Race report: 'UK not deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities'

hurfdurf said:
You all criticise my posting, but you are also all replying, some of you with great effort. So I know my posting is working as intended.
Click to expand...

Only if your purpose is to damage the wider cause you claim to represent.

You devalue any attempt to actually discuss racism, the challenges that genuinely exist and the damage that incorrectly attributing something to racism can cause, and instead just work well to paint anyone who cares or considers such things problematic as an irrational moron.

If you were doing it ironically, it would be this, but sadly you seem to be acting in all seriousness.

<Edit: link hit by the censor, but you're looking for an alternate way of referring to fecal matter posting>
 
Dolph said:
Your post is no less dishonest than his.

There is no evidence in the report that they discarded or ignored evidence provided, they just factored in all the evidence available.

Ironically, you are demanding the report do exactly what you accuse it of doing, namely taking a subset of evidence and treating it as the whole truth.
Click to expand...
What have you got to say about the people that said they gave evidence or participated in discussions only for their input to be ignored?

Im not demanding anything. As Ive said before you are happy with the report because it is in line with your already deeply held beliefs that it is always the indivuals at fault.
There is no evidence in the report that they discarded or ignored evidence provided
Click to expand...
Really? You would have to be pretty partisan to be able to post that in all seriousness.

The evidence was ignored thats why its not in there. Thats why people are saying their stuff wasnt in the report despite being named as contributors.
 
Tony Edwards said:
What have you got to say about the people that said they gave evidence or participated in discussions only for their input to be ignored?

Im not demanding anything. As Ive said before you are happy with the report because it is in line with your already deeply held beliefs that it is always the indivuals at fault.Really? You would have to be pretty partisan to be able to post that in all seriousness.

The evidence was ignored thats why its not in there. Thats why people are saying their stuff wasnt in the report despite being named as contributors.
Click to expand...

Just because the conclusion doesn't exclusively align with the evidence provided from one viewpoint doesn't mean that evidence was ignored.

Alternatively, it may have been discarded or ignored due to other factors (such as if you make a decision to prioritise objective, numerically driven evidence over subjective, feeling driven evidence), or any other myriad of reasons.

But then given you can neither represent my views, nor the reports view with any accuracy, I highly doubt you are an impartial judge.

My actual view, for example, is:

Dolph said:
Full report here

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...the-commission-on-race-and-ethnic-disparities

Having read through the report now, it's most definitely a lot more nuanced than the press and many other commentators (including some in this thread) are trying to portray it as. The challenge is some people are determined to either find things that support their preconceived ideas on race, or that support their preconceived view that the report will be a an attempt to sweep problems under the carpet.

I don't necessarily agree with every conclusion drawn on the data, but I can see how the conclusions have been drawn, and by and large they have a logical consistency often missing from this sort of debate, for example the way people tie themselves in knots by both claiming there is is no link between race and crime disparities (because the link is actually socioeconomic, which is true) while at the same time complaining stop and search disparities are racist, despite them being driven by the exact same socioeconomic factors that drive crime.

The report also prioritising tangible data over feelings based data will likely also not go down well, even though it's the most objective approach.

Sadly though, any attempt to actually change things for the better will be drowned out by nonsense from both sides yet again.
Click to expand...

As per my first post in the sc thread. Your post, on the other hand is an example of the nonsense from both sides drowning out any potential for positive change that may have come from this exercise.
 
The Guardian had an article on modern slavery today. They stated the nationalities who were most abused by it and totally ignored those most abusing. Except one sentence on county lines gangs.

One can guess who the gang bosses and slave masters are and pound to a penny they are not white British. The Guardian are just too woke to write about it.
 
Hagar said:
The Guardian had an article on modern slavery today. They stated the nationalities who were most abused by it and totally ignored those most abusing. Except one sentence on county lines gangs.

One can guess who the gang bosses and slave masters are and pound to a penny they are not white British. The Guardian are just too woke to write about it.
Click to expand...
What has this got to do with the report?

Besides it having sod all to do with the report or this thread it wouldnt take a genius to work out who is exploiting these people.
Reports to the helpline, which is run by anti-slavery charity Unseen, indicated that Romanians make up the largest victim group, followed by people from China, Albania and England.
Click to expand...
 
FoxEye said:
Evidently not, because he's admitted to being a troll more than once.
Click to expand...
H8v2GHK.png


:eek:
 
Tony Edwards said:
I read an interesting take on this by a Tory, that it is all just a ruse or a hand out to the people that complain about BLM and those that think equality has gone too far, to make the woking class and the red wall feel like they were are right all along backing the Tories and their war on woke.
Click to expand...
How does equality go too far?
 
Tony Edwards said:
You tell me.
Click to expand...
Is so-called "positive discrimination" the new "equality"?

Equality is absolute the goal (or should be). "Going too far" is everything that goes beyond equality to actively discriminating in favour of minorities and/or those who shout the loudest.
 
Skunkworks said:
My observations suggest that, to woke types, equality isn’t reached by everyone being treated equally, it’s reached when whitey has been sufficiently punished for the sins of the father. Hence they’re constantly reverting to slavery and colonialism.
Click to expand...
That's what drives me nuts about the guilt tripping narrative. We don't lay a burden of guilt upon modern day Germans for the behaviour of the Nazis. It also makes no sense for modern day Brits to feel guilty for stuff that happened well over a hundred years ago.

Anything that works towards demolishing this stupid victimhood power game is fine by me - humanity will never move on if it constantly dwells on the past IMO (although obviously we need to learn from it and shouldn't be rewriting it!). As for the present day, well, there are still problems and it's going to take generations to get to a better place but the current trend looks pretty good at least in the UK if someone doesn't tip the cart.

Some people just like to cause division and sow the seeds of unrest to advance their own sinister agendas.
 
Last edited:
Narj said:
That's what drives me nuts about the guilt tripping narrative. We don't lay a burden of guilt upon modern day Germans for the behaviour of the Nazis. It also makes no sense for modern day Brits to feel guilty for stuff that happened well over a hundred years ago.
Click to expand...
Thats all well and good but defending the statues of slave traders and racists is not about burden of guilt is it? That looks like not only not giving a **** about what happened but also defending the person and actions.

While we dont lay a burden of guilt on modern day germans we do hold the Jewish people slightly higher because of what happened to them during the war. Isnt it the same sort of ****?
 
Tony Edwards said:
Thats all well and good but defending the statues of slave traders and racists is not about burden of guilt is it? That looks like not only not giving a **** about what happened but also defending the person and actions.

While we dont lay a burden of guilt on modern day germans we do hold the Jewish people slightly higher because of what happened to them during the war. Isnt it the same sort of ****?
Click to expand...
Really? So why was the Labour Party so rife with antisemitism then?
 
Tony Edwards said:
Thats all well and good but defending the statues of slave traders and racists is not about burden of guilt is it? That looks like not only not giving a **** about what happened but also defending the person and actions.

While we dont lay a burden of guilt on modern day germans we do hold the Jewish people slightly higher because of what happened to them during the war. Isnt it the same sort of ****?
Click to expand...

How about defending democracy as to whether the statues should be removed? In most cases, those involved have other aspects of their lives that are reasons why they are recognised (for example, Edward coulston's role as mp and philanthropist), and any decision shouldn't be driven by vandalism and property destruction.

That's not to say I wouldn't support the removal of some or even most of them, but that's not the point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom