Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Ottae

Political Correctness

Recommended Posts

Share Sharqi

 

I saw a commercial for some burger place yesterday.

It had 'Shout at the Devil' by Motley Crue playing.

Wouldn't you f*cking know it, that they cut out the 'Shout at the Devil' part?!

Al you hear is 'shout, shout, shout' and then a guitar riff.

I'm pretty much guessing this is due to the hardcore Christians who cry about ANYTHING like that.

This sh*t is going too motherf*cking far.

You can't ruin a f*cking classic just because of some f*cking religious nutcases.

 

Why would Christians be opposed to shouting at the Devil? Surely they would be the group most in support of that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeakyLine

 

 

I saw a commercial for some burger place yesterday.

It had 'Shout at the Devil' by Motley Crue playing.

Wouldn't you f*cking know it, that they cut out the 'Shout at the Devil' part?!

Al you hear is 'shout, shout, shout' and then a guitar riff.

I'm pretty much guessing this is due to the hardcore Christians who cry about ANYTHING like that.

This sh*t is going too motherf*cking far.

You can't ruin a f*cking classic just because of some f*cking religious nutcases.

 

Why would Christians be opposed to shouting at the Devil? Surely they would be the group most in support of that

 

It's prob the fact that they mention the devil at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jatiger13

 

 

 

 

So what you're saying is, we need to continue this policy of trying to afford special rights/benefits to black Americans to get them out of poverty? Because as I said before, we've done affirmative action for a long time now and it has yet to fix the problems we have.

 

 

Thought this article is timely given the subject of this post. - http://ti.me/1ADzyvQ

 

"Harlem-born rapper Azealia Banks has some trenchant criticism for Middle America in the April 2015 Playboy cover story, assailingeveryone from fat white Americans to black musicians, most of whom fail to meet her grade."

 

If Eminem came out and said "I hate fat black Americans", there'd be uproar. Again displaying how there is a double standard to political correctness.

 

How is one rapper's song "displaying how there is a double standard to political correctness?".I'd also argue that black rage about white america comes from a much more logical place than vice versa, given the whole f*cked up history of black america, but even if that wasn't so it is just one song by one person, proving exactly nothing. You're really grasping now.

So modern day black people have a right to have anger towards modern day white people, because slavery happened?

 

Going by that logic, I guess Americans and Europeans can then still be angry with Germans. Nazi Germany and all that, which was much worse than slavery btw.

 

 

They can be angry at today's policies and today's systemical racism, but the "whole f*cked up history of black america" isn't something they should be allowed to still dwell on.

Anger over slavery is not something they should direct towards today's americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

I think he's probably referring to decades of racial discrimination, something that's still ongoing, rather than the legacy of slavery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Share Sharqi

I think he's probably referring to decades of racial discrimination, something that's still ongoing, rather than the legacy of slavery.

It's amusing when people try to disavow themselves of slavery, as if by eschewing the 'blame' it means they are free from responsibility for the persistence of race inequality in society today. Each generation inherits the capital, and consequently the debts of their forebears - just because white people today did not play a part in slavery does not mean they haven't benefited from it; 150 or so years of legislated social and economic inequality since then has simply been white people stealing slightly less every year (and in return monetising and monopolising every single form of minority cultural expression - from tap to rap), until inevitably they conclude that after 300-400 years of oppression, society is equal and we can call it quits (while presumably some conservatives in Mississippi grumble about affirmative action, ignoring that the history of america is 99.9% constituted by positive discrimination for white people).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
W1ddL3

Whether white people today have benefited from slavery and racial inequality or not is hardly relevant. They are free from responsibility. You simply can't blame an entire group of people for the actions of their ancestors. I wouldn't accept any blame for anything my father did let alone something some white guys did hundreds of years ago.

 

We're born white therefore we're all privileged (because social / economic class has no bearing apparently) and should feel bad about ourselves and go out of our way to help all those poor helpless minorities? Nigga, please.

 

There's obviously still work to do be done as far as achieving the goal of racial equality but I'm not convinced things like Affirmative Action is the answer. Continue working to try and change attitudes and public perception sure, but the very idea of trying to achieve equality by giving certain groups special treatment just seems silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Share Sharqi

So we, who created a society that in every narrative (even liberal) places minorities below us, describing them as 'under-privileged' or in 'relative deprivation' rather than acknowledging that the history of america has been the appeasement of the white working classes in order to divide and conquer - to instil in white people, even those that are penniless, the notion of 'whiteness' as some sort of virtue to be counted on, that no matter how little you have you will be 'white' and can have pride in that. We also, currently are the voters primarily targeted by politicians because we are in the majority, we are the disproportionate creators, interpreters and enforcers of the law - white people wield power, and therefore responsibility; funnily enough when white people question why everyone judges them to be racist - more so than any other denomination of creed or colour - ignorance probably plays a larger part than malice. Whiteness is an illusion created so that you believe you have more in common with the rich industrialist than the ethnic minorities living in similar conditions to you, so that when minorities threaten the power of the rich, white people for no reason other than the solidarity of their skin would protect the rich from the poor, while languishing in poverty themselves. We should not be opposed to affirmative action, true if it ignored white people entirely there might be reason to be incensed, however when you take race out of the equation they are simply poor, or do not have the same opportunities, and the highly visible factor of race masks everything else.

You chose to focus on affirmative action, but the entire division of white and black in the country was defined by affirmative action for white americans, in the early colonial days where class was the most transparent and important distinction between people. The granting of limited economic freedoms and land ownership rights, while allowing white people to act as overseers to black workers was highly economically beneficial to colonial taskmasters, after all, with quite a limited concession they could control dissension amongst workers, preventing strike action, and ensured the subservience of both black and white workers.

The same rhetoric that you see in the UK today from the UKIP party; Euroscepticism, Xenophobia, a fear that they will take our jobs, was the kind of rhetoric used to motivate families in the confederate states to sacrifice their sons to stop the blacks from gaining economic independence and 'taking jobs'. Of course glossing over the fact that the economy was based almost entirely on slavery, black americans already had the jobs, they were just working for free and slave owners did not want to pay them a decent wage any more than they cared to pay white workers a decent wage. In the UK with the focus on people taking our jobs we ignore the fact that inflation is outpacing rises in the national minimum wage (which is in relative terms, abysmal) or the fact that we have been 'out of the recession' for three years yet employers are not hiring (not to mention glossing over the fact that with the ever-increasing automation of labour these jobs may only be hypothetical 'labour roles' where you are as likely to be passed-over for MK1 R2-D2 as you are an off-the-boat Lithuanian/Bulgarian/Polish immigrant; and of course the fact that migrants coming from the European Economic Zone make a net positive contribution to the economy might suggest they are simply better). So these right-allied political parties choosing to emphasise the difference between people in all of their campaigns, but they have a very limited manifesto and are rarely willing to talk about real economic issues, their stance on the privatisation of policing, healthcare and education, environmental issues, social services, infrastructure, taxation (especially for those at the top and bottom of the pile) etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dingdongs

So we, who created a society that in every narrative (even liberal) places minorities below us, describing them as 'under-privileged' or in 'relative deprivation' rather than acknowledging that the history of america has been the appeasement of the white working classes in order to divide and conquer - to instil in white people, even those that are penniless, the notion of 'whiteness' as some sort of virtue to be counted on, that no matter how little you have you will be 'white' and can have pride in that. We also, currently are the voters primarily targeted by politicians because we are in the majority, we are the disproportionate creators, interpreters and enforcers of the law - white people wield power, and therefore responsibility; funnily enough when white people question why everyone judges them to be racist - more so than any other denomination of creed or colour - ignorance probably plays a larger part than malice. Whiteness is an illusion created so that you believe you have more in common with the rich industrialist than the ethnic minorities living in similar conditions to you, so that when minorities threaten the power of the rich, white people for no reason other than the solidarity of their skin would protect the rich from the poor, while languishing in poverty themselves. We should not be opposed to affirmative action, true if it ignored white people entirely there might be reason to be incensed, however when you take race out of the equation they are simply poor, or do not have the same opportunities, and the highly visible factor of race masks everything else.

You chose to focus on affirmative action, but the entire division of white and black in the country was defined by affirmative action for white americans, in the early colonial days where class was the most transparent and important distinction between people. The granting of limited economic freedoms and land ownership rights, while allowing white people to act as overseers to black workers was highly economically beneficial to colonial taskmasters, after all, with quite a limited concession they could control dissension amongst workers, preventing strike action, and ensured the subservience of both black and white workers.

The same rhetoric that you see in the UK today from the UKIP party; Euroscepticism, Xenophobia, a fear that they will take our jobs, was the kind of rhetoric used to motivate families in the confederate states to sacrifice their sons to stop the blacks from gaining economic independence and 'taking jobs'. Of course glossing over the fact that the economy was based almost entirely on slavery, black americans already had the jobs, they were just working for free and slave owners did not want to pay them a decent wage any more than they cared to pay white workers a decent wage. In the UK with the focus on people taking our jobs we ignore the fact that inflation is outpacing rises in the national minimum wage (which is in relative terms, abysmal) or the fact that we have been 'out of the recession' for three years yet employers are not hiring (not to mention glossing over the fact that with the ever-increasing automation of labour these jobs may only be hypothetical 'labour roles' where you are as likely to be passed-over for MK1 R2-D2 as you are an off-the-boat Lithuanian/Bulgarian/Polish immigrant; and of course the fact that migrants coming from the European Economic Zone make a net positive contribution to the economy might suggest they are simply better). So these right-allied political parties choosing to emphasise the difference between people in all of their campaigns, but they have a very limited manifesto and are rarely willing to talk about real economic issues, their stance on the privatisation of policing, healthcare and education, environmental issues, social services, infrastructure, taxation (especially for those at the top and bottom of the pile) etc.

So what's your solution? Paint everyone a new color so that we can start fresh? You keep pouring paragraph upon paragraph about how white people are the problem, whiteness is terrible, etc. but actually the so called successful white working class has actually seen negative gains in the past 30 years, like significantly negative ones. I would say that your average blue collar white guy would identify more with a minority on the job with him than he would a rich capitalist. As for you saying the right wing parties exploit differences in people, the left wing ones do too! The Democratic Party in the US has exploited and taken advantage of the black vote for the past 50 years. Lyndon Johnson said it quite well when he signed the civil rights act/voting rights act "I'll have those f*cking ni**ers voting democrat for the next 100 years"... this notion that the right is the only one that exploits people for political gain is just silly. They both do it and they're both f*cking ridiculous for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tyler

 

[...] I guess Americans and Europeans can then still be angry with Germans.

 

Regardless of nationality, anyone who seriously supports Nazi doctrine has earned my hatred. To use your example for another end: what do we think of people who disregard the horrors of the Nazi regime? Holocaust deniers are ridiculed. The same is not said of people who simply brush off centuries of slavery because it happens to exist at a place in time where we feel we're absolved of any relation. The truth is not so invigorating, though. Sharqi alluded quite well to the fact that a society carries its burdens, past and present. We cannot have the gains without recognizing just how ill-gotten they are. Or, I guess we can, since historical revisionism and rampant historical illiteracy and misinformation pervades every aspect of the world, and everyone wants the words on the page to read: it's not my fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Share Sharqi

So what's your solution? Paint everyone a new color so that we can start fresh? You keep pouring paragraph upon paragraph about how white people are the problem, whiteness is terrible, etc. but actually the so called successful white working class has actually seen negative gains in the past 30 years, like significantly negative ones. I would say that your average blue collar white guy would identify more with a minority on the job with him than he would a rich capitalist. As for you saying the right wing parties exploit differences in people, the left wing ones do too! The Democratic Party in the US has exploited and taken advantage of the black vote for the past 50 years. Lyndon Johnson said it quite well when he signed the civil rights act/voting rights act "I'll have those f*cking ni**ers voting democrat for the next 100 years"... this notion that the right is the only one that exploits people for political gain is just silly. They both do it and they're both f*cking ridiculous for it.

