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

chroniclard said:
Never seen so many white snow flakes crying so much about being repressed. Completely pathetic bunch of ragers. :cry:
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for the claim that age restrictions in playgrounds is evidence of systemic discrimination against white men...
 
mmj_uk said:
Taking note of a persons skin colour and allowing it to influence behaviour is what allowed 1500+ white girls to be systematically groomed and raped by majority Pakistani gangs. Racial identity politics is toxic in so many ways. If local Labour councils and woke police officers just treated all people as equal under the law they could have dealt with it earlier on and it wouldn't have become so widespread.

1500+ abused girls up and down the country would probably argue that the UK is rigged in favour of ethnic minorities.
Click to expand...


Nothing to see here.

Rochdale grooming gang member 'pictured in the town six years after he was supposed to be deported'

Taxi driver and Muslim preacher Abdul Rauf, 51, was convicted of trafficking and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with a child
Click to expand...

He was jailed for six years, however, he was released in November 2014 after serving two years and six months of his sentence.

In July 2015, The Home Office began the process of removing Rauf's British citizenship and those of two other men convicted alongside him - Adil Khan, 51 and Abdul Aziz, 50 - who all had dual UK-Pakistani citizenship, in order to pave the way for their deportation.

The trio challenged the move, saying it breached their human rights and the rights of their children.
Click to expand...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ma...le-grooming-gang-member-pictured-20322998.amp
 
Dolph said:
Because they are no less credible than the outrage scenarios being posted seriously by others?
Click to expand...

I believe The Running Man (who are these "others") has touched on some genuine matters which may not have been presented or defended in the best way.

But if you believe he's posting garbage, why is your response to stoop lower and invent garbage to post multiple times instead of discussing what he actually posts.

Doesn't have to be a **** throwing contest.
 
Hotwired said:
I believe The Running Man (who are these "others") has touched on some genuine matters which may not have been presented or defended in the best way.

But if you believe he's posting garbage, why is your response to stoop lower and invent garbage to post multiple times instead of discussing what he actually posts.

Doesn't have to be a **** throwing contest.
Click to expand...

Racism is the irrational response of simple minds, you can't reason with the irrational.
 
Stumble Bum said:
Perhaps comment on the genuine scenarios then instead of making up ones to fit your narrative.
Click to expand...

Already did.

Dolph said:
The mere existence of such schemes in no way demonstrates that the white male is at an net disadvantage.
Click to expand...

Dolph said:
I'm not an advocate of equality of outcomes, I am, however, an advocate of the value of diversity. That doesn't just relate to race, gender etc, even within the generally considered homogenous groups that are straight white men and women, there is a huge range of experiences and values.

While a given role clearly has basic criteria that any applicant must meet, you want a range of personalities and experiences backing up those skills and training, and some of those people that make great contributions would get lost or wouldn't even think to apply in a standard hiring process, and in that case, targeted recruitment plans should be considered acceptable.

Now, if there are blanket hiring policies in place, or programs aimed simply to make up numbers, that's something different that I don't agree with.
Click to expand...

Essentially it's cherry picking examples that look bad in isolation while failing to acknowledge that, far from establishing a pattern of discrimination, they are actually specific responses to a pattern of discrimination.
 
Personally, having read as much as I could have the report (a bit of skim reading in places), I don't really understand where all this discussion has come from..

The underlying findings acknowledge the 'disparities' that affect everyone, and suggest methods of improving things, and acknowledge out and out racism is one aspect.

Lets hope common sense prevails
 
Stumble Bum said:
Perhaps comment on the genuine scenarios then instead of making up ones to fit your narrative.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately he (and others here) are starting from the viewpoint that racism is/must be the cause of various problems, and the people who don't agree (or challenge/ask for evidence) are also part of the problem (ie racists).

You can't reason with these people ;)

^^That part is a jokey reference to Dolph's cop-out response.

If both sides take the snarky attitude that "the other side are too ignorant to discuss things with", then you have no hope of a sensible discussion.

But I don't believe certain posters want a discussion, just blind obedience to the narrative.
 
Demon said:
Personally, having read as much as I could have the report (a bit of skim reading in places), I don't really understand where all this discussion has come from..
Click to expand...

Many groups stand to lose power and influence over government and major organisations if the government accepts that institutional racism isn't a meaningful factor holding back minority groups in this country.

The report clearly states that racism is a thing and a problem but it's at the level of joe public and you get no power out of accusing joe public of being racist.

So there's substantial bias visible from some towards wanting institutional racism to be hyped up and deliberately confused with casual racism because the report damages the existence of their jobs.


That's what most of this thread is padded with at any rate, arguing over how racist the institution and thread posters are. Barely been more than a handful of words on the many quite reasonable suggestions in the report.
 
Dolph said:
Already did.

Essentially it's cherry picking examples that look bad in isolation while failing to acknowledge that, far from establishing a pattern of discrimination, they are actually specific responses to a pattern of discrimination.
Click to expand...
I can't believe the irony/hypocrisy in your posts. Let me refer you to what you said earlier.

Talking about examples of "affirmative action"/"positive discrimination":
Dolph said:
The mere existence of such schemes in no way demonstrates that the white male is at an net disadvantage.
Click to expand...
Dolph said:
I'm not an advocate of equality of outcomes, I am, however, an advocate of the value of diversity. That doesn't just relate to race, gender etc, even within the generally considered homogenous groups that are straight white men and women, there is a huge range of experiences and values.

While a given role clearly has basic criteria that any applicant must meet, you want a range of personalities and experiences backing up those skills and training, and some of those people that make great contributions would get lost or wouldn't even think to apply in a standard hiring process, and in that case, targeted recruitment plans should be considered acceptable.

Now, if there are blanket hiring policies in place, or programs aimed simply to make up numbers, that's something different that I don't agree with.
Click to expand...
So...

#Believes that black (etc) people start at a disadvantage due to race and racism.
#Believes that "positive discrimination" does not disadvantage the majority, merely re-balances the disadvantage.
#Chastises the majority for "feeling disadvantaged when there is no proof" - oh the irony of this one. Where is the proof of the "systemic racism"? Yet there is documented proof of the various schemes implementing "affirmative action".
#Goes on to make various accusations of racism and invent various fictitious arguments to respond to.

The whole "systemic racism" argument is so lacking in proof it's absurd. And yet actual proof of "affirmative action" is dismissed, with the incredibly hypocritical argument that "your feelings of discrimination (against whites) do not amount to proof."

It's so delicious in its irony and absurdity.

e: forgot this one..
#Believes that white people are diverse, black people are diverse, but not that black people and white people can share similar experiences, or similar ideas or political leanings.
#Believes that having black/asian people in your workforce guarantees "diversity", because black/asian people can't be of a similar character/experience to any white boy.

My conclusion: @Dolph's ideas are incredibly racist.
 
FoxEye said:
I can't believe the irony/hypocrisy in your posts. Let me refer you to what you said earlier.

Talking about examples of "affirmative action"/"positive discrimination":


So...

#Believes that black (etc) people start at a disadvantage due to race and racism.
#Believes that "positive discrimination" does not disadvantage the majority, merely re-balances the disadvantage.
#Chastises the majority for "feeling disadvantaged when there is no proof" - oh the irony of this one. Where is the proof of the "systemic racism"? Yet there is documented proof of the various schemes implementing "affirmative action".
#Goes on to make various accusations of racism and invent various fictitious arguments to respond to.

The whole "systemic racism" argument is so lacking in proof it's absurd. And yet actual proof of "affirmative action" is dismissed, with the incredibly hypocritical argument that "your feelings of discrimination (against whites) do not amount to proof."

It's so delicious in its irony and absurdity.

e: forgot this one..
#Believes that white people are diverse, black people are diverse, but not that black people and white people can share similar experiences, or similar ideas or political leanings.
#Believes that having black/asian people in your workforce guarantees "diversity", because black/asian people can't be of a similar character/experience to any white boy.

My conclusion: @Dolph's ideas are incredibly racist.
Click to expand...

Your ability to draw incorrect and irrelevant conclusions is truly impressive.

Still, it's probably the first time I've been considered a woke lefty.
 
Dolph said:
Your ability to draw incorrect and irrelevant conclusions is truly impressive.

Still, it's probably the first time I've been considered a woke lefty.
Click to expand...
Your beliefs as expressed (the sum of) are highly contradictory and conflicting.

I'm surprised you can't see it.

Here's a hint: most/all "affirmative action" schemes are drawn along the lines of race and sex.

You stated that these schemes do not disadvantage the other races/sexes that don't benefit.

When asked if you agreed with equality of outcome you went off on a tangent about "diversity". Then said that "white people are diverse" but that didn't stop the need for "more diversity". You used this as a justification of "affirmative action" schemes. Run along the lines of race and sex.

Hence you must believe that skin colour determines many things about a person, such that having a workforce with many different skin colours guarantees a workforce with a "more diverse" set of ideas/experiences.

None of what you said is the slightest bit convincing, and as a package the sum total of what you said barely makes any sense as a coherent position. *Unless* you believe that people with different skin colour can't be similar. Either in upbringing, experience, or equality of opportunity.
 
Demon said:
Personally, having read as much as I could have the report (a bit of skim reading in places), I don't really understand where all this discussion has come from..

The underlying findings acknowledge the 'disparities' that affect everyone, and suggest methods of improving things, and acknowledge out and out racism is one aspect.

Lets hope common sense prevails
Click to expand...

There seems to be more discussion of the opinions of #twitterpeople than the actual report contents.

I thought the report was pretty good, and made some interesting recommendations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom