• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Anti-Asian Hate Crimes

Status
Not open for further replies.
ScorpioVI said:
You know what's funny, reading social media in the aftermath of yesterday's VTA shootings, I saw a lot of comments that's along the lines of "of course it's a white man!" and everybody thumbs ups, upvotes, or replies with an approval. So it's almost universally accepted that mass shooters are predominantly white male, and it appears to be OK to voice that opinion. So why are we getting such a blowback when we dare say that blacks are the predominant race that's perpetrating violent attacks against Asians?
Click to expand...

https://time.com/6051948/educating-white-people-anti-asian-racism/

Because of "White Supremacy" and "White Silence" it can never be their fault according to the Mainstream Media narratives.
 
YogaJeni said:
I don't see what difference it makes, but the pattern I see from those that disagree is that you must always try to discredit. I see how it always redirects the discussion so maybe it explains why you do it.
Click to expand...

That's exactly why. Easier to wave off and dismiss the source than to address the points raised.
 
YogaJeni said:
According to Critical Race Theory all whites are oppressor colonizers so it acceptable to bully the "bully". Blacks are the colonized oppressed group and if they act bad it is only because they lack equal opportunity for social status in society. This is what CRT teaches at company "anti racism" seminars and what they are trying to teach kids at school too. This is why we are seriously considering homeschooling our children.

[YOUTUBE]suQNjoSHSUk[/YOUTUBE]
Click to expand...
I watched the clip and agreed with the speaker. What did you find to be objectionable?

(For the record I'm a white cismale, mid-50s, raised in an all white openly racist urban town. I learned a lot along the way.)

.
 
MysterYvil said:
I watched the clip and agreed with the speaker. What did you find to be objectionable?
Click to expand...

They are demanding submission to the notion of "antiracism", which is more than merely not being racist, nor opposing racism. It is an Orwellian use of a term to manipulate people into supporting blatantly bad policy, like defunding police departments (predictably followed by skyrocketing crime). To the Wokesheviks, any dissent to their dogma is proof of racism.

https://level.medium.com/dear-woke-...ith-racism-is-no-longer-required-c29207c46606

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/202...ite-fragility-robin-diangelo-ibram-kendi.html
 
Last edited:
jt2 said:
They are demanding submission to the notion of "antiracism", which is more than merely not being racist, nor opposing racism. It is an Orwellian use of a term to manipulate people into supporting blatantly bad policy, like defunding police departments (predictably followed by skyrocketing crime). To the Wokesheviks, any dissent to their dogma is proof of racism.

https://level.medium.com/dear-woke-...ith-racism-is-no-longer-required-c29207c46606

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/202...ite-fragility-robin-diangelo-ibram-kendi.html
Click to expand...

Good articles. That so called "antiracism" industry is whack!

I'm thinking that, like the homeless industry, if the problem were to be solved, there'd be no convincing others of a need to fund the industry. Isn't it then logical (I know, I know, logical is for vulcans and white supremacists.) that these industries don't actually want to solve the problem since that would make them irrelevant?
 
jt2 said:
They are demanding submission to the notion of "antiracism", which is more than merely not being racist, nor opposing racism. It is an Orwellian use of a term to manipulate people into supporting blatantly bad policy, like defunding police departments (predictably followed by skyrocketing crime). To the Wokesheviks, any dissent to their dogma is proof of racism.

https://level.medium.com/dear-woke-...ith-racism-is-no-longer-required-c29207c46606

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/202...ite-fragility-robin-diangelo-ibram-kendi.html
Click to expand...

You got some cray-cray ideas about antiracism. All it is is going beyond just saying "I'm not racist" and taking steps to eliminate racism from your community and your culture.

If you want to bring Orwell into it, perhaps consider how racism is already conditioned into the language you use everyday.
 
bojangle said:
Good articles. That so called "antiracism" industry is whack!

I'm thinking that, like the homeless industry, if the problem were to be solved, there'd be no convincing others of a need to fund the industry. Isn't it then logical (I know, I know, logical is for vulcans and white supremacists.) that these industries don't actually want to solve the problem since that would make them irrelevant?
Click to expand...

As long at there is profit motive for these companies there will always be a problem. Removing the profit motive would then naturally place the burden on the state/us. But of course you're gonna have people screaming bloody communism and/or blaming poor people for being poor (as seen earlier in this thread) if they barely get a whiff of a robust welfare state.

