!2 Years a Slave

Rum, beer, women, movies, nice websites, gaming, etc., without interrupting the flow of martial threads.

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Michael on Tue May 09, 2017 8:32 am

Steve James wrote:Oh well, btw, that "group identity" (i.e. "racial identity") idea was invented by White men here; it's not some new idea that others are thrusting upon them.

I know from reading your posts over the years that race was first legally codified in the USA, but that's not what I'm referring to. I gave a couple of examples in East and Southeast Asia where the default in-group / out-group recognition is quite obvious. Ethnic and racial conflict is common around the world and it happens partly because of group identity based on race and ethnicity. Is this a controversial statement?

There's the group of people who believe in the DoI's principles. And, there's the group who don't.

Very quoteworthy.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11247
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Ian C. Kuzushi on Tue May 09, 2017 9:15 am

There are a lot of generalizations being thrown about to defend...minimizing black slavery? Attacks on "social justice warriors?" It's telling that such a word is used as an insult by some. The problem, as usual, is that the veneer of factoids can't hide the pile of bullshit it covers.

Japan is apparently the current perfect example of a country maintaining its culutral [sic] identity by avoiding the "melting pot myth."


No competent scholars argue or believe that Japan is homogenous. I hate to bring out the antiquated terms, but I guess it's appropriate when people present antiquated ideas: homogenous Japan is an invented tradition. Guess where the royal family hails from?

I've only been to Vietnam a handful of times, but I never witnessed significant "outsider treatment" that couldn't be explained by language barriers. I think every one of my ex-pat friends who live in Vietnam are married and most have kids. This includes my brother. They are welcomed into the homes and villages of their friends and friends of friends. I understand that China, and to some extent, Korea, have very strong nationalist rhetorics at play that create very different situations, but the arguments being forwarded by some on this thread only seem to support this very unfortunate set of conditions.

It's really a shame that some find it to be hip, chic, or avant-garde to attack the ideas of fraternity and equality. It really is in the same vein as attacking the essentially benign radical left in defense of the actually deadly dangerous Alt-Right.
文武両道。

Lord Li requires one hundred gold coins per day!
User avatar
Ian C. Kuzushi
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Steve James on Tue May 09, 2017 12:04 pm

I know from reading your posts over the years that race was first legally codified in the USA, but that's not what I'm referring to.


You're referring to the inevitability of a dominant group. I'll repeat. In France, that means French. In the U.S., that means U.S. citizens. Period. Sure, one can go on dividing and sub-dividing citizens; but, the fact remains that U.S. citizens should be dominant here.

Spencer argues that this is an ethnic state "because" he considers "whiteness" an ethnicity. Canadian or Greek or Jamaican or Jewish can be considered an ethnicity. Whiteness is an ideology that links together different ethnic groups into an over-arching category called race. That ideology sees Obama as not belonging to that category. But, then we get down to the facts of human interbreeding, and its inevitability.

Afa other societies, who gives a fuck? I'm interested in the rights of American citizens. Those who think they're European can always go home. That's what they've told me. Nowadays, Mexicans probably hear it more.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15918
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby grzegorz on Tue May 09, 2017 4:59 pm

How do whites, blacks, browns and other citizens feel about illegal Mexican immigrants taking over the menial labor jobs that previously belonged to them? Owners then driving down the wages, at least partly forced to do so in terms of competition, to the point that the industry norm for payment is now so far below poverty that citizens can't compete for those jobs?


Well those cherry tomatoes are still growing in Fresno. If you want feel free to fly back and pick them. ;)

I was talking about European immigrants both legal and illegal complaining about Latino immigrants both legal and illegal. People enjoy feeling superior.

Image
Last edited by grzegorz on Tue May 09, 2017 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Fascists rejected reason in the name of will, denying objective truth in favor of a glorious myth articulated by leaders who claimed to give voice to the people."

-Timothy Snyder
User avatar
grzegorz
Wuji
 
Posts: 4688
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 1:42 pm
Location: Divided States of America

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Michael on Tue May 09, 2017 7:18 pm

Ian, why do you insist on this passive-aggressive style of communication? There are only three or four people in this thread. Thrown around by some means whom?

Michael wrote:Japan is apparently the current perfect example of a country maintaining its culutral [sic] identity by avoiding the "melting pot myth."


I was not clear enough in what I meant because I thought the other parts of my post and videos were giving the context. From the side of the social justice warriors come group identity assignment of "white male patriarchy", which is basically an accusation of collective guilt, and one of the many responses from those put into the category is something like, "Maybe maintaining cultural integrity is a good thing. Look at Japan, they are doing well because they don't have mass immigration. Also, no Muslim terror attacks. See, we were right."

Ian wrote:No competent scholars argue or believe that Japan is homogenous. I hate to bring out the antiquated terms, but I guess it's appropriate when people present antiquated ideas: homogenous Japan is an invented tradition. Guess where the royal family hails from?


I am pointing out what is happening in current events, it doesn't mean I believe the rationale on either side. I am not surprised to hear you say Japan is not homogenous, but it will probably be news to the reactionaries who don't like being put into into categories meant to marginalize them. However, I don't think I've explained this train of thought well enough and I doubt my point is getting across if it sounds like I'm defending or minimizing black slavery.

Anyway, thanks for your response, I'm sure you know a thing or two about Japan.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11247
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Steve James on Wed May 10, 2017 6:43 am

From the side of the social justice warriors come group identity assignment of "white male patriarchy", which is basically an accusation of collective guilt,


Michael, that sentence just doesn't make sense.

1) Who is not in favor of social justice? The way you're using the term is straight out of George Orwell. I.e., "social justice" just can't be right or just or even social. Better to use leftist, hippie, radical, militant, thug, commie, pinko, red, anarchist, or terrorist. Best to describe the individuals in the group by what they do (not collectively).

Anyway, I'm sure you didn't make up the term, and I'm equally sure that those who created it as shorthand for "people who disagree." It would be less useful rhetorically if they called them "brick throwers" --because nobody's got a patent on that. I'd bet that no one actually named themselves social justice warriors. I say that also because I remember people criticizing and attacking "civil rights" workers (but it goes back to the abolitionists). It's totally American that MLK was a terrorist investigated by the FBI. Malcolm X was assassinated

2) The idea of group identity connected to "white male patriarchy" was invented by white males (like Spencer."

3) The only group in this country that has ever been guaranteed "rights" are white males. In fact, you told me that others should just get used to it? I know that's not exactly what you meant, but it supports the idea of white males having rights and privileges that others don't. And, that's specifically, white males.

4) Afa collective guilt, that's an emotion. Tough shit. Htfu. It's like me feeling hurt for not being turned away from renting an apartment. Wel, note that you see collective (group) guilt is wrong, but argue that some groups should accept collective praise. Iow, the same group celebrated for its accomplishments can not be blamed for its failures. And when guilt is acknowledged, it's spread out globally: i.e., "everybody does it."

Otoh, ever notice how collective guilt is applied to Mexicans and Muslims just for being Mexican and Muslim? (I.e., collective guilt applied simply for being the member of a group). That's not fair or just is it? (Back in my militant days, we recognized that "justice" in most of the US meant "just us." The only exceptions were the southern (former plantation) states where that there was no veil on that meaning.)
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15918
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Michael on Thu May 11, 2017 8:15 am

Steve James wrote:Afa other societies, who gives a fuck? I'm interested in the rights of American citizens. Those who think they're European can always go home. That's what they've told me. Nowadays, Mexicans probably hear it more.


Who gives a fuck? Lol. Going back to the previous page, you posted a video about Danish inclusion of everyone, I said that wouldn't work in China. Both are other societies.

