Boots cutting 4000 jobs. I would hate to be applying for a job now. I remember how hard it was in the early 80s getting work. In my opinion it is going to be even harder now.
Sunak is getting a good press now, but I reckon he is in deep trouble. Deep trouble.
When he comes to have to raise taxes on in a desperate attempt to make ends meet it will be like asking a skeleton to give blood.
The economy will just be too weak. His only other opinion, draconian spending cuts, has already been ruled out by his boss.
I suspect the time for tax rises won't be in 2021 but in 2022/23 by which point it will be Sunak's successor's problem as Sunak looks on from No 10...
Interesting idea. If and when Boris goes, I'm not sure Sunak will have things all his own way.
A candidate from the right may emerge. A conservative!
Sunak is most definitely a conservative, these are extraordinary times and getting the UK into a V shaped recovery is worth whatever it costs. The long term damage of anything else will out weigh whatever the short term costs of achieving the V shaped recovery.
Well you know what I am like, I just do not buy the extraordinary times argument. We are always living in extraordinary times and have done for centuries, but I am not sure we have ever been presented with the economic circumstances we face now.
So an economic period where suddenly we have to shut down 50% of the economy isn't extraordinary?
We never had to shut down anything. We never have before, after all, no matter what the circumstances. The economy's collapsed before, true, but not at the government's order.
We chose to shut the economy down.
Actually we have. This has been pointed out to you many times but you keep ignoring it.
Plagues have resulted in lockdowns before
what has been presented to me is evidence of strong measures by the authorities to quarantine the sick. I accept those and also the argument the economy would have taken a big hit anyway, as it has in the past vie the evidence of 1920 etc.
I have never seen any evidence that whole industries were shut down by government fiat and these measures backed up with the legally enforced house arrest of the healthy.
I still maintain that what is extraordinary is not the circumstances but the response to them.
Shutdowns due to viruses have occurred before, though the economy now is very different to how it used to be last time this was necessary. The economy now is much more services based.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
An annual wealth tax of 0.6% of all UK held assets to replace IT wouldn't be a terrible idea. If the USA is able to maybe get their billionaire tax in in Biden's first term it could look more attractive for elsewhere to do so too. I'm basing the 0.6% off of the Duke of Westminster's trust arrangements in case anyone is wondering.
Could you explain what you mean regarding the 0.6% and the Duke of Westminster's trust arrangements please?
“ Many hands began to scan around for the next plateau Some say it was Greenland, and some say Mexico Others decided it was nowhere except for where they stood But those were all just guesses Wouldn't help you if they could”
Surely the option of tax rises on higher earners is out of the question for the Tories since they would be attacking most of their donors
There are precisely no options for Sunak. The super rich never pay more tax, ever. Surely the fact every attempt to get them to do so since the war has failed would be the clinching argument there.
The poor cannot pay more because their marginal tax rates are already high.
Which essentially leave the bedrock of property owning tory voters in middle England.
To say Sunak's options are unpalatable would be a big understatement.
Really been enjoying your posts of late - agreed with all of them.
You agree that the government had no need to lockdown? Very transparent.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
Whitelist/blacklist is offensive. It is literally saying white is good/allowed, black is bad/forbidden.
If you're offended by using allowlist/blocklist instead then quit being a whinging snowflake and get over it.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
Its neither rude nor offensive. But combined with hundreds of other cases of language using white as good and black as bad it re-enforces our subconscious biases. That is why people are moving away from usage.
The thing that some people clearly understand about economics and others clearly don't is that it is circulation that matters.
Giving money to struggling businesses/individuals does absolutely nothing for the macro economy whatsoever as they cling on to that cash (and then continue to struggle if they're not getting anything circulated back to them).
What is needed is to get money circulating again. That is why I have been calling for a VAT cut here for months. And I've been laughed at here saying we need tax cuts with replies like "yeah and I'd like a supermodel".
Cutting VAT and similar issues on the struggling hospitality sectors will allow money to circulate more in those sectors - and allow businesses to cope with thicker margins on smaller volumes - thus saving the sector from a catastrophe and in the long-term the government will make more tax revenue despite temporarily lower taxes.
Essentially adjusting for the time value of money the peak of the Laffer Curve has temporarily moved far to the left of the graph and the government needs to respond accordingly.
Wasn't there an old song about the circulation of money? The lines "see the money flow, round the Barley Mow" float into my head but Google finds nothing.
No one cut teachers salaries for exactly the reason in that film
Not all government spending is productive or useful
This is true. But government spends money more "wisely" than private individuals.
You really believe that?
Yes he does. He`s a collectivist. The rest of us see it the other way round.
Well that's nice. I feel totally exposed now. Friendless and alone in the midst of the bustling crowd.
Nobody can say categorically that either the public or private sectors spend money more efficiently. It depends on the circumstances. The public sector is able to look at the big picture and the public good, and spend on things where the social return outweighs any private benefit. But the private sector usually does a better job on cost effectiveness and avoiding waste (not always in large bureaucratic firms where managers are spending other people's money). Depending on what factor is most important for the matter at hand, either could be the wiser. Anyone who takes a black and white position on this is just posturing, or hasn't thought about it very seriously.
A fair summary. On waste, though, I did see eye watering amounts of it in the City during my time. In the boom times hidden by revenues.
Yes- from a perspective as a teacher in the state / academy sector, I wonder if the difference is more about the range than the average. Private enterprise can give super efficiency and effectiveness, but it can also lead to spectacular wasteful madness; remember boo.com, anyone? State systems tend to be more consistently average. You see the same thing when council schools become more business-like academies.
So which is better? I'm willing to believe that, in terms of creating wealth and new stuff, a mixture of triumph and disaster is a smart plan; the wins pay for the losses overall. But that attitude of making multiple bets so that one or two come off is harder to apply to things that governments do, like health.
The language used here to describe the initial UK Covid testing plan, feels out of place:
I think if we are to progress, the state needs to embrace failure as an option. In many fields, the attempt to guarantee success before any change, leads to total stagnation.
You have a rose-tinted view of the private sector. One feature of the failure of large corporations in recent years is that the owners and directors seem to walk away with fairly large bank balances, fuelled by ridiculous salaries and bonuses. Corporate failure doesn't equate to personal privation, usually.
And in the state sector, failure often has consequences. As an example, not many headteachers or college principals who fail an Ofsted inspection survive in their jobs.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
The thing that some people clearly understand about economics and others clearly don't is that it is circulation that matters.
Giving money to struggling businesses/individuals does absolutely nothing for the macro economy whatsoever as they cling on to that cash (and then continue to struggle if they're not getting anything circulated back to them).
What is needed is to get money circulating again. That is why I have been calling for a VAT cut here for months. And I've been laughed at here saying we need tax cuts with replies like "yeah and I'd like a supermodel".
Cutting VAT and similar issues on the struggling hospitality sectors will allow money to circulate more in those sectors - and allow businesses to cope with thicker margins on smaller volumes - thus saving the sector from a catastrophe and in the long-term the government will make more tax revenue despite temporarily lower taxes.
Essentially adjusting for the time value of money the peak of the Laffer Curve has temporarily moved far to the left of the graph and the government needs to respond accordingly.
Wasn't there an old song about the circulation of money? The lines "see the money flow, round the Barley Mow" float into my head but Google finds nothing.
No one cut teachers salaries for exactly the reason in that film
Not all government spending is productive or useful
This is true. But government spends money more "wisely" than private individuals.
You really believe that?
Yes he does. He`s a collectivist. The rest of us see it the other way round.
Well that's nice. I feel totally exposed now. Friendless and alone in the midst of the bustling crowd.
Nobody can say categorically that either the public or private sectors spend money more efficiently. It depends on the circumstances. The public sector is able to look at the big picture and the public good, and spend on things where the social return outweighs any private benefit. But the private sector usually does a better job on cost effectiveness and avoiding waste (not always in large bureaucratic firms where managers are spending other people's money). Depending on what factor is most important for the matter at hand, either could be the wiser. Anyone who takes a black and white position on this is just posturing, or hasn't thought about it very seriously.
A fair summary. On waste, though, I did see eye watering amounts of it in the City during my time. In the boom times hidden by revenues.
Yes- from a perspective as a teacher in the state / academy sector, I wonder if the difference is more about the range than the average. Private enterprise can give super efficiency and effectiveness, but it can also lead to spectacular wasteful madness; remember boo.com, anyone? State systems tend to be more consistently average. You see the same thing when council schools become more business-like academies.
So which is better? I'm willing to believe that, in terms of creating wealth and new stuff, a mixture of triumph and disaster is a smart plan; the wins pay for the losses overall. But that attitude of making multiple bets so that one or two come off is harder to apply to things that governments do, like health.
The language used here to describe the initial UK Covid testing plan, feels out of place:
I think if we are to progress, the state needs to embrace failure as an option. In many fields, the attempt to guarantee success before any change, leads to total stagnation.
You have a rose-tinted view of the private sector. One feature of the failure of large corporations in recent years is that the owners and directors seem to walk away with fairly large bank balances, fuelled by ridiculous salaries and bonuses. Corporate failure doesn't equate to personal privation, usually.
And in the state sector, failure often has consequences. As an example, not many headteachers or college principals who fail an Ofsted inspection survive in their jobs.
Headteachers leave with big pension packages
But earned over the years. Not given to them simply because they are failing. Let alone discretionary bonuses and further directorships.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
Nope. You're rude and lazy, and based on available evidence, probably a bigot too. Everything you say reinforces this position.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
Whitelist/blacklist is offensive. It is literally saying white is good/allowed, black is bad/forbidden.
If you're offended by using allowlist/blocklist instead then quit being a whinging snowflake and get over it.
And you call yourself a libertarian? Are you kidding?
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
Absolutely use whatever words you want. Freedom of speech. And others will judge you for it. Freedom of speech has never been freedom from other people making judgments on what you say.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
So what do you define as ordinary language?
Is saying white is right and black is bad ordinary language? Is calling black people n****r ordinary language?
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
Whitelist/blacklist is offensive. It is literally saying white is good/allowed, black is bad/forbidden.
If you're offended by using allowlist/blocklist instead then quit being a whinging snowflake and get over it.
And you call yourself a libertarian? Are you kidding?
I am a libertarian. You can be a libertarian without being an arsehole.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
Nope. You're rude and lazy, and based on available evidence, probably a bigot too. Everything you say reinforces this position.
Everything you say reinforces the idea that you have no ability to think for yourself, and would do or think anything in response to the slightest social pressure. A perfectly compliant drone, in other words.
Spanish researchers develop treatment that drastically cuts mortality in critically ill Covid-19 patients
A group of Spanish scientists have identified a stem-cell treatment which tests suggest can decrease the mortality rate by 70 percent among critically ill Covid-19 patients.
Researchers at Spain’s Universidad Miguel Hernández (UMH) in Elche have announced that they have developed a stem-cell treatment which can decrease the mortality rate in Covid-19 sufferers who are in a critical condition from the current average of 85 percent to 15 percent.
The treatment was given to 13 Covid-19 patients who had been admitted to the ICU, were on a ventilator and had not responded favourably to conventional treatments.
All but two patients who died responded favourably to the medication, with a generalised clinical and radiological (X-ray results) improvement and no side effects detected.
In fact, the results suggest that the new treatment increases the presence of T lymphocytes - immune response cells which attack the virus - and B lymphocytes which synthesize the appropriate antibodies.
Most of the patients were taken off the ventilator during the data collection period, which reflects the marked improvement in their condition.
The treatment, dubbed the BALMYS-19 project, has seen six other universities take part as well as six Spanish hospitals.
Their research has been published in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet.
This all-Spanish Covid-19 treatment is based on stem cells with regenerative, anti-inflammatory and immunoregulatory properties Source: The Local.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
Nope. You're rude and lazy, and based on available evidence, probably a bigot too. Everything you say reinforces this position.
Everything you say reinforces the idea that you have no ability to think for yourself, and would do or think anything in response to the slightest social pressure. A perfectly compliant drone, in other words.
That's exactly the kind of thing my racist uncle would say. Apparently being a bigot is "thinking for yourself".
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Language evolves, me old china.
As a lad I often heard the expression 'nigger in the woodpile'. It has vanished now, partly because 'fly in the ointment' works as well. I don't think the intention was ever racist but I accept that language is important and we all need to take care.
Btw, I have often heard the expression '..he's a white man' to indicate 'one of us, good chap etc', usually in business circles and quite recently too. I actually find it quite amusing; there is a certain jocular irony about it. But I wouldn't use it myself.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
Whitelist/blacklist is offensive. It is literally saying white is good/allowed, black is bad/forbidden.
If you're offended by using allowlist/blocklist instead then quit being a whinging snowflake and get over it.
And you call yourself a libertarian? Are you kidding?
I am a libertarian. You can be a libertarian without being an arsehole.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Language evolves, me old china.
As a lad I often heard the expression 'nigger in the woodpile'. It has vanished now, partly because 'fly in the ointment' works as well. I don't think the intention was ever racist but I accept that language is important and we all need to take care.
Btw, I have often heard the expression '..he's a white man' to indicate 'one of us, good chap etc', usually in business circles and quite recently too. I actually find it quite amusing; there is a certain jocular irony about it. But I wouldn't use it myself.
I have never heard that expression before but it horrifies me!
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
Nope. You're rude and lazy, and based on available evidence, probably a bigot too. Everything you say reinforces this position.
Everything you say reinforces the idea that you have no ability to think for yourself, and would do or think anything in response to the slightest social pressure. A perfectly compliant drone, in other words.
That's exactly the kind of thing my racist uncle would say. Apparently being a bigot is "thinking for yourself".
So exercising your own judgement is always the wrong thing to do because your racist uncle once advocated it? My God, that's an awful argument.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
My thoughts exactly. Who cares? If people are somehow happier with a different word being used, then it's just polite to use a different word. I don't understand why some people appear to be irrationally attached to words like "whitelist".
Why do the views of those who are happier to use the word not count?
But if we're going to be banning common usages, my number one proposal would be to ban the new-fangled use of the word 'survivor' to mean a victim of sexual abuse. I find this really quite offensive and grating, when there's a perfectly reasonable word already, and 'survivor' means something quite different.
That's not a good example, Richard. There is a genuine benefit in dropping "victim". People do not like to be thought of as victims of something. It has negative connotations of powerlessness and ongoing definition of yourself by it. Survivor is more empowering.
So a victim of a burglary now has to be called a survivor of a burglary?
Sorry, words matter. They should, above all be precise. A victim is not a survivor, unless there was a substantial risk of death. A resident of Grenfell Tower who managed to get out on that fateful night is a survivor. A chap who had a teacher who liked to touch him sexually is not.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
Nope. You're rude and lazy, and based on available evidence, probably a bigot too. Everything you say reinforces this position.
Everything you say reinforces the idea that you have no ability to think for yourself, and would do or think anything in response to the slightest social pressure. A perfectly compliant drone, in other words.
That's exactly the kind of thing my racist uncle would say. Apparently being a bigot is "thinking for yourself".
So exercising your own judgement is always the wrong thing to do because your racist uncle once advocated it? My God, that's an awful argument.
You're just an arsehole for the sake of it. You enjoy annoying "lefties" and "wokeists". You don't think for yourself at all, you just enjoy other people being miserable.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Language evolves, me old china.
As a lad I often heard the expression 'nigger in the woodpile'. It has vanished now, partly because 'fly in the ointment' works as well. I don't think the intention was ever racist but I accept that language is important and we all need to take care.
Btw, I have often heard the expression '..he's a white man' to indicate 'one of us, good chap etc', usually in business circles and quite recently too. I actually find it quite amusing; there is a certain jocular irony about it. But I wouldn't use it myself.
On the other hand, “In the black” as opposed to “in the red” i.e. in credit and the most positive of all The All Blacks - the most successful team in any sport in history
Surely the option of tax rises on higher earners is out of the question for the Tories since they would be attacking most of their donors
Correct, so they will just borrow more.
It will take a Starmer Government for big tax increases to occur
How can we just borrow more when we have been told for over a decade there is no magic money tree and it will be for our grandchildren to pay back?
You're now supportive of unlimited spending, i.e. you're a Labour 2019 supporter are you?
No, as the Tories still oppose tax increases even if they are now easing off the spending austerity they imposed from 2010.
Labour now supports big spending and tax increases, the Tories support big spending but not raising tax
And what should we call this Tory approach?
Do we prefer "maxing out the credit card" or "living on the never never"?
Living on the never never is quite appropriate.
I think austerity was initially needed but then overdone, especially post about 2013 and dont mind the current extra spending given covid.
However the repeated argument on here, that public spending now is impossible to support for people who opposed public spending in 2008 is quite bizarre. The world economy is far from static so requires different responses to every situation.
Mr. Thompson, being in the black is considered good (profitable).
White and black and descriptors that don't have to be about race.
Never brown in town is promoting black shoes when applying for legal/financial jobs in the city, but that's nothing to do with race either.
A lot of negative connotations are simply about the dark (night) being scary, and light (bright sunny days) being good.
Of course they don't. But if it would be better for racial and community cohesion to phase out some arbitrary ones, such as blacklist and whitelist, then why on earth wouldn't we, other than laziness?
Surely the option of tax rises on higher earners is out of the question for the Tories since they would be attacking most of their donors
Correct, so they will just borrow more.
It will take a Starmer Government for big tax increases to occur
How can we just borrow more when we have been told for over a decade there is no magic money tree and it will be for our grandchildren to pay back?
You're now supportive of unlimited spending, i.e. you're a Labour 2019 supporter are you?
No, as the Tories still oppose tax increases even if they are now easing off the spending austerity they imposed from 2010.
Labour now supports big spending and tax increases, the Tories support big spending but not raising tax
Can we make you eat that post if it turns out not to be true by this time next year?
It won't be, Boris could not care less about the deficit unlike Cameron and May. He is a populist not a deficit hawk
As usual can anyone with two braincells to rub together please realise that HYUFD is speaking for himself and not the Tory party or Boris.
I am not, Boris is increasing spending more than any Tory leader since Macmillan
Which is true, but you have also hinted that this won't have to be paid for (i.e. by not raising taxes- which is fantastic...but unlikely).
We're going to pay for it, they are just relying on Labour mopping up afterwards. It's interesting that the position of the parties seems to have reversed.
I suspect a lot of this is true. In particular, China is clearly using social media to hijack political campaigns - XR, Stop the war, BLM. It hopes to undermine western self confidence, and sabotage liberal democracy.
China knows that Free Speech is a cornerstone of Western power and influence. If they get us to tear it down by ourselves, they achieve a great victory without a shot being fired.
Surely the option of tax rises on higher earners is out of the question for the Tories since they would be attacking most of their donors
Correct, so they will just borrow more.
It will take a Starmer Government for big tax increases to occur
How can we just borrow more when we have been told for over a decade there is no magic money tree and it will be for our grandchildren to pay back?
You're now supportive of unlimited spending, i.e. you're a Labour 2019 supporter are you?
No, as the Tories still oppose tax increases even if they are now easing off the spending austerity they imposed from 2010.
Labour now supports big spending and tax increases, the Tories support big spending but not raising tax
Can we make you eat that post if it turns out not to be true by this time next year?
It won't be, Boris could not care less about the deficit unlike Cameron and May. He is a populist not a deficit hawk
As usual can anyone with two braincells to rub together please realise that HYUFD is speaking for himself and not the Tory party or Boris.
I am not, Boris is increasing spending more than any Tory leader since Macmillan
Which is true, but you have also hinted that this won't have to be paid for (i.e. by not raising taxes- which is fantastic...but unlikely).
We're going to pay for it, they are just relying on Labour mopping up afterwards. It's interesting that the position of the parties seems to have reversed.
I'd be surprised if they didn't start mopping up themselves, as it were.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
Nope. You're rude and lazy, and based on available evidence, probably a bigot too. Everything you say reinforces this position.
Everything you say reinforces the idea that you have no ability to think for yourself, and would do or think anything in response to the slightest social pressure. A perfectly compliant drone, in other words.
Just because black list Etc was/ is in common use does not make it right. If you continue to use the word when explained in context as to how it is offensive shows you actually don’t care about inequality and prejudice.
I suspect a lot of this is true. In particular, China is clearly using social media to hijack political campaigns - XR, Stop the war, BLM. It hopes to undermine western self confidence, and sabotage liberal democracy.
China knows that Free Speech is a cornerstone of Western power and influence. If they get us to tear it down by ourselves, they achieve a great victory without a shot being fired.
They are winning. They may have just won.
It is both sides that are the problem. The whiners on the left on Twitter, as well as the frothers on the right like @BluestBlue. The total lack of self awareness on both sides is ridiculous.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Well someone in the 18th century decided to rename Bubonic Plague/Great Mortality/Great Death as Black Death......whats to stop the 21st century choosing a name that fits our times?
Black Death was not a term used by the people of the time.
That's a really interesting point.
That said, we are humans whose physical existence depends firstly on the sun, and secondly on our mimicry of the sun with fire, electric light etc. - to save us from darkness which equals nothingness and death. Light vs. darkness is a common theme across cultures (not just white ones), and I don't see that this can, or potentially should, be overidden because the social mores of our era are weighted so heavily toward the giving of offence being censurable. In an ideal world, 'black' things would be decoupled from racial identity.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
Nope. You're rude and lazy, and based on available evidence, probably a bigot too. Everything you say reinforces this position.
Everything you say reinforces the idea that you have no ability to think for yourself, and would do or think anything in response to the slightest social pressure. A perfectly compliant drone, in other words.
That's exactly the kind of thing my racist uncle would say. Apparently being a bigot is "thinking for yourself".
So exercising your own judgement is always the wrong thing to do because your racist uncle once advocated it? My God, that's an awful argument.
You're just an arsehole for the sake of it. You enjoy annoying "lefties" and "wokeists". You don't think for yourself at all, you just enjoy other people being miserable.
I would maintain that the lefties and wokeists are the ones annoying me by trying to butcher our common linguistic and cultural inheritance. I can see why it might be annoying that not everyone shares your love of automatic, uncritical compliance with every new diktat, but I'm afraid that's just life.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
Whitelist/blacklist is offensive. It is literally saying white is good/allowed, black is bad/forbidden.
If you're offended by using allowlist/blocklist instead then quit being a whinging snowflake and get over it.
I didn’t even know there was such a thing as a whitelist
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
Nope. You're rude and lazy, and based on available evidence, probably a bigot too. Everything you say reinforces this position.
Everything you say reinforces the idea that you have no ability to think for yourself, and would do or think anything in response to the slightest social pressure. A perfectly compliant drone, in other words.
Just because black list Etc was/ is in common use does not make it right. If you continue to use the word when explained in context as to how it is offensive shows you actually don’t care about inequality and prejudice.
On the list of priorities for people of colour who still experience racism these days, I'm sure the choice of terminology used in computing is way, way down near the bottom.
Mr. Thompson, being in the black is considered good (profitable).
White and black and descriptors that don't have to be about race.
Never brown in town is promoting black shoes when applying for legal/financial jobs in the city, but that's nothing to do with race either.
A lot of negative connotations are simply about the dark (night) being scary, and light (bright sunny days) being good.
I agree that day/night are the origins and not race but at a time when we know there is subconscious racial bias against black people I do think for common decency purposes to stop using the word black as a pejorative is not unreasonable.
Good example about finance though, that is a rare example where its the other way around.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Well someone in the 18th century decided to rename Bubonic Plague/Great Mortality/Great Death as Black Death......whats to stop the 21st century choosing a name that fits our times?
Black Death was not a term used by the people of the time.
That's a really interesting point.
That said, we are humans whose physical existence depends firstly on the sun, and secondly on our mimicry of the sun with fire, electric light etc. - to save us from darkness which equals nothingness and death. Light vs. darkness is a common theme across cultures (not just white ones), and I don't see that this can, or potentially should, be overidden because the social mores of our era are weighted so heavily toward the giving of offence being censurable. In an ideal world, 'black' things would be decoupled from racial identity.
Of course in the ideal world where racism wasnt an issue these words wouldnt be an issue. If you know how to teleport us into that ideal world, great, otherwise they remain problematic. I agree the original meaning of the words is often from day/night but that doesnt stop them re-enforcing our sub conscious biases around white good, black bad.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
It's a very similar situation to 'breast' and 'leg' of chicken changing in Victorian times to 'white meat' and 'drumstick'. There were probably some diehard 'breast and leggers' at the time who thought it was all rot and enjoyed shocking their more prudish children.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Language evolves, me old china.
As a lad I often heard the expression 'nigger in the woodpile'. It has vanished now, partly because 'fly in the ointment' works as well. I don't think the intention was ever racist but I accept that language is important and we all need to take care.
Btw, I have often heard the expression '..he's a white man' to indicate 'one of us, good chap etc', usually in business circles and quite recently too. I actually find it quite amusing; there is a certain jocular irony about it. But I wouldn't use it myself.
I have never heard that expression before but it horrifies me!
Perhaps one day people will be equally horrified at the 'flyist' version.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Language evolves, me old china.
As a lad I often heard the expression 'nigger in the woodpile'. It has vanished now, partly because 'fly in the ointment' works as well. I don't think the intention was ever racist but I accept that language is important and we all need to take care.
Btw, I have often heard the expression '..he's a white man' to indicate 'one of us, good chap etc', usually in business circles and quite recently too. I actually find it quite amusing; there is a certain jocular irony about it. But I wouldn't use it myself.
I have never heard that expression before but it horrifies me!
Another one is eeny-meeny-miny-mo. As a kid (in the 80s) I heard and spoke the next line as 'catch a nicker by his toe', assuming nicker meant thief. I actually don't know for certain what words my parents were saying when I was learning this - may have to ask them... I doubt anyone here is going to defend use of the original US version of the rhyme, so there is a point at acceptable things become accepted as unacceptable.
A free software community I've been involved in has periodic heated debates about master/slave (KDE, libraries used to handle remote filesystems transparently as if they were local, without mounting, known as KIO slaves). For most the word contributors slave does not conjure up notions of slavery, it's just a technical word, but for others it does and people have strong views on each side. I'd be quite happy to switch if it offends anyone - 'KIO helpers/services/libs' - because it's just a word and as long as everyone understands what it is I don't care what the word is. Same with whitelist/blacklist. If I'm in an organisation that decides to use safelist/banlist or goodlist/badlist or similar I couldn't care less.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
My thoughts exactly. Who cares? If people are somehow happier with a different word being used, then it's just polite to use a different word. I don't understand why some people appear to be irrationally attached to words like "whitelist".
Why do the views of those who are happier to use the word not count?
But if we're going to be banning common usages, my number one proposal would be to ban the new-fangled use of the word 'survivor' to mean a victim of sexual abuse. I find this really quite offensive and grating, when there's a perfectly reasonable word already, and 'survivor' means something quite different.
That's not a good example, Richard. There is a genuine benefit in dropping "victim". People do not like to be thought of as victims of something. It has negative connotations of powerlessness and ongoing definition of yourself by it. Survivor is more empowering.
So a victim of a burglary now has to be called a survivor of a burglary?
Sorry, words matter. They should, above all be precise. A victim is not a survivor, unless there was a substantial risk of death. A resident of Grenfell Tower who managed to get out on that fateful night is a survivor. A chap who had a teacher who liked to touch him sexually is not.
It's where a person has come through a sustained ordeal at the hands of others. Sexual abuse. Torture. This sort of thing. In which case they WERE a victim (negative) but they are NOW a survivor (positive). To keep calling them a victim cements the negative.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Language evolves, me old china.
As a lad I often heard the expression 'nigger in the woodpile'. It has vanished now, partly because 'fly in the ointment' works as well. I don't think the intention was ever racist but I accept that language is important and we all need to take care.
Btw, I have often heard the expression '..he's a white man' to indicate 'one of us, good chap etc', usually in business circles and quite recently too. I actually find it quite amusing; there is a certain jocular irony about it. But I wouldn't use it myself.
I have never heard that expression before but it horrifies me!
Perhaps one day people will be equally horrified at the 'flyist' version.
The last time I heard the woodpile expression was at a hustings in Pulbrough, 2001 now? (UKIP candidate obvs) To be fair, he was ancient - probably no longer with us.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
Which would be as incorrect as the rest of your laughable suggestions. There is no right not to be offended.
Nobody is saying there is a right not to be offended.
There is however a common understanding amongst civilised people that they should be polite, and not deliberately rude.
You seem to be want to be rude to prove a point. That makes you a dick.
There is also a common understanding that ordinary language should not be effaced when its usage is - as you say - not deliberately rude: 'whitelist' is a good example of precisely that. You'll only find that rude or offensive if you are actively seeking to be offended.
So what? If someone is offended, and there's literally no downside to using a different word, then we should.
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
The onus is not on the users of ordinary language to pander to perpetually-offended idiots. It's called freedom of thought and expression - you should look into it one day.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Well someone in the 18th century decided to rename Bubonic Plague/Great Mortality/Great Death as Black Death......whats to stop the 21st century choosing a name that fits our times?
Black Death was not a term used by the people of the time.
Was it not? I've learned something then - I'd always assumed the name was linked to blackening of the skin due to gangrene.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
So ... what? We should rewrite our entire language - even including historical terms such as the Black Death, ffs! - just to appease the irrational obsessions of some perpetually-offended snowflakes? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody is suggesting we rewrite our entire language including historical terms. Just some terms that are in daily usage are being phased out in favour of better ones. If that upsets you, then I suggest that you are the snowflake.
I'd say that is exactly what they are suggesting - with the proviso that it is calibrated by whatever they have decided to be offended about this particular week.
See for example "niggardly" in the 1999 Madison case, when "niggardly" in Chaucer was viewed as racist (which, as we know, is untrue).
From wiki: "a junior English major and vice chairwoman of the Black Student Union told the group how a professor teaching Chaucer had used the word niggardly. She later said she was unaware of the related Washington, D.C., controversy that had come to light the week before. She said the professor continued to use the word even after she told him that she was offended. "I was in tears, shaking," she told the faculty. "It's not up to the rest of the class to decide whether my feelings are valid." https://reason.com/1999/07/01/cracking-the-speech-code/
In that case it is precisely for the rest of the class to explain that.
If somebody gets offended because they have believed their own made-up fiction or are pursuing a game of Victim Narrative Top Trumps in search of attention, then it is an indicator of ignorance, not a flag to censor a word.
Surely the option of tax rises on higher earners is out of the question for the Tories since they would be attacking most of their donors
Correct, so they will just borrow more.
It will take a Starmer Government for big tax increases to occur
How can we just borrow more when we have been told for over a decade there is no magic money tree and it will be for our grandchildren to pay back?
You're now supportive of unlimited spending, i.e. you're a Labour 2019 supporter are you?
No, as the Tories still oppose tax increases even if they are now easing off the spending austerity they imposed from 2010.
Labour now supports big spending and tax increases, the Tories support big spending but not raising tax
And what should we call this Tory approach?
Do we prefer "maxing out the credit card" or "living on the never never"?
Living on the never never is quite appropriate.
I think austerity was initially needed but then overdone, especially post about 2013 and dont mind the current extra spending given covid.
However the repeated argument on here, that public spending now is impossible to support for people who opposed public spending in 2008 is quite bizarre. The world economy is far from static so requires different responses to every situation.
It is an artificial word chosen as the opposite of “blacklist” - which at least has some history.
I think it’s silly that people get upset about the word as it clearly isn’t racist. But if they do, then find a new word (how about “Safelist”). No biggie.
I hadn't known of the existence of the word 'whitelist' until I saw that tweet so am somewhat behind the curve at being upset at its banning.
Same here. Never heard of it. So a choice now. I can mug up on it, maybe use it a few times, and then drop it under protest of "cancel culture". Or I can just not bother. Second seems more efficient but I do have time on my hands today.
Obviously on its own its not a problem, its in the context of how much of our language re-enforces white as good and black as bad.
Just off the top of my head
White magic v Black magic White witch White lies Black sheep Blackball Blackmail Black mark Black death
Even for new words like white hat hacker it is just assumed that white is good.
Is it really so difficult to understand that if your group is treated negatively by society, then having language that re-enforces sub conscious biases isnt helpful?
Totally agree. Language is very important.
One party can't control how another party controls language, and it is bonkers to try. You'll all reach the twentieth century eventually.
Comments
You only don't want to, because you want to prove a point. That's just rude and lazy.
https://www.pruadviser.co.uk/knowledge-literature/oracle-plus/discretionary-trust-10-yearly-charge/#
0.6% is that annualised-ish.
Some say it was Greenland, and some say Mexico
Others decided it was nowhere except for where they stood
But those were all just guesses
Wouldn't help you if they could”
https://twitter.com/pwyowell/status/1281204575819759617?s=21
If you're offended by using allowlist/blocklist instead then quit being a whinging snowflake and get over it.
What about those with mobility problems, should they be described as "cripples"?
Labour now supports big spending and tax increases, the Tories support big spending but not raising tax
It always does...
Or don't you tories care about living within our means anymore?
Is saying white is right and black is bad ordinary language?
Is calling black people n****r ordinary language?
A group of Spanish scientists have identified a stem-cell treatment which tests suggest can decrease the mortality rate by 70 percent among critically ill Covid-19 patients.
Researchers at Spain’s Universidad Miguel Hernández (UMH) in Elche have announced that they have developed a stem-cell treatment which can decrease the mortality rate in Covid-19 sufferers who are in a critical condition from the current average of 85 percent to 15 percent.
The treatment was given to 13 Covid-19 patients who had been admitted to the ICU, were on a ventilator and had not responded favourably to conventional treatments.
All but two patients who died responded favourably to the medication, with a generalised clinical and radiological (X-ray results) improvement and no side effects detected.
In fact, the results suggest that the new treatment increases the presence of T lymphocytes - immune response cells which attack the virus - and B lymphocytes which synthesize the appropriate antibodies.
Most of the patients were taken off the ventilator during the data collection period, which reflects the marked improvement in their condition.
The treatment, dubbed the BALMYS-19 project, has seen six other universities take part as well as six Spanish hospitals.
Their research has been published in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet.
This all-Spanish Covid-19 treatment is based on stem cells with regenerative, anti-inflammatory and immunoregulatory properties
Source: The Local.
Do we prefer "maxing out the credit card" or "living on the never never"?
Btw, I have often heard the expression '..he's a white man' to indicate 'one of us, good chap etc', usually in business circles and quite recently too. I actually find it quite amusing; there is a certain jocular irony about it. But I wouldn't use it myself.
Would also be interested in hearing @Philip_Thompson 's answer to this question.
Sorry, words matter. They should, above all be precise. A victim is not a survivor, unless there was a substantial risk of death. A resident of Grenfell Tower who managed to get out on that fateful night is a survivor. A chap who had a teacher who liked to touch him sexually is not.
White and black and descriptors that don't have to be about race.
Never brown in town is promoting black shoes when applying for legal/financial jobs in the city, but that's nothing to do with race either.
A lot of negative connotations are simply about the dark (night) being scary, and light (bright sunny days) being good.
I think austerity was initially needed but then overdone, especially post about 2013 and dont mind the current extra spending given covid.
However the repeated argument on here, that public spending now is impossible to support for people who opposed public spending in 2008 is quite bizarre. The world economy is far from static so requires different responses to every situation.
It simply comes down to laziness.
https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1280966277343981568?s=20
I suspect a lot of this is true. In particular, China is clearly using social media to hijack political campaigns - XR, Stop the war, BLM. It hopes to undermine western self confidence, and sabotage liberal democracy.
China knows that Free Speech is a cornerstone of Western power and influence. If they get us to tear it down by ourselves, they achieve a great victory without a shot being fired.
They are winning. They may have just won.
They all need to get a f*cking grip.
That said, we are humans whose physical existence depends firstly on the sun, and secondly on our mimicry of the sun with fire, electric light etc. - to save us from darkness which equals nothingness and death. Light vs. darkness is a common theme across cultures (not just white ones), and I don't see that this can, or potentially should, be overidden because the social mores of our era are weighted so heavily toward the giving of offence being censurable. In an ideal world, 'black' things would be decoupled from racial identity.
And it turns out that it's too big (and probably just too out of the way) to be profitable.
NEW THREAD
Good example about finance though, that is a rare example where its the other way around.
A free software community I've been involved in has periodic heated debates about master/slave (KDE, libraries used to handle remote filesystems transparently as if they were local, without mounting, known as KIO slaves). For most the word contributors slave does not conjure up notions of slavery, it's just a technical word, but for others it does and people have strong views on each side. I'd be quite happy to switch if it offends anyone - 'KIO helpers/services/libs' - because it's just a word and as long as everyone understands what it is I don't care what the word is. Same with whitelist/blacklist. If I'm in an organisation that decides to use safelist/banlist or goodlist/badlist or similar I couldn't care less.
See for example "niggardly" in the 1999 Madison case, when "niggardly" in Chaucer was viewed as racist (which, as we know, is untrue).
From wiki: "a junior English major and vice chairwoman of the Black Student Union told the group how a professor teaching Chaucer had used the word niggardly. She later said she was unaware of the related Washington, D.C., controversy that had come to light the week before. She said the professor continued to use the word even after she told him that she was offended. "I was in tears, shaking," she told the faculty. "It's not up to the rest of the class to decide whether my feelings are valid."
https://reason.com/1999/07/01/cracking-the-speech-code/
In that case it is precisely for the rest of the class to explain that.
If somebody gets offended because they have believed their own made-up fiction or are pursuing a game of Victim Narrative Top Trumps in search of attention, then it is an indicator of ignorance, not a flag to censor a word.
At least I hope not.
Or has MaxPB banned it because he is offended?