The problem is usually with entities commodifying poorly translated and academic studies from social sciences, economic and political sciences.

Any organization with a sizable labor force are incentivized to cover their ass, through company-wide socialization training. At times these companies will get it wrong (government agencies are susceptible to this) will hire bottom of the barrel, low quality training companies/org to do this training.

This doesn't mean the base academic materials that these shitty for-profit orgs use are inherently bad.
 
Last edited:
When we replaced religion with government regarding where morality is taught and encouraged AND when we were betrayed by those institutions who were trusted to manage the morality (churches), things went to shit.

Government is still the LAST place to look for morality.
 
Holeshot said:
When we replaced religion with government regarding where morality is taught and encouraged AND when we were betrayed by those institutions who were trusted to manage the morality (churches), things went to shit.

Government is still the LAST place to look for morality.
Click to expand...

religion has always been part of the government since forever till 1776, hence kings being next to god. We don't call him commissar Jesus, we call him lord.
 
Holeshot said:
When we replaced religion with government regarding where morality is taught and encouraged AND when we were betrayed by those institutions who were trusted to manage the morality (churches), things went to shit.

Government is still the LAST place to look for morality.
Click to expand...

Religions taught a pretty fucked up version of morality. Some of the most immoral grand acts made by humans were done under the influence of religious faith.

All things considered, things ARE better than they've ever been, but there's still plenty of room for improvement, because that betterness we have so far achieved has not been evenly distributed.
 
TylerW said:
You got some cray-cray ideas about antiracism. All it is is going beyond just saying "I'm not racist" and taking steps to eliminate racism from your community and your culture.

If you want to bring Orwell into it, perhaps consider how racism is already conditioned into the language you use everyday.
Click to expand...


This is as clear a example of gaslighting I have ever seen. Just using the "antiracism" term when referring to Critical Race Theory tells me you know exactly what you are doing. Anyone that spend 10min trying to understand CRT can see what a diabolical racist evil thing it is. You creep me out.
 
YogaJeni said:
I saw that clip on twitter and tried finding it on youtube because it is easier to link here. That channel had it. I don't see what difference it makes, but the pattern I see from those that disagree is that you must always try to discredit. I see how it always redirects the discussion so maybe it explains why you do it.
Click to expand...

You see what you want to see. The pattern you see is more to do with sources you are using. Tucker Carlson is a shitty source. This YouTube channel with Qannon symbol with a cross in the middle doesn't seem to be much better. Want a better discussion? Use better sources. For example an actual link to a curriculum that teaches this theory you are so fixated on. Not some talking heads interpretation of under a guise of "Just asking questions".

The difference is driving views to a conspiratorial looking YouTube channel and promoting it in rankings.
 
Holeshot said:
When we replaced religion with government regarding where morality is taught and encouraged AND when we were betrayed by those institutions who were trusted to manage the morality (churches), things went to shit.

Government is still the LAST place to look for morality.
Click to expand...

So as religion, but that is playing in to the narrative that people are now getting morality from the government. That is a quite a meaningless statement.
 
jt2 said:
That's exactly why. Easier to wave off and dismiss the source than to address the points raised.
Click to expand...
Well there wasn't any points raised either. Just some fear based posts about taking children out of school and YouTube links. One to an entertainment talking head, and another to some conspiracy looking channel.
 
UDRider said:
You see what you want to see. The pattern you see is more to do with sources you are using. Tucker Carlson is a shitty source. This YouTube channel with Qannon symbol with a cross in the middle doesn't seem to be much better. Want a better discussion? Use better sources. For example an actual link to a curriculum that teaches this theory you are so fixated on. Not some talking heads interpretation of under a guise of "Just asking questions".

The difference is driving views to a conspiratorial looking YouTube channel and promoting it in rankings.
Click to expand...

You and your other creepy friends here really want to control what and how discussion is held. What articles can be posted and what sources are credible. Newsflash, you don't get to decide Tucker Carlson isn't a credible source, you don't get to be a hall monitor for what articles can be posted.
 
YogaJeni said:
Newsflash, you don't get to decide Tucker Carlson isn't a credible source, you don't get to be a hall monitor for what articles can be posted.
Click to expand...

Newsflash, everyone gets to decide which sources they find credible. They even get to state their opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top