Wait until you hear about the similar technology at least one bank has looked at rolling out that is very similar to that (this is pre plague.)
Also looked at putting the face of customers on debit and credit cards to stop in person fraud.
The advantage to the latter is that it would shift liability for frauds to the companies.
Surveys found customers liked it as an anti fraud procedure.
So a national identity card containing vaccination details and every piece if ID with a photo attached.
That will be sold to a frightened public on the basis of being anti-fraud and people will support it. As I've already said, make people scared enough and they'll sign away (and willingly) every freedom they've ever had.
By the way, having read his comments, my estimation of Michael Howard has gone up several notches. The current Government is treating Covid as a form of terrorist attack and using it as a facade for the centralisation of more power in Westminster and Whitehall and the erosion of personal freedoms. The extension of the Covid legislation and Patel's clampdown on peaceful protests are part of this.
Totally agree stodge. Becoming more and more tempted to vote for the Yellow team over the next few years if Boris tries to ram this through. Labour are too weak to oppose anything that will "save the NHS".
Wait until you hear about the similar technology at least one bank has looked at rolling out that is very similar to that (this is pre plague.)
Also looked at putting the face of customers on debit and credit cards to stop in person fraud.
The advantage to the latter is that it would shift liability for frauds to the companies.
Surveys found customers liked it as an anti fraud procedure.
So a national identity card containing vaccination details and every piece if ID with a photo attached.
That will be sold to a frightened public on the basis of being anti-fraud and people will support it. As I've already said, make people scared enough and they'll sign away (and willingly) every freedom they've ever had.
By the way, having read his comments, my estimation of Michael Howard has gone up several notches. The current Government is treating Covid as a form of terrorist attack and using it as a facade for the centralisation of more power in Westminster and Whitehall and the erosion of personal freedoms. The extension of the Covid legislation and Patel's clampdown on peaceful protests are part of this.
That would be the Michael Howard who wanted to introduce ID cards when he was Home Secretary?
Yet, the roll-out has inflicted enormous reputational damage on the EU, even if much of that damage has been fanned by a triumphalist UK press. Indeed, during this week’s summit, the Taoiseach reminded leaders about how exposed Ireland is to the anti-EU odium being pumped out of Fleet Street, and how demoralising it is.
There will be a long and painful inquest into how things might have been done differently, and it may well be that member states will need to grant more powers to Brussels as a result.
So it's all really our fault again, for writing things that Irish people choose to read
Its yet another example of the dangerous fake narrative that is being spread, which the GRU would be proud of....the UK stole our vaccines and also tried to push their ineffective one on us and that is leading to 1000s of unnecessary deaths of Europeans.
Wait until you hear about the similar technology at least one bank has looked at rolling out that is very similar to that (this is pre plague.)
Also looked at putting the face of customers on debit and credit cards to stop in person fraud.
The advantage to the latter is that it would shift liability for frauds to the companies.
Surveys found customers liked it as an anti fraud procedure.
So a national identity card containing vaccination details and every piece if ID with a photo attached.
That will be sold to a frightened public on the basis of being anti-fraud and people will support it. As I've already said, make people scared enough and they'll sign away (and willingly) every freedom they've ever had.
By the way, having read his comments, my estimation of Michael Howard has gone up several notches. The current Government is treating Covid as a form of terrorist attack and using it as a facade for the centralisation of more power in Westminster and Whitehall and the erosion of personal freedoms. The extension of the Covid legislation and Patel's clampdown on peaceful protests are part of this.
Totally agree stodge. Becoming more and more tempted to vote for the Yellow team over the next few years if Boris tries to ram this through. Labour are too weak to oppose anything that will "save the NHS".
Some of us did warn you when Boris Johnson (and Theresa May before him) scooped up so many Henry VIII powers as part of Brexit.
This is quite possibly the most disturbing thing I've read in ages. I hope it's just a journalist getting the wrong end of the wrong stick. If the government introduces anything like this I'll meet everyone at the march to Parliament with torches and pitchforks in hand.
Unfortunately that'll be illegal. Sorry citizen, please return to your home.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
But it is worth reading these types of writings and doing a little self-reflection. I have rarely had to gird myself into a defensive position before starting any activity (ok, a few times working in Iraq, or in the seedier parts of NYC, but not because of who I am). I have rarely had to worry about expected discrimination of any type. Diplomatic circles were probably the closest I have ever come to that - where people have preconceived notions of who you are based on your nationality. But it is not and never was my daily expectation.
Thank the lord. A post with a modicum of insight on this topic rather than facetious dimwittery.
I agree. The Mystal piece is very, very good and insightful.
Thank the lord take two.
I'll be so sad if this place becomes a kind of 'safe space' for people to just bandy about to mutual appreciation a ton of facile, cheap-as-chips sentiment about racism.
Yet, the roll-out has inflicted enormous reputational damage on the EU, even if much of that damage has been fanned by a triumphalist UK press. Indeed, during this week’s summit, the Taoiseach reminded leaders about how exposed Ireland is to the anti-EU odium being pumped out of Fleet Street, and how demoralising it is.
There will be a long and painful inquest into how things might have been done differently, and it may well be that member states will need to grant more powers to Brussels as a result.
So it's all really our fault again, for writing things that Irish people choose to read
Anglophobia always goes down a storm in Ireland.
To be fair to the Irish any Anglophobia there maybe is understandable.
It's not so long since Tory politicians were quite relaxed at the thought of starving the Irish. And I#m not thinking of the 1840s famine.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
Ok, instead of rocks, how about some elenchus? To start us off, could you explain the exact reason why you and I and civilized people the world over consider racism to be wrong in principle?
Wait until you hear about the similar technology at least one bank has looked at rolling out that is very similar to that (this is pre plague.)
Also looked at putting the face of customers on debit and credit cards to stop in person fraud.
The advantage to the latter is that it would shift liability for frauds to the companies.
Surveys found customers liked it as an anti fraud procedure.
So a national identity card containing vaccination details and every piece if ID with a photo attached.
That will be sold to a frightened public on the basis of being anti-fraud and people will support it. As I've already said, make people scared enough and they'll sign away (and willingly) every freedom they've ever had.
By the way, having read his comments, my estimation of Michael Howard has gone up several notches. The current Government is treating Covid as a form of terrorist attack and using it as a facade for the centralisation of more power in Westminster and Whitehall and the erosion of personal freedoms. The extension of the Covid legislation and Patel's clampdown on peaceful protests are part of this.
Totally agree stodge. Becoming more and more tempted to vote for the Yellow team over the next few years if Boris tries to ram this through. Labour are too weak to oppose anything that will "save the NHS".
Some of us did warn you when Boris Johnson (and Theresa May before him) scooped up so many Henry VIII powers as part of Brexit.
This is quite possibly the most disturbing thing I've read in ages. I hope it's just a journalist getting the wrong end of the wrong stick. If the government introduces anything like this I'll meet everyone at the march to Parliament with torches and pitchforks in hand.
Unfortunately that'll be illegal. Sorry citizen, please return to your home Re-education camp.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
But it is worth reading these types of writings and doing a little self-reflection. I have rarely had to gird myself into a defensive position before starting any activity (ok, a few times working in Iraq, or in the seedier parts of NYC, but not because of who I am). I have rarely had to worry about expected discrimination of any type. Diplomatic circles were probably the closest I have ever come to that - where people have preconceived notions of who you are based on your nationality. But it is not and never was my daily expectation.
Thank the lord. A post with a modicum of insight on this topic rather than facetious dimwittery.
I agree. The Mystal piece is very, very good and insightful.
Thank the lord take two.
I'll be so sad if this place becomes a kind of 'safe space' for people to just bandy about to mutual appreciation a ton of facile, cheap-as-chips sentiment about racism.
Free Speech! - Yay!
Wokery!- Boo!
This is about the level.
Just want to gauge your reaction to The Times article earlier on fiacial recognition linked to the database. Would you be in favour or against if the government said it's the only way to save the NHS and prevent it from being overrun by virus patients?
This is quite possibly the most disturbing thing I've read in ages. I hope it's just a journalist getting the wrong end of the wrong stick. If the government introduces anything like this I'll meet everyone at the march to Parliament with torches and pitchforks in hand.
Unfortunately that'll be illegal. Sorry citizen, please return to your home.
The local Labour politicians have come out in favour of the protestors and are condemning the poor teacher. Who was carefully and politely following the syllabus
Tracy Brabin has come out strongly in support of the school and the Head teacher.
Can you produce some actual evidence for that comment or is it just your typical kneejerk anti-Labour hysteria? It never changes, does it?
"Tracy Brabin, the Labour MP for Batley and Spen, was forced to alter her stance following pressure from the party's leadership after her initial statement appeared to blame the teacher.
"Ms Brabin, also Labour's mayoral candidate for West Yorkshire, issued a statement on Thursday night saying that the "upset and offence" caused by the cartoon being shown in a religious studies lesson was "understandable but also predictable"."
"However, on Friday she released a follow-up statement which said that "no teacher should be facing intimidation or threats". She also called for calm, adding that those who "seek to fan the flames of this incident will only provoke hate and division".
"The Telegraph understands that senior Labour figures suggested Ms Brabin had been told to change tack. Her apparent change in stance came shortly after Kate Green, shadow education secretary, warned that there was "no excuse for intimidation of teachers". "
Yet, the roll-out has inflicted enormous reputational damage on the EU, even if much of that damage has been fanned by a triumphalist UK press. Indeed, during this week’s summit, the Taoiseach reminded leaders about how exposed Ireland is to the anti-EU odium being pumped out of Fleet Street, and how demoralising it is.
There will be a long and painful inquest into how things might have been done differently, and it may well be that member states will need to grant more powers to Brussels as a result.
So it's all really our fault again, for writing things that Irish people choose to read
Anglophobia always goes down a storm in Ireland.
To be fair to the Irish any Anglophobia there maybe is understandable.
It's not so long since Tory politicians were quite relaxed at the thought of starving the Irish. And I#m not thinking of the 1840s famine.
Yup, you'd have thought that alone and forgetting her being a disgraced national security risk would have disbarred her from being Home Secretary.
Yet, the roll-out has inflicted enormous reputational damage on the EU, even if much of that damage has been fanned by a triumphalist UK press. Indeed, during this week’s summit, the Taoiseach reminded leaders about how exposed Ireland is to the anti-EU odium being pumped out of Fleet Street, and how demoralising it is.
There will be a long and painful inquest into how things might have been done differently, and it may well be that member states will need to grant more powers to Brussels as a result.
So it's all really our fault again, for writing things that Irish people choose to read
Anglophobia always goes down a storm in Ireland.
To be fair to the Irish any Anglophobia there maybe is understandable.
It's not so long since Tory politicians were quite relaxed at the thought of starving the Irish. And I#m not thinking of the 1840s famine.
The Irish were pretty relaxed about the Nazis destroying us, iirc. And the Soviets a few decades later for that matter.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
(iii) A Chinese person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be Han Chinese.
(iv) An Indian person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be Hindu.
Yet, the roll-out has inflicted enormous reputational damage on the EU, even if much of that damage has been fanned by a triumphalist UK press. Indeed, during this week’s summit, the Taoiseach reminded leaders about how exposed Ireland is to the anti-EU odium being pumped out of Fleet Street, and how demoralising it is.
There will be a long and painful inquest into how things might have been done differently, and it may well be that member states will need to grant more powers to Brussels as a result.
So it's all really our fault again, for writing things that Irish people choose to read
Anglophobia always goes down a storm in Ireland.
To be fair to the Irish any Anglophobia there maybe is understandable.
It's not so long since Tory politicians were quite relaxed at the thought of starving the Irish. And I#m not thinking of the 1840s famine.
The Irish were pretty relaxed about the Nazis destroying us, iirc. And the Soviets a few decades later for that matter.
The Irish were pretty relaxed about Irish people going over to Britain to blow up British children, until a few years ago. They are famously chilled in these matters.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
They are exact equivalents if you believe in logic, reason and rational thinking.
Wait until you hear about the similar technology at least one bank has looked at rolling out that is very similar to that (this is pre plague.)
Also looked at putting the face of customers on debit and credit cards to stop in person fraud.
The advantage to the latter is that it would shift liability for frauds to the companies.
Surveys found customers liked it as an anti fraud procedure.
So a national identity card containing vaccination details and every piece if ID with a photo attached.
That will be sold to a frightened public on the basis of being anti-fraud and people will support it. As I've already said, make people scared enough and they'll sign away (and willingly) every freedom they've ever had.
By the way, having read his comments, my estimation of Michael Howard has gone up several notches. The current Government is treating Covid as a form of terrorist attack and using it as a facade for the centralisation of more power in Westminster and Whitehall and the erosion of personal freedoms. The extension of the Covid legislation and Patel's clampdown on peaceful protests are part of this.
Totally agree stodge. Becoming more and more tempted to vote for the Yellow team over the next few years if Boris tries to ram this through. Labour are too weak to oppose anything that will "save the NHS".
Some of us did warn you when Boris Johnson (and Theresa May before him) scooped up so many Henry VIII powers as part of Brexit.
This is quite possibly the most disturbing thing I've read in ages. I hope it's just a journalist getting the wrong end of the wrong stick. If the government introduces anything like this I'll meet everyone at the march to Parliament with torches and pitchforks in hand.
Unfortunately that'll be illegal. Sorry citizen, please return to your home.
My home is now a labour camp you say?
It's the 21st century model Glavnoye Upravleniye Lagerey from home.
They weren't violently racist, just crude and silly
Are we really going to destroy people for social media they did in their TEENS? Ten years later?
All those progressives saying, cancel culture, what cancel culture....is this lady now effectively banned from her chosen field for life, despite being now having a reputation for being about as woke as possible.
Revolutions devouring their own. Apparently she was a bit of a canceller herself.
And now it seems one of the people cancelling HER has used the N word on social media many years ago, so the canceller who cancelled the canceller who cancelled someone else, is now getting cancelled.
This guy is going to get chucked under the bus isn't he...
‘The governors are going to consider whether they should ask for the section about blasphemy to be removed from the GCSE RE syllabus which the pupils are taught.
‘It is clear that the teacher in question did all he could to warn the pupils that some might be offended before he showed the caricature.
‘But when you get shouting and swearing and protests at the school gates, any chance of having a sensible debate just dies.'
Yes he is, because it is perfectly possible to teach the subject without showing the images. I do it by discussing the news reports. At the very least, it was a serious lapse of judgement.
But the bigger question is what social conditions render it a serious lapse of judgement? In the olden days not long ago you might say that a young girl walking alone in a quiet and dark place was engaged in a serious lapse of judgement. Now, anyone saying that would have to resign.
Behind the idea of 'lapse of judgement' in the Batley case lies a significant and real fear that a lawful act by a teacher will be followed by deadly, brutal unlawful violence. Just like the girl walking down the street. I want the rights of both to be equally protected. Are they?
50 years ago saying ‘Jesus Christ’ in a lesson would have been a disciplinary offence.
And incidentally I am not certain that this would count as a lawful act. One reason I don’t show these images is because there are restrictions on what images we can show in lessons and I do not think the cartoons would meet them. Certainly not the one of a praying man being sodomised by a dog, or the bomb in a turban.
Let's just hope the teacher isn't beheaded so you don't come across as a clueless, bleating, naive, short-sighted dickhead, eh
Well, let’s hope that he isn’t beheaded as murder is against the law. And even the nastiest human being doesn’t deserve to be murdered (well, perhaps Xi or Jong or Salman). Certainly that is true of teachers. I’ve never known a teacher deliberately set out to harm or upset children. If they do, they don’t last long.
This person doesn’t seem nasty, so much as foolish. A bit like a poster called SeanT we used to have, who uncritically listened to any old bullshit going and believed it all.
But let’s also ask ourselves why somebody would choose to show controversial images unnecessarily and in breach of government guidelines, and then respond to a parental concern by doubling down.
You may not like those questions, but they still need to be asked, because that is how the situation arose.
I suppose the irony is of course that it provides a perfect case study on free speech and blasphemy...which I may well end up using myself...
I have not the slightest sympathy for the protestors in this instance.
Wait until you hear about the similar technology at least one bank has looked at rolling out that is very similar to that (this is pre plague.)
Also looked at putting the face of customers on debit and credit cards to stop in person fraud.
The advantage to the latter is that it would shift liability for frauds to the companies.
Surveys found customers liked it as an anti fraud procedure.
So a national identity card containing vaccination details and every piece if ID with a photo attached.
That will be sold to a frightened public on the basis of being anti-fraud and people will support it. As I've already said, make people scared enough and they'll sign away (and willingly) every freedom they've ever had.
By the way, having read his comments, my estimation of Michael Howard has gone up several notches. The current Government is treating Covid as a form of terrorist attack and using it as a facade for the centralisation of more power in Westminster and Whitehall and the erosion of personal freedoms. The extension of the Covid legislation and Patel's clampdown on peaceful protests are part of this.
That would be the Michael Howard who wanted to introduce ID cards when he was Home Secretary?
Sigh. The problem with ID card is not the ID cards. What Michael Howard was talking about was, essentially a non-driving license version of the photo driving license.
The problem with ID cards is the attempts in this country to attach every single piece of data to it and make it available to every user of the system. Such as the ID cards that New Labour actually introduced. Which included such hilarities as partioning of the system so that VIPs (as decided by the government) would have their data sequestered.
"Britons could have their faces scanned to allow them to access pubs, gigs and sports events under one government-funded plan being drawn up for vaccine passports."
This is quite possibly the most disturbing thing I've read in ages. I hope it's just a journalist getting the wrong end of the wrong stick. If the government introduces anything like this I'll meet everyone at the march to Parliament with torches and pitchforks in hand.
Who are the people thinking up these dystopian schemes?
Tech companies with whizzy ideas (that probably won't work) but see a government splashing contracts out willy nilly.
They weren't violently racist, just crude and silly
Are we really going to destroy people for social media they did in their TEENS? Ten years later?
All those progressives saying, cancel culture, what cancel culture....is this lady now effectively banned from her chosen field for life, despite being now having a reputation for being about as woke as possible.
Revolutions devouring their own. Apparently she was a bit of a canceller herself.
And now it seems one of the people cancelling HER has used the N word on social media many years ago, so the canceller who cancelled the canceller who cancelled someone else, is now getting cancelled.
This guy is going to get chucked under the bus isn't he...
‘The governors are going to consider whether they should ask for the section about blasphemy to be removed from the GCSE RE syllabus which the pupils are taught.
‘It is clear that the teacher in question did all he could to warn the pupils that some might be offended before he showed the caricature.
‘But when you get shouting and swearing and protests at the school gates, any chance of having a sensible debate just dies.'
Yes he is, because it is perfectly possible to teach the subject without showing the images. I do it by discussing the news reports. At the very least, it was a serious lapse of judgement.
But the bigger question is what social conditions render it a serious lapse of judgement? In the olden days not long ago you might say that a young girl walking alone in a quiet and dark place was engaged in a serious lapse of judgement. Now, anyone saying that would have to resign.
Behind the idea of 'lapse of judgement' in the Batley case lies a significant and real fear that a lawful act by a teacher will be followed by deadly, brutal unlawful violence. Just like the girl walking down the street. I want the rights of both to be equally protected. Are they?
50 years ago saying ‘Jesus Christ’ in a lesson would have been a disciplinary offence.
And incidentally I am not certain that this would count as a lawful act. One reason I don’t show these images is because there are restrictions on what images we can show in lessons and I do not think the cartoons would meet them. Certainly not the one of a praying man being sodomised by a dog, or the bomb in a turban.
Let's just hope the teacher isn't beheaded so you don't come across as a clueless, bleating, naive, short-sighted dickhead, eh
Well, let’s hope that he isn’t beheaded as murder is against the law. And even the nastiest human being doesn’t deserve to be murdered (well, perhaps Xi or Jong or Salman). Certainly that is true of teachers. I’ve never known a teacher deliberately set out to harm or upset children. If they do, they don’t last long.
This person doesn’t seem nasty, so much as foolish. A bit like a poster called SeanT we used to have, who uncritically listened to any old bullshit going and believed it all.
But let’s also ask ourselves why somebody would choose to show controversial images unnecessarily and in breach of government guidelines, and then respond to a parental concern by doubling down.
You may not like those questions, but they still need to be asked, because that is how the situation arose.
The questions can be asked, but are not as pressing or important as the reaction even if the answers to those questions reflect poorly on the man or the school. That's why it is perfectly right and proper to prioritise focus on the reaction, even without all the details of the action. Because the answers won't particularly change whether the reaction is proportionate or not.
He's obviously missed the fact that we HAVE a people's vaccine, it is given away at cost, the IP is sent freely abroad, it is called Astra Zeneca, it is highly effective and very safe. It's the same vaccine being smeared and rubbished by the EU and EU governments even as they try to steal it
He's not the brightest button on the pearly king, is he?
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
Ok, instead of rocks, how about some elenchus? To start us off, could you explain the exact reason why you and I and civilized people the world over consider racism to be wrong in principle?
My question first. Do you truly and honestly see those things as equally indicative of racism*? Or do agree with me that (ii) is more so.
Because if you actually can see the difference we don't need to write a screed from first principles.
Yet, the roll-out has inflicted enormous reputational damage on the EU, even if much of that damage has been fanned by a triumphalist UK press. Indeed, during this week’s summit, the Taoiseach reminded leaders about how exposed Ireland is to the anti-EU odium being pumped out of Fleet Street, and how demoralising it is.
There will be a long and painful inquest into how things might have been done differently, and it may well be that member states will need to grant more powers to Brussels as a result.
So it's all really our fault again, for writing things that Irish people choose to read
Anglophobia always goes down a storm in Ireland.
To be fair to the Irish any Anglophobia there maybe is understandable.
It's not so long since Tory politicians were quite relaxed at the thought of starving the Irish. And I#m not thinking of the 1840s famine.
The Irish were pretty relaxed about the Nazis destroying us, iirc. And the Soviets a few decades later for that matter.
The Irish were pretty relaxed about Irish people going over to Britain to blow up British children, until a few years ago. They are famously chilled in these matters.
Their government also did its best to frustrate our democratic decision of five years ago.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
But it is worth reading these types of writings and doing a little self-reflection. I have rarely had to gird myself into a defensive position before starting any activity (ok, a few times working in Iraq, or in the seedier parts of NYC, but not because of who I am). I have rarely had to worry about expected discrimination of any type. Diplomatic circles were probably the closest I have ever come to that - where people have preconceived notions of who you are based on your nationality. But it is not and never was my daily expectation.
Thank the lord. A post with a modicum of insight on this topic rather than facetious dimwittery.
I agree. The Mystal piece is very, very good and insightful.
Thank the lord take two.
I'll be so sad if this place becomes a kind of 'safe space' for people to just bandy about to mutual appreciation a ton of facile, cheap-as-chips sentiment about racism.
Free Speech! - Yay!
Wokery!- Boo!
This is about the level.
Just want to gauge your reaction to The Times article earlier on fiacial recognition linked to the database. Would you be in favour or against if the government said it's the only way to save the NHS and prevent it from being overrun by virus patients?
Sounds a bit OTT but I'm not as spooked as some by high tech ID cards and processes. I'll read the article.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
They are exact equivalents if you believe in logic, reason and rational thinking.
Berlin 1937. An Aryan person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be Aryan
A jewish person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be Jewish.
I think logic reason and rational thinking would admit a lack of equivalence. Do you agree?
Wait until you hear about the similar technology at least one bank has looked at rolling out that is very similar to that (this is pre plague.)
Also looked at putting the face of customers on debit and credit cards to stop in person fraud.
The advantage to the latter is that it would shift liability for frauds to the companies.
Surveys found customers liked it as an anti fraud procedure.
So a national identity card containing vaccination details and every piece if ID with a photo attached.
That will be sold to a frightened public on the basis of being anti-fraud and people will support it. As I've already said, make people scared enough and they'll sign away (and willingly) every freedom they've ever had.
By the way, having read his comments, my estimation of Michael Howard has gone up several notches. The current Government is treating Covid as a form of terrorist attack and using it as a facade for the centralisation of more power in Westminster and Whitehall and the erosion of personal freedoms. The extension of the Covid legislation and Patel's clampdown on peaceful protests are part of this.
That would be the Michael Howard who wanted to introduce ID cards when he was Home Secretary?
Sigh. The problem with ID card is not the ID cards. What Michael Howard was talking about was, essentially a non-driving license version of the photo driving license.
The problem with ID cards is the attempts in this country to attach every single piece of data to it and make it available to every user of the system. Such as the ID cards that New Labour actually introduced. Which included such hilarities as partioning of the system so that VIPs (as decided by the government) would have their data sequestered.
My issue with ID cards of any form is that pre plague I started leaving the house without my wallet because thanks to my phone and watch I had everything I really needed (heck I can even withdraw money from a cash machine without my debit card.)
But I can just imagine the fun a jumped up Napoleons that populate our police forces would have if I couldn't produce my ID card there and then.
He's obviously missed the fact that we HAVE a people's vaccine, it is given away at cost, the IP is sent freely abroad, it is called Astra Zeneca, it is highly effective and very safe. It's the same vaccine being smeared and rubbished by the EU and EU governments even as they try to steal it
He's not the brightest button on the pearly king, is he?
Its a weird narrative Jezza-ites have been pushing for weeks.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
They are exact equivalents if you believe in logic, reason and rational thinking.
Not even under those conditions are they exact equivalents. Imagine a black person going to work in a professional setting in NYC:
Case 1 expects to have a bad interaction with, say, 1% of the group that makes up 70% of the population which has traditionally had power and privilege over said person, and which forms greater than 70% of the population of the environment into which they are going.
Case 2 expects to have a bad interaction with, say, 1% of the group that makes up 9% of the population, but probably 1% of the people they will meet in the day, and over whom said person's group has traditionally had power and privilege.
Not at all equivalent, in any universe of logic, reason and rational thinking.
Surely there will be an audience in Scotland for a liberal pro-independence party? Since Sturgeon became leader even before Covid Scotland had become an extremely nanny state society. Dragonian altitudes to alcohol usage etc. Now with its just passed Hate Crimes Legislation the Sturgeon's SNP has exposed itself as a party that would have been very comfortable living in 'Stasiland' the former East Germany . Salmon as a former racing tipster must be aware of this and will see the scope of building up a liberal pro-independence base
He's obviously missed the fact that we HAVE a people's vaccine, it is given away at cost, the IP is sent freely abroad, it is called Astra Zeneca, it is highly effective and very safe. It's the same vaccine being smeared and rubbished by the EU and EU governments even as they try to steal it
He's not the brightest button on the pearly king, is he?
Its a weird narrative Jezza-ites have been pushing for weeks.
How can you get more People's Vacciney than a Vaccine paid for by the people and given away at cost to anyone, all around the world? They are literally not making a profit (and getting no thanks for it). It is basically communism.
My view is that obsession over race is a phase that we need to go through before everyone starts mixing (lots of James Cleverly, Jessica Ennis-Hills, Chukas, Archies, Sunders etc.) and identifying with a common British heritage again.
The question is whether we can get through it without blowing ourselves up in the meantime, aggravated by the far-Left and state actors like China and Russia.
He's obviously missed the fact that we HAVE a people's vaccine, it is given away at cost, the IP is sent freely abroad, it is called Astra Zeneca, it is highly effective and very safe. It's the same vaccine being smeared and rubbished by the EU and EU governments even as they try to steal it
He's not the brightest button on the pearly king, is he?
Its a weird narrative Jezza-ites have been pushing for weeks.
How can you get more People's Vacciney than a Vaccine paid for by the people and given away at cost to anyone, all around the world? They are literally not making a profit (and getting no thanks for it). It is basically communism.
The Covid death count for the last seven days is now 451, down (if memory serves) from 489 yesterday, with a weekly rate of change of -31.6%.
If that rate of decline continues then we should get down to 100 per day in about another four weeks, and be averaging single figures daily by the end of April.
They weren't violently racist, just crude and silly
Are we really going to destroy people for social media they did in their TEENS? Ten years later?
If you’re editor of ‘Teen Vogue’, not unreasonable.
The internet makes it so much easier for people to reveal character traits that, in olden times, they would have been able to keep under wraps until long after they got the job. It isn’t necessarily a bad thing that those with a dark side can get rumbled before they get given responsibility, rather than after.
Finally, we have an answer to that ancient biblical question let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
They are exact equivalents if you believe in logic, reason and rational thinking.
Not even under those conditions are they exact equivalents. Imagine a black person going to work in a professional setting in NYC:
Case 1 expects to have a bad interaction with, say, 1% of the group that makes up 70% of the population which has traditionally had power and privilege over said person, and which forms greater than 70% of the population of the environment into which they are going.
Case 2 expects to have a bad interaction with, say, 1% of the group that makes up 9% of the population, but probably 1% of the people they will meet in the day, and over whom said person's group has traditionally had power and privilege.
Not at all equivalent, in any universe of logic, reason and rational thinking.
Not at all equivalent, although my reaction to the original article is along the lines of "worse things happen at sea."
Labour really need to dump this cretin. Preferably in a hole deep enough that nobody can hear him.
Tell him we need a People's Vote about a People's Vaccine. That should keep him busy for months. Like the last People's Vote campaign. And with the same outcome.....
The Covid death count for the last seven days is now 451, down (if memory serves) from 489 yesterday, with a weekly rate of change of -31.6%.
If that rate of decline continues then we should get down to 100 per day in about another four weeks, and be averaging single figures daily by the end of April.
We're already well below 100 per day. One of the issues will be cases among unvaccinated people and a high CFR among the over 70s who declined the vaccine. That will keep us in the tens of people for a while before we hit herd immunity. It's not something I think will change our plans though as it will be a short term issue and it is now Darwinism for people who chose not to get it.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
They are exact equivalents if you believe in logic, reason and rational thinking.
Believing in rational thinking is good, I agree. And it's even better if you apply it.
The Covid death count for the last seven days is now 451, down (if memory serves) from 489 yesterday, with a weekly rate of change of -31.6%.
If that rate of decline continues then we should get down to 100 per day in about another four weeks, and be averaging single figures daily by the end of April.
We're already well below 100 per day. One of the issues will be cases among unvaccinated people and a high CFR among the over 70s who declined the vaccine. That will keep us in the tens of people for a while before we hit herd immunity. It's not something I think will change our plans though as it will be a short term issue and it is now Darwinism for people who chose not to get it.
Oops, that was a typo - I meant to key 100 per WEEK.
I suspect that if the death count levels off when it's still in the tens per day then this may be used as a device by some of the more potty scientists to try to frighten the Government into lumbering us with at least some of the restrictions indefinitely - on the basis that 'look, it's still not safe, and what about the people in whom it hasn't worked properly?' But hopefully the sensible faction will win out and the apparatus of suppression can be thrown in the dustbin before too much longer.
It would be a particular pleasure to be rid of the damned masks.
They weren't violently racist, just crude and silly
Are we really going to destroy people for social media they did in their TEENS? Ten years later?
If you’re editor of ‘Teen Vogue’, not unreasonable.
The internet makes it so much easier for people to reveal character traits that, in olden times, they would have been able to keep under wraps until long after they got the job. It isn’t necessarily a bad thing that those with a dark side can get rumbled before they get given responsibility, rather than after.
Finally, we have an answer to that ancient biblical question let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
The Covid death count for the last seven days is now 451, down (if memory serves) from 489 yesterday, with a weekly rate of change of -31.6%.
If that rate of decline continues then we should get down to 100 per day in about another four weeks, and be averaging single figures daily by the end of April.
The figures today were very encouraging indeed.
Deaths at 58 compared to 96 last Saturday, 121 the Saturday before and 158 the Saturday before that.
Also new infections lower than I would have guessed,, 4715 versus 5587 last Saturday.
I'm hearing from multiple sources that excess deaths are trending lower than a normal year.
On topic, I think @Dura_Ace 's summary of Salmond's objectives is basically correct.
An added fantasy of his might be that if he can deny the SNP an overall majority but, say, holds 25 seats in his own right then he can demand Sturgeon's head as a price of a deal, and thus get his revenge.
The politics of that means that Sturgeon will direct her SNP supporters, as far as she can, not to give Alba their list preference.
On topic, I think @Dura_Ace 's summary of Salmond's objectives is basically correct.
An added fantasy of his might be that if he can deny the SNP an overall majority but, say, holds 25 seats in his own right then he can demand Sturgeon's head as a price of a deal, and thus get his revenge.
The politics of that means that Sturgeon will direct her SNP supporters, as far as she can, not to give Alba their list preference.
Yet, the roll-out has inflicted enormous reputational damage on the EU, even if much of that damage has been fanned by a triumphalist UK press. Indeed, during this week’s summit, the Taoiseach reminded leaders about how exposed Ireland is to the anti-EU odium being pumped out of Fleet Street, and how demoralising it is.
There will be a long and painful inquest into how things might have been done differently, and it may well be that member states will need to grant more powers to Brussels as a result.
So it's all really our fault again, for writing things that Irish people choose to read
Anglophobia always goes down a storm in Ireland.
To be fair to the Irish any Anglophobia there maybe is understandable.
To be fair at least they're still 94% English-speaking.
On topic, I think @Dura_Ace 's summary of Salmond's objectives is basically correct.
An added fantasy of his might be that if he can deny the SNP an overall majority but, say, holds 25 seats in his own right then he can demand Sturgeon's head as a price of a deal, and thus get his revenge.
The politics of that means that Sturgeon will direct her SNP supporters, as far as she can, not to give Alba their list preference.
Surely the added goal is the only one he really cares about. Even if he only has 5-7 seats and that is the difference between a separitist majority his price will be Sturgeon's head on a plate.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
Ok, instead of rocks, how about some elenchus? To start us off, could you explain the exact reason why you and I and civilized people the world over consider racism to be wrong in principle?
My question first. Do you truly and honestly see those things as equally indicative of racism*? Or do agree with me that (ii) is more so.
Because if you actually can see the difference we don't need to write a screed from first principles.
The two examples are identical in principle; the only difference between them is historical context. The question is whether it's worth sacrificing the former - which provides the fundamental moral basis for all anti-racism - for the sake of the latter. I happen to think that that is a trade that prioritizes a short-term potential gain at the price of a certain long-term loss.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
They are exact equivalents if you believe in logic, reason and rational thinking.
Believing in rational thinking is good, I agree. And it's even better if you apply it.
You may be operating with a different definition of racism, but the definition was always judging someone solely based on the colour of their skin.
If a black person (the term to me is itself racist by the way) says he/she is proud to be black it implies that he/she thinks being black is better than being white. Therefore to that person every white person is judged inferior and therefore the person is being racist. Ditto the other example.
On topic, I think @Dura_Ace 's summary of Salmond's objectives is basically correct.
An added fantasy of his might be that if he can deny the SNP an overall majority but, say, holds 25 seats in his own right then he can demand Sturgeon's head as a price of a deal, and thus get his revenge.
The politics of that means that Sturgeon will direct her SNP supporters, as far as she can, not to give Alba their list preference.
Surely the added goal is the only one he really cares about. Even if he only has 5-7 seats and that is the difference between a separitist majority his price will be Sturgeon's head on a plate.
I don't think he can demand it if he only has a handful of seats - the SNP will tell him to get lost and challenge Alba to vote down their independence plans.
Yet, the roll-out has inflicted enormous reputational damage on the EU, even if much of that damage has been fanned by a triumphalist UK press. Indeed, during this week’s summit, the Taoiseach reminded leaders about how exposed Ireland is to the anti-EU odium being pumped out of Fleet Street, and how demoralising it is.
There will be a long and painful inquest into how things might have been done differently, and it may well be that member states will need to grant more powers to Brussels as a result.
So it's all really our fault again, for writing things that Irish people choose to read
Anglophobia always goes down a storm in Ireland.
To be fair to the Irish any Anglophobia there maybe is understandable.
My view is that obsession over race is a phase that we need to go through before everyone starts mixing (lots of James Cleverly, Jessica Ennis-Hills, Chukas, Archies, Sunders etc.) and identifying with a common British heritage again.
The question is whether we can get through it without blowing ourselves up in the meantime, aggravated by the far-Left and state actors like China and Russia.
I see it more as a reckoning than an obsession, I think it's necessary and we'll emerge stronger and more at peace from it, and I think 'white privilege' and 'white fragility' are perfectly serviceable and insightful concepts and terms, but nevertheless I do see some dangers and downsides. We don't want to disappear down a rabbit hole and get endlessly introspective and angsty. And the West beats the totalitarian East as a place to live - any day of the week - so let's not forget that.
On topic, I think @Dura_Ace 's summary of Salmond's objectives is basically correct.
An added fantasy of his might be that if he can deny the SNP an overall majority but, say, holds 25 seats in his own right then he can demand Sturgeon's head as a price of a deal, and thus get his revenge.
The politics of that means that Sturgeon will direct her SNP supporters, as far as she can, not to give Alba their list preference.
Surely the added goal is the only one he really cares about. Even if he only has 5-7 seats and that is the difference between a separitist majority his price will be Sturgeon's head on a plate.
I don't think he can demand it if he only has a handful of seats - the SNP will tell him to get lost and challenge Alba to vote down their independence plans.
They won't vote down independence though, they'll just vote down everything else and the main opposition will immediately push a vote of confidence in the SNP and his price then becomes small.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
Ok, instead of rocks, how about some elenchus? To start us off, could you explain the exact reason why you and I and civilized people the world over consider racism to be wrong in principle?
My question first. Do you truly and honestly see those things as equally indicative of racism*? Or do agree with me that (ii) is more so.
Because if you actually can see the difference we don't need to write a screed from first principles.
The two examples are identical in principle; the only difference between them is historical context. The question is whether it's worth sacrificing the former - which provides the fundamental moral basis for all anti-racism - for the sake of the latter. I happen to think that that is a trade that prioritizes a short-term potential gain at the price of a certain long-term loss.
They are only identical in principle if each group is equally represented in society, if each group has equal power in society, and if each person in each group receives equal personal respect.
None of these conditions for equivalence are met.
There is absolutely no need to sacrifice fundamental principles of respect for the individual and equality before the law/god/whatever in order to either recognize or address the very evident racial inequality issues we face.
My view is that obsession over race is a phase that we need to go through before everyone starts mixing (lots of James Cleverly, Jessica Ennis-Hills, Chukas, Archies, Sunders etc.) and identifying with a common British heritage again.
The question is whether we can get through it without blowing ourselves up in the meantime, aggravated by the far-Left and state actors like China and Russia.
I see it more as a reckoning than an obsession, I think it's necessary and we'll emerge stronger and more at peace from it, and I think 'white privilege' and 'white fragility' are perfectly serviceable and insightful concepts and terms, but nevertheless I do see some dangers and downsides. We don't want to disappear down a rabbit hole and get endlessly introspective and angsty. And the West beats the totalitarian East as a place to live - any day of the week - so let's not forget that.
We don't need to do it because it already happened in the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s. Such a waste of time.
My view is that obsession over race is a phase that we need to go through before everyone starts mixing (lots of James Cleverly, Jessica Ennis-Hills, Chukas, Archies, Sunders etc.) and identifying with a common British heritage again.
The question is whether we can get through it without blowing ourselves up in the meantime, aggravated by the far-Left and state actors like China and Russia.
That's a very astute observation.
We might currently be in overshoot territory which winds up the old guard but is probably necessary and which will settle down eventually as you note and as I also hope to something far more positive.
As an example (no not Tandoori Chicken although that is not a bad one) we can look at ska which came from Jamaica and is now I believe part of our common British heritage.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
But it is worth reading these types of writings and doing a little self-reflection. I have rarely had to gird myself into a defensive position before starting any activity (ok, a few times working in Iraq, or in the seedier parts of NYC, but not because of who I am). I have rarely had to worry about expected discrimination of any type. Diplomatic circles were probably the closest I have ever come to that - where people have preconceived notions of who you are based on your nationality. But it is not and never was my daily expectation.
Worth reading the whole thing. The younger generation of academics is increasingly intolerant, way out on the left, and does not believe in Free Speech
Interesting that one of the 'likers' which include all the right wingers on the site is one whose political idol is Enoch Powell. One that found nothing even a little bit iffy with his 'Rivers of Blood' speech. If I was judging values I'd find for the 1 in 4 academics
They weren't violently racist, just crude and silly
Are we really going to destroy people for social media they did in their TEENS? Ten years later?
If you’re editor of ‘Teen Vogue’, not unreasonable.
The internet makes it so much easier for people to reveal character traits that, in olden times, they would have been able to keep under wraps until long after they got the job. It isn’t necessarily a bad thing that those with a dark side can get rumbled before they get given responsibility, rather than after.
Finally, we have an answer to that ancient biblical question let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
None of us would 'scape a whipping if a contentious post from a decade ago was grounds to be sacked.
Indeed. I've known people to act recklessly and stupidly in their youth, and grow up to be fine upstanding citizens. I've seen one or two sink down a black hole despite a good start - usually due to bereavement or drugs, sadly - and, I've also known those who have scrupulous maintained their Ps & Qs throughout but are devious shits at heart. There are also some who've never changed.
You have to judge someone's character fairly in the round, and be willing to give them a second chance when you know they are trying to change and do the right thing. However, social media today seems about casting absolute judgement on others, usually in the hope it deflects attention and suspicion from the accuser.
I'm just glad it wasn't around when I was at university.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
They are exact equivalents if you believe in logic, reason and rational thinking.
Believing in rational thinking is good, I agree. And it's even better if you apply it.
Kinbalu, you're a ceaselessly reasonable poster, but I strongly disagree with you in this subject. Which appears to boil down to if you're white and English, you're irredeemably guilty and had better start apologising. Especially if you're alsi straight and male. Your rules don't appear to hold any other sub-groups to thhe same standard that you hold mine. As you say, let's not throw rocks about it. But I'd at least point out that your position is far from being as self-evident and widely accepted as you appear to think.
My view is that obsession over race is a phase that we need to go through before everyone starts mixing (lots of James Cleverly, Jessica Ennis-Hills, Chukas, Archies, Sunders etc.) and identifying with a common British heritage again.
The question is whether we can get through it without blowing ourselves up in the meantime, aggravated by the far-Left and state actors like China and Russia.
I see it more as a reckoning than an obsession, I think it's necessary and we'll emerge stronger and more at peace from it, and I think 'white privilege' and 'white fragility' are perfectly serviceable and insightful concepts and terms, but nevertheless I do see some dangers and downsides. We don't want to disappear down a rabbit hole and get endlessly introspective and angsty. And the West beats the totalitarian East as a place to live - any day of the week - so let's not forget that.
The one glaring inequality of which very little discussion or calls for radical measures is, of course, class. Do we really think a very poor white person is inherently more privilege than a wealthy black person?
My view is that obsession over race is a phase that we need to go through before everyone starts mixing (lots of James Cleverly, Jessica Ennis-Hills, Chukas, Archies, Sunders etc.) and identifying with a common British heritage again.
The question is whether we can get through it without blowing ourselves up in the meantime, aggravated by the far-Left and state actors like China and Russia.
That's a very astute observation.
We might currently be in overshoot territory which winds up the old guard but is probably necessary and which will settle down eventually as you note and as I also hope to something far more positive.
As an example (no not Tandoori Chicken although that is not a bad one) we can look at ska which came from Jamaica and is now I believe part of our common British heritage.
Thanks. To be fair, it's not mine - well, I've always thought something wasn't quite right about this obsessive 21st Century take on race - but it was Eric Kaufmann who put in into words for me in his book Whiteshift.
It's very good. I'd thoroughly recommend it: it explores (exhaustively) all the issues one isn't supposed to today and the political implications for the West, and he does it professionally, objectively and academically.
On topic, I think @Dura_Ace 's summary of Salmond's objectives is basically correct.
An added fantasy of his might be that if he can deny the SNP an overall majority but, say, holds 25 seats in his own right then he can demand Sturgeon's head as a price of a deal, and thus get his revenge.
The politics of that means that Sturgeon will direct her SNP supporters, as far as she can, not to give Alba their list preference.
Surely the added goal is the only one he really cares about. Even if he only has 5-7 seats and that is the difference between a separitist majority his price will be Sturgeon's head on a plate.
I don't think he can demand it if he only has a handful of seats - the SNP will tell him to get lost and challenge Alba to vote down their independence plans.
They won't vote down independence though, they'll just vote down everything else and the main opposition will immediately push a vote of confidence in the SNP and his price then becomes small.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
They are exact equivalents if you believe in logic, reason and rational thinking.
Believing in rational thinking is good, I agree. And it's even better if you apply it.
You may be operating with a different definition of racism, but the definition was always judging someone solely based on the colour of their skin.
If a black person (the term to me is itself racist by the way) says he/she is proud to be black it implies that he/she thinks being black is better than being white. Therefore to that person every white person is judged inferior and therefore the person is being racist. Ditto the other example.
Again, this is assuming equivalent power within society. The reason that Anglo-Americans don't have a St George's Day parade down 5th Avenue is that they have always been at the top of the power structure.
The reason that it is not inherently racist for a Black or a Puerto Rican to be proud of their heritage is that, in the past, that might have been seen as some badge of shame, or lower social status.
It is interesting that most of those who feel a need to express their pride in being white are precisely those who do not feel themselves to be at the top of society's pecking order.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
Ok, instead of rocks, how about some elenchus? To start us off, could you explain the exact reason why you and I and civilized people the world over consider racism to be wrong in principle?
My question first. Do you truly and honestly see those things as equally indicative of racism*? Or do agree with me that (ii) is more so.
Because if you actually can see the difference we don't need to write a screed from first principles.
The two examples are identical in principle; the only difference between them is historical context. The question is whether it's worth sacrificing the former - which provides the fundamental moral basis for all anti-racism - for the sake of the latter. I happen to think that that is a trade that prioritizes a short-term potential gain at the price of a certain long-term loss.
They are only identical in principle if each group is equally represented in society, if each group has equal power in society, and if each person in each group receives equal personal respect.
None of these conditions for equivalence are met.
There is absolutely no need to sacrifice fundamental principles of respect for the individual and equality before the law/god/whatever in order to either recognize or address the very evident racial inequality issues we face.
US has gone bonkers....women makes crazy statement that Piers Morgan is a definitely racist, not because he said anything racist, but because she felt his tone was racist. Another woman says hold on there, that's crazy, I know this person, he isn't racist..... klaxon goes off, your fired.
It's a blow to the cause of freedom of expression in the western world to not only lose Morgan, but now Osbourne too, but to me "racism" is just a cypher was what has actually driven this one. She was fired for the same reason she was hired - being Sharon Osbourne. It was an asset (for the show), now it's a liability. That's how it goes sometimes.
Never fear. Freedom of expression is alive and well ... for some:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1374385601504440331 To be clear, it’s not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are “bad”; it’s that I’m able to choose when to expose myself to interactions with potentially bad white people. That choice is a privilege I’ve never really had until this past year. Going out into white society for me is a little bit like a beekeeper going to get honey. I know what I’m doing: If I put on the right protection and blow enough smoke, most of the bees will leave me alone and the ones who don’t won’t really cause me that much pain. But I’ve got to put on the suit and the hat with the mesh and carry the smoke machine and be careful every time I want some goddamn honey. This year, it’s been like somebody said, “You know the honey comes in bottles now, right? You don’t have to risk being stung every time you want some food.”
"I want some goddamn honey". Very good!
Of course there are people - and sadly lots of them - whose perspective on racism in western post-colonial societies is so noddy and one dimensional that whenever they see something like this they go, "If a white person said that about black people, there'd be hell to pay! Why is this different?"
But as most on here know, I'm not one of those people.
We know, you don't believe in the equal and non-contingent application of universal principles. But some of us do.
You just refuse to engage with this issue on any level beyond the stupifyingly superficial. For a (very) bright bloke, I find it bizarre. For example, picking up on where we left off before, in a white majority dominant western country with a history of colonialism, imagine both of the following -
(i) A black person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be black.
(ii) A white person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be white.
Are these exact equivalents? Or is (ii) a rather different thing to (i) and more indicative of a racism problem?
To me, the answer is blindingly obvious. It's the latter. And tbh, if somebody can't see this, I don't think there is any chance of a productive conversation on the subject. All we can do is throw rocks.
They are exact equivalents if you believe in logic, reason and rational thinking.
Believing in rational thinking is good, I agree. And it's even better if you apply it.
You may be operating with a different definition of racism, but the definition was always judging someone solely based on the colour of their skin.
If a black person (the term to me is itself racist by the way) says he/she is proud to be black it implies that he/she thinks being black is better than being white. Therefore to that person every white person is judged inferior and therefore the person is being racist. Ditto the other example.
Again, this is assuming equivalent power within society. The reason that Anglo-Americans don't have a St George's Day parade down 5th Avenue is that they have always been at the top of the power structure.
The reason that it is not inherently racist for a Black or a Puerto Rican to be proud of their heritage is that, in the past, that might have been seen as some badge of shame, or lower social status.
It is interesting that most of those who feel a need to express their pride in being white are precisely those who do not feel themselves to be at the top of society's pecking order.
Comments
I'll be so sad if this place becomes a kind of 'safe space' for people to just bandy about to mutual appreciation a ton of facile, cheap-as-chips sentiment about racism.
Free Speech! - Yay!
Wokery!- Boo!
This is about the level.
The EU's abysmal vaccine failure doesn't justify our vote to leave
BY GILES FRASER"
https://unherd.com/2021/03/you-wont-catch-me-crowing-about-brexit/
"Ms Brabin, also Labour's mayoral candidate for West Yorkshire, issued a statement on Thursday night saying that the "upset and offence" caused by the cartoon being shown in a religious studies lesson was "understandable but also predictable"."
"However, on Friday she released a follow-up statement which said that "no teacher should be facing intimidation or threats". She also called for calm, adding that those who "seek to fan the flames of this incident will only provoke hate and division".
"The Telegraph understands that senior Labour figures suggested Ms Brabin had been told to change tack. Her apparent change in stance came shortly after Kate Green, shadow education secretary, warned that there was "no excuse for intimidation of teachers". "
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/26/labour-teaching-union-accused-not-enough-bately-teacher/
You did all fill the car with petrol, didn’t you?
(iv) An Indian person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be Hindu.
Where do you stand on those?
https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1375810518724796418
The problem with ID cards is the attempts in this country to attach every single piece of data to it and make it available to every user of the system. Such as the ID cards that New Labour actually introduced. Which included such hilarities as partioning of the system so that VIPs (as decided by the government) would have their data sequestered.
If the EU makes a mess of something, it's needs more powers over member states. If it does something well, it deserves more powers over member states.
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1375828241127243778?s=20
He's not the brightest button on the pearly king, is he?
Because if you actually can see the difference we don't need to write a screed from first principles.
* https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
A jewish person makes a big deal of proclaiming they are proud to be Jewish.
I think logic reason and rational thinking would admit a lack of equivalence. Do you agree?
But I can just imagine the fun a jumped up Napoleons that populate our police forces would have if I couldn't produce my ID card there and then.
Case 1 expects to have a bad interaction with, say, 1% of the group that makes up 70% of the population which has traditionally had power and privilege over said person, and which forms greater than 70% of the population of the environment into which they are going.
Case 2 expects to have a bad interaction with, say, 1% of the group that makes up 9% of the population, but probably 1% of the people they will meet in the day, and over whom said person's group has traditionally had power and privilege.
Not at all equivalent, in any universe of logic, reason and rational thinking.
Since Sturgeon became leader even before Covid Scotland had become an extremely nanny state society.
Dragonian altitudes to alcohol usage etc.
Now with its just passed Hate Crimes Legislation the Sturgeon's SNP has exposed itself as a party that would have been very comfortable living in 'Stasiland' the former East Germany .
Salmon as a former racing tipster must be aware of this and will see the scope of building up a liberal pro-independence base
What a tool
The question is whether we can get through it without blowing ourselves up in the meantime, aggravated by the far-Left and state actors like China and Russia.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1371911395395112965?s=19
Labour Richard Burgon 19,464 49.8 -11.6
Conservative Jill Mortimer 13,933 35.7 +5.1"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeds_East_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
"2021 Hartlepool by-election:
Labour Paul Williams
Conservative Jill Mortimer"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartlepool_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
If that rate of decline continues then we should get down to 100 per day in about another four weeks, and be averaging single figures daily by the end of April.
The answer is @IanB2
I suspect that if the death count levels off when it's still in the tens per day then this may be used as a device by some of the more potty scientists to try to frighten the Government into lumbering us with at least some of the restrictions indefinitely - on the basis that 'look, it's still not safe, and what about the people in whom it hasn't worked properly?' But hopefully the sensible faction will win out and the apparatus of suppression can be thrown in the dustbin before too much longer.
It would be a particular pleasure to be rid of the damned masks.
Deaths at 58 compared to 96 last Saturday, 121 the Saturday before and 158 the Saturday before that.
Also new infections lower than I would have guessed,, 4715 versus 5587 last Saturday.
I'm hearing from multiple sources that excess deaths are trending lower than a normal year.
Yet here we are ...
'The problem is the bow is in Asia and the stern in Africa'
An added fantasy of his might be that if he can deny the SNP an overall majority but, say, holds 25 seats in his own right then he can demand Sturgeon's head as a price of a deal, and thus get his revenge.
The politics of that means that Sturgeon will direct her SNP supporters, as far as she can, not to give Alba their list preference.
If a black person (the term to me is itself racist by the way) says he/she is proud to be black it implies that he/she thinks being black is better than being white. Therefore to that person every white person is judged inferior and therefore the person is being racist. Ditto the other example.
2017 - 12,752
2019 - 5,531
Except against the French.
None of these conditions for equivalence are met.
There is absolutely no need to sacrifice fundamental principles of respect for the individual and equality before the law/god/whatever in order to either recognize or address the very evident racial inequality issues we face.
https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1375784342627225603
We might currently be in overshoot territory which winds up the old guard but is probably necessary and which will settle down eventually as you note and as I also hope to something far more positive.
As an example (no not Tandoori Chicken although that is not a bad one) we can look at ska which came from Jamaica and is now I believe part of our common British heritage.
You have to judge someone's character fairly in the round, and be willing to give them a second chance when you know they are trying to change and do the right thing. However, social media today seems about casting absolute judgement on others, usually in the hope it deflects attention and suspicion from the accuser.
I'm just glad it wasn't around when I was at university.
Your rules don't appear to hold any other sub-groups to thhe same standard that you hold mine.
As you say, let's not throw rocks about it. But I'd at least point out that your position is far from being as self-evident and widely accepted as you appear to think.
It's very good. I'd thoroughly recommend it: it explores (exhaustively) all the issues one isn't supposed to today and the political implications for the West, and he does it professionally, objectively and academically.
The reason that it is not inherently racist for a Black or a Puerto Rican to be proud of their heritage is that, in the past, that might have been seen as some badge of shame, or lower social status.
It is interesting that most of those who feel a need to express their pride in being white are precisely those who do not feel themselves to be at the top of society's pecking order.
from cases
from hospitalisations