Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 1213 of 1791 FirstFirst ... 213713111311631203121112121213121412151223126313131713 ... LastLast
Results 18,181 to 18,195 of 26863
Like Tree10277Likes

Thread: The American Politics thread

  1. #18181
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    9,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    If you're basing your self-interest on race, then it must be racist. If you're a greedy bastard* and you say to people "**** you, I want what I want and you can all **** off", then it's not racially based. If you say "**** off n****r, I want what I want and you can't have it because you're black/ brown/ Asian" then that's racist. I'd have thought it's self-evident.

    *Tories, Corrin etc. Still ****s, but not racist ****s.
    You are implying that Tibetan people who enjoy living with other Tibetan people in a greater Tibetan society are Tibetan racists? That's silly.

  2. #18182
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    69,003
    What's silly is saying "[X race] self-interest isn't racism". Self-interest isn't racism, but if you're self-interest is based on excluding another race/ ethnic group then it has to be racist. How can't it be?
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie

    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
    - JK Galbraith
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    You need to clap a cows c**** over your head and get a woolly bull to f**** some sense into you.

    "Do you know why I have credibility? Because I don't exude morality." - Bob Hawke

    #408. Sixty three not out forever.

  3. #18183
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    9,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    What's silly is saying "[X race] self-interest isn't racism". Self-interest isn't racism, but if you're self-interest is based on excluding another race/ ethnic group then it has to be racist. How can't it be?
    It is a given that exclusion is bad. So that's not really part of the contemporary right-now argument unless you are a Nazi or something similar.

    Put simply, the Conservative argument is this - a Tibetan society where the majority of the population are not Tibetan, is not Tibet.

    You then debate what constitutes a 'majority' and whether not having Tibet is a good or bad thing for Tibetan people.

    If you conclude 'bad' you then have to decide whether the principle should apply to other racial/cultural groups no matter their skin colour or religion, including 'white' European societies. What's bad for a Tibetan is also bad for a WASP.

    If you don't care about Tibetans and Tibetan society then everthing is null and void. Move on.
    Last edited by watson; 11-09-2017 at 09:57 PM.

  4. #18184
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    What world are you living in where people are acting in the interest of their race rather than the interest of themselves?

    We're not all sitting around playing a board game of Risk or Civilisation. It's generally accepted now that going to war to advance your race's interests over another's is not acceptable. Dying for King and Country (in and of itself) is no longer a glorified thing. It's acceptable to fight for freedom or against oppression. It's not acceptable to attempt to advance your race over another.
    Last edited by hendrix; 12-09-2017 at 12:43 AM.
    vcs and straw man like this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    "You don't look like me in this world without being firm on what you want to do."

    - Hashim Amla.
    Quote Originally Posted by DriveClub View Post
    He bowls with a lot of heart, his heart makes the ball bounce more


  5. #18185
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    55,664
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    What world are you living in where people are acting in the interest of their race rather than the interest of themselves?

    We're not all sitting around playing a board game of Risk or Civilisation. It's generally accepted now that going to war to advance your race's interests over another's is not acceptable. Dying for King and Country (in and of itself) is no longer a glorified thing. It's acceptable to fight for freedom or against oppression. It's not acceptable to attempt to advance your race over another.
    maybe eu4 or hoi4 though
    citoyens, vouliez-vous une révolution sans révolution?

    those nights were on fire
    we couldn't get higher
    we didn't know that we had it all
    but no one warns you before the fall

  6. #18186
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    69,003
    lol Ted Cruz
    Shri likes this.

  7. #18187
    Hall of Fame Member Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    15,463
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    What's silly is saying "[X race] self-interest isn't racism". Self-interest isn't racism, but if you're self-interest is based on excluding another race/ ethnic group then it has to be racist. How can't it be?
    Then by that definition everyone is a racist. People have a preference on sexual partners/relationships based on race. Or what about things like this where even minorities would rather have a doctor of their race rather than others - white people were actually much more open to doctors from other racial backgrounds. Do you live in a neighbourhood with equal representation from all races or is it particularly white? I think we all understand where this can go.

