believe in the principles of statehood. As for the principle of "mob rule", hardly. The fact I champion negative preference utilitarianism means that the actions of a major societal grouping holding political power cannot be fundamentally harmful for society. I also don't really engage in demagoguery, unlike yourself.

You don't hide your leftist zealotry very well. The way you would put it into practice would be based largely on leftist dogma with ideas of "fighting white privilege" and "equality of outcome". Your view of the human species for one comes across as very simplistic and ignores a great deal of the actual biology. You also seem to think that state micromanagement and loss of personal sovereignty is key to minimal suffering. Anyone who has their eyes open can see that all you're doing is using utilitarianism to sweeten the poison you're making us drink.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Frankly, I don't care given that your bigoted diatribe has done little other than demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge. If you can substantiate your views with something vaguely passing for empiricism, then go ahead, but I sincerely doubt that you can empirically justify your chauvinism.

That sounds very funny coming from an ideological supremacist who wants to use the state to shove his "progressive" politics down people's throats and punish them when they try to resist. Throw around "bigot" all you want if it makes you feel better about yourself. You're really nothing more to me than a troglodyte priest pushing some asinine theocracy, heretics be damned.

QUOTE (sivispacem)
Wow, this could have come straight from The Turner Diaries.

Be that as it may. I'm giving whites the moral stance to stand up for themselves. You would see them scapegoated for the failings of others. I offer them pride and a moral backbone where you push guilt and discrimination. I offer a realistic future away from your stale mediocrity.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#100

Posted 13 May 2013 - 07:09 AM

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
I invite everyone to look this stuff up. Yuri Bezmenov even talks about it to his classes. People fight wars, people have agendas. Guess what? Some people act on those agendas. If you believe in "white privilege", you believe in conspiracies, if you believe in "the patriarchy", you believe in conspiracies. They happen. Deal with it.

Invite all you want. Most of us are plenty rational enough to know that current political and ethical discourse is not a product of a clandestine Soviet programme. It's merely denialism stemming from the fact that people of your political and social disposition struggle to understand how anyone could have the audacity to hold fair, reasonable and inclusive political views. Mainly as you appear to fail to appreciate what a tiny minority you actually form.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
How many decades are you ignoring?

Zero. The only point you really serve to accentuate here is the idea that morality and inalienable rights are societally based and not actually inalienable. Which I'm sure wasn't the point you were trying to make given that your entire argument appears to be based on the premise that all rights are universal and my only aim is to step all over them.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
Well, whether or not that's actually true is questionable. Even if it were, I'm working to change minds.

I don't really think your views have much of an appeal given how they've been mocked in both of the "equal rights" threads to which you've contributed.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
The media IS both biased AND influential AND universal

I'm not denying this but the media is not all-powerful. It also follows public opinion to a greater degree than it shapes it. It's also not a clear-cut entity. You must recognise the intrinsic right-wing bias which exists in large portions of the Western media? You'd have to be blind or terminally stupid not to notice it.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
If laws enforcing anti-white preferences were abolished, there would be no need to hide pro-white recruitment policies from the outside world.

There would- the economic risks posed to a company by operating such a policy in flagrant violation of the accepted ethical norms of society.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
Well, you are promoting discrimination and its enforcement by the state against the founding stock in light of leftist ideology.

How am I promoting enforcement of discrimination by arguing that discrimination should be punished? Isn't that fundamentally contradictory?

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
You are also stepping on personal liberties for the sake of some larger, artificial collective.

Of course I am. That's how social contracts work. Rights are not fundamental, enduring or all-encompassing; they're societally derived.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
I take your claim of neutrality with a pinch of salt.

I never claimed neutrality, just discouraged your radical zeal and far-right pandering by chastising you for referring to everything in technically incorrect terms.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
I don't want to see my race discriminated against and reduced to a minority it its own countries and I certainly don't want it to go extinct.

No-one capable of rational thought would even consider this a remove possibility.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
Well, for one thing, the violation of personal rights especially for heresy by an ideologically corrupt power.

Personal rights that are a creation of that apparently corrupt power, lest we forget. Especially in the US, where the actual meaning of the various inalienable rights to which people are apparently entitled is decided by a political entity.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
I suppose to you that includes sound bites like "rape culture" and "slut shaming" or the idea that "gender [I think he means "sex"] is antiquated"?

Not really. I can simply refer to the overwhelming amount of academic discourse and empirical studies on the subject. Which is a privilege you probably lack given that the majority of academics tend to side with my perspective- or more accurately I tend to side with the majority of academics. Or is that a conspiracy too?

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
LMAO!!! As if people are actually that rational.

People are rational. They make decisions based on the wealth of evidence provided to them. The problem is not a lack of rationality; it's a lack of cognition when it comes to determining the accuracy and validity of sources of information. Hence why Rational Choice Theory underpins the basis of pretty much all modern economic and social discourse. [/url]Someone should have the guts to tell all those Nobel prize winning economists and sociologists like Daniel Kahneman, Gary Becker and Thomas Schelling that they've got it all wrong, and a borderline white supremacist ranting on an internet forum is has got it all right.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
You don't hide your leftist zealotry very well.

That's kinda funny, given that I'm not a left-winger.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
That sounds very funny coming from an ideological supremacist who wants to use the state to shove his "progressive" politics down people's throats and punish them when they try to resist.

I find this utterly, brilliantly hilarious given that you've all but said that the White race is under ideological attack by people who seek to depose it and destroy it and must be fought to protect the rights of the privileged white male. I can only think of one kind of supremacy which might be applicable in the circumstances, and I've already alluded to that above.

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday, May 13 2013, 01:22)
Be that as it may. I'm giving whites the moral stance to stand up for themselves.

Right, the chance that they haven't had in the last three hundred years of political, social and economic history. What you are actually doing is perpetuating a xenophobic myth by falsely claiming that the ideology of the white male is under threat despite the fact that all empirical evidence suggests they are still the recipients of the largest proportional share of political and economic power, and perpetrate a far greater proportion of the discrimination that occurs in Western societies than any other group.

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Unknown

#101

Posted 13 May 2013 - 07:18 AM

Thanks, hl_world. I did need a bit more convincing that all the dialogue from the far right of the political spectrum is simply the kicking and screaming of indignant white patriarchs being dragged into the modern world. You have erased every doubt from my mind.

The Scottish Guy
  • The Scottish Guy

    Toasty!

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2011

#102

Posted 13 May 2013 - 01:48 PM

QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 00:22)
QUOTE (sivispacem)
I'm defending monopolies of violence because I believe in the principles of statehood. As for the principle of "mob rule", hardly. The fact I champion negative preference utilitarianism means that the actions of a major societal grouping holding political power cannot be fundamentally harmful for society. I also don't really engage in demagoguery, unlike yourself.
You don't hide your leftist zealotry very well.


Indeed he doesn't. On multiple occasions he has (bizarrely) insisted he doesn't rest on the left to myself also. Granted he may not be quite as far left as our well-to-do, never-happy preaching friend Melchior patently is, but judging by some of his comments providing a clear testimony of his political position, he is definitely shaped of the leftist, liberal ("progressive") mold.

He is either a little confused as to where political allegiances and beliefs actually fit into these categorised groups, or he is simply in denial; possibly the result of being a tad ashamed. Hey, I wouldn't disparage him for that. He also appears to be a little naive of reality, but then again, most on the left are emotionally weak, and that is what the evidently left biased media prey on, and have successfully fed on for the last 25-30 years or so.

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Unknown

#103

Posted 13 May 2013 - 01:56 PM

QUOTE (The Scottish Guy @ Monday, May 13 2013, 23:48)
QUOTE (hl_world @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 00:22)
QUOTE (sivispacem)
I'm defending monopolies of violence because I believe in the principles of statehood. As for the principle of "mob rule", hardly. The fact I champion negative preference utilitarianism means that the actions of a major societal grouping holding political power cannot be fundamentally harmful for society. I also don't really engage in demagoguery, unlike yourself.
You don't hide your leftist zealotry very well.


Indeed he doesn't. On multiple occasions he has (bizarrely) insisted he doesn't rest on the left to myself also. Granted he may not be quite as far left as our well-to-do, never-happy preaching friend Melchior patently is, but judging by some of his comments providing a clear testimony of his political position, he is definitely shaped of the leftist, liberal ("progressive") mold.

He is either a little confused as to where political allegiances and beliefs actually fit into these categorised groups, or he is simply in denial; possibly the result of being a tad ashamed. Hey, I wouldn't disparage him for that. He also appears to be a little naive of reality, but then again, most on the left are emotionally weak, and that is what the evidently left biased media prey on, and have successfully fed on for the last 25-30 years or so.

I can't really tell if you're a reactionary, or just a contrarian. I lean towards the latter.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#104

Posted 13 May 2013 - 02:05 PM

QUOTE (The Scottish Guy @ Monday, May 13 2013, 14:48)
Indeed he doesn't. On multiple occasions he has (bizarrely) insisted he doesn't rest on the left to myself also. Granted he may not be quite as far left as our well-to-do, never-happy preaching friend Melchior patently is, but judging by some of his comments providing a clear testimony of his political position, he is definitely shaped of the leftist, liberal ("progressive") mold.

He is either a little confused as to where political allegiances and beliefs actually fit into these categorised groups, or he is simply in denial; possibly the result of being a tad ashamed. Hey, I wouldn't disparage him for that. He also appears to be a little naive of reality, but then again, most on the left are emotionally weak, and that is what the evidently left biased media prey on, and have successfully fed on for the last 25-30 years or so.

Excuse my bluntness, but given your previous history on this forum I'm not entirely sure I or anyone else trusts your perspective on what constitutes left or right wing. Compared to you, I'm certainly on the left, but given that your political allegiance seems to lie about as far right as it is possible to be without actually constituting fascism the same could be said for pretty much the entire world. In fact, US Republicans tend to be left wing compared to you. This poses an interesting conundrum as it rather brings your ability to accurately judge left and right into question, based on your pre-existing biases. If you looked at my political views with an ounce of objectivity your comments might hold more weight.

I also can't help but notice that, yet again, you have entirely failed to bring anything of note or interest to the discussion. Not that that surprises me given that you evidently can't even begin to explain your own political beliefs.

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Unknown

#105

Posted 13 May 2013 - 02:08 PM

^ the communist hive mind is strong with this one

The Scottish Guy
  • The Scottish Guy

    Toasty!

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2011

#106

Posted 13 May 2013 - 02:26 PM

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday, May 13 2013, 14:05)
Not that that surprises me given that you evidently can't even begin to explain your own political beliefs.

Well they've apparently appeared to be explained enough for you to form your own opinion of my position. Again, you refuse to acknowledge your left leaning stance. You really do amuse me sivi.

QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:08)
^ the communist hive mind is strong with this one


A far left wacko claiming I have communist values? Cheers for the chuckle mate.

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Unknown

#107

Posted 13 May 2013 - 02:40 PM

QUOTE (The Scottish Guy @ Tuesday, May 14 2013, 00:26)
A far left wacko claiming I have communist values? Cheers for the chuckle mate.

...

I meant sivis and it was sarcasm.

Still you offer no critique of my views. I think it's because, rather than actually discussing politics, you just want people to know that you're a right-winger so you can present yourself as a Gallileo figure. Of course, that kind of falls apart when you don't actually share your views or demonstrate any knowledge of other peoples' views.

I get that you think it's fun being the minority and that it does a few favours for your self-image, but nobody likes a contrarian.

gta 4 gamer
  • gta 4 gamer

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008

#108

Posted 13 May 2013 - 02:45 PM Edited by gta 4 gamer, 13 May 2013 - 02:51 PM.

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Wednesday, May 8 2013, 17:37)
I'm pressed for time and will respond to the rest of your post as and when I can, but I just wanted to start with this:

QUOTE (gta 4 gamer @ Wednesday, May 8 2013, 17:24)
Just to clear things up, if you think I strategically chose those 4 institutions due to their propensity to the STEM disciplines, then you are mistaken. This just happens to be a coincidence. What is not a coincidence, however, is that those 4 institutions removed AA and Asians are the majority. And, for the record, many (probably the majority) of USA universities do not admit based on program, be it STEM fields or social sciences.

That's sort of my point, though. I'm aware that US institutions don't admit on a the same basis as European ones, but the fact remains that the three examples you have used are institutions that specialise in STEM subjects. You would expect a disproportionately high number of Asian students amongst them as the Asian minority is over-represented in technical disciplines due to cultural factors. I still maintain that whilst the correlation is compelling, it doesn't represent evidence of direct causality. What I would be interested to know is if the same statistics were borne out of a wider group of public universities which lacked AA provisions but which also tend to have reputations as institutions for the study of humanities and social sciences. I don't think you can make the conclusion you are making from these statistics without factoring institutions which cater predominantly for people studying non-STEM subjects- because without doing so you aren't actually properly representing the higher education landscape.

Oh, and your quote is broken because the [/b] is inside the end quote bracket.

I apologize for not responding earlier. Was getting my university stuff together!