 

 

 

I never came here espousing a 'third way', or pretending that I would make a competent legislator; rather I felt the need to comment on the fact that only now that it is to the benefit of minority groups do we care about positive governmental discrimination - which is an issue especially when we try to blame the people in receipt of it rather than blaming, say, our parents or grandparents for not doing more to tackle race discrimination in their time.

Also, I'm not stating that 'white people are bad' by virtue of their skin tone, but white people today are the only people with enough privilege to be ignorant; to be led around with eyes closed to violence, poverty and other hardships disproportionately affecting minorities; to look through the media, seeing everything that is there, and not query all the things that are absent. or questionable.

 

Regarding the whole right-wing thing, perhaps I should have specified something more ideal-centric, like Conservatism, something which transcends the distinctions of left and right and indeed the decades between then and now - it is quite telling that you had to reach back 50 years into the annals of history to find a comparative example to modern day conservatives, even I don't believe them to be that unabashedly racist in the UKIP; your Tea Party, however - I wouldn't put it past them. In all seriousness I agree with your point, especially in terms of liberal and conservative representative media accounts always trying to deliberately misrepresent what the other is saying - it is actually the liberals at the moment in the UK doing the worst to the UKIP party and whilst I would never want the party voted in, I still find it annoying knowing that this misrepresentation is going on - and for what purpose? Party councillors come out, seemingly every week with the most delightfully-ignorant sexist, racist and homophobic rubbish without anyone's help.

_________________________________________________________________________

 

As more of an aside really.

 

You might have to explain the term 'negative gains' to me, does that mean;

- (Very) small gains?

- Losses?

- Proportionately less than before, but still reasonably large gains?

In fact I can't even tell what 'gains' are: Workers' rights, Pay rates, Employment opportunities, Union representation - no clue.

[The 'successful' working classes of old-America are, by virtue of their 'success' <cough> <cough> the successful middle class of modern America.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
X S

 

Regarding the whole right-wing thing, perhaps I should have specified something more ideal-centric, like Conservatism, something which transcends the distinctions of left and right and indeed the decades between then and now - it is quite telling that you had to reach back 50 years into the annals of history to find a comparative example to modern day conservatives, even I don't believe them to be that unabashedly racist in the UKIP; your Tea Party, however - I wouldn't put it past them.

 

The original Tea Party started back in 2007 as a money bomb fundraiser for Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign. It was a protest against George W. Bush's war, big government, and corporate welfare policies.

 

But here's a perfect example of how the media can totally subvert and pervert a message. Calling someone a racist is the new wolf cry of the media.

 

>Are you losing an argument? Don't agree?

>Call them a racist

>winrar.exe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

Ron Paul is a racist though, and a cowardly one at that. When his press office issued several documents in effect claiming that blacks were genetically predisposed to crime, he forced them to quit and then denied ever saying it even though it was a verbatim quote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Share Sharqi

 

 

Regarding the whole right-wing thing, perhaps I should have specified something more ideal-centric, like Conservatism, something which transcends the distinctions of left and right and indeed the decades between then and now - it is quite telling that you had to reach back 50 years into the annals of history to find a comparative example to modern day conservatives, even I don't believe them to be that unabashedly racist in the UKIP; your Tea Party, however - I wouldn't put it past them.

 

The original Tea Party started back in 2007 as a money bomb fundraiser for Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign. It was a protest against George W. Bush's war, big government, and corporate welfare policies.

 

But here's a perfect example of how the media can totally subvert and pervert a message. Calling someone a racist is the new wolf cry of the media.

 

>Are you losing an argument? Don't agree?

>Call them a racist

>winrar.exe

 

I do believe when correctly applied, the moral would be that nobody believes the claim that someone is racist;

>racist_winrar.exe

Although I will admit that my perspective of the Tea Party at the time was misinformed, disproportionately influenced by their media-highlighted affiliation with religion (of the right-wing variety), rather than their actual party policy - the name so often comes up, not always in a positive light, regarding all manner of social issues that I might be forgiven for the mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
X S

That's ok, the Tea Party is all about dead now. Once the media, the religious nut-jobs, the Sean Hannity's and Glen Beck's got a hold of it, it was dead in the water. Most of the original crowd jumped ship. But it's a perfect example of how a movement can be subverted and perverted beyond its origins.

 

 

Ron Paul is a racist though, and a cowardly one at that. When his press office issued several documents in effect claiming that blacks were genetically predisposed to crime, he forced them to quit and then denied ever saying it even though it was a verbatim quote.

 

That's not the point. The original Tea Party movement was not racially motivated. By the time the Tea Party went mainstream, Ron Paul had no affiliation with it. When there's a vacuum of leadership, you get crazies like Glen Beck assuming the Tea Party podium.

Edited by X S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hayduke

The Tea Party was always reactionary and individualistic, even were it not I don't see the point in defending the origins of the movement simply for the sake of saying it didn't use to be like that. A liberal minded person does not vote republican because they freed the slaves 100 odd years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
X S

Nobody's defending it, but this discussion apparently caught many off-guard because they were not aware of the history behind it. This isn't some political paradigm shift that occurred over the course of a century, it's simply an example of how the media and political powers that be can conquer and divide groups for their own benefit.

 

They did the same thing to Occupy Wall Street. Not exactly the same situation, but it only took a few allegations of rape and sexual assault to begin dismantling its credibility. It happens all the time. Let's not categorize movements for the sake of making them easier to understand, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

Nobody's defending it, but this discussion apparently caught many off-guard because they were not aware of the history behind it. This isn't some political paradigm shift that occurred over the course of a century, it's simply an example of how the media and political powers that be can conquer and divide groups for their own benefit.

 

They did the same thing to Occupy Wall Street. Not exactly the same situation, but it only took a few allegations of rape and sexual assault to begin dismantling its credibility. It happens all the time. Let's not categorize movements for the sake of making them easier to understand, please.

I'm aware that the original Tea Party that formed in response to the bailout was a a genuine expression of frustration with the status quo, distinct from the corporate shilling machine it is now. But it never had anything but disastrous and repressive policy to offer... and it was made up of religious crazies and racists from the get-go. It has always been a reactionary movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy

Nobody's defending it, but this discussion apparently caught many off-guard because they were not aware of the history behind it. This isn't some political paradigm shift that occurred over the course of a century, it's simply an example of how the media and political powers that be can conquer and divide groups for their own benefit.

 

They did the same thing to Occupy Wall Street. Not exactly the same situation, but it only took a few allegations of rape and sexual assault to begin dismantling its credibility. It happens all the time. Let's not categorize movements for the sake of making them easier to understand, please.

Nah, Occupy was crushed by police truncheons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
igotskiz

Sometimes I wonder what direction the world will turn if everyone got their way. Seeing as how "political correctness" establishes itself on the idea of censorship and catering to the lowest common denominator and disregarding the majority of the population, I can't imagine it would be a good world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

Sometimes I wonder what direction the world will turn if everyone got their way. Seeing as how "political correctness" establishes itself on the idea of censorship and catering to the lowest common denominator and disregarding the majority of the population, I can't imagine it would be a good world.

What?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.