Coca Cola : "Be less white"

Status
Not open for further replies.
dLockers said:
Love the random insult slinging. Know what that is a sign off? ;)

The bit you trimmed off my quote says exactly what you took 4 paragraphs to say. It simply confirm it exists. What is your point? Try and keep it to fewer than 4 paragraphs next time please.
Click to expand...

Can I borrow your victim card when you're done with it?
 
dLockers said:
Love the random insult slinging. Know what that is a sign off? ;)

The bit you trimmed off my quote says exactly what you took 4 paragraphs to say. It simply confirm it exists. What is your point? Try and keep it to fewer than 4 paragraphs next time please.
Click to expand...

It's best to a actually provide an argument..
... rather than make a load of assertions and then post some rather random links when challenged that don't support the previous assertion.

In group biases are not surprising or particularly controversial.

Asserting that the cause of the relative poor performance of certain groups of non white groups is 'whiteness', 'white supremacy' etc however is load of nonsense as you will never get a sensible answer to explain why certain non white groups consistently perform so well, in a wide range of metrics, under such a supposed system.

Sorry if that's a bit long for you but the real world is sometimes quite complicated and you can only dumb down things so much before you loose all meaning with regards to what is being talked about.
 
Caracus2k said:
It's best to a actually provide an argument..
... rather than make a load of assertions and then post some rather random links when challenged that don't support the previous assertion.

In group biases are not surprising or particularly controversial.

Asserting that the cause of the relative poor performance of certain groups of non white groups is 'whiteness', 'white supremacy' etc however is load of nonsense as you will never get a sensible answer to explain why certain non white groups consistently perform so well, in a wide range of metrics, under such a supposed system.

Sorry if that's a bit long for you but the real world is sometimes quite complicated and you can only dumb down things so much before you loose all meaning with regards to what is being talked about.
Click to expand...
Honestly your posts are so long and pointless. If you have a point to make then make it. You already said BAME are smarter than us white folk, how do you explain their under representation in other metrics such as employment? Are they just not trying hard enough despite being objectively smarter? The last time you made this point was just to point out how whites have it worse :rolleyes:

Stumble Bum said:
Can I borrow your victim card when you're done with it?
Click to expand...
What am I the victim of? :confused: Think you'll find its all the other group thinkers who believe they are the victims of this, given they are white and the thread is about being less white. If you want I can just say "I AGREE BEING LESS WHITE IS RACIST" and "BAME ARE SMARTER THAN US!" if that makes you feel better?
 
FoxEye said:
Why even lump all the BAME people together, anyhow?

Surely the end goal for this is:
"You should hire this many people from Bangladesh.
"You should hire this many people from China.
"You should hire this many people from Senegal.
"You should hire this many people with one arm.
"You should hire this many people with a third nipple.
"You should hire this many people who are deaf.
"You should exactly match your workforce composition with the composition of the UK population.
Or else."

I mean, surely Chinese, Somalian, South African, Indian, South Korean can't all be considered the same thing, and discriminated against in the same way.

We surely need league tables of discrimination!
Click to expand...

That's the issue with this itersectionality rubbish. All you're doing is creating the oppression olympics.

But yeah, if you're going to have ethnicity quotas to diversify the workforce clearly you need to subdivide according to ethnicity and nationality. It's all very well saying 20% of the workforce has to be non-white but how are you going to break that down? What if your employ a coupe of Asian managers who employ their mates (presumably they have as much implicit bias as white people?) and 19% of that 20% ends up being Asian. You've hit your quota but Black/etc groups are still completely underrepresented?

As you've said clearly we need a spreadsheet and league table with representative ethnicity quotas to make it fair?

Actually don't suggest the above. They'll probably think you're being serious!
 
dLockers said:
There are 18 studies referenced in the data you asked for, go and have a look for yourself. I can only speak for my own personal experiences that my training at two employers was good. Not without challenging questions at the end, but good.
Click to expand...

The whole thing that spurred this particular exchange was me pointing out my "personal experience" when I said I had seen zero. Now you are speaking from your personal experience that you have seen good training on the subject.

At the core of this disagreement is the idea that this subject is virtually impossible to address from a totally objective position.

Ironically, the people saying that unconcious bias training is good or bad, do so from the perspective of their own bias. Taking specific examples and debating the merits, or lack thereof, regarding such examples, allows the differing subjective views to be challenged.

The portions of the training outlined in the OP are the kind of specific examples that allow for clear debate.
 
Caracus2k said:
It's best to a actually provide an argument..
... rather than make a load of assertions and then post some rather random links when challenged that don't support the previous assertion.

In group biases are not surprising or particularly controversial.

Asserting that the cause of the relative poor performance of certain groups of non white groups is 'whiteness', 'white supremacy' etc however is load of nonsense as you will never get a sensible answer to explain why certain non white groups consistently perform so well, in a wide range of metrics, under such a supposed system.

Sorry if that's a bit long for you but the real world is sometimes quite complicated and you can only dumb down things so much before you loose all meaning with regards to what is being talked about.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/11/centreville-illinois-flooding-sewage-overflow

This article is a prime example:

“The system is broken because people have not paid attention. And because of that, there are Black people in Centreville who cannot live in their homes. That is absolutely a class and race issue,” Nelson said. These problems continue because some people in power “believe this population is expendable”.

Greenwood said that when her family moved to Centreville in the 1960s, things were different. “If all of those white people were still here, this wouldn’t happen,” she said."


Those people in power they speak of from the city council? All of them are black. But its white people fault?
 
dLockers said:
Honestly your posts are so long and pointless. If you have a point to make then make it. You already said BAME are smarter than us white folk, how do you explain their under representation in other metrics such as employment?
Click to expand...

BAME is a ridiculous term used by the disingenuous to make false arguments about western society. It sits in the same category as terms like VEM and BIPOC

BAME and associated terms are prime examples of the deliberate intellectual dishonesty that typifies large sections of the contemporary debate on race and racism.

These terms are used to compare disparate groups of people against one common group... 'whites' to try and prop up false narratives like western nations being 'white supremacies'.

You can tell the comparison made are false because when you look at the different constituent groups that make up terms like 'BAME' you often find that they lie on either side of the average distributions around the group they are being compared against (whites)!

So no 'BAME' people are not smarter or doing better than White people because it's a misleading grouping used to make false arguments.

Of course the premises in question (white supremacy or some variant thereof) often starts to break down when the groups in categories like BAME are separated.
 
Caracus2k said:
BAME is a ridiculous term used by the disingenuous to make false arguments about western society. It sits in the same category as terms like VEM and BIPOC

BAME and associated terms are prime examples of the deliberate intellectual dishonesty that typifies large sections of the contemporary debate on race and racism.

These terms are used to compare disparate groups of people against one common group... 'whites' to try and prop up false narratives like western nations being 'white supremacies'.

You can tell the comparison made are false because when you look at the different constituent groups that make up terms like 'BAME' you often find that they lie on either side of the average distributions around the group they are being compared against (whites)!

So no 'BAME' people are not smarter or doing better than White people because it's a misleading grouping used to make false arguments.

Of course the premises in question (white supremacy or some variant thereof) often starts to break down when the groups in categories like BAME are separated.
Click to expand...
Wow you really are playing the victim aren't you. Can I ask what demographic you are from?
 
I think most people would agree that BAME is a pretty unhelpful term given it, as other have said, simply gathers everyone who isn't white into one large group even though many of them have nothing in common.

What purpose does the term serve other than to create racial division and play identity politics ? If the goal was to support minorities it would also include white minorities like eastern Europeans rather then excluding them on the basis of skin colour.
 
Last edited:
dLockers said:
Wow you really are playing the victim aren't you.
Click to expand...

Playing the victim? Not sure how you worked that out.

Criticism of an ideology and its associated terms hardly counts as playing the victim now does it?

dLockers said:
Can I ask what demographic you are from?
Click to expand...

Like all people i could be associated with many different ones.

But my association (or not) to any of these groups, where my association is inherent (as opposed to those based on ideology), does not have any bearing as to whether an argument I make has merit or not.
 
silvagti said:
I think most people would agree that BAME is a pretty unhelpful term given it, as other have said, simply gathers everyone who isn't white into one large group even though many of them have nothing in common.

What purpose does the term serve other than to create racial division and play identity politics ? If the goal was to support minorities it would also include white minorities like eastern Europeans rather then excluding them on the basis of skin colour.
Click to expand...

Wasn't the term "coloured" banned because it was considered disrespectful to simply lump all non-whites into one group, and it was replaced with "black" (previously considered rude and blunt), asian, etc. Now language has changed again to create BAME, but I've never seen it weaponised by the left to such a degree. All the more ironic that the left used to be the bastion of free speech and expressing who you are and what you feel, but now the same structures are being used to shut down speech and discussion, deplatform, demonise everyone that uses words they don't like.

Even that control of language (to control your thinking and force self-censorship) changes all the time, because it's all about control and compliance. Discourse has been replaced with a totally "us or them" attitude that has more in common with the far right than anything in the centre. The group identity can never be satisfied without an ongoing, never ending cultural jihad, a war that's never won, because then where would the left's intersectional self-identity come from?

As someone firmly centre left, I can't remember a time when I thought of the far left in the same way as I do the far right, but here we are.
 
Stumble Bum said:
You're the resident troll. I think many posters on these forums can't be bothered to reply to you. No idea why you have even quoted me. Go away.
Click to expand...
Yet here you are replying.

Just because you dont like what I have to say doesnt make me a troll. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

So is your victim card all worn out then or not?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom