The not so Great Racism in Canada Thread

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Not all minorities perform the same in the various metrics related to financial status and educational achievement. Clearly that suggests the lack of systemic racism, or perhaps systemic racism against only certain racial/minority groups.

Yes, even within vague categories like "Black", which don't map on to biological population groups, show huge diversity in outcomes. This further calls into question systemic racism.

Originally Posted by rousseau

The SJW game is set up for white people to lose. "Don't be racist!" we are told. Okay then, I won't let a person's skin colour affect my interaction with him. But then: "Don't say you don't see skin colour or that you're 'post-racist,' that means you're in denial of the inevitability of racism!" Uh, so you're saying it's like original sin then?

Christ, I'm starting to think that religion is just like power when it comes to vacuums. The SJW theology, dogma and identification of heresy are looking strikingly like "meet the new boss, same as the old boss," but in a very pre-Reformation sort of way.

Yup, it feels like the Cultural Revolution is happening.

And yes, it is very cult like.

Probably to the benefit of no one. Seems more like a matter of elite competition.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Yup, it feels like the Cultural Revolution is happening.

And yes, it is very cult like.

Probably to the benefit of no one. Seems more like a matter of elite competition.

No one is getting killed like in the Cultural Revolution, but it does seem that livelihoods are being destroyed.

I am somewhat of a 'light' Twitter user... I check it to keep tabs on news, sports, weather and other goings on. I don't really follow any kind of ideological Twitter. But some of the people I follow, people who post interesting parenting stuff, for example, have gone off the deep end with this, hurling indignant accusations over minor transgressions. People are getting doxxed for dumb things they said when they were in junior high 10 years ago, that sort of stuff.

It does seem as though there is no longer any disincentive when it comes to moderating critical impulses... the only way to get ahead in this game is to be the most indignant, most outraged voice possible.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

No one is getting killed like in the Cultural Revolution, but it does seem that livelihoods are being destroyed.

I am somewhat of a 'light' Twitter user... I check it to keep tabs on news, sports, weather and other goings on. I don't really follow any kind of ideological Twitter. But some of the people I follow, people who post interesting parenting stuff, for example, have gone off the deep end with this, hurling indignant accusations over minor transgressions. People are getting doxxed for dumb things they said when they were in junior high 10 years ago, that sort of stuff.

It does seem as though there is no longer any disincentive when it comes to moderating critical impulses... the only way to get ahead in this game is to be the most indignant, most outraged voice possible.

For me , it really started with Donald Trump. Not just with his musings, which were typically crazy, but with the reactions TO him.

All of a sudden, one's level of outrage vis-à-vis Trump was being measured. One needs to be sufficiently outraged lest you be viewed as suspicious.

In a lot of circles, BLM has actually taken this to another level.

As in "Esquire, I couldn't help but notice that your Facebook avatar was not changed to black on Blackout day. I guess you... simply... forgot. Right?

A few days ago Rousseau reported getting subtle or not-so-subtle pressure of this nature from "friends" on social media.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by esquire

It does seem as though there is no longer any disincentive when it comes to moderating critical impulses... the only way to get ahead in this game is to be the most indignant, most outraged voice possible.

I think the cultural context is a huge part of what's going on. We are in a pandemic and we have not adapted yet to social media platforms that have hugely lowered the bar for mass communication.

It is easy to invent or share falsehoods on a platform like Twitter. In the past this was moderated by defamation laws and publishers who acted as gatekeepers. That system was not perfect but we are in the wild west now, and social media companies have resisted enforcement of anti-defamation rules on their platforms. There's a massive imbalance between the low cost of making unsubstantiated negative claims about somebody and the amount of damage they can cause. The social media platforms have made it very easy for people to communicate with a large group; mistakes are practically encouraged (more engagement!).

We're also seeing feedback loops where groups with extreme opinions are self-reinforcing. Then on top of that there's the usual religious faith type dynamic; believing extreme stuff is itself a signal of commitment to a cause. These two things aren't unique to social media but the ability of large numbers of random people to easily connect and then operate in this type of system is new.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Acajack

For starters, I never talked about "a black guy" so maybe you'd wanna quote people correctly?

Secondly, my main point was about human nature. And I stand by that. It is what it is.

I'd add that it's not about "us doing this for white people all the time", it's more about people "doing it for their in-group all the time".

You can bet that more than a few African-Americans have a different reaction (at least in their minds) when they get a speeding ticket from a white cop vs. a black cop. The same goes for getting denied for a job or a loan.

Learn the difference between a quote and a paraphrase, and a refusal to play the disingenuous algebra thing you and Lio do to obfuscate the issues. You insist that it's "human nature" for people to judge an entire group based on the actions of an individual, or to give the benefit of the doubt to one's in-group, even after I've pointed out that all races give white people the benefit of the doubt as individuals rather than as proof "Group X" is bad. Saying that blacks (often rightly) suspect authorities/banks/employers of racism, is a particularly stupid way of trying to deny that.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by dleung

Learn the difference between a quote and a paraphrase, and a refusal to play the disingenuous algebra thing you and Lio do to obfuscate the issues. You insist that it's "human nature" for people to judge an entire group based on the actions of an individual, or to give the benefit of the doubt to one's in-group, even after I've pointed out that all races give white people the benefit of the doubt as individuals rather than as proof "Group X" is bad. Saying that blacks (often rightly) suspect authorities/banks/employers of racism, is a particularly stupid way of trying to deny that.

It's patently false that all races give white people the benefit of the doubt, as my example shows.

Also, we have several Canadians of European origin on here who live in Asia, and they've posted in recent weeks that people in China or Japan most definitely don't give white people the benefit of the doubt.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by dleung

Learn the difference between a quote and a paraphrase, .

There is no definition of paraphrasing where someone saying "a member of Group X" becomes them saying "a black guy".

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's patently false that all races give white people the benefit of the doubt, as my example shows.

Also, we have several Canadians of European origin on here who live in Asia, and they've posted in recent weeks that people in China or Japan most definitely don't give white people the benefit of the doubt.

"Homophobia still exists in America. Something should be done"

Acajack: "Hey look at the Middle East. Gotta accept human nature"

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by dleung

...even after I've pointed out that all races give white people the benefit of the doubt as individuals rather than as proof "Group X" is bad.

This is not true.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's patently false that all races give white people the benefit of the doubt, as my example shows.

Also, we have several Canadians of European origin on here who live in Asia, and they've posted in recent weeks that people in China or Japan most definitely don't give white people the benefit of the doubt.

The only time in my life that I have experienced racism directed at me was in China. It was fairly innocuous, I wasn't scarred by it or anything. But it was definitely Not Nice.

[Acajack]

"Everyone in the world was getting along just great until those — Euros started leaving their tiny patch of land a couple hundred years ago."

[dleung]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

I think we need to do a lot of work to ensure that we have a high "floor" or minimum standard of living. I think programs like UBI can help us get there.

But you can't just look at disparate outcomes between groups and conclude that it is because of discrimination or the inherited disadvantages you note, although the latter does play some role (but could be significantly addressed through race-neutral social programs).

No one said discrimination and inherited disadvantages are the only factors, but those are the only factors society can fix. Pitting Asian success against other minorities, and pointing to "cultural" factors, has never been done for any other reason than to pretend that discrimination doesn't exist and to question the need for change.

Radicals might see differently, but I agree any solution must be race-neutral and focused on lifting the "floor". Republicans have been pretty good as suppressing black votes and upward mobility through race-neutral policies, so of course things can be reversed through race-neutral means. As an Asian, who on average needs to score 140 points higher than a white guy on SATs to get in an Ivy league school, obviously I'm against affirmative action lol, especially when done to negate the achievement of one race overcoming the odds too successfully.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by rousseau

This is not true.

I've provided examples backing my statement. Where's yours? Hopefully not as retarded as Acajack's "well blacks don't give whites cops the benefit of the doubt as individuals when they get profiled at a traffic stop"

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by dleung

I've provided examples backing my statement. Where's yours? Hopefully not as retarded as Acajack's "well blacks don't give whites cops the benefit of the doubt as individuals when they get profiled at a traffic stop"

Uh, I've lived in Taiwan. People all over the world make pat judgments about "all white people" based on the actions of a few.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Uh, I've lived in Taiwan. People all over the world make pat judgments about "all white people" based on the actions of a few.

The problem is that most bias is implicit and therefore unconscious. It is not so much the actions of explicitly racist people but rather the tendency of everyone to react at times according to these racial ideas that has a cumulative effect. Over time these tendencies shape cultural climates in ways which favour certain groups over others, making it easier for them without their awareness usually, etc. A good metaphor for this is swimming with the current. One might be proud of how fast they are, but turn them against the current and they will have a different experience. That current is implicit bias.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Yes, even within vague categories like "Black", which don't map on to biological population groups, show huge diversity in outcomes. This further calls into question systemic racism.

Yup, it feels like the Cultural Revolution is happening.

And yes, it is very cult like.

Probably to the benefit of no one. Seems more like a matter of elite competition.

The revolution started, in earnest, in the 1960s. I don't think people understand just how completely upside down our society is today compared to that which preceded the counterculture movements of the 1960s. Some of that change has been good, of course. Some of it, however, has had dire consequences on the quality of our lives.

Now we're adrift in this turbulent nightmare of a world. Up is down. Black is white. Men are women. Women are men. Words are violence.

All we can do is brace ourselves and wait for the storm to pass. The problem is that these squalls can last decades...

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

The revolution started, in earnest, in the 1960s. I don't think people understand just how completely upside down our society is today compared to that which preceded the counterculture movements of the 1960s. Some of that change has been good, of course. Some of it, however, has had dire consequences on the quality of our lives.

Now we're adrift in this turbulent nightmare of a world. Up is down. Black is white. Men are women. Women are men. Words are violence.

All we can do is brace ourselves and wait for the storm to pass. The problem is that these squalls can last decades...

This thread is full of stubborn resistance to progress and change, a stubborn refusal to listen. The answers to your questions are out there. There are plenty of books to be read, podcasts to listen to, and social media accounts to follow. From an argumentative stance, someone may not be able to “change your mind”. Because you won’t let that happen. It’s your mind after all and you choose what you allow in. You can either keep pouting here where you have some like-minded souls to commiserate with or you can do the work of learning some new perspectives. It’s entirely up to you whether or not you do that. The consequences of not doing so, however, will put you further and further out of sync with the evolution of culture.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by rousseau

This is not true.

DEFINITELY not true in East Asia.

Hey, let me paraphrase dleung the dleung way: "Judges in Japan are well known to be very lenient towards white criminals while always delivering harsher sentences to ethnically Japanese people who have committed the exact same crimes!"

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

"Everyone in the world was getting along just great until those — Euros started leaving their tiny patch of land a couple hundred years ago."

The only reason the Sioux and Ojibwe were killing each other before the year 1492 was the toxic telepathic influence of Europeans across the North Atlantic, no question.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by Acajack

For me , it really started with Donald Trump. Not just with his musings, which were typically crazy, but with the reactions TO him.

All of a sudden, one's level of outrage vis-à-vis Trump was being measured. One needs to be sufficiently outraged lest you be viewed as suspicious.

In a lot of circles, BLM has actually taken this to another level.

As in "Esquire, I couldn't help but notice that your Facebook avatar was not changed to black on Blackout day. I guess you... simply... forgot. Right?

A few days ago Rousseau reported getting subtle or not-so-subtle pressure of this nature from "friends" on social media.

One’s outrage vis-a-vis Trump is a good measure of where you fall on the political spectrum, as is one’s response to BLM.

How do one’s passions, anger, love, etc. not correlate with that? Trump is a much greater threat to some than others. That’s why they are more angry. In the same sense that if your neighbour shits on your lawn you are going to be much angrier than if he shits on someone else’s. Yes, there is still a crazy person shitting on people’s lawns in your neighbourhood but the effect on you is somewhat mitigated. Maybe a secret part of you doesn’t like that neighbour either and so you condone or enjoy that someone has — on his lawn.