Keeping up with the Markles
- Thread starter antijoke
- Start date
Ironically 2 + 2 = 5 was a thing among the woke on twitter not too long ago!
See, for example, this classic:
IIRC the number system we use came from the Arabs and the "0" was invented by the Indians, all very Eastern to me and nothing to do with Western imperialism/colonization.
If it was not for the above we would all still be using Roman numerals.
The 0-9 numerical system was (as far as current evidence can tell) invented in northern India. It spread around India and around a bit further, then Arabs encountered it and started using it, spreading it further, then Europeans encountered it and started using it, spreading it further. So Europeans got it from Arabs, but Arabs got it from Indians. There's no sign of it being anywhere before it was being used in India, so the currently available evidence indicates that it was invented in India.
More specifically, a Persian mathematician wrote a maths textbook (they did a lot of other work in maths too, but the textbook is what's relevant here) that was very good and became a standard text for teaching higher maths in the Arabic empire. By that point, the Indian 0-9 numerical system was already the standard in the Arabic empire, so the mathematician was using it. That maths textbook found its way into Europe and with it the Indian 0-9 numerical system. Since the book was written in Arabic and contained maths that was a development of Euclidean maths but new to European scholars (having been invented by the Persian mathematician who wrote the book), it was widely (but incorrectly) assumed that the 0-9 numerical system was also an Arabic invention. That assumption stuck for a long time. In my lifetime, 0-9 was still being referred to as "Arabic numerals". Maybe it still is.
The 0-9 numerical system spread so much because it was simply better than what people were using before. Arabs realised that as soon as they encountered it from Indian sources and Europeans realised that as soon as they encountered it from Arab sources. Both Arabs and Europeans modified the forms of the numerals, but the evidence for the 0-9 system goes back to India.
[..] If it was not for the above we would all still be using Roman numerals.
Which is not at all good for doing anything involving maths. Not just mathematicians. Merchants, architects, builders...all sorts of things. It's doable, but a 0-9 system is so much easier to use.
Ironically 2 + 2 = 5 was a thing among the woke on twitter not too long ago!
See, for example, this classic:
This is why they can't be real scientists.
And yea I don't our "maths" system is even western in origin. But it is global and universal...
I didn't see what was wrong with your premise, the silent majority understood : those, denying or criticizing Meghans unsubstantiated personal truth, now have a special place in hell awaiting them.
I'm wondering if the PM can't demand inspection of this review the royal family are conducting, like the Priti report.
Thread should be re-named the rise and fall of the Markles;
have they decided yet what font the Mail on Sundays apology will be in ... or how the newspaper will enforce their electronic readers to review it, will it be like a gdpr popup.
HARRY AND MEGHAN’S NEW STRATEGIST SAYS ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE ‘RIFE WITH INTERNALISED RACISM’
“Race is an issue in our marriage because as a white woman of privilege, I have racist tendencies written in at a cellular level.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/harry-meghan-genevieve-roth-b1821582.html
“Race is an issue in our marriage because as a white woman of privilege, I have racist tendencies written in at a cellular level.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/harry-meghan-genevieve-roth-b1821582.html
HARRY AND MEGHAN’S NEW STRATEGIST SAYS ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE ‘RIFE WITH INTERNALISED RACISM’
“Race is an issue in our marriage because as a white woman of privilege, I have racist tendencies written in at a cellular level.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/harry-meghan-genevieve-roth-b1821582.html
So...it seems they're going full racist. It was the obvious political choice, her best route to more power.
I think everyone will have some inherently racist thought patterns from time to time in the sense that we all prefer what we know and distrust what we don’t. We like familiarity and dislike the unknown. We are consciously able to recognise and act on these feelings or not.
I don’t think that has anything to do with being or a particular race though.
I don’t think that has anything to do with being or a particular race though.
Are you suggesting that Black and Asian people are racist at a cellular/generic level because of their ethnicity and skin colour. That's a disgusting, abhorrent and quite frankly racist comment to make
If you said the same about white people it would be ok though......
I agree with you though that perhaps we all have a level of bias towards those who are 'different' from ourselves. However, many of the people who claim to be anti-racist are often worse than those they accuse. They clearly have just as much "unconcious bias" themsevles and are trying to rationalise it with comments like "all white people are racist" IMO.
I accept that maybe everyone has the same level of unconcoius bias but they way some people talk about it you'd think it was something genetic in "white people" that's the cause! The funny thing is if you suggest that all people regardless of whether they've white,black, asias, ect are biased to some degree you'd probably be accused of being a racist!
Last edited:
Is that racist or is it simply cultural. How can something be racist when you do it to one group and not when you do it to another. If it was racially driven then you wouldn't apply that same logic to the other group. It would be like calling someone racist for not liking rap music when they don't like Swedish house music either.
This is kind of where society has come to. Where we are so keen to scream racism at anything deemed negative towards someone of colour instead of perhaps wondering if there could be another reason for it.
“Race is an issue in our marriage because as a white woman of privilege, I have racist tendencies written in at a cellular level.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/harry-meghan-genevieve-roth-b1821582.html
I read that article and its actually sad how she has convinced herself that any behaviour of her husbands is OK because be is black and she is white.
He got so angry that he nearly crashed the car which could have killed them but its OK, he was worried that if a cop stops him for expired plates they might decide to shoot him for no reason. Man she is so racist for not knowing that its a serious concern for black people if they have expired plates. He is not at all at fault for nearly crashing the car.
She pushed him to negotiate a better salary without realising black men are underpaid even compared to white women!!!! Lets ignore for a second that the wage gap has been demonstrably disproved when you look at anything beyond the "average man gets X, average woman gets Y" and try and understand how its racist for her to try and help him get a better salary.
I don't understand what its like to go without food every day, I don't understand what its like to have so much money that spending £1m on a wedding is nothing. This is simply ignorance of things outside your sphere of knowledge. Its not racist to not know what other people deal with.
“To be raised white in America is to be told in countless small ways that how you live is correct. It means having your image and your values reflected back at you – in the education you received, the toys you were sold, the ideals of beauty you were given”
Yeah, its called culture. If you go to Ghana they won't be teaching you American culture, religious ideals or asking you to vote for the president of the US. US culture is driving by its white population, thats true but it has a rich tapestry of different cultures that are interwoven with white culture. Any countries culture will be directed by the dominant group whether they are black or white.
I genuinely have no idea what the end game for people like this. Do they want every country to have the same culture and somehow educate everyone on every different culture, way of thinking and ideas.
We keep giving nutters like her a voice instead of people who can deal with issues of actual racism and bigotry rather than the "racism is everywhere and occurs every time anything negative happens to a person of colour".
Last edited:
Did you meant to quote me here? It doesn’t seem to relate to what I posted.
In case you did mean to quote me, if it helps to clarify I was saying that everyone has a natural tendency to discriminate in favour of what they are familiar with and that isn’t of itself abhorrent.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,317
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
I wouldn't call it racist but inherently prejudice. This is 10,000 years of human evolution. You're not going to get rid of that in a hurry despite what you do on the face of it. It is always going to be there in the back of your mind. Modern society is a drop in the ocean compared to what has come before.
Because it's an extremely effective control mechanism and Meghan knows this. And once someone is branded as racist it's difficult to come back from it.
As Monty Python said, "let's face it, deep down we're all bigots".
I think everyone has a percentage of racism in them, it's genetic. And that goes for all races. Whether one makes a conscious effort to suppress that or educate themselves above it is another matter.
EDIT: I think "racism" is the wrong word actually. More like caution or apprehension. "Racism" is too strong.
I did mean to reply to you. You said "racist thought patterns" whereas I would simply call them cultural. Its not racist when you don't understand or know about a different culture. I just really hate the overuse and application of racism to everything at the moment.
Your clarification makes more sense.
Discrimination is also something that is completely unavoidable. We discriminate against less attractive people, people we don't like, people who don't share our values or like the same humour. Any time you choose one person over another you are discriminating. Its free will and choice and its almost impossible to know where to draw the line between negative discrimination and simple choice.
I think the word "discriminate" didn't originally have negative connotations. It just meant one had the ability to sort positive from negative via subjective preference. It's only recently it's taken on a wholly negative meaning.
Its genuinely dangerous that we allow people to label others racist, sexist etc without an actual shred of evidence. The rise of labelling people with nasty attributes that are completely disprovable by their very nature. The fact that unconscious bias has become a recognised thing boggles the mind. Its just another stick to beat people with who don't agree with your world view. "Oh thats just your unconscious bias talking", no, its the fact that I don't like that person because they are rude and I don't think I will get on with them. The fact they are a woman or black has nothing to do with it.
Yes, I was grouping ‘inherently racist’ as a part of what you are calling ‘inherent prejudice’ - there is going to be some inherent prejudice against things you are unfamiliar with. Some of this prejudice of human instinct is understandably going to favour groups of people that you are familiar with.
@fez have now seen your reply also.
From that, I’m gathering that you have both picked up on and scrutinised my use of the word ‘racist’ when describing inherent prejudice from natural human emotions.
In this context, I was not prescribing any fault to any person that has these feelings (as I said, everyone has them). I think that you have both read that word and, understandably considering the modern usage, applied it as being a ‘negative thing’ or something to be ‘frowned upon’ which was not what I meant.
So I hope that clears it up.
It does make me recall a thought I had the other day about the use of the word ‘racist’ and how the label of being racist (or avoiding being called racist) seems to actually be more provoking now than actually being (or not being) racist, which is a strange state of affairs.
@fez @adam cool dude
Fleshing out my post above, I do not actually think there is any disagreement on what is being said, only we are interpreting the word ‘racist’ as being different things.
I am more broadly considering racism to just be ‘unfair discrimination against people based on race’ and therefore I think people can have thoughts and feelings that do this, without there necessarily being any maliciousness to it or any objectionable behaviour.
I think you both associate the word racist in a narrower sense of it being “behaviour that is inherently negative” and are inferring that natural behaviour as I describe should not be described as racist as it’s not malicious.
Ultimately, none of us think that harmless thoughts or feelings are ‘inherently bad things’.
It’s actually pretty interesting to see our different takes on it.
Neither is ‘correct’ but I do prefer my approach because I think the other leads to a weaponisation of the word and also “labelling and a fear of labelling” (but I accept that my way of thinking is not how it’s currently dealt with in the media with this whole dramatic “Someone accused someone of being RACIST” thing).
Fleshing out my post above, I do not actually think there is any disagreement on what is being said, only we are interpreting the word ‘racist’ as being different things.
I am more broadly considering racism to just be ‘unfair discrimination against people based on race’ and therefore I think people can have thoughts and feelings that do this, without there necessarily being any maliciousness to it or any objectionable behaviour.
I think you both associate the word racist in a narrower sense of it being “behaviour that is inherently negative” and are inferring that natural behaviour as I describe should not be described as racist as it’s not malicious.
Ultimately, none of us think that harmless thoughts or feelings are ‘inherently bad things’.
It’s actually pretty interesting to see our different takes on it.
Neither is ‘correct’ but I do prefer my approach because I think the other leads to a weaponisation of the word and also “labelling and a fear of labelling” (but I accept that my way of thinking is not how it’s currently dealt with in the media with this whole dramatic “Someone accused someone of being RACIST” thing).