Michael wrote:From the side of the social justice warriors come group identity assignment of "white male patriarchy", which is basically an accusation of collective guilt,


Steve wrote:1) Who is not in favor of social justice? The way you're using the term is straight out of George Orwell. I.e., "social justice" just can't be right or just or even social. Better to use leftist, hippie, radical, militant, thug, commie, pinko, red, anarchist, or terrorist. Best to describe the individuals in the group by what they do (not collectively).

I mentioned this last year when we were talking about Jordan Peterson. Social Justice is a legally codified term in Canada and the accepted term elsewhere, as is social justice warrior.

Anyway, I'm sure you didn't make up the term, and I'm equally sure that those who created it as shorthand for "people who disagree."

Actually, it's other way around. It's the leftists and SJW's who reflexively use pejoratives against those with whom they disagree, such as: racist, Nazi, and fascist.

2) The idea of group identity connected to "white male patriarchy" was invented by white males (like Spencer.)

Thanks for pointing it out 'cos the irony had not passed my blood-brain barrier until now.

3) The only group in this country that has ever been guaranteed "rights" are white males. In fact, you told me that others should just get used to it?

What? I told you that others should just get used to it? I don't think so.

I know that's not exactly what you meant, but it supports the idea of white males having rights and privileges that others don't. And, that's specifically, white males.

I'm glad to hear that's not what I meant, because I was defending slavery and beating my wife just one page ago.

4) Afa collective guilt, that's an emotion. Tough shit. Htfu. It's like me feeling hurt for not being turned away from renting an apartment.

I meant guilt as a legal finding, not an emotion. Hurt feelings is nothing these days. Now we also have microaggressions because you wore a poncho (cultural appropriation) and systemic violence from using the wrong pronoun.

Wel, note that you see collective (group) guilt is wrong, but argue that some groups should accept collective praise. Iow, the same group celebrated for its accomplishments can not be blamed for its failures. And when guilt is acknowledged, it's spread out globally: i.e., "everybody does it."

Okay, you got me here. Thanks for pointing it out.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11247
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Steve James on Fri May 12, 2017 5:42 am

Going back to the previous page, you posted a video about Danish inclusion of everyone


It was a video advertisement from Denmark, but it was about how people grouped each other.

Social Justice is a legally codified term in Canada and the accepted term elsewhere, as is social justice warrior.


I ain't Canadian. What is the legal definition in Canada? Anyway, I googled and found the Wiki definition.

Social justice is the fair and just relation between the individual and society. This is measured by the explicit and tacit terms for the distribution of wealth, opportunities for personal activity and social privileges. In Western as well as in older Asian cultures, the concept of social justice has often referred to the process of ensuring that individuals fulfill their societal roles and receive what was their due from society.[1][2][3] In the current global grassroots movements for social justice, the emphasis has been on the breaking of barriers for social mobility, the creation of safety nets and economic justice.[4][5][6][7][8]


Do you disagree with the concept? Is there something wrong with it? What is your alternative? Btw, read the wiki section on the history of the idea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice#History
And, I'd be happy to admit to being a social justice warrior, as opposed to being the opposite. It's not a derogatory term for me.

I meant guilt as a legal finding, not an emotion. Hurt feelings is nothing these days. Now we also have microaggressions because you wore a poncho (cultural appropriation) and systemic violence from using the wrong pronoun.


Guilt is a feeling. Collective guilt is a collective feeling. Btw, not all of the collective group you identify feel the same way. I have no idea what collective guilt is in terms of law. The opposite would be collective innocence. Besides, if you want to talk about laws against "groups," bone up on the Dred Scott decision https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/no-right ... to-respect
or Plessy v Ferguson Supreme Court decisions. They weren't overturned until after I was born (1954).

But sure, if one thinks one deserves more, any law or act of the justice system to deny that will be considered an injustice. That's the thing about the America that you describe. There can't be "equality" when people tell themselves they're better. Though, the reality is that individuals recognize that they are not personally superior, or see examples of members of inferior groups who are actually superior.

Just because a baby is born a prince doesn't mean he won't be dumber than his butler -except that he will get the education. Try to tell him that he's no better than anyone else when he grows up. It takes an exceptional person to recognize that. They exist. Often, they're called traitors (like the American colonists. "You think you're equal. Colonists puhleeze"). They will be the first "social justice warriors" to go to war, too. Look up Beecher's Bibles.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15918
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby grzegorz on Mon May 15, 2017 12:17 am

Mayor of Charlottesville calls Pro-Confederate rallies 'horrific'

http://abcnews.go.com/US/mayor-charlott ... d=47404820
Last edited by grzegorz on Mon May 15, 2017 12:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Fascists rejected reason in the name of will, denying objective truth in favor of a glorious myth articulated by leaders who claimed to give voice to the people."

-Timothy Snyder
User avatar
grzegorz
Wuji
 
Posts: 4688
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 1:42 pm
Location: Divided States of America

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Michael on Wed May 17, 2017 9:44 am

What is the legal definition in Canada?
Provinces and territories have their own human rights codes and social justice courts, and there is also a federal level human rights code, so obviously this gets complicated, so I just know the basic info. From looking at the Social Justice Tribunals Ontario web site it is a human rights code to prevent discrimination and harrassment based on specific criteria within a larger mandate.

Social Justice Mandate wrote:Social Justice Tribunals Ontario (SJTO) is a cluster of eight adjudicative tribunals with a mandate to resolve applications and appeals brought under statutes relating to child and family services oversight, youth justice, human rights, residential tenancies, compensation for victims of violent crime, disability support and other social assistance, and special education.


As we discussed last November or so, the federal level Canadian codes have a very short bill, only a couple of paragraphs of text, to add another protected group that includes "gender identity and gender expression", but it doesn't provide a definition of its own and is distinct from groups such as transsexual and transgender, which are already protected in Canuckistan. The problem is that definitions in academia for gender identity and expression have no attachment to physical reality or acknowledged group membership, such as formal religious initiation, and can be changed on a whim, with no prerequisite or even duration, so they could change in any time period, such as daily, for the same person, and are difficult or impossible to distinguish from clothing and grooming preferences.

The social justice court in Alberta infamously made a case against a publisher named Ezra Levant in 2008, who re-publshed the Danish Mohammed bomb cartoons as part of a piece examining the controversy. The case against Levant was eventually dropped, although he says it cost him about $100,000 CDN. This six minute video of the proceedings sums it up well for me when they asked him what his intentions were when he printed. His answer is good, IMO, but to me the question sounds like a teacher in a playground asking Johnny to apologize for hurting Suzie's feelings, "Now, Johnny. You didn't really mean to make Suzie cry, did you? Be a good boy and say you're sorry."



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

Social justice is the fair and just relation between the individual and society. This is measured by the explicit and tacit terms for the distribution of wealth, opportunities for personal activity and social privileges. In Western as well as in older Asian cultures, the concept of social justice has often referred to the process of ensuring that individuals fulfill their societal roles and receive what was their due from society.[1][2][3] In the current global grassroots movements for social justice, the emphasis has been on the breaking of barriers for social mobility, the creation of safety nets and economic justice.[4][5][6][7][8]


I support somewhat the wiki definition, like measuring overall social justice by wealth distribution, but not enforcing wealth distribution to an extreme, as seen in Communist countries, in order to satisfy social justice. The difference is whether your enforece equality of rights and opportunity or enforce equality of outcomes.

The way that I've seen social justice used recently is an umbrella term for a collection of ideologies, such as multi-culturalism and moral relativism (we have no right to judge other cultures), radical feminism (sexuality is a social construct and there are no inherent biological differences that determine identity), and post-modernism (there are no universal truths). These have a focal point of suppressing free speech by categorizing the opposing group's speech as a tabu gateway drug to oppression of a minority group that those particular social justice warriors claim to belong to and/or represent. They take social justice as a banner for white-knighting a cause within a dichotomy of oppressor and victim, ostensibly to assist the victim, but actually it's just to assert power.

The thing I can point to and argue about social justice is the suppression of free speech. Sometimes it's violent like I described in the antifa thread. Sometimes it's shouting down other people's speech or making their meetings impossible by protesting them with completely unrelated issues, or even parallel issues, like feminists denouncing men's right advocacy groups. Sometimes it's a massive chilling effect as Dr. Gad Saad explained in his reading of endless letters from academic colleagues, students and students' parents complaining about their fear of voicing any opinion that may be deemed inappropriate by the social justice warriors.

Campus Censorship and Thought Policing, 8 minutes



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QhdvMaTK-w

One example of the suppression of free speech was the Halloween 2015 e-mail by a Yale teacher, who suggested politely that the voluminous social justice warnings and prohibitions about offensive costumes were unnecessary. She was castigated and resigned. Her husband, also a professor at Yale, stayed on and was confronted by students on campus. Here's a 1 minute clip of a social justice warrior screeching at and berating her extremely contrite professor. The irate girl asks how he got hired, but she forgot she was on the hiring comittee, lol lol lol lol. This is one small example of social justice on a non-issue since there is no issue small enough to be ignored by them.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IEFD_JVYd0
Last edited by Michael on Wed May 17, 2017 9:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11247
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Ian C. Kuzushi on Wed May 17, 2017 10:07 am

Talk about missing the forest for the trees...
文武両道。

Lord Li requires one hundred gold coins per day!
User avatar
Ian C. Kuzushi
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Steve James on Wed May 17, 2017 10:48 am

If you don't believe in social justice, then why expect justice for yourself?

Anyway,
The way that I've seen social justice used recently is an umbrella term for a collection of ideologies, such as multi-culturalism and moral relativism (we have no right to judge other cultures), radical feminism (sexuality is a social construct and there are no inherent biological differences that determine identity), and post-modernism (there are no universal truths).


You're saying that "social justice" is an "umbrella term for a collection of ideologies" with which you disagree. Fine, good research. When did this continent become a mono-culture? That's just for people who speak one language, and are relatively literate in that language. I don't want to belong to your mono-culture.

Afa moral relativism, that's a laugh. First try to define morality and then apply it to American history or culture.

But, your shorthand umbrella term from Canada is misplaced. It's lazy. I'm sure you can find loads of blogs and videos that rant against social justice. Fine. If you don't believe in it, you don't deserve it. Rather than social justice, you want ... civil justice, or just justice? Then you have to define "just" in a way that it doesn't apply to just people like you, or with the same culture. If you do, it ain't justice except in your imagination.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15918
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Michael on Wed May 17, 2017 7:53 pm

If you don't believe in social justice, then why expect justice for yourself?

As I said, I believe in equal rights and equal opportunity.

You're saying that "social justice" is an "umbrella term for a collection of ideologies" with which you disagree. Fine, good research. When did this continent become a mono-culture? That's just for people who speak one language, and are relatively literate in that language. I don't want to belong to your mono-culture.

I don't see the connection to a mono-culture from what I've said. Just the opposite, it's social justice as I've explained it that is trying to drastically decrease diversity of ideas. There's about 15 minutes of video supporting that. Take a look.

But, your shorthand umbrella term from Canada is misplaced. It's lazy.

I'm explaining how people with radical ideologies confuse terminology. Like you said earlier, it's Orwellian.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11247
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: !2 Years a Slave

Postby Michael on Thu May 18, 2017 5:16 am

Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:Talk about missing the forest for the trees...

Can you or Steve elaborate?

If it helps, on this topic of social justice, of course I believe in justice as in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and rule of law in the USA and elsewhere, but I'm saying there are two groups who both consider themselves part of social justice.

In response to Steve's comment, I don't support a mono-culture. Gawd, that's China all over.

One group claiming social justice believes in equal rights for ALL people, and also equal opportunity, and the other group claiming social justice I categorize as believing in equality of outcome, which is basically the Marxist principle of "from each according to their ability and to each according to their need." That would be fine is omniscient robots were in charge of the government.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11247
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Previous

Return to Off the Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest