Nah, the world is fine. Social media is the problem.
Is it ok to be proud to be white?
- Thread starter rubberduck
- Start date
Nah, the world is fine. Social media is the problem.
Social media isn't the only problem. There were plenty of problems before it.
The world is fine. Human society is the problem. Social media makes it worse by promoting groupthink, intolerance and irrational prejudice.
@Angilion
As for the homelessness thing:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...eresa-may-david-cameron-welfare-a7502126.html
I've been pretty consistent with this point .
As for the homelessness thing:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...eresa-may-david-cameron-welfare-a7502126.html
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
WTF is this thread about??? I'm white, male, straight and middle aged and I have zero feelings about what skin I was born in. People think waaaaay too much about this ****. FFS to coin a phrase, man up!
Perhaps you should check your facts and backtrack from your disengenious and unsupported by the facts claim?
Angilion was clearly reffering to 'rough sleepers' not thoose that are in the wider Statutory homeless category (with the two not being the same thing)
Its would hardly be surprising that that the statutory homeless category would have a disproportionate amount of non whites in it given that this group would include recent immigrants (including some larger family units) into the UK who lacked permeant and therefore secure housing and so would count for the statutory homeless figures.
By and large these people won't be rough sleeping however.
However when it comes to rough sleepers in the diverse capital city, London .... ..
So in the 2011 the census whites made up under 60% of the population of London but seven years later, when the white population of London can be expected to have decreased, 65.2% of rough sleepers identified were white. I. E whites are over represented in the most diverse city in London when it comes to rough sleepers!
Last edited:
And as expected cheesyboy even your quoted link has demonstrable falsehoods in it.. ...
In 2010 the employment rate for blacks was 60% in 2016 it had risen to 67%...
the rates for all ethnic minority groups listed by the goverment data went up in this time frame
It would therefore seem a stretch to say that the increased rates of recorded homelessness in ethnic minorities were due to unemployment rates under the Tories....
But lets look deeper.... what's one group of mostly 'BAME' people are deemed at greater risk of being defined as being 'homeless' (but not generally rough sleepers)?.... asylum seekers
From 2010 to 2016 the numbers of UK Asylum application went from 24,335 to 39,737 an increase of 15,402 or over a 63% increase from 2010 to 2016 and the rate every year after 2010 to 2016 was higher than the 2010 figure with the biggest figure being 40,159 in 2015
Now given that the Independent says the BAME (statutory) homeless rate increased 52% in the same period but BAME employment rates went up in this time frame.
What's the more likely significant cause of increased BAME homeless rates? unemployment rates in general in the BAME demographic or a massive surge in asylum applicants in the same period?
… bare in mind in absolute numbers the number of BAME households registered as homeless went from 3,310 to 5,030 (an increase of 1,720) with the number of individual asylum applications rising by 15,402 comparing year on year in the same period
In 2010 the employment rate for blacks was 60% in 2016 it had risen to 67%...
the rates for all ethnic minority groups listed by the goverment data went up in this time frame
It would therefore seem a stretch to say that the increased rates of recorded homelessness in ethnic minorities were due to unemployment rates under the Tories....
But lets look deeper.... what's one group of mostly 'BAME' people are deemed at greater risk of being defined as being 'homeless' (but not generally rough sleepers)?.... asylum seekers
From 2010 to 2016 the numbers of UK Asylum application went from 24,335 to 39,737 an increase of 15,402 or over a 63% increase from 2010 to 2016 and the rate every year after 2010 to 2016 was higher than the 2010 figure with the biggest figure being 40,159 in 2015
Now given that the Independent says the BAME (statutory) homeless rate increased 52% in the same period but BAME employment rates went up in this time frame.
What's the more likely significant cause of increased BAME homeless rates? unemployment rates in general in the BAME demographic or a massive surge in asylum applicants in the same period?
… bare in mind in absolute numbers the number of BAME households registered as homeless went from 3,310 to 5,030 (an increase of 1,720) with the number of individual asylum applications rising by 15,402 comparing year on year in the same period
Last edited:
This. It's what kids should be taught now - Judge others on actions and not their skin colour.
Last edited:
AFAIK "black" is OK but some people object to "non-white".
The current fashionable term is "people of colour" though this seems to get adopted sometimes by people who aren't exactly too different to the average white person in order to give themselves some status... like Greek or Turkish who otherwise look white referring to themselves as "people of colour", lumping themselves in with black people as if Greeks and Turks have the same potential issues with racism as they do.
IIRC some black people have now started rejecting the POC label and just refer to themselves as black, something that woke "SJW" types who are basically white but with say a Turkish Grandad can't co-opt.
A similar phenomenon seems to occur with LGBTQ at the moment, in particular the "Q" bit - now someone who is say female but has decided to go with short hair/alternative look can claim to be "queer" and "gender fluid" while basically still living as a girl and dating guys.... they too can the join the rainbow club, go on marches and co-opt the victimhood status without really having had any of the same level of discrimination.
Pretty much came here to post this.
I haven't saidthat you're being inconsistent. I've said (and am saying) that you're being irrationally prejudiced and discriminatory.
I see your claim has already been debunked, even using your own sources. And, as I said before, it would be irrelevant even if it was true (which it isn't). Also as I said before, you can't understand or acknowledge the idea of an individual because you are devoted to a belief in biological group identity, i.e. that "they're all the same". Even when they're obviously not. Also as I said before, you won't answer the question I asked.
You're consistent in your point, but your point is inconsistent with reality. It's simply not true that "they're all the same" just because "they" have a vaguely similar amount of melanin in their skin or they're the same sex or whatever other triviality it's fashionable to irrationally consider of such extreme importance that it defines everything a person is, that it's their identity.
I think that the position directly opposing yours was most eloquently expressed by Martin Luther King when he spoke of dreaming that one day people would be judged not by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character. I'd extend that to sex, gender, sexual orientation, etc.
I like how questions like this are always centered around white people, and yet this is the reality...
Whites don't think race is central to their identity because that wouldn't be allowed. They're constantly told they can't have pride in their race, heritage, etc. but it is actively encouraged within all other races.
Whites don't think race is central to their identity because that wouldn't be allowed. They're constantly told they can't have pride in their race, heritage, etc. but it is actively encouraged within all other races.
It's pretty sad and pathetic to be proud of the colour of your skin, something which you have no control over! (Obviously being proud of your culture & history is very different)
Be proud of something you have achieved, created or relationships you have developed in life. ie something YOU have actually done.
Be proud of something you have achieved, created or relationships you have developed in life. ie something YOU have actually done.
Agreed.
The difference was before it, people could tell them to shut their face then they would go and sulk and unless you were there, you would never have known about it. Now, today it promotes mob rule and everything about life these days is about trending. Which the mainstream media has the biggest influence on including fees for it.
I wasn't posting that to argue my consistency. Its purpose was to re-confirm my argument (which I've been consistent on
).So what's 'irrationally prejudiced and discriminatory' about this:
And how does this fail to fit with your homeless white people 'point'?
You can still do that. If you have no social media presence or use an alias, they can't do much
The best security online is anonymity and always has been. It's only with facebook etc that people started posting their lives online and making themselves targets. When the internet was only for geeks it was considered stupid to even post your real name let alone a photo of yourself, your kids, your house, etc.
Throughout my life i've noticed that most black people are obessed about their colour. A vast majorty of their time, speak to any black person long enough and the subject of their race always come up, some take longer than others but it always come up eventually. I've only known a couple of guys who where chill and got on with their life without bringing it up. I don't get the same with any Asians i work with.
Agree, but this goes for all Colours/races not just White people.