politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Compulsory face mask wearing – the Brexit divide
Comments
-
Well, it depends on whether it is respectful. For example is blackface a perfectly fine bit of cultural appropriation?noneoftheabove said:
Cultural appropriation is the one area on racism where the angry right are correct. It is indeed a nonsense.Andy_JS said:"In praise of cultural appropriation
The mixing and meshing of different cultures is something to celebrate.
Frank Furedi"
https://www.spiked-online.com/2016/02/15/in-praise-of-cultural-appropriation/0 -
Yeah, this is blatant "Biden is weak on China" crap. For one thing, Uncle Joe far more likely to have 7th Fleet sail right through South China Sea once a day & twice on Sundays IF he thought it in the US national interest.kinabalu said:
That sounds more like Trumpery than how the world actually works.MrEd said:FPT and off topic (so apologies)
It was asked why China has suddenly decided to come out all nasty to the world. I think the answer is that it has placed its bets on a Biden win in November and takes the view that, if he wins, Biden will be essentially Obama Mark 2, namely will want to avoid conflict and so will bend over backwards to do anything to calm China down. So China is probably thinking that the more it sabre rattles, the more Biden (or his successor) will look to give give aways.
Trump has zero conception of national interest - beyond his own fundament that is.1 -
Can we please not get hung up on the Johnny Depp story. It's rather unsavoury.Luckyguy1983 said:
Defecating on a carpet is a genuine contribution. If you think it has merit, please say so and explain why.algarkirk said:
Tend to disagree. Look at the whole thingLadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
and it is a genuine contribution to a tricky discussion (my opinion as a white, centre right liberal male) including, naturally, lots to disagree with.0 -
That assumes information is accurate or not accurate. The reality is far more complex, spin doctors and the advertising industry exist for a reason.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
It you got a review for a new car online, wouldnt you want to know if it was by an independent journalist, direct from the manufacturer, an expert, or a journalist sponsored by the manufacturer? Each one might be true, but you should read it differently.
It is no different when reading about an idea.1 -
It's a compelling argument for accepting restrictions, and I think it's reasonable that masks in shops be one of them. Not the other way round though.rcs1000 said:
That is a pretty compelling argument for mask wearing in shops.LadyG said:Ominous. But important
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1283434043867049985?s=20
Basically, the argument is a simple one: by accepting slightly more onerous restrictions now, you avoid a hard lock down (either de facto or de jure).
0 -
So a majority of voters are fine with mandatory wearing of facemasks in the high street, public transport or shops but less than half think they should be compulsory in officesStereotomy said:
UhPagan2 said:So the only gtoup of people that actually are over all in favour of compulsion are the authoritarian left and the remainers who still don't like the fact some peasants didn't vote as they were told to.
I have said I expect a uturn will come on the compulsion and I think those percentages make it look more likely as it's people more likely to vote tory that appear to reject compulsion
0 -
Classic Grayling.SouthamObserver said:So, the Number 10 Grayling stitch-up fails spectacularly. If they cannot even get that right, you do have to wonder about their ability to deal with slightly bigger issues like trade deals, saving the economy, keeping the UK together and managing the covid-19 pandemic.
This is really good news for the nation's security. It may be bad news for whichever department Boris offers him to next though.0 -
I associate it with racism, misogyny, malice, stupidity and ignorance.Malmesbury said:kinabalu said:
I will have to leave you to it. Good luck.Stereotomy said:
Okay? The article is about how traits associated with white culture have become treated as the default or norm in the US as a result of long-standing white dominance of US institutions. If you're saying that a lot of very similar traits are also treated as the default in Korea because they're also present in Korean culture then I don't really see how that's relevant.Malmesbury said:
I would associate that value list far more with Korean society than the US.Stereotomy said:
I'd like to know Katz' sources for this, or if she just made it up. I'm certainly not giving a blanket agreement to all of it, or necessarily any of it. My issue is with you- and the original tweeter- freaking out over things which don't really seem particularly outlandish.LadyG said:
It says, in the original, that "common characteristics of US white people, most of the time" are -
Self reliance
Planning for the future
Nuclear families
The avoidance of conflict
Politeness
Hard work
Working before playing
Respect for authority
Giving kids their own rooms, so they can be independent
Punctuality
Objective and rational thinking
Protection of property
Belief in cause and effect
That's what is says "characterises most American white people"
Is it really that shocking. for example, to claim that the protestant work ethic a) is culturally dominant in the US and b) primarily originated with white settlers? Is it fair to characterise that claim as saying that only white people work hard?
Do you really associate modern US culture with -Stereotomy said:
Okay? The article is about how traits associated with white culture have become treated as the default or norm in the US as a result of long-standing white dominance of US institutions. If you're saying that a lot of very similar traits are also treated as the default in Korea because they're also present in Korean culture then I don't really see how that's relevant.Malmesbury said:
I would associate that value list far more with Korean society than the US.Stereotomy said:
I'd like to know Katz' sources for this, or if she just made it up. I'm certainly not giving a blanket agreement to all of it, or necessarily any of it. My issue is with you- and the original tweeter- freaking out over things which don't really seem particularly outlandish.LadyG said:
It says, in the original, that "common characteristics of US white people, most of the time" are -
Self reliance
Planning for the future
Nuclear families
The avoidance of conflict
Politeness
Hard work
Working before playing
Respect for authority
Giving kids their own rooms, so they can be independent
Punctuality
Objective and rational thinking
Protection of property
Belief in cause and effect
That's what is says "characterises most American white people"
Is it really that shocking. for example, to claim that the protestant work ethic a) is culturally dominant in the US and b) primarily originated with white settlers? Is it fair to characterise that claim as saying that only white people work hard?
Planning for the future
The avoidance of conflict
Politeness
Respect for authority
Objective and rational thinking
Belief in cause and effect
Because I don't....
But that will hopefully change on 3rd November.0 -
-
I agree it is about respect. Blackface as generally done in the 20th century was disrespectful, rude and problematic. It doesnt have to be, though, there shouldnt be an automatic bar on people copying looks of other races.Foxy said:
Well, it depends on whether it is respectful. For example is blackface a perfectly fine bit of cultural appropriation?noneoftheabove said:
Cultural appropriation is the one area on racism where the angry right are correct. It is indeed a nonsense.Andy_JS said:"In praise of cultural appropriation
The mixing and meshing of different cultures is something to celebrate.
Frank Furedi"
https://www.spiked-online.com/2016/02/15/in-praise-of-cultural-appropriation/0 -
EU citizens will keep the right to vote after the end of transition.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/eu-citizens-2021-local-elections_uk_5f0ec044c5b6df6cc0b373050 -
Alistair said:
.
OMFG.Richard_Nabavi said:
So, to be clear, Objective rational linear thinking and emphasis on cause and effect is evidence of 'white* dominance of US institutions'? Really? In the annals of utterly bonkers nonsense, that is a quite spectacular example.Stereotomy said:
Okay? The article is about how traits associated with white culture have become treated as the default or norm in the US as a result of long-standing white dominance of US institutions.
