The not so Great Racism in Canada Thread

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by wave46

To wit: If you want to ascend to the highest office in this land, bilingualism is now an (unofficial) requirement. I'd imagine being the head of a major Canadian corporation is likewise.

I wouldn't say the latter is true, though it's a damn good nice to have.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Acajack

And sometimes they are just opportunistic 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 who want a bigger TV.

Those aren't the people starting the riots though. They are seeing an opportunity and exploiting it.

Kind of like big business gobbling up billions in government cash.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Again, that's a strawman characterization of current opposition to BLM. Opposition to MLK in the 1960s was rooted in pure racism. I'm quite certain that some opposition to BLM in the 21st century is as well, but the two eras are not analogous.

The "problem" with BLM is that so many people define it they way they want to and either attack or support accordingly. It's the ultimate strawman.

[memememe76]

Even if it’s true that LGTBQ rights and Francophone rights have been achieved (I suspect a lot of members in those groups would disagree), I mean those groups are often led by older white males. Their voices are going to be heard.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

Yes, we’re getting a master class in how to obfuscate. There’s enough of them here to keep the illusion alive.

Gaslighting in the form of "critical thinking".

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by memememe76

Even if it’s true that LGTBQ rights and Francophone rights have been achieved (I suspect a lot of members in those groups would disagree),.

I never said everything was settled.

Originally Posted by memememe76

I mean those groups are often led by older white males. Their voices are going to be heard.

Every cause has its cross to bear.

I wonder though who has a better chance of being heard between a unilingual francophone Québécois, or one with shaky English and a really thick accent, and someone like James Baldwin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tek9h3a5wQ

I mean...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3X_BUUZkZ8

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by JHikka

My feelings exactly on this. This thread, filled with older white men determining what is and isn't racist and how it affects them, is not going to be the shining beacon of dialogue on this subject.

As opposed to other threads / forums filled with younger white men telling minorities how they should feel. Filled with younger white men who pretend to be the new Jesus / white man's burden trope by bearing all the sins of the noble savages who have no agency of their own. Much of the woke BS coming predominantly from White liberals is another side of the same coin of tribalism, perhaps even worse.

As I said earlier, I haven't experienced any material racism, but when there are minor things, it's often from woke white liberals who have stereotypes and expectations about what minorities should believe. If minorities don't toe their line, the white woke liberals can be the most vicious. They will be called Uncle Toms or their views will be fully disregarded as internalized racism or whatever BS.

Woke white liberals just use minorities in their political football against white conservatives and to feel a sense of superiority.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Woke white liberals just use minorities in their political football against white conservatives and to feel a sense of superiority.

A lotta truth here.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Woke white liberals just use minorities in their political football against white conservatives and to feel a sense of superiority.

Not really, as least IMO. "Woke white liberals" probably try to elevate minorities and give them a voice where they otherwise wouldn't have one, this forum as only one example of which lacks those voices. I can't really talk about racism because i've never experienced it personally, much like many others in this thread haven't because they grew up and experienced life in the majority. We're all privileged and fortunate enough to speak about Canadian life from ivory towers and attempting to interpret racism as something that happens to others but as something that we've never personally experienced is a foolish venture at best. It's akin to male government officials making legal decisions on abortion and saying yay or nay based on their experience or insight into it.

I was never one that supported Trudeau's quota system for women on federal cabinet positions, and quotas are still something that I am very much against, but the value that it does bring is new voices into a void that has never experienced them. It's an attempt to lift up women, and by extension minorities, into positions which they could not achieve or were not allowed to achieve previously for whatever reasons the pre-existing establishment created at the time. This thread, and forum, are extensions of that environment. On this forum we have a handful of minorities at best, but I don't think we have any women...

I'm not trying to raise minority voices above those of others, but the lack of them entirely should at least signal something to most here. This thread is effectively an echo chamber for white males to speak about something that's never, ever, ever affected them personally.

Anyway, long story short, nothing is really going to be resolved or figured out on the discussion in this thread because it's inherently hindered by its direction and users, and i'm afraid to say that my opinion of a handful of users on this forum has been altered from what they've said in this thread, which is probably par for the course anyway.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Anyway, long story short, nothing is really going to be resolved or figured out on the discussion in this thread because it's inherently hindered by its direction and users, and i'm afraid to say that my opinion of a handful of users on this forum has been altered from what they've said in this thread, which is probably par for the course anyway.

You can take solace in the fact that nothing would be resolved or figured out in this thread even if it were made up of nothing but non-white voices because it's a discussion forum, not a decision-making body with any kind of actual power.

[MolsonExport]

"Woke white liberals" probably try to elevate minorities and give them a voice where they otherwise wouldn't have one

Of course, and I agree fully. Slandering people with the term "woke" suggests some ulterior motive on behalf of those so-called white liberals, other than actually caring deeply about the issue at hand, in recognition of the systemic obstacles facing non-whites, especially black (and in Canada, First Nations) people. This is not to say that there hasn't been progress (of course there has been much progress) but the journey towards full equality and acceptance is still some ways from being completed. I am white but my wife is not. My children are mixed. Many of my colleagues and close friends, inside and outside of academia, are not white. I have seen injustices suffered by these people that I care about first hand, and I have heard many accounts of the same, second hand.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by wave46

To wit: If you want to ascend to the highest office in this land, bilingualism is now an (unofficial) requirement. I'd imagine being the head of a major Canadian corporation is likewise.

Calling Stephen Harper bilingual is a real stretch. I suspect a lot of people could pick up the level of French proficiency he had when he was first elected relatively quickly, particularly if they have a level of intelligence you'd expect from an aspiring PM.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Of course, and I agree fully. Slandering people with the term "woke" suggests some ulterior motive on behalf of those so-called white liberals, other than actually caring deeply about the issue at hand, in recognition of the systemic obstacles facing non-whites, especially black (and in Canada, First Nations) people.

I dunno, I think this accusation of ulterior motive is a prime example of what's wrong in this thread. For example saffronleaf was posting about wokesters and he already said he isn't white. hipster duck said he's Chinese and got ignored. Didn't Acajack say he had a mixed background too?

I don't think criticizing an argument has to have anything to do with caring or not caring about racism. Pointing out flaws in vacuous politically correct arguments is not a pro-racist activity. If people want to campaign for anti-racism, they need to have good reasoning, and ideally good focus too.

What I see is that there's a range of posters and opinions, set against an impulse to either pigeonhole people or identify ulterior motives and subliminal messages (e.g. "he complained about rioting" -> "he must be a Fox News acolyte!", "he said this building is ugly" -> "he hates my city!").

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

. Didn't Acajack say he had a mixed background too?
.

I am but you can't really tell so no one would call me a visible minority. And I would never make that claim. Though interestingly enough even if it's several generations removed one of my kids gets asked if they are of that specific origin from time to time. So does one my siblings. Out of all of my siblings I am the one who has the least of those traits visible.

Though honestly, we all look pretty "white". Including my kid. At the very most the darkest among us look like central-southern Europeans.

Things might have been different if my parents' names had been flipped around and I had ended up with the "foreign" sounding name as opposed to the French one. Though AFAIK that half of the family have never really been discriminated based on their surname and its pretty obvious foreign origin.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by memememe76

Even if it’s true that LGTBQ rights and Francophone rights have been achieved (I suspect a lot of members in those groups would disagree), I mean those groups are often led by older white males. Their voices are going to be heard.

Related, from this morning:

Canadian Museum for Human Rights employees say they were told to censor gay content for certain guests

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/cmhr-gay-censorship-allegations-1.5615969

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Related, from this morning:

Canadian Museum for Human Rights employees say they were told to censor gay content for certain guests

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/cmhr-gay-censorship-allegations-1.5615969

Given that this was the Canadian Museum of Human Rights, the requests by some patrons to bypass certain exhibits on the guided tours is particularly unconscionable.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Related, from this morning:

Canadian Museum for Human Rights employees say they were told to censor gay content for certain guests

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/cmhr-gay-censorship-allegations-1.5615969

When "certain forms of diversity" bump into "other forms of diversity"...

[esquire]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Given that this was the Canadian Museum of Human Rights, the requests by some patrons to bypass certain exhibits on the guided tours is particularly unconscionable.

It's kind of interesting, going by the news articles in recent weeks, it appears that the CMHR is being pushed hard to change from a somewhat staid institution representing safe, middle of the road Canadian impulses to one that is more on the cutting edge of progressive thought as it relates to human rights.

I'm not being critical either, an institution with a name like that shouldn't be walking the Hutterite kids or conservative donors briskly past the gay marriage exhibit.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

It's kind of interesting, going by the news articles in recent weeks, it appears that the CMHR is being pushed hard to change from a somewhat staid institution representing safe, middle of the road Canadian impulses to one that is more on the cutting edge of progressive thought as it relates to human rights.

I'm not being critical either, an institution with a name like that shouldn't be walking the Hutterite kids or conservative donors briskly past the gay marriage exhibit.

Especially not when it's (mostly) publicly funded.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I am but you can't really tell so no one would call me a visible minority. And I would never make that claim. Though interestingly enough even if it's several generations removed one of my kids gets asked if they are of that specific origin from time to time. So does one my siblings. Out of all of my siblings I am the one who has the least of those traits visible.

It does seem like it would have some relevance in terms of hypothetical accusations that you are callous toward any injustices that might be experienced by non-Europeans, or are just totally clueless about all of this (possibly more clueless than a silver spoon blond haired blue eyed guy who posts the right stuff on twitter!).

(My preference would be for the "background" stuff to all be irrelevant, except if people want to share thoughts on it or their experiences. We should not go on the offensive and demand that people prove what identity characteristics they have that qualify them to speak.)