I see you noted 'cultural factors' as the reason Asian students are under-represented in non-STEM fields. Can you blame competitive and high achieving students for wanting a chance at a job that pays handsomely? I'm sorry, but this is reality. Getting a degree in basket weaving will not pay the bills. Many smart students, from what I've observed, are vying for jobs in investment banking, corporate law, medicine, dentistry, venture capital among others.STEM majors are known to be quite rigorous, and thus cater to a cutthroat audience. If we do factor in statistics from institutions that emphasize non STEM subjects, and then analyse the demographics of such an institution, we will more likely than not find out that competitive Asians won't be attending. Simply because jobs in the humanities and social sciences don't pay as well as STEM fields.

You then go on to mention that you "would be interested to know if the same statistics were borne out of a wider group of public universities which lacked AA provisions but which also tend to have reputations as institutions for the study of humanities and social sciences." To my knowledge, institutions like that do not exist. If they do, their might only be a handful. One of the only social science majors competitive students would consider studying is economics (which can also be categorized under math using the STEM acronym).

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#109

Posted 13 May 2013 - 02:55 PM

QUOTE (The Scottish Guy @ Monday, May 13 2013, 15:26)
QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday, May 13 2013, 14:05)
Not that that surprises me given that you evidently can't even begin to explain your own political beliefs.

Well they've apparently appeared to be explained enough for you to form your own opinion of my position. Again, you refuse to acknowledge your left leaning stance. You really do amuse me sivi.

Your diatribes against the "loony left" and inane ramblings on how common decency and rationality are destroying the world rather give the game away in terms of your basic political ideology. What I struggle with is the fact you don't appear to understand your own beliefs well enough to debate the actual meat of the subject with anyone, or even actually quantify them. I don't know whether this is just s desire to be contain or provocative or whether you really are just completely incapable of expressing cognition, but never mind.

Incidentally, I don't think you have ever managed to explain why I'm "left wing". You've claimed it many times but never quantified it. Why is that? Is it a covert admission that you can't actually quantify it or that you don't know enough to!

The Scottish Guy
  • The Scottish Guy

    Toasty!

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2011

#110

Posted 13 May 2013 - 03:31 PM

QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:40)
Still you offer no critique of my views.


Experience has taught me any attempt to compromise with your kind is an act of futility.

QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:40)
you don't actually share your views or demonstrate any knowledge of other peoples' views.


So you basically want me to quote or repeat previous contributions from myself as well as others for the purpose of what exactly?

QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:40)
I get that you think it's fun being the minority


Not quite sure how you concluded this, but believe me, it's not fun at all, nor is it comforting.

QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:40)
and that it does a few favours for your self-image


How you come across politically on a gaming forum might rank high in your importance meter, but not mine I'm afraid. Sorry to disappoint you. Sometimes I just can't help myself when I read some of the typical and laughable stupidity that you lefties pollute places with.

QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:40)
but nobody likes a contrarian.


You keep labeling me this as if it's supposed to depreciate me in some way. Remember, just because something is popular, doesn't automatically constitute it being right. Sorry to break it to you fella, but it doesn't work that way. Religion being a prime example. In fact it's a pretty parallel example actually, given that those who follow religion have also been brainwashed. You just need to replace Jesus or Muhammed or Joseph Smith or whoever with the BBC/MSNBC/CNN/etc.

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:55)
-usual wearisome drivel-

Incidentally, I don't think you have ever managed to explain why I'm "left wing".


Is there any need? You've demonstrated quite clearly your position on certain issues. As I alluded to earlier, your not quite as far as the completely deranged communism driven wackos who are continually telling us how bigoted we are for not agreeing with them, but you definitely lean in that direction. If you feel otherwise, then you obviously have a warped idea of the spectrum's, which, like I also alluded to, is probably the result of self denial as you more than likely feel being considered a leftie is a little discreditable to you. Sorry for not entertaining you further.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#111

Posted 13 May 2013 - 03:53 PM Edited by sivispacem, 13 May 2013 - 04:05 PM.

QUOTE (The Scottish Guy @ Monday, May 13 2013, 16:31)
Is there any need?

Yes, there is. I've cast doubt on your ability to legitimately and impartially assess the political affiliation of others given that you appear to consider everything to the left of your own position as "left wing". So humour me. If it is so abundantly clear that my political views rest firmly to the left of centre, you should have no problem demonstrating it.

But I suspect you'll just run away again, like you usually do when anyone asks you a vaguely taxing question.



Also, don't you see the irony in consistently coming into General Chat to do little more than lambast others without justification, and them claim you have no actual interest in contributing and that you know better than to discuss with anyone who doesn't share your view? Doesn't the fact you seem to enjoy spending not inconsiderable amounts of time responding to the political views of others not sort of nullify your argument that there's no point in engaging in discussion over the issue? You are in fact engaging in a discussion. But then promptly ignoring it despite the fact you instigated it. Which, if you ask me is either cowardice or childishness.

The Scottish Guy
  • The Scottish Guy

    Toasty!

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2011

#112

Posted 13 May 2013 - 05:08 PM Edited by The Scottish Guy, 13 May 2013 - 05:18 PM.

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 15:53)
don't you see the irony in consistently coming into General Chat to do little more than lambast others


I came into this thread to acknowledge somebody else's comment about how you deny your political allegiance, and how you've made this claim numerous times before. My apologies if you were offended that another party came here to acknowledge this observation. Oh, and you are definitely not the candidate to be handing out lectures on coming into this forum to lambast others.

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 15:53)
Which, if you ask me is either cowardice or childishness.


Well then consider it cowardice, if that will help keep that titanic ego of yours intact.

Also, I just remembered something. I'm pretty sure I recall you disclosing that you vote for the Conservatives. This explains it all. I'm just glad the more traditional Tory voters are defecting to UKIP, which is achieving a very welcome surge in popularity from people who are simply sick fed up of their previous chosen party caving into this left agenda that is being forced on people throughout the western world. This popularity surge is much to the great annoyance of people such as yourself I suspect.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#113

Posted 13 May 2013 - 06:41 PM

QUOTE (The Scottish Guy @ Monday, May 13 2013, 18:08)
Oh, and you are definitely not the candidate to be handing out lectures on coming into this forum to lambast others.

I can justify my actions on two counts. One, I'm always willing to explain myself, and two I'm more than happy for people to disagree with me as long as they can support it. I don't see eye to eye with a whole range of people on these forums but I'm nothing other than civil with them because I recognise and respect the logic behind their views. I don't afford you the same privilege because you have persistently shown your unwillingness to actually be engaged, or for that matter to do anything other than slur other people. If you disagree with this, then respond to me like an intelligent being instead of a child.

QUOTE (The Scottish Guy @ Monday, May 13 2013, 18:08)
Also, I just remembered something. I'm pretty sure I recall you disclosing that you vote for the Conservatives.

I voted for the Conservatives at the last general election, yes. I voted for independent candidates in my last council election, and Labour back in 2005. I'm a pragmatist. It's a shame I can't say that I'm purely a Conservative supporter, as it rather blows your idea of me being left-wing out of the water, but facts are facts. If you must pigeon-hole, then a centrist "third way" attitude is probably the most accurate way of expressing my economic and social views, but a propensity towards meritocracy/technocracy and strategic realist views towards international relations which both side in the centre right of the political spectrum.

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Unknown

#114

Posted 14 May 2013 - 02:51 AM

QUOTE (The Scottish Guy @ Tuesday, May 14 2013, 01:31)
QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:40)
Still you offer no critique of my views.


Experience has taught me any attempt to compromise with your kind is an act of futility.

QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:40)
you don't actually share your views or demonstrate any knowledge of other peoples' views.


So you basically want me to quote or repeat previous contributions from myself as well as others for the purpose of what exactly?

QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:40)
I get that you think it's fun being the minority


Not quite sure how you concluded this, but believe me, it's not fun at all, nor is it comforting.

QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:40)
and that it does a few favours for your self-image


How you come across politically on a gaming forum might rank high in your importance meter, but not mine I'm afraid. Sorry to disappoint you. Sometimes I just can't help myself when I read some of the typical and laughable stupidity that you lefties pollute places with.

QUOTE (Melchior @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:40)
but nobody likes a contrarian.


You keep labeling me this as if it's supposed to depreciate me in some way. Remember, just because something is popular, doesn't automatically constitute it being right. Sorry to break it to you fella, but it doesn't work that way. Religion being a prime example. In fact it's a pretty parallel example actually, given that those who follow religion have also been brainwashed. You just need to replace Jesus or Muhammed or Joseph Smith or whoever with the BBC/MSNBC/CNN/etc.

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday @ May 13 2013, 14:55)
-usual wearisome drivel-

Incidentally, I don't think you have ever managed to explain why I'm "left wing".


Is there any need? You've demonstrated quite clearly your position on certain issues. As I alluded to earlier, your not quite as far as the completely deranged communism driven wackos who are continually telling us how bigoted we are for not agreeing with them, but you definitely lean in that direction. If you feel otherwise, then you obviously have a warped idea of the spectrum's, which, like I also alluded to, is probably the result of self denial as you more than likely feel being considered a leftie is a little discreditable to you. Sorry for not entertaining you further.

Well it seems everything I typed went completely over your head. You don't even seem to grasp what contrarian means in this context.

You like being the minority, you like viewing yourself as a Galileo figure. That's the only way I can explain your constant ranting about the left despite not demonstrating any slither of political understanding.

KaRzY6
  • KaRzY6

    ♧ Sick Kunt ♤

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2011

#115

Posted 27 June 2013 - 08:14 AM

I think the AA is complete bullsh*t, and is basically hidden racism in the government.

But what I'm curious about is, as a white Australian male, is if I went to the USA, would I be counted as a minority because I'm Australian, or would I be discriminated for being a white male?

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Unknown

#116

Posted 27 June 2013 - 10:03 AM

QUOTE (KaRzY6 @ Thursday, Jun 27 2013, 18:14)
I think the AA is complete bullsh*t, and is basically hidden racism in the government.

But what I'm curious about is, as a white Australian male, is if I went to the USA, would I be counted as a minority because I'm Australian, or would I be discriminated for being a white male?

...

No, Australians are not a minority. dozingoff.gif

KaRzY6
  • KaRzY6

    ♧ Sick Kunt ♤

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2011

#117

Posted 27 June 2013 - 10:15 AM

QUOTE (Melchior @ Thursday, Jun 27 2013, 21:03)
QUOTE (KaRzY6 @ Thursday, Jun 27 2013, 18:14)
I think the AA is complete bullsh*t, and is basically hidden racism in the government.

But what I'm curious about is, as a white Australian male, is if I went to the USA, would I be counted as a minority because I'm Australian, or would I be discriminated for being a white male?

...

No, Australians are not a minority. dozingoff.gif

This is why the AA is a load of sh*t. Because, just say I was American, I would be less likely to get a job or get into college, because I'm a white male. If this isn't discrimination/racism, then I don't know what is.

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Unknown

#118

Posted 27 June 2013 - 10:22 AM

QUOTE (KaRzY6 @ Thursday, Jun 27 2013, 20:15)
This is why the AA is a load of sh*t.

...because it doesn't cover Australians?

And no, white males aren't statistically less likely to get into college or get a job. In fact, they're statistically more likely, that's why AA exists.

KaRzY6
  • KaRzY6

    ♧ Sick Kunt ♤

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2011

#119

Posted 27 June 2013 - 11:20 AM

QUOTE (Melchior @ Thursday, Jun 27 2013, 21:22)
QUOTE (KaRzY6 @ Thursday, Jun 27 2013, 20:15)
This is why the AA is a load of sh*t.

...because it doesn't cover Australians?

And no, white males aren't statistically less likely to get into college or get a job. In fact, they're statistically more likely, that's why AA exists.

No, I was just asking that out of curiosity about the Australian thing. But my point is, how can a western democracy say that it is an equal society when a black person has the right for a job, even if the white person is better qualified.

And if I remember correctly, Kennedy introduced the AA in 1965. That's nearly 50 years ago. So how could white people still statistically be more likely to get into college, when for nearly 50 years, non-whites have the better chance of getting in?

Mr.Mordecai
  • Mr.Mordecai

    To be, or not to be. That is the question.

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2012

#120

Posted 27 June 2013 - 11:29 AM

QUOTE (KaRzY6 @ Thursday, Jun 27 2013, 03:20)
QUOTE (Melchior @ Thursday, Jun 27 2013, 21:22)
QUOTE (KaRzY6 @ Thursday, Jun 27 2013, 20:15)
This is why the AA is a load of sh*t.

...because it doesn't cover Australians?

And no, white males aren't statistically less likely to get into college or get a job. In fact, they're statistically more likely, that's why AA exists.

No, I was just asking that out of curiosity about the Australian thing. But my point is, how can a western democracy say that it is an equal society when a black person has the right for a job, even if the white person is better qualified.

And if I remember correctly, Kennedy introduced the AA in 1965. That's nearly 50 years ago. So how could white people still statistically be more likely to get into college, when for nearly 50 years, non-whites have the better chance of getting in?

Because of the fact that people are still racially-biased.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users