* by which they don't actually seem to mean white, they've equated skin colour with the culture of a subset of northern European settlers, but we'll let that racist logical error pass
- Has there been a law passed against nuance while my back was turned? 0 -
-
Here in US the ABC Morning News featured zoom from a House of Commons committee or something, where the stage was stolen by a cat with a VERY fluffy tail.
Cat did more for Anglo-American relations in one minute than Foreign Office in decades.2 -
Excellent. Classic Grayling.Scott_xP said:
0 -
So, what you're saying is that if Trump wins, China will suddenly back down?MrEd said:FPT and off topic (so apologies)
It was asked why China has suddenly decided to come out all nasty to the world. I think the answer is that it has placed its bets on a Biden win in November and takes the view that, if he wins, Biden will be essentially Obama Mark 2, namely will want to avoid conflict and so will bend over backwards to do anything to calm China down. So China is probably thinking that the more it sabre rattles, the more Biden (or his successor) will look to give give aways.
The reality is that the US is weaker now than it has been for a long time, and has a President who is susceptible to flattery and is simultaneously scared of committing military force. Obama, at least, was willing to sail a US carrier group through the Formosa strait - while Trump has been much lower key, preferring to send the occasional missile cruiser, but never something as significant as a carrier group.
China has grown in confidence and grown in aggressiveness during the Trump Presidency: to deny that is to deny that the world is round. To claim that it is due to fear of a Biden Presidency, given their increased aggression long predates Trump's unpopularity, is simply delusional.0 -
Really pleased Grayling has lost. Utter useless mpScott_xP said:1 -
-
-
Indeed. It seems to me that the evidence does not support OGH trying to make it a Leaver vs Remainer issue. I would suggest it is more of a Statist vs Individualist issue which is seen far more clearly in party affiliation than in how people voted in the referendum.kinabalu said:The Lab Con split is more striking to me than Leave Remain.
2 -
Julian Lewis is probably more right-wing than Chris Grayling.1
-
It appears to come from the same tradition as those, who during the 1980's* would explain that liberal democracy and human rights were bad, and really could only work for white people. Since it didn't fit with other cultures.kinabalu said:
Thank you and hats off.algarkirk said:
Tend to disagree. Look at the whole thingLadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
and it is a genuine contribution to a tricky discussion (my opinion as a white, centre right liberal male) including, naturally, lots to disagree with.
If only more would take a leaf instead of doing the Pavlov's dogs routine.
Hence Socialist Democratic Republics** were more democratic than actual democracy.
*This line of argument vanished in 1989 without the slightest hint of an apology.
**One party, hereditary dictatorships with a big serving of kleptocracy.0 -
Also this: China has built a significant advantage in missiles. They could maybe wipe out a US carrier group that got too closercs1000 said:
So, what you're saying is that if Trump wins, China will suddenly back down?MrEd said:FPT and off topic (so apologies)
It was asked why China has suddenly decided to come out all nasty to the world. I think the answer is that it has placed its bets on a Biden win in November and takes the view that, if he wins, Biden will be essentially Obama Mark 2, namely will want to avoid conflict and so will bend over backwards to do anything to calm China down. So China is probably thinking that the more it sabre rattles, the more Biden (or his successor) will look to give give aways.
The reality is that the US is weaker now than it has been for a long time, and has a President who is susceptible to flattery and is simultaneously scared of committing military force. Obama, at least, was willing to sail a US carrier group through the Formosa strait - while Trump has been much lower key, preferring to send the occasional missile cruiser, but never something as significant as a carrier group.
China has grown in confidence and grown in aggressiveness during the Trump Presidency: to deny that is to deny that the world is round. To claim that it is due to fear of a Biden Presidency, given their increased aggression long predates Trump's unpopularity, is simply delusional.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/section/china-army/0 -
The website suggests that you benefit from "white privilege" by displaying such characteristics.rpjs said:
Could one of the the right-wingers getting their knickers in a twist about this please point out the bits where it says either or both of "only white people have these characteristics" or "these characteristics are bad"? Because if it isn't saying either of those things (hint: it isn't), then I fail to see what the problem is.LadyG said:
It says, in the original, that "common characteristics of US white people, most of the time" are -Stereotomy said:
Yeah, we really have gone insane in the far future of *checks notes* 1990.LadyG said:
To be honest, I don't even understand what that graphic is trying to say to people. Are these things bad because they are "white"? Are they good despite being "typically white"? Do non-whites not do these things, or should they avoid them, or what?Stereotomy said:
So you think the protestant work ethic is universal, not cultural? Clue's in the name.LadyG said:
Who cares who tweeted itkinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
It's genuine. See here
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
Woke has gone so far it has entered a parallel universe outwith my comprehension. I am not jesting. I don't get it.
And I don't know why you're trying to read into it more than what it says. You're the one who's putting this "white = bad" narriative on it
Self reliance
Planning for the future
Nuclear families
The avoidance of conflict
Politeness
Hard work
Working before playing
Respect for authority
Giving kids their own rooms, so they can be independent
Punctuality
Objective and rational thinking
Protection of property
Belief in cause and effect
That's what is says "characterises most American white people"
Though it seems to me that there are plenty of members of all ethnic groups who display such characteristics.0 -
American politics just seems so much livelier than ours. We are supposed to be amused at a joke about underpants.SeaShantyIrish2 said:OFF TOPIC - This from Texas Monthly 2020 Runoff Roundup
Former Travis County GOP chair and B-list Austin crank Robert Morrow has suffered a stinging defeat in his bid to serve on the State Board of Education. GOP voters were apparently not in the mood for Morrow’s ideas for Texas schoolchildren, including pole-dancing classes for high-schoolers and teaching that Lyndon Johnson assassinated John Kennedy.
Morrow is losing 78-22 to Lani Popp, who has a lovely name and seems wisely to have stayed off
Twitter, her challenger’s preferred medium for anime porn. Current Travis County GOP chair Matt Mackowiak must be relieved that he will not have to follow through on his promise to “light [himself] on fire” if Morrow wins.
0 -
I must admit I am having real trouble seeing how wearing a mask is a restriction. I know more than a few libertarian minded medical professionals who would not dream of working without wearing a mask and who were quick to adopt them in general day to day interactions long before anyone suggested they should be mandatory.Omnium said:
It's a compelling argument for accepting restrictions, and I think it's reasonable that masks in shops be one of them. Not the other way round though.rcs1000 said:
That is a pretty compelling argument for mask wearing in shops.LadyG said:Ominous. But important
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1283434043867049985?s=20
Basically, the argument is a simple one: by accepting slightly more onerous restrictions now, you avoid a hard lock down (either de facto or de jure).2 -
And start WW3 in the process.LadyG said:
Also this: China has built a significant advantage in missiles. They could maybe wipe out a US carrier group that got too closercs1000 said:
So, what you're saying is that if Trump wins, China will suddenly back down?MrEd said:FPT and off topic (so apologies)
It was asked why China has suddenly decided to come out all nasty to the world. I think the answer is that it has placed its bets on a Biden win in November and takes the view that, if he wins, Biden will be essentially Obama Mark 2, namely will want to avoid conflict and so will bend over backwards to do anything to calm China down. So China is probably thinking that the more it sabre rattles, the more Biden (or his successor) will look to give give aways.
The reality is that the US is weaker now than it has been for a long time, and has a President who is susceptible to flattery and is simultaneously scared of committing military force. Obama, at least, was willing to sail a US carrier group through the Formosa strait - while Trump has been much lower key, preferring to send the occasional missile cruiser, but never something as significant as a carrier group.
China has grown in confidence and grown in aggressiveness during the Trump Presidency: to deny that is to deny that the world is round. To claim that it is due to fear of a Biden Presidency, given their increased aggression long predates Trump's unpopularity, is simply delusional.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/section/china-army/
The US has the most powerful military overall, then Russia, then China
https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp0 -
Finally. Something within his competence.noneoftheabove said:
0 -
NOT what you'd expect under a strong PM, is it. Appears the worm MAY be turning.HYUFD said:
Also fact that stench of incompetence beginning to permeate HM's current govt, and reckon that significant section of Tory Party has had more than enough.
They can't defenestrate BoJo - not yet - but they CAN rattle his cage. AND do so in knowledge that they defending national security threat foreign & domestic - including PM's keepers, minders & minions.0 -
57% of Tories back making facemasks compulsory in shops as do 55% of Leavers and 60% of voters overallRichard_Tyndall said:
Indeed. It seems to me that the evidence does not support OGH trying to make it a Leaver vs Remainer issue. I would suggest it is more of a Statist vs Individualist issue which is seen far more clearly in party affiliation than in how people voted in the referendum.kinabalu said:The Lab Con split is more striking to me than Leave Remain.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/consumer/survey-results/daily/2020/07/13/f7e6f/10 -
Soviets could have done that any day of the week. Surprised they did not?LadyG said:
Also this: China has built a significant advantage in missiles. They could maybe wipe out a US carrier group that got too closercs1000 said:
So, what you're saying is that if Trump wins, China will suddenly back down?MrEd said:FPT and off topic (so apologies)
It was asked why China has suddenly decided to come out all nasty to the world. I think the answer is that it has placed its bets on a Biden win in November and takes the view that, if he wins, Biden will be essentially Obama Mark 2, namely will want to avoid conflict and so will bend over backwards to do anything to calm China down. So China is probably thinking that the more it sabre rattles, the more Biden (or his successor) will look to give give aways.
The reality is that the US is weaker now than it has been for a long time, and has a President who is susceptible to flattery and is simultaneously scared of committing military force. Obama, at least, was willing to sail a US carrier group through the Formosa strait - while Trump has been much lower key, preferring to send the occasional missile cruiser, but never something as significant as a carrier group.
China has grown in confidence and grown in aggressiveness during the Trump Presidency: to deny that is to deny that the world is round. To claim that it is due to fear of a Biden Presidency, given their increased aggression long predates Trump's unpopularity, is simply delusional.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/section/china-army/0 -
-
Maybe. Things are changing fast.HYUFD said:
And start WW3 in the process.LadyG said:
Also this: China has built a significant advantage in missiles. They could maybe wipe out a US carrier group that got too closercs1000 said:
So, what you're saying is that if Trump wins, China will suddenly back down?MrEd said:FPT and off topic (so apologies)
It was asked why China has suddenly decided to come out all nasty to the world. I think the answer is that it has placed its bets on a Biden win in November and takes the view that, if he wins, Biden will be essentially Obama Mark 2, namely will want to avoid conflict and so will bend over backwards to do anything to calm China down. So China is probably thinking that the more it sabre rattles, the more Biden (or his successor) will look to give give aways.
The reality is that the US is weaker now than it has been for a long time, and has a President who is susceptible to flattery and is simultaneously scared of committing military force. Obama, at least, was willing to sail a US carrier group through the Formosa strait - while Trump has been much lower key, preferring to send the occasional missile cruiser, but never something as significant as a carrier group.
China has grown in confidence and grown in aggressiveness during the Trump Presidency: to deny that is to deny that the world is round. To claim that it is due to fear of a Biden Presidency, given their increased aggression long predates Trump's unpopularity, is simply delusional.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/section/china-army/
The US has the most powerful military overall, then Russia, then China
https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp
Besides, China's goal is not to strike America, and start WW3, at least not yet. It is to deter America from hitting China, and to push America out of Asia and the Eastern Pacific. China wants to be the Asian hegemon, supplanting the USA
So far it is doing pretty well. They've just taken Hong Kong without a shot being fired. Taiwan is next.0 -
Please see my reply 6.35 to Pagan.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold. If their interpretation is suspect or incorrect, that's an entirely separate matter.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
Unless it's a "2+2=4" type assertion, you should always be cautious about accepting at face value things tweeted by dubious sources with an extremist agenda.
And especially so when - as here - it's a tweet from such a source copied onto PB.com by a poster of similar ilk. When it comes to this think Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd - Double Jeopardy.0 -
Frank Furedi is a good example of how the Left/Right definitions fail us these days. His book Culture of Fear is a brilliant analysis of how both Left and Right use fear to instil compliance in the population and how the media feeds this in its chase for ratings.Theuniondivvie said:
Is Revolutionary Commie Furedi the angry right or the angry left?noneoftheabove said:
Cultural appropriation is the one area on racism where the angry right are correct. It is indeed a nonsense.Andy_JS said:"In praise of cultural appropriation
The mixing and meshing of different cultures is something to celebrate.
Frank Furedi"
https://www.spiked-online.com/2016/02/15/in-praise-of-cultural-appropriation/1 -
-
Has anyone has come up with this theory yet:
There were a couple of days of increasing positive cases week on week and R seemed to be above 1, though on a very low number of cases, as Barnesian has shown.
And the government shat itself in panic.
Why ? Because the government is desperate for people to return to 'normal' and had just announced inducements for people to go to pubs and restaurants.
Now if those inducements had to be cancelled because of an increasing infection rate then the government would look bad and many jobs would have been at risk.
So instead the government decided to do something different - mandatory masks in shops. Its not likely to do have much effect but the government are desperate to squeeze the last drop out of the orange metaphorically speaking.
And this panic explains why the government made no effort to prepare the public for a change in policy and why we saw politicians in pub / restaurant / hairdresser photostunts while not wearing masks.
Ironically the last two days of positive cases have shown things to be improving again.1 -
Well rules, restrictions. They're something whereby freedom is slightly curtailed. Wearing a mask clearly isn't something you would do if you were on your own.Richard_Tyndall said:
I must admit I am having real trouble seeing how wearing a mask is a restriction. I know more than a few libertarian minded medical professionals who would not dream of working without wearing a mask and who were quick to adopt them in general day to day interactions long before anyone suggested they should be mandatory.Omnium said:
It's a compelling argument for accepting restrictions, and I think it's reasonable that masks in shops be one of them. Not the other way round though.rcs1000 said:
That is a pretty compelling argument for mask wearing in shops.LadyG said:Ominous. But important
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1283434043867049985?s=20
Basically, the argument is a simple one: by accepting slightly more onerous restrictions now, you avoid a hard lock down (either de facto or de jure).
Having a rule that we should all wear seat-belts is silly - it should be blindingly obvious, but us being us, a rule seems necessary.
Masks in shops is apparently somewhat marginal in benefit, but even if it had no benefit at all it might be worth doing anyway just to keep people's attention on the risk (albeit that is now small).0 -
Hong Kong has been Chinese territory since 1997, the Chinese have just cancelled Hong Kong devomax basically and Trump ended Hong Kong's preferential trade status todayLadyG said:
Maybe. Things are changing fast.HYUFD said:
And start WW3 in the process.LadyG said:
Also this: China has built a significant advantage in missiles. They could maybe wipe out a US carrier group that got too closercs1000 said:
So, what you're saying is that if Trump wins, China will suddenly back down?MrEd said:FPT and off topic (so apologies)
It was asked why China has suddenly decided to come out all nasty to the world. I think the answer is that it has placed its bets on a Biden win in November and takes the view that, if he wins, Biden will be essentially Obama Mark 2, namely will want to avoid conflict and so will bend over backwards to do anything to calm China down. So China is probably thinking that the more it sabre rattles, the more Biden (or his successor) will look to give give aways.
The reality is that the US is weaker now than it has been for a long time, and has a President who is susceptible to flattery and is simultaneously scared of committing military force. Obama, at least, was willing to sail a US carrier group through the Formosa strait - while Trump has been much lower key, preferring to send the occasional missile cruiser, but never something as significant as a carrier group.
China has grown in confidence and grown in aggressiveness during the Trump Presidency: to deny that is to deny that the world is round. To claim that it is due to fear of a Biden Presidency, given their increased aggression long predates Trump's unpopularity, is simply delusional.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/section/china-army/
The US has the most powerful military overall, then Russia, then China
https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp
Besides, China's goal is not to strike America, and start WW3, at least not yet. It is to deter America from hitting China, and to push America out of Asia and the Eastern Pacific. China wants to be the Asian hegemon, supplanting the USA
So far it is doing pretty well. They've just taken Hong Kong without a shot being fired. Taiwan is next.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-53414539.
Taiwan however is a different story and don't forget it is not only the US concerned about Chinese expansion, Japan, South Korea and India are too0 -
Texas is bigger & brasher at most things, including politics.DavidL said:
American politics just seems so much livelier than ours. We are supposed to be amused at a joke about underpants.SeaShantyIrish2 said:OFF TOPIC - This from Texas Monthly 2020 Runoff Roundup
Former Travis County GOP chair and B-list Austin crank Robert Morrow has suffered a stinging defeat in his bid to serve on the State Board of Education. GOP voters were apparently not in the mood for Morrow’s ideas for Texas schoolchildren, including pole-dancing classes for high-schoolers and teaching that Lyndon Johnson assassinated John Kennedy.
Morrow is losing 78-22 to Lani Popp, who has a lovely name and seems wisely to have stayed off
Twitter, her challenger’s preferred medium for anime porn. Current Travis County GOP chair Matt Mackowiak must be relieved that he will not have to follow through on his promise to “light [himself] on fire” if Morrow wins.
BUT Lone Star politics tame in some respects compared with Pelican State.
For example, had one friend of mine (the former ambassador's son) whose uncle once threatened in a drunken rage to assassinate His Honor the Mayor of New Orleans ("I'm gonna shot the god-damn son of a bitch!") because representatives from the city had come to his house and interrogated his wife about 100 or so unpaid parking tickets. He was dissuaded, but took some doing.
Interesting, had another friend (a fugitive from a Florida chain gang) who was once detained briefly by police ("arrest the usual suspects") following the murder of the same mayor's long-time mistress.0 -
lol. The source is real. It's been tweeted by thousands of otherskinabalu said:
Please see my reply 6.35 to Pagan.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold. If their interpretation is suspect or incorrect, that's an entirely separate matter.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
Unless it's a "2+2=4" type assertion, you should always be cautious about accepting at face value things tweeted by dubious sources with an extremist agenda.
And especially so when - as here - it's a tweet from such a source copied onto here by a poster of similar ilk. When it comes to this think Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd - Double Jeopardy.
https://twitter.com/hrkbenowen/status/1283463753481297920?s=20
Here's the relevant literature from the museum
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
I even went through history and found you the original source, all the way back in 1990, and mad academic Judith H Katz
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
You can thank me later1 -
0
-
Isn't this just another example of Brexit voters being more likely to be wrong?1
-
Its not rocket science. wearing masks must be compulsory.0
-
Yet the majority, possibly including myself*, will wait until it is actually mandatory before wearing one to the shops instead of starting now. We are a strange bunch.HYUFD said:
So a majority of voters are fine with mandatory wearing of facemasks in the high street, public transport or shops but less than half think they should be compulsory in officesStereotomy said:
UhPagan2 said:So the only gtoup of people that actually are over all in favour of compulsion are the authoritarian left and the remainers who still don't like the fact some peasants didn't vote as they were told to.
I have said I expect a uturn will come on the compulsion and I think those percentages make it look more likely as it's people more likely to vote tory that appear to reject compulsion
* For me, until mandatory Ill wear one if expecting to be in shop >10 mins, otherwise probably not.0 -
I don’t take anything I think is controversial at face value without multiple sources (not including the Mail and Express as multiple sources). People get so easily wound up by what they think they hear, read on FB etc I just let it go over my head Unless I know it’s true/false until I can be bothered checking it out.kinabalu said:
Please see my reply 6.35 to Pagan.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold. If their interpretation is suspect or incorrect, that's an entirely separate matter.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
Unless it's a "2+2=4" type assertion, you should always be cautious about accepting at face value things tweeted by dubious sources with an extremist agenda.
And especially so when - as here - it's a tweet from such a source copied onto PB.com by a poster of similar ilk. When it comes to this think Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd - Double Jeopardy.1 -
O/T
AC Milan have gone behind versus Parma.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/football/italian-serie-a/ac-milan-v-parma-betting-298980280 -
Does anyone know if Labour's policies are still to write off student debts and to hand out billions to waspi women ?0
-
Grayling is an intellectual colossus in the company of Burgon.noneoftheabove said:0 -
And despite doing all that you don't seem to have actually read it beyond your outrage share.LadyG said:
lol. The source is real. It's been tweeted by thousands of otherskinabalu said:
Please see my reply 6.35 to Pagan.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold. If their interpretation is suspect or incorrect, that's an entirely separate matter.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
Unless it's a "2+2=4" type assertion, you should always be cautious about accepting at face value things tweeted by dubious sources with an extremist agenda.
And especially so when - as here - it's a tweet from such a source copied onto here by a poster of similar ilk. When it comes to this think Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd - Double Jeopardy.
https://twitter.com/hrkbenowen/status/1283463753481297920?s=20
Here's the relevant literature from the museum
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
I even went through history and found you the original source, all the way back in 1990, and mad academic Judith H Katz
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
You can thank me later1 -
The headline states that the graphic depicts "Assumptions of Whiteness and White Culture in the USofA".LadyG said:
lol. The source is real. It's been tweeted by thousands of otherskinabalu said:
Please see my reply 6.35 to Pagan.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold. If their interpretation is suspect or incorrect, that's an entirely separate matter.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
Unless it's a "2+2=4" type assertion, you should always be cautious about accepting at face value things tweeted by dubious sources with an extremist agenda.
And especially so when - as here - it's a tweet from such a source copied onto here by a poster of similar ilk. When it comes to this think Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd - Double Jeopardy.
https://twitter.com/hrkbenowen/status/1283463753481297920?s=20
Here's the relevant literature from the museum
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
I even went through history and found you the original source, all the way back in 1990, and mad academic Judith H Katz
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
You can thank me later
My guess is that it is predominantly white people who are making these assumptions, associating things which these people perceive as virtues, with their own whiteness.
I didn't get the impression that the author shares these assumptions, only that she observed the fact that white people, at least a majority of them, hold these views.0 -
-
AS GOES MAINE 2020
Democrats appear to be winners of July 2020 Maine Primary. Mostly because they nominated current state house Speaker Sara Gideon to run against incumbent (and unopposed in GOP primary) Republican US Sen Susan Collins.
Gideon is "moderate" who beat "progressive" for nomination, receiving whopping 70% of Dem primary vote. Of Maine's 500+ cities, towns and "plantations" (unincorporated with few or zero voters) Gideon only lost 9 and tied in 6.
Democrats nationally and locally are NOT happy with Sen. Collins, not at all. Unity behind Democrat best qualified (re: both experience & politics) is just one sign of determination to end the incumbent's over-long senatorial career.0 -
Surely all losing manifestos lapse after the GE to a fresh sheet of paper?another_richard said:Does anyone know if Labour's policies are still to write off student debts and to hand out billions to waspi women ?
Indeed, often winning ones too.1 -
No. Read the headline from the original source. The author believes what is plainly said:matthiasfromhamburg said:
The headline states that the graphic depicts "Assumptions of Whiteness and White Culture in the USofA".LadyG said:
lol. The source is real. It's been tweeted by thousands of otherskinabalu said:
Please see my reply 6.35 to Pagan.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold. If their interpretation is suspect or incorrect, that's an entirely separate matter.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
Unless it's a "2+2=4" type assertion, you should always be cautious about accepting at face value things tweeted by dubious sources with an extremist agenda.
And especially so when - as here - it's a tweet from such a source copied onto here by a poster of similar ilk. When it comes to this think Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd - Double Jeopardy.
https://twitter.com/hrkbenowen/status/1283463753481297920?s=20
Here's the relevant literature from the museum
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
I even went through history and found you the original source, all the way back in 1990, and mad academic Judith H Katz
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
You can thank me later
My guess is that it is predominantly white people who are making these assumptions, associating things which these people perceive as virtues, with their own whiteness.
I didn't get the impression that the author shares these assumptions, only that she observed the fact that white people, at least a majority of them, hold these views.
"While different individuals might not practice or accept all of these traits, they are common characteristics of most U.S. White people most of the time."
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
Meanwhile on the infographic, see the greyed out text:
It says all these are "white traditions, attitudes and ways of life" which have been "internalized" by "people of color"0 -
I have read it. All of it.Alistair said:
And despite doing all that you don't seem to have actually read it beyond your outrage share.LadyG said:
lol. The source is real. It's been tweeted by thousands of otherskinabalu said:
Please see my reply 6.35 to Pagan.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold. If their interpretation is suspect or incorrect, that's an entirely separate matter.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
Unless it's a "2+2=4" type assertion, you should always be cautious about accepting at face value things tweeted by dubious sources with an extremist agenda.
And especially so when - as here - it's a tweet from such a source copied onto here by a poster of similar ilk. When it comes to this think Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd - Double Jeopardy.
https://twitter.com/hrkbenowen/status/1283463753481297920?s=20
Here's the relevant literature from the museum
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
I even went through history and found you the original source, all the way back in 1990, and mad academic Judith H Katz
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
You can thank me later
There is probably room for agreement here. The intent of the overall message (before the graphic) is worthy, if, in places, disputable.
However, the infographic is clumsy, and ugly, and sounds insane to anyone sensible (who isn't fully equipped with the latest critical race theory and can somehow parse it into sort-of acceptability). As such, it is a bad mistake, which is why it is getting such a harsh reaction online.0 -
-
I suspect that a 1% swing would see almost the same number of MPs as 2019 as the Conservatives would benefit from their new incumbancy votes.Andy_JS said:2 -
His book Paranoid Parenting is a tonic for those fed up with the usual childcare manuals.Richard_Tyndall said:
Frank Furedi is a good example of how the Left/Right definitions fail us these days. His book Culture of Fear is a brilliant analysis of how both Left and Right use fear to instil compliance in the population and how the media feeds this in its chase for ratings.Theuniondivvie said:
Is Revolutionary Commie Furedi the angry right or the angry left?noneoftheabove said:
Cultural appropriation is the one area on racism where the angry right are correct. It is indeed a nonsense.Andy_JS said:"In praise of cultural appropriation
The mixing and meshing of different cultures is something to celebrate.
Frank Furedi"
https://www.spiked-online.com/2016/02/15/in-praise-of-cultural-appropriation/
He remains an interesting academic, but his spiritual children in the RCP are much more interested in political power. They have simply followed Moscows line, from Communist days to the present fermenting of divisive Populism
0 -
Certainly but I was wondering what might happen to Labour's 'bribe votes' of 2019.Foxy said:
Surely all losing manifestos lapse after the GE to a fresh sheet of paper?another_richard said:Does anyone know if Labour's policies are still to write off student debts and to hand out billions to waspi women ?
Indeed, often winning ones too.0 -
How could I have left out Captain Francois?Foxy said:0 -
In pubs, restaurants and gyms as well ?squareroot2 said:Its not rocket science. wearing masks must be compulsory.
How about workplaces ?
What about in the home, isn't that where most infections happen ?0 -
Burgon is apparently so daft that I dare not slander brushes. Clearly he's not mind. He just seems that way. It's astonishing that he and other really flimsy wits should be vying to star in a Labour party where there are some quite good people still left around. Benn, Cooper, Kinnock, Milliband, Harman, and even Cruddas.Mexicanpete said:
Grayling is an intellectual colossus in the company of Burgon.noneoftheabove said:
I don't quite see what Starmer is up to in terms of his shadow cabinet - Dodds as shadow chancellor is just ridiculous, but I guess we'll see over tie, and if Burgon reappears then we know that Starmer has lost the internal fights.
0 -
And don't forget the gerrymandering... I mean new boundaries being drawn up by the commission.another_richard said:
I suspect that a 1% swing would see almost the same number of MPs as 2019 as the Conservatives would benefit from their new incumbancy votes.Andy_JS said:0 -
And objective, rational thinking!Casino_Royale said:
Down with... the scientific method!LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=201 -
In Switzerland, where everything is usually compulsory if it isn't illegal, it's apparently not a requirement to wear a mask (apart from public transport, which was only introduced on 1st July). Interesting.squareroot2 said:Its not rocket science. wearing masks must be compulsory.
0 -
Just a comment on the Smithsonian fracas. Try reading Kate Fox 'Watching the English'. In this book she treats English culture to a bit of simple anthropology, as if they are an exotic tribe being observed. It's very popular, and funny too. The Smithsonian is doing a similar thing, though it is much more stereotyped and sharp, so uncomfortable. It reads more like a critical outsider might see a white culture.
The PB critics have included these broad criticisms:
The picture is white supremacist by attributing a range of self evident good qualities to a white culture only.
The picture is racist and anti-white by attributing a rage of doubtful qualities to a white culture.
The picture is racist and anti non-white because it implies every non white lacks a range of self evident good qualities.
It's woke nonsense gone mad.
I doubt if all these can be true. Personally I feel stereotyped by it, which is exactly I think what happens more to other groups than to whites. So I think it is of value.3 -
My Israeli contacts tell me it was opening the schoolsLadyG said:Ominous. But important
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1283434043867049985?s=200 -
Did anyone back AC Milan while they were behind? They've scored twice since and lead 2-1.Andy_JS said:O/T
AC Milan have gone behind versus Parma.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/football/italian-serie-a/ac-milan-v-parma-betting-298980280 -
Really? Shit.Charles said:
My Israeli contacts tell me it was opening the schoolsLadyG said:Ominous. But important
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1283434043867049985?s=20
Also, I like the way you have "Israeli contacts". It makes me think you are probably linked to Mossad, which is cool0 -
If true, that's a big worry.Charles said:
My Israeli contacts tell me it was opening the schoolsLadyG said:Ominous. But important
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1283434043867049985?s=200 -
Also that regardless of whether what he proposes is right, Trump will not get consensus support fit any action against them right nowMrEd said:FPT and off topic (so apologies)
It was asked why China has suddenly decided to come out all nasty to the world. I think the answer is that it has placed its bets on a Biden win in November and takes the view that, if he wins, Biden will be essentially Obama Mark 2, namely will want to avoid conflict and so will bend over backwards to do anything to calm China down. So China is probably thinking that the more it sabre rattles, the more Biden (or his successor) will look to give give aways.0 -
However, it hasn't happened in other countries which have opened schools - Denmark, Norway, etctlg86 said:
If true, that's a big worry.Charles said:
My Israeli contacts tell me it was opening the schoolsLadyG said:Ominous. But important
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1283434043867049985?s=200 -
-
algarkirk said:
Just a comment on the Smithsonian fracas. Try reading Kate Fox 'Watching the English'. In this book she treats English culture to a bit of simple anthropology, as if they are an exotic tribe being observed. It's very popular, and funny too. The Smithsonian is doing a similar thing, though it is much more stereotyped and sharp, so uncomfortable. It reads more like a critical outsider might see a white culture.
The PB critics have included these broad criticisms:
The picture is white supremacist by attributing a range of self evident good qualities to a white culture only.
The picture is racist and anti-white by attributing a rage of doubtful qualities to a white culture.
The picture is racist and anti non-white because it implies every non white lacks a range of self evident good qualities.
It's woke nonsense gone mad.
I doubt if all these can be true. Personally I feel stereotyped by it, which is exactly I think what happens more to other groups than to whites. So I think it is of value.
Have they come up with one of these charming stereotyping charts about other ethnic groups, or is it just the one? The way the new Wokeists focus monomaniacally on 'White', 'Whites', 'Whiteness' reminds me of the way the Corbyn cadre talks about, er, 'Zionists'.0 -
Seems a bit of an extreme reaction.eek said:0 -
The fact that they needed to highlight that it was characteristic of white culture implies that other cultures do not have the same set of values (otherwise they would be the same)rpjs said:
Could one of the the right-wingers getting their knickers in a twist about this please point out the bits where it says either or both of "only white people have these characteristics" or "these characteristics are bad"? Because if it isn't saying either of those things (hint: it isn't), then I fail to see what the problem is.LadyG said:
It says, in the original, that "common characteristics of US white people, most of the time" are -Stereotomy said:
Yeah, we really have gone insane in the far future of *checks notes* 1990.LadyG said:
To be honest, I don't even understand what that graphic is trying to say to people. Are these things bad because they are "white"? Are they good despite being "typically white"? Do non-whites not do these things, or should they avoid them, or what?Stereotomy said:
So you think the protestant work ethic is universal, not cultural? Clue's in the name.LadyG said:
Who cares who tweeted itkinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
It's genuine. See here
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
Woke has gone so far it has entered a parallel universe outwith my comprehension. I am not jesting. I don't get it.
And I don't know why you're trying to read into it more than what it says. You're the one who's putting this "white = bad" narriative on it
Self reliance
Planning for the future
Nuclear families
The avoidance of conflict
Politeness
Hard work
Working before playing
Respect for authority
Giving kids their own rooms, so they can be independent
Punctuality
Objective and rational thinking
Protection of property
Belief in cause and effect
That's what is says "characterises most American white people"
To the extent you see the characteristics as positive you are then starting from a position that white culture is better unless you can justify why the alternative is better0 -
Quite funny really. Disaster follows Grayling everywhereeek said:0 -
I think the meaning of the graphic is that those traits are generally perceived to be associated with whiteness. So despite Nigerians being the most highly qualified of US immigrants, science is associated with whiteness.algarkirk said:Just a comment on the Smithsonian fracas. Try reading Kate Fox 'Watching the English'. In this book she treats English culture to a bit of simple anthropology, as if they are an exotic tribe being observed. It's very popular, and funny too. The Smithsonian is doing a similar thing, though it is much more stereotyped and sharp, so uncomfortable. It reads more like a critical outsider might see a white culture.
The PB critics have included these broad criticisms:
The picture is white supremacist by attributing a range of self evident good qualities to a white culture only.
The picture is racist and anti-white by attributing a rage of doubtful qualities to a white culture.
The picture is racist and anti non-white because it implies every non white lacks a range of self evident good qualities.
It's woke nonsense gone mad.
I doubt if all these can be true. Personally I feel stereotyped by it, which is exactly I think what happens more to other groups than to whites. So I think it is of value.1 -
Given that he is 68 I don't think Julian was after re-election so he probably doesn't care less.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Quite funny really. Disaster follows Grayling everywhereeek said:0 -
Did Cummings tell Johnson he had removed the whip from Julian Lewis?0
-
Alabama On My Mind 2020
Well, what to say re: Jeff Sessions except, welcome to the dustbin of history - loser.
Even in overwhelming defeat had to grovel to the Trumpsky who hates, hurts, humiliates & hurls him into oblivion.
Appears only real reason he ran to get his old job back was because he could NOT make it in the world of lobbying & influencing (commercial or ideological).
Ended up winning three widely scattered counties; Mobile on the Gulf, his home county in south-central AL, and Madison (Huntsville) on Tennessee River, where he obviously impressed the rocket scientists (likely due to congressional space spending than anything else).
Not much to be said for Coach Tuberville, except true measure of his runoff victory is that he took Tuscaloosa County. AND he begins the general election - and likely will end it - as a prohibitive favorite against incumbent Dem US Sen. Doug Jones. Who PBers may remember upset just about the worst GOP nominee possible, the (in)famous Judge Roy Moore who has 10 Commandments tatooed on his forehead - or is it his ass?0 -
I stand corrected.LadyG said:
No. Read the headline from the original source. The author believes what is plainly said:matthiasfromhamburg said:
The headline states that the graphic depicts "Assumptions of Whiteness and White Culture in the USofA".LadyG said:
lol. The source is real. It's been tweeted by thousands of otherskinabalu said:
Please see my reply 6.35 to Pagan.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold. If their interpretation is suspect or incorrect, that's an entirely separate matter.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
Unless it's a "2+2=4" type assertion, you should always be cautious about accepting at face value things tweeted by dubious sources with an extremist agenda.
And especially so when - as here - it's a tweet from such a source copied onto here by a poster of similar ilk. When it comes to this think Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd - Double Jeopardy.
https://twitter.com/hrkbenowen/status/1283463753481297920?s=20
Here's the relevant literature from the museum
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
I even went through history and found you the original source, all the way back in 1990, and mad academic Judith H Katz
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
You can thank me later
My guess is that it is predominantly white people who are making these assumptions, associating things which these people perceive as virtues, with their own whiteness.
I didn't get the impression that the author shares these assumptions, only that she observed the fact that white people, at least a majority of them, hold these views.
"While different individuals might not practice or accept all of these traits, they are common characteristics of most U.S. White people most of the time."
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
Meanwhile on the infographic, see the greyed out text:
It says all these are "white traditions, attitudes and ways of life" which have been "internalized" by "people of color"
After a second, more thorough look at it, I tend to agree that the author, more or less, does share these assumptions, which does seem to bring her own work into disrepute.
I'm still struggling to identify what she has written as 'woke', though. It really seems to be the opposite of that.0 -
England for the English! Cornwall for the Cornish!! Rutland for the Ruttish!!!0
-
-
It says white people "avoid conflict".Foxy said:
I think the meaning of the graphic is that those traits are generally perceived to be associated with whiteness. So despite Nigerians being the most highly qualified of US immigrants, science is associated with whiteness.algarkirk said:Just a comment on the Smithsonian fracas. Try reading Kate Fox 'Watching the English'. In this book she treats English culture to a bit of simple anthropology, as if they are an exotic tribe being observed. It's very popular, and funny too. The Smithsonian is doing a similar thing, though it is much more stereotyped and sharp, so uncomfortable. It reads more like a critical outsider might see a white culture.
The PB critics have included these broad criticisms:
The picture is white supremacist by attributing a range of self evident good qualities to a white culture only.
The picture is racist and anti-white by attributing a rage of doubtful qualities to a white culture.
The picture is racist and anti non-white because it implies every non white lacks a range of self evident good qualities.
It's woke nonsense gone mad.
I doubt if all these can be true. Personally I feel stereotyped by it, which is exactly I think what happens more to other groups than to whites. So I think it is of value.
So white people are peaceful. "Whiteness is peace".
How is that not just barking mad?
We are overanalyzing. The document is insane.0 -
If by woke you mean good, then no, it isn't woke. But woke isn't a synonym for good, in my opinion.matthiasfromhamburg said:
I stand corrected.LadyG said:
No. Read the headline from the original source. The author believes what is plainly said:matthiasfromhamburg said:
The headline states that the graphic depicts "Assumptions of Whiteness and White Culture in the USofA".LadyG said:
lol. The source is real. It's been tweeted by thousands of otherskinabalu said:
Please see my reply 6.35 to Pagan.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold. If their interpretation is suspect or incorrect, that's an entirely separate matter.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
Unless it's a "2+2=4" type assertion, you should always be cautious about accepting at face value things tweeted by dubious sources with an extremist agenda.
And especially so when - as here - it's a tweet from such a source copied onto here by a poster of similar ilk. When it comes to this think Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd - Double Jeopardy.
https://twitter.com/hrkbenowen/status/1283463753481297920?s=20
Here's the relevant literature from the museum
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
I even went through history and found you the original source, all the way back in 1990, and mad academic Judith H Katz
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
You can thank me later
My guess is that it is predominantly white people who are making these assumptions, associating things which these people perceive as virtues, with their own whiteness.
I didn't get the impression that the author shares these assumptions, only that she observed the fact that white people, at least a majority of them, hold these views.
"While different individuals might not practice or accept all of these traits, they are common characteristics of most U.S. White people most of the time."
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
Meanwhile on the infographic, see the greyed out text:
It says all these are "white traditions, attitudes and ways of life" which have been "internalized" by "people of color"
After a second, more thorough look at it, I tend to agree that the author, more or less, does share these assumptions, which does seem to bring her own work into disrepute.
I'm still struggling to identify what she has written as 'woke', though. It really seems to be the opposite of that.0 -
A lot of that “white culture” poster is specific to WASP culture, surely?1
-
China has been fighting a Cold War against Western democracies for a couple of decades. But our politicians have been too [callow/stupid/corrupt] to notice and our industrialists have cared for nothing but profit. Speak to anyone that knows about these things in Asia and they will describe the Cameron/Osborne years in particular as a shameful humiliation for Britain, for the transactional approach taken to British-Sino relations.HYUFD said:
Hong Kong has been Chinese territory since 1997, the Chinese have just cancelled Hong Kong devomax basically and Trump ended Hong Kong's preferential trade status todayLadyG said:
Maybe. Things are changing fast.HYUFD said:
And start WW3 in the process.LadyG said:
Also this: China has built a significant advantage in missiles. They could maybe wipe out a US carrier group that got too closercs1000 said:
So, what you're saying is that if Trump wins, China will suddenly back down?MrEd said:FPT and off topic (so apologies)
It was asked why China has suddenly decided to come out all nasty to the world. I think the answer is that it has placed its bets on a Biden win in November and takes the view that, if he wins, Biden will be essentially Obama Mark 2, namely will want to avoid conflict and so will bend over backwards to do anything to calm China down. So China is probably thinking that the more it sabre rattles, the more Biden (or his successor) will look to give give aways.
The reality is that the US is weaker now than it has been for a long time, and has a President who is susceptible to flattery and is simultaneously scared of committing military force. Obama, at least, was willing to sail a US carrier group through the Formosa strait - while Trump has been much lower key, preferring to send the occasional missile cruiser, but never something as significant as a carrier group.
China has grown in confidence and grown in aggressiveness during the Trump Presidency: to deny that is to deny that the world is round. To claim that it is due to fear of a Biden Presidency, given their increased aggression long predates Trump's unpopularity, is simply delusional.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/section/china-army/
The US has the most powerful military overall, then Russia, then China
https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp
Besides, China's goal is not to strike America, and start WW3, at least not yet. It is to deter America from hitting China, and to push America out of Asia and the Eastern Pacific. China wants to be the Asian hegemon, supplanting the USA
So far it is doing pretty well. They've just taken Hong Kong without a shot being fired. Taiwan is next.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-53414539.
Taiwan however is a different story and don't forget it is not only the US concerned about Chinese expansion, Japan, South Korea and India are too
The current upper echelon of the Chinese Communist Party are best described as racial supremacists. When you grasp this basic point everything becomes clear. They’ve not even been hiding their goals, with frequent speeches and policy papers targeting technological dominance, military dominance through One Belt One Road and economic dominance through its trade abuses and corporate espionage (helped by Bush II’s green light to WTO). With casual suppression of dissenting culture through concentration camps thrown in for good measure.
It has been obvious for years that once the years of fat cows inevitably gave way to skinny ones, that the only tool available to the Party would be geographic expansionism and a hyping up of totalitarian nationalism. It’s a happy coincidence (?) for them that the hard economic contraction is happening at a time when a) the world is looking the other way, and b) there’s a plausible reason to restrict movement of people in/out and across the country.
The original Huawei decision last year was as crushingly disappointing as any I can remember from a government I supported. Trump has too many flaws to list and is no doubt a psychopathic narcissist. But three cheers to him for decisively shifting the terms of debate on China. They see us as their enemy and have been treating us as such. It’s time we woke up and returned the favour.3 -
Grayling must have the most complete record of all the skeletons in Westminster out of any MP to keep being appointed / put forward for roles clearly beyond his competence (except this time of course). I just can't think of another logical explanation for someone so blatantly useless still being the favoured candidate for a position of responsibility0
-
Evening all
Some fascinating US polling today. Rasmussen has Biden only three points up on Trump (47-44) which is a big swing to Trump from last week. As I can't access the crosstabs, the only nugget I have is Independents favour Biden by six this week compared with twelve last week.
Economist/YouGov has enormous crosstabs:
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/hpupr0zhkl/econTabReport.pdf
Page 125 has the key numbers. Biden leads Trump 49-40 with a one point Trump lead among men (46-45) outbalanced by a 17 point Biden lead among women (52-35).
Trump leads 49-42 among White voters but Biden is up 46-40 in the Midwest and tied 45-45 in the South so an excellent poll for the Democrat challenger.
The CNBC/Change Research Poll crosstabs aren't very helpful:
https://9b1b5e59-cb8d-4d7b-8493-111f8aa90329.usrfiles.com/ugd/9b1b5e_cabe0094cdf847dc8a2f12309173b8dd.pdf
Biden leads 51-41. I did note 55% of the sample were women which looks a little high and would skew the numbers toward Biden based on the above.
If anyone can access the Rasmussen crosstabs they would be very interesting.0 -
I know the origins of this kind of thought. It is - or was - an extreme strand of identity politics, grounded in Marxism (hence the attempt to deconstruct the "capitalist" nuclear family). A few rad left academics thought this up over previous decades.matthiasfromhamburg said:
I stand corrected.LadyG said:
No. Read the headline from the original source. The author believes what is plainly said:matthiasfromhamburg said:
The headline states that the graphic depicts "Assumptions of Whiteness and White Culture in the USofA".LadyG said:
lol. The source is real. It's been tweeted by thousands of otherskinabalu said:
Please see my reply 6.35 to Pagan.kle4 said:
What does who tweets something have to do with whether the thing tweeted is accurate or not? If it isn't, they are disreputable. If it is, then it doesn't matter whether they have views or interpretations others would not share, since we are not obliged to share the view or interpretation they hold. If their interpretation is suspect or incorrect, that's an entirely separate matter.kinabalu said:
I see the tweeter is the proud author of the following work -LadyG said:Peak Woke?
Truly bizarre
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651?s=20
THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY:
The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President - and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time.
Unless it's a "2+2=4" type assertion, you should always be cautious about accepting at face value things tweeted by dubious sources with an extremist agenda.
And especially so when - as here - it's a tweet from such a source copied onto here by a poster of similar ilk. When it comes to this think Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd - Double Jeopardy.
https://twitter.com/hrkbenowen/status/1283463753481297920?s=20
Here's the relevant literature from the museum
https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness
I even went through history and found you the original source, all the way back in 1990, and mad academic Judith H Katz
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
You can thank me later
My guess is that it is predominantly white people who are making these assumptions, associating things which these people perceive as virtues, with their own whiteness.
I didn't get the impression that the author shares these assumptions, only that she observed the fact that white people, at least a majority of them, hold these views.
"While different individuals might not practice or accept all of these traits, they are common characteristics of most U.S. White people most of the time."
http://www.cascadia.edu/discover/about/diversity/documents/Some Aspects and Assumptions of White Culture in the United States.pdf
Meanwhile on the infographic, see the greyed out text:
It says all these are "white traditions, attitudes and ways of life" which have been "internalized" by "people of color"
After a second, more thorough look at it, I tend to agree that the author, more or less, does share these assumptions, which does seem to bring her own work into disrepute.
I'm still struggling to identify what she has written as 'woke', though. It really seems to be the opposite of that.
See the list of Katz's work. She's utterly obscure, and quite old
https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/91319.Judith_H_Katz
The problem is that this nutty radicalism has suddenly gone mainstream., Let's hope it is a passing phase. I agree it is the opposite of Woke as most people perceive it.0 -
Those are better results for Biden in Florida and Arizona that I would have expected. I wonder if - in both - it is a reaction to the renewed CV-19 outbreak.HYUFD said:0 -
Yes, it is literally describing the social construct of whiteness.LadyG said:
It says white people "avoid conflict".Foxy said:
I think the meaning of the graphic is that those traits are generally perceived to be associated with whiteness. So despite Nigerians being the most highly qualified of US immigrants, science is associated with whiteness.algarkirk said:Just a comment on the Smithsonian fracas. Try reading Kate Fox 'Watching the English'. In this book she treats English culture to a bit of simple anthropology, as if they are an exotic tribe being observed. It's very popular, and funny too. The Smithsonian is doing a similar thing, though it is much more stereotyped and sharp, so uncomfortable. It reads more like a critical outsider might see a white culture.
The PB critics have included these broad criticisms:
The picture is white supremacist by attributing a range of self evident good qualities to a white culture only.
The picture is racist and anti-white by attributing a rage of doubtful qualities to a white culture.
The picture is racist and anti non-white because it implies every non white lacks a range of self evident good qualities.
It's woke nonsense gone mad.
I doubt if all these can be true. Personally I feel stereotyped by it, which is exactly I think what happens more to other groups than to whites. So I think it is of value.
So white people are peaceful. "Whiteness is peace".
.
Race is a social construct. This mind-blowingly woke idea was arrived at in the mid 1940s.0