    There is a prevailing confusion with regards to preference equating to racism. You can have a preference and not think that makes your race superior to others. If we want to open up this charge of racism so broadly, then it loses a lot of its political capital - which is ok, but it means that people have to acknowledge that racism is simply not always evil and is a discrimination that makes sense in many cases. But as long as people want to use the word to vilify others for every slight deviance from equal treatment of all races, then it's just a nonsensical discussion.
    Last edited by Ikki; 12-09-2017 at 03:48 AM.
    ★★★★★

  8. #18188
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    30,592
    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel_Vimes View Post
    Well here's a rebuttal from the Jacobin corner (Asad Haider), skewering both Lilla and Coates. Not too fond of it either (too much Sanders would have won, but that's to be expected from that lot), but at least it takes apart Coates' singular focus on white people's racism by replacing it with a hope of "removing whiteness".

    https://www.viewpointmag.com/2017/09...nehisi-coates/

    Disclosure: I came to the piece via a black Norwegian writer.
    If you're interested in Coates's response to a similar argument there's one here: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-write/459909/

  9. #18189
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    Then by that definition everyone is a racist. People have a preference on sexual partners/relationships based on race. Or what about things like this where even minorities would rather have a doctor of their race rather than others - white people were actually much more open to doctors from other racial backgrounds. Do you live in a neighbourhood with equal representation from all races or is it particularly white? I think we all understand where this can go.

    There is a prevailing confusion with regards to preference equating to racism. You can have a preference and not think that makes your race superior to others. If we want to open up this charge of racism so broadly, then it loses a lot of its political capital - which is ok, but it means that people have to acknowledge that racism is simply not always evil and is a discrimination that makes sense in many cases. But as long as people want to use the word to vilify others for every slight deviance from equal treatment of all races, then it's just a nonsensical discussion.
    You have completely misunderstood Burgey. I suggest you read properly.

    No one has implied sexual preference is racist. This is a ****ing stupid argument and I suggest you get your head out of your ass and think about what Burgey has said because you're saying some damn stupid **** right now.

  10. #18190
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Spark View Post
    maybe eu4 or hoi4 though
    serious question what is this?

  11. #18191
    Request Your Custom Title Now! OverratedSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Elton Chicken Burrah
    Posts
    33,936
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    serious question what is this?
    Like Civilization but about 7 million times more complex.
    hendrix likes this.
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    You need to clap a cows c**t over your head and get a woolly bull to f**k some sense into you.

  12. #18192
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    9,851
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    What world are you living in where people are acting in the interest of their race rather than the interest of themselves?

    We're not all sitting around playing a board game of Risk or Civilisation. It's generally accepted now that going to war to advance your race's interests over another's is not acceptable. Dying for King and Country (in and of itself) is no longer a glorified thing. It's acceptable to fight for freedom or against oppression. It's not acceptable to attempt to advance your race over another.
    It is possible for Tibetan people to preference Tibetan society without harming anyone.

    So the problem is not people wanting to coalesce around the 'ethno-culture' of their choice and then advancing their civilisation. The problem is stupid evil people with stupid evil ideologies buggering it up for everyone else.


    Note: Liberals tend to fixate on the notion of race despite the fact that absolutely no one 'self identifies' according to race alone. Rather, 'self identity' is a blending of race and culture combined. This is important as it allows the debate to focus on the importance of preserving individual cultures rather focusing on the toxic and inaccurate notion of black and white races.
    Last edited by watson; 12-09-2017 at 05:24 AM.

  13. #18193
    Hall of Fame Member Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    15,463
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    You have completely misunderstood Burgey. I suggest you read properly.

    No one has implied sexual preference is racist. This is a ****ing stupid argument and I suggest you get your head out of your ass and think about what Burgey has said because you're saying some damn stupid **** right now.

    His definition suggests exactly those interpretations. If you can't rebut why insult? Franky, someone who calls themselves libertarian and can't even get the basic tenets right shouldn't be calling anyone stupid

    Burgey can answer for himself and we can discuss it if he likes. If it triggers you so badly you got problems.
    Last edited by Ikki; 12-09-2017 at 05:41 AM.

  14. #18194
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    His definition suggests exactly those interpretations.
    It does not. Sexual preference is not "advancing one race's interests over another".

  15. #18195
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    Quote Originally Posted by watson View Post
    It is possible for Tibetan people to preference Tibetan society without harming anyone.

    So the problem is not people wanting to coalesce around the 'ethno-culture' of their choice and then advancing their civilisation. The problem is stupid evil people with stupid evil ideologies buggering it up for everyone else.

    Note: Liberals tend to fixate on the notion of race despite the fact that absolutely no one 'self identifies' according to race alone. Rather, 'self identity' is a blending of race and culture combined. This is important as it allows the debate to focus on the importance of preserving individual cultures rather focusing on the toxic and inaccurate notion of black and white races.
    I don't see anything to disagree with here.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The British Politics Thread
    By cover drive man in forum News and Politics
    Replies: 18012
    Last Post: Yesterday, 07:21 PM
  2. Media
    By SirBloody Idiot in forum Cricket Web Tennis
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 06-08-2011, 07:10 AM
  3. FAQ & Introduction Thread
    By Magrat Garlick in forum Cricket Web Tennis
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 20-06-2011, 12:06 PM
  4. Finally ! A Last Word Thread
    By SJS in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 08:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •