|
Argas posted:I think you're still wrong on neoliberalism and some of your politics. That's fair, I'm not arrogant enough to think I'm objectively right on matters of opinion.
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 22:14 |
|
|
PT6A posted:
So you're saying that tackling a multitude of different social issues would be more effective than tackling the common socio-economic inequalities? Was it sarcasm? Maybe it's my crazy workday. I can't follow that logic. Edit: in my haste I didn't see the many better posts addressing the above EvidenceBasedQuack fucked around with this message at 03:44 on Feb 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 03:39
|
|
|
Personally I'd think it'd be a tad easier to tackle cultural and systemic racial inequalities than neoliberalism and poverty, but both absolutely need to be addressed. Edit: In Canada at least. Argas fucked around with this message at 03:48 on Feb 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:Well, first of all - lots and lots and lots of nations haven't signed any agreement, and are in fact actively protesting pipelines across the country I didn't ask about FNs that haven't signed an agreement. I was specifically asking about those who have and whether you think that's okay. You didn't explicitly say "yes" or even "maybe", so I'll read your response as "no". quote:That being said, those that have signed agreements do so because they have precious few other options for revenue generation under the current set-up - you know, the one where we coerced them into unproductive patches of land as far as we could get them away from land desired by settlers. The entire point of a partnership or land use agreement is revenue. Of course that's the reason FNs agree to them. quote:I would be very curious to see how many FNs would be pro-pipeline in a world where they had retained or were returned true political/economic self-determination and weren't desperate for any chance at revenue. My guess would be "pretty much zero". You're getting into some real noble savage territory if you think FNs would never build industry around natural resources if they had full economic self-determination.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 03:56
|
|
. To say nothing of the federal government trying to push pipelines through unceded land. But the whole point of sovereignty is that whitey doesn't get to tell FNs what they can or cannot do anymore. So... 
?
|
cougar cub posted:I didn't ask about FNs that haven't signed an agreement. I was specifically asking about those who have and whether you think that's okay. You didn't explicitly say "yes" or even "maybe", so I'll read your response as "no". This whole thing seems to either be a tortured interpretation of my post or straight up putting words in my mouth, but then also mixed in with this weird hostility. You seem far more interested in turning my words into something you can beat up on rather than actually having an honest conversation. So congrats, shadow boxer. You're the champ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:This whole thing seems to either be a tortured interpretation of my post or straight up putting words in my mouth, but then also mixed in with this weird hostility. You seem far more interested in turning my words into something you can beat up on rather than actually having an honest conversation. So congrats, shadow boxer. You're the champ. So Stickarts why exactly are you saying that you'd like 200 tiny mexicos scattered across the Canada?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 04:25
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:So Stickarts why exactly are you saying that you'd like 200 tiny mexicos scattered across the Canada? lol. This actually is something I was chatting about today - that to follow through on true sovereignty in a way that raises standards of living would require us to totally change our understanding of statehood and sovereignty and borders. Otherwise, yea, you get little mini-apartheid states scattered across the country. So it isn't exactly a "1 year plan". But they are conversations about ideas that nevertheless need to be held. And better than talking about The loving Keg one more time Lord Help Me Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 04:33
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:This actually is something I was chatting about today - that to follow through on true sovereignty in a way that raises standards of living would require us to totally change our understanding of statehood and sovereignty and borders. Otherwise, yea, you get little mini-apartheid states scattered across the country. So it isn't exactly a "1 year plan". But they are conversations about ideas that nevertheless need to be held. Yeah, I think that bolded part is the important quantum leap that polarizes that issue. When I hear somebody argue for true sovereignty, I'm hearing "give the right to govern poorly", without interference like other truly sovereign countries and it doesn't mesh with a guaranteed raised standard of living for all. I'd definitely be interested to hear or read about that just to understand the argument better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 05:02
|
|
|
Starting to push my pay grade here, but I will definitely put some effort into a post on this in the next little bit for you to half-interpret and denigrate. e. Conservative scum
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
PT6A posted:1) Because the electoral college is a stunningly imperfect system and Trump's nativism managed to flip white racists in exactly the right places, despite Clinton getting the same number of votes as Obama and Trump getting significantly fewer. I would answer this question with another question: if a factor other than racism was causing people to vote for Trump, then why didn't more people of colour who shared that factor, vote for Donald Trump? Just to pick out a bit here, but there are a stunning number of white people that are completely oblivious to the existence of systemic racism. PoC, in the USA especially, are however made Very, Very, Aware. Those oblivious people can be reached with education and awareness, but instantly calling them racists isn't going to warm them up to your side of the argument. I know poo poo all about you because I'm still fairly new to the Canada threads, but I'm getting the impression you did not always have the opinions and knowledge that you have today? What changed your opinion? When was your "woke" moment? Why do you think such a moment is impossible in any other person that isn't you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 05:31
|
|
|
You guys are really pushing crazing pipe dreams here with true sovereignty or most any future forms of it. The indigenous are decimated and will never gain meaningful power politically to make such changes. Even if these changes were made, they won't necessarily help. It would be helpful for people to look at history from a longer perspective than the last 300 years and realize that culture comes and goes, is adapted and is appropriated, warped and twisted. Everyone would be better off trying to raise the living standards of every human in our silly imaginary borders and move our collective culture towards something that makes sense for the future. We're well on our way to a global government. Give it a hundred or two years. But realistically the sooner we become some shade of beige and stop all this otherness the better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
NZAmoeba posted:Just to pick out a bit here, but there are a stunning number of white people that are completely oblivious to the existence of systemic racism. PoC, in the USA especially, are however made Very, Very, Aware. He had a beer with a progressive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 05:40
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:Starting to push my pay grade here, but I will definitely put some effort into a post on this in the next little bit for you to half-interpret and denigrate. Well, thankfully you're going to have to keep it concise for conservatives to understand. If I follow this, the argument you want to be having with reasonable people is essentially L: Full true sovereignty for First Nations! R: No thanks, think of the logistics and is it actually even going to make things better L: No no, you need to totally change your understanding of statehood and sovereignty and borders R: Okay, we're listening but now with less patience because maybe you should have just started with that Who wouldn't want to hear the next part? It is a messy situation and those are interesting to debate free from having to do anything about it. Also I voted NDP Postess with the Mostest fucked around with this message at 05:44 on Feb 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 05:41
|
|
|
NZAmoeba posted:I know poo poo all about you because I'm still fairly new to the Canada threads, but I'm getting the impression you did not always have the opinions and knowledge that you have today? What changed your opinion? When was your "woke" moment? Why do you think such a moment is impossible in any other person that isn't you? I think it was Tiny Brontosaurus and Koalas March yelling at me for saying something offhandedly racist, that and the horrible realization that Donald Trump actually got elected despite the fact he was a giant, obvious racist. So, I think it's possible for people to improve once they are called out, harshly if need be, for doing or saying racist things, precisely because that moment happened to me. It's cliche, but the first step to self-improvement has to be recognizing that you've got a problem. And I'm by no means perfectly not racist now. White people, including myself, are raised and educated in a system that teaches white supremacy, and we have to work at examining our own biases even when we don't think we're being purposefully racist. PT6A fucked around with this message at 05:45 on Feb 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 05:43
|
|
|
are we really going to pretend helsing's charming anecdote about the model minority conveniently sharing his concerns that jagmeet singh is just too...something...to be electable isn't blatantly disgustingly appallingly racist? i'm about as communist as you can get; i pay dues to two unions that operate in an industry i don't even work in anymore and i spend my free time trying to organize labour in the (woefully unorganized) industry i now work in. however, even i understand that 'no war but class war' is just a way for 'progressives' to place themselves at the head of the line when it comes to reforming society. i want economic justice as much as anyone but to get there we're going to first need to tackle systemic racism, criminal justice, closed borders and free trade. you can't just give everyone free college and free houses and free healthcare and call all problems solved
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 06:18
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:Well, thankfully you're going to have to keep it concise for conservatives to understand. If I follow this, the argument you want to be having with reasonable people is essentially I was definitely just trying to be funny there. Sorry if it came off too heavy. I’m sincere about trying to figure out a post on the matter - I definitely am interested in a good faith discussion about it because honestly I don’t know what the answer is. But I don’t think “wait for a global government” is much of a plan, and what we’re currently doing isn’t working. Throw in the historical legal precedent - that is still being further entrenched by courts today - that is Treaty, and how messy it would be to begin to overwrite/change them... I don’t know. I see Canada as being in a unique situation - a stable, prosperous nation if you don’t squint too hard. We have strong government and a high standard of living. As a nation we are in the ideal position to try to build new and better solutions. As an aside, I would also add that this is a way bigger issue in SK and MB than other areas of Canada. We’re a generation away from 1/4 of the population being Indigenous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 06:20
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:This whole thing seems to either be a tortured interpretation of my post or straight up putting words in my mouth, but then also mixed in with this weird hostility. You seem far more interested in turning my words into something you can beat up on rather than actually having an honest conversation. So congrats, shadow boxer. You're the champ.  You are completely wrong with the opinion that if you believe in Indigenous sovereignty you must reject pipelines outright. Not sorry that you got butt hurt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 08:54
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:are we really going to pretend helsing's charming anecdote about the model minority conveniently sharing his concerns that jagmeet singh is just too...something...to be electable isn't blatantly disgustingly appallingly racist? I can agree with pretty much all of that. I mean, this is Canada and all but we can just look south at a lot of support systems in America or things that lifted up the non-rich segments of society like the GI Bill and the New Deal, and you'll realize that minorities didn't benefit as much from those programs. Don't get me wrong, those programs do help people but they alone do not do enough, and as long as racism is allowed to fester, it'll remain a useful tool to strip away programs that help minorities. Just look at the whole welfare queen narrative and how it was used to disenfranchise everyone who benefitted from it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 09:53
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I think it was Tiny Brontosaurus and Koalas March yelling at me for saying something offhandedly racist, that and the horrible realization that Donald Trump actually got elected despite the fact he was a giant, obvious racist. Still a little shitter about Parmesan and PDOs I'll bet. It was good to see you come this far man, don't mind my jokes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 12:17
|
|
|
cougar cub posted:
I think, with an honest re-read of that post and a little bit of inference, you will find there’s been an answer all along to your delightful query.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 13:36
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:I was definitely just trying to be funny there. Sorry if it came off too heavy. I’m sincere about trying to figure out a post on the matter - I definitely am interested in a good faith discussion about it because honestly I don’t know what the answer is. I don't mind, I mentioned the ndp thing because it's not just the far right that you'll have to sell this to. I'm genuinely interested in knowing what people are actually asking for when they say real sovereignty or nation to nation relationships with FN. On the liberal's campaign page on it boils down to listening and more money but I feel like that's a far cry from what you have in mind. quote:It is time for Canada to have a renewed, nation-to-nation relationship with Indigenous Peoples, based on recognition, rights, respect, co-operation, and partnership. This is both the right thing to do and a sure path to economic growth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 14:00
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:are we really going to pretend helsing's charming anecdote about the model minority conveniently sharing his concerns that jagmeet singh is just too...something...to be electable isn't blatantly disgustingly appallingly racist? I've got a cousin up on the rez that constantly boosts for the conservatives, so Helsing's anecdote doesn't seem that far fetched to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 14:15
|
|
|
Argas posted:Personally I'd think it'd be a tad easier to tackle cultural and systemic racial inequalities than neoliberalism and poverty, but both absolutely need to be addressed. I thought someone would have bothered to make an effortpost by now but goddamn how do so many of you seem to think that systemic racism and poverty are separable issues, as if they aren't at least partly a product of each other? What does it even mean to solve systemic racism without addressing poverty? I don't understand. The living conditions in indigenous communities in Canada (and also the US, Australia and other former colonies) are often outright dire as a direct result of systemic racism. Even if you bury your head in the sand and ignore the history, most reserves are woefully underfunded. How many still have boil water advisories? Much of the black population in the US is hardly any better off. Are you imagining some kind of education campaign or strict enforcement of anti-racism laws as a serious solution to anything?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 14:29
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:I've got a cousin up on the rez that constantly boosts for the conservatives, so Helsing's anecdote doesn't seem that far fetched to me. it doesn't matter if it's real ask why anyone would post that anecdote in that manner in this forum
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
eXXon posted:I thought someone would have bothered to make an effortpost by now but goddamn how do so many of you seem to think that systemic racism and poverty are separable issues, as if they aren't at least partly a product of each other? What does it even mean to solve systemic racism without addressing poverty? I don't understand. The living conditions in indigenous communities in Canada (and also the US, Australia and other former colonies) are often outright dire as a direct result of systemic racism. Even if you bury your head in the sand and ignore the history, most reserves are woefully underfunded. How many still have boil water advisories? Much of the black population in the US is hardly any better off. No, obviously not. There are huge problems that are going to be expensive and time-consuming to fix. What I'm saying is that there needs to be a focus on fixing those things, with money and resources provided by the government as necessary, in a way that's not blind to the role race and and racism has played in creating those problems in the first place, before we spend money and effort on more generalized social spending. What good is a UBI when food costs four times as much as it should and there's a boil-water advisory? What good is free university if you've been attending an underfunded school that can't possibly prepare you for university?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 15:03
|
|
|
eXXon posted:I thought someone would have bothered to make an effortpost by now but goddamn how do so many of you seem to think that systemic racism and poverty are separable issues, as if they aren't at least partly a product of each other? What does it even mean to solve systemic racism without addressing poverty? I don't understand. The living conditions in indigenous communities in Canada (and also the US, Australia and other former colonies) are often outright dire as a direct result of systemic racism. Even if you bury your head in the sand and ignore the history, most reserves are woefully underfunded. How many still have boil water advisories? Much of the black population in the US is hardly any better off. i don't think anyone is saying you can solve systemic racism and poverty will magically solve itself. the argument is that solving poverty does nothing to solve systemic racism
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 15:04
|
|
|
racism becomes a lot easier to address if it's not tied so closely to economic outcomes, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 15:34
|
|
|
" But we can't give "them" money, they'll just waste it and mismanage it, just look at the state of them and where they live, why sho..." etc.Something's feeding these prejudices. These somethings might include property crime, substance abuse, social isolation, antisocial behaviour in public, unchecked mental illness: in short, things that poverty either causes, contributes to or makes much worse. Addressing the poverty problem could go a long way towards depriving the continuing bigotry on a little bit of what it feeds on. flakeloaf fucked around with this message at 15:39 on Feb 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 15:35
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:it doesn't matter if it's real To demonstrate that there are people, who are not whatever caricature of white racists we like to lampoon in this thread, who will not vote for an openly religious Sikh man?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 15:38
|
|
|
PT6A posted:No, obviously not. There are huge problems that are going to be expensive and time-consuming to fix. What I'm saying is that there needs to be a focus on fixing those things, with money and resources provided by the government as necessary, in a way that's not blind to the role race and and racism has played in creating those problems in the first place, before we spend money and effort on more generalized social spending. Stop looking at individual social programs in a vacuum and comparing them against the one issue you think you can solve with Neoliberalism and calling people racists on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 15:41
|
|
|
this is an american source but this paper does a good job showing how one particular issue that is often cast purely in turns of systemic racism is more a factor of class but a) disproportionately affects people of colour because people of colour are disproportionately poorer and b) there are elements of systemic discrimination built into that system. it's a symbiotic relationship and I don't see how you target one without targeting the other. quote:Overall, this study supports the view of Cedric Johnson and others that mass incarceration in the United States is primarily a system of locking up lower class men—one which ends up disproportionately imprisoning black men, since they are far more likely to be lower class than white men. Racial disparities remain among certain incarceration outcomes, which are consistent with findings of other studies on this topic, but it is nevertheless class that is the predominant factor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 15:49
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:To demonstrate that there are people, who are not whatever caricature of white racists we like to lampoon in this thread, who will not vote for an openly religious Sikh man? of course there are. who cares?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 16:21
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:of course there are. who cares? People who would otherwise believe that the religiosity of a progressive candidate isn't an issue for people who would likely vote NDP. This isn't something that has to be resolved, there's no implied solution of "openly religious people can't run", simply pointing out that such an issue exists and can alienate some progressive blocs. infernal machines fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Feb 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 16:28
|
|
|
"Well I'm personally not racist or sexist, but y'know, gosh darnit, I'm just really concerned that some people are, so what we should do is pick a white man as leader." It's amazing how being a racist, and being vocally concerned about "electability" because of other people's racism, turns out to have the exact same result! Who could've guessed? Works out conveniently, doesn't it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
PT6A posted:"Well I'm personally not racist or sexist, but y'know, gosh darnit, I'm just really concerned that some people are, so what we should do is pick a white man as leader." Is this something Helsing actually said or implied in that post you're referencing? Or are you just making the leap from an explanation of how people who are not cranky white conservatives may take issue with an openly religious Sikh candidate, to mean that we need some whitebread motherfucker instead as some kind of electable default?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 16:50
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:Is this something Helsing actually said or implied in that post you're referencing? Or are you just making the leap from an explanation of how people who are not cranky white conservatives may take issue with an openly religious Sikh candidate, to mean that we need some whitebread motherfucker instead as some kind of electable default? why post the anecdote if this isn't what you really want to say?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 17:20
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:racism becomes a lot easier to address if it's not tied so closely to economic outcomes, though. We have a winner.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:why post the anecdote if this isn't what you really want to say? Again, to point out that there are people who are not racist white conservative caricatures who nonetheless have a problem voting for an openly religious candidate. Because the assumption in this thread often appears to be that only racist/rural/white folks have a problem with Jagmeet as a candidate. That is not true. There are people from diverse backgrounds that may indeed have issues with Jagmeet's religiosity, so lumping them all under the racist/rural/white banner is inaccurate. If your conclusion after reading this is that Helsing thinks the only acceptable candidate is Whitey Corngood, that's up to you, but that isn't necessarily the implicit intent of the anecdote.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 17:37
|
|
|
inferring vs implying
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 22:14 |
|
|
infernal machines posted:Again, to point out that there are people who are not racist white conservative caricatures who nonetheless have a problem voting for an openly religious candidate. Because the assumption in this thread often appears to be that only racist/rural/white folks have a problem with Jagmeet as a candidate. That is not true. There are people from diverse backgrounds that may indeed have issues with Jagmeet's religiosity, so lumping them all under the racist/rural/white banner is inaccurate. okay but why is it so important to educate this thread about the ndp voters who are uncomfortable with jagmeet singh's "outward displays of religiosity"? is anyone here unaware that there are people who hold opinions of this nature? if you want to say you think he's unelectable because he's brown and a lot of ndp supporters would rather defect to the greens or liberals than vote for him then just say that. don't couch it in 'oh no i had a shocking encounter that makes me think maybe jagmeet is going to have problems because of his religion!' doing that just makes you look like a racist rear end in a top hat who doesn't have the courage to say that you don't want to vote for jagmeet because he wears a turban i think what makes helsing racist is that he's *concerned* that the ndp under jagmeet are going to pay more than lip service to progressive causes that aren't his precious full communism now and that jagmeet's religion and ethnicity are an impediment to a glorious workers republic. he thinks his desires for progressive economic policy are more important than respecting the democratically distilled desires of the ndp membership as embodied by jagmeet singh the talent deficit fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Feb 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 17:58
|
|