RACISM SOLVED on IIDB! "This whole business about whether someone had ancestors who were a slave or slaveholder is just ridiculous. It means nothing."

[TomC]

I did not misrepresent thebeave.

Yes you did.
It's in post # 216. You added a bunch of your ideology to what beave said.
Just like JR did in the OP.

 

[Gospel]

Every time I see this thread title I remain confused and frustrated about exactly what point Janice Rael was trying to make. Thebeave was as confused as I was and asked her about her point in post #12 but a response was never posted.

It has always been obvious to me that a person should be judged only by their actions. Involuntary associations with other people (like ancestors and other family members) have no actual bearing on my judgement of any individual's quality.

Your father died saving 50 kids trapped in a burning building? So what? Please pay your delinquent child support instead of racking up a bigger tab at your favorite dive bar, dirtbag.

Your mom helped a serial killer hide the bodies and still visits him in prison? So what? Thank you so much for bringing me a doughnut this morning, you always make my day brighter.

I agree. As I’ve mentioned before, ancestry holds cultural significance, which can manifest in aspects like parenting, food, and various traditions. In my opinion, that’s the only meaningful use for it. Anyone using ancestry for anything else is simply misinformed—like using it to decide if someone should be president. There are more important metrics for that. At least to me.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I did not misrepresent thebeave.

Yes you did.
It's in post # 216. You added a bunch of your ideology to what beave said.
Just like JR did in the OP.

This statement is false:

Finally, this whole business about whether someone had ancestors who were a slave or slaveholder is just ridiculous. It means nothing, other than a mildly curious footnote in someone's ancestry that might make for interesting cocktail party conversation. But that's it.

Do you want to discuss why it is false or continue with personal drama? Personal drama is stupid and does not deserve conversation. If you continue, you will be placed back on ignore.

 

[TomC]

I did not misrepresent thebeave.

Yes you did.
It's in post # 216. You added a bunch of your ideology to what beave said.
Just like JR did in the OP.

This statement is false:

Finally, this whole business about whether someone had ancestors who were a slave or slaveholder is just ridiculous. It means nothing, other than a mildly curious footnote in someone's ancestry that might make for interesting cocktail party conversation. But that's it.

Do you want to discuss why it is false or continue with personal drama? Personal drama is stupid and does not deserve conversation. If you continue, you will be placed back on ignore.

Best, probably for you, is if you keep pretending that what I pointed out not is true.

That way you can keep your ideology intact.

And you can put me back on Ignore so that you don't have to explain your beliefs. Because you can't.

Have a nice Ignore.

ETA ~So, why do you think that using the ignore function is worth censorsing yourself for. I don't.~

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Is there an answer somewhere in there to you stating whether or not you think thebeave's post is true or false? Here is the post:

Finally, this whole business about whether someone had ancestors who were a slave or slaveholder is just ridiculous. It means nothing, other than a mildly curious footnote in someone's ancestry that might make for interesting cocktail party conversation. But that's it.

 

[Gospel]

Is there an answer somewhere in there to you stating whether or not you think thebeave's post is true or false? Here is the post:

Finally, this whole business about whether someone had ancestors who were a slave or slaveholder is just ridiculous. It means nothing, other than a mildly curious footnote in someone's ancestry that might make for interesting cocktail party conversation. But that's it.

I believe the context was within the presidential elections. Now unless I’m mistaken, I agree with thebeave's post.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Is there an answer somewhere in there to you stating whether or not you think thebeave's post is true or false? Here is the post:

Finally, this whole business about whether someone had ancestors who were a slave or slaveholder is just ridiculous. It means nothing, other than a mildly curious footnote in someone's ancestry that might make for interesting cocktail party conversation. But that's it.

I believe the context was within the presidential elections. Now unless I’m mistaken, I agree with thebeave's post.

The present is caused by the past. This is axiomatic. So it is not meaningless. It might have conferred undue advantage. In Kamala Harris's case, her connection to an Irish ancestor who owned slaves is dubious. Any privilege or generational wealth is extremely unlikely. However, we cannot make a general rule that it means nothing. Then say because it means nothing, it means nothing for Harris. It means nothing for Harris because of her specific genealogy and ancestral background. That said having an ancestor doesn't mean a person is evil or good, but it can mean something, especially if the advantages last generations and ideologies of denialism are developed around them.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If racism didn't exist, there wouldn't be a demand for DEI programs that you and many others dislike so much. How about focusing on addressing racism within your own community, just as Black people have to work on ours? That way, there would be no need for DEI initiatives in the first place.

Disagree--movements take on a life of their own and they can be useful for posturing even if they don't serve a purpose. The fact that a group is fighting XYZ isn't proof that XYZ is a problem. Same as the MAGA crowd screaming about illegal immigrants bringing in drugs.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Unfortunately, there will always be racism as long as there are any group differences at all. Even when humans transplant our conscious minds into robot bodies we will have racism. The Androids will think they are better than the iRobots because their adapters are shaped differently. So we will always need some people (or robot people) to try to counteract the effects of racism.

Yup. I'm thinking of many years ago in China. We were going to visit a different part of it. Some of her relatives were worried because the people there weren't Han Chinese.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You realize the 70s ended 45 years ago?

You realize that some of those people are still alive today, and their descendants are still impacted by the horrific racism they endured? Just look at this "culture" that I've seen racist white people bitching about across the internet. Racists white people helped create that regardless of how hard many try to distance themselves from this reality.

And helping other blacks will do nothing to undo the damage they suffered. Unless you have a time machine you can't fix the past. All we can do is try to be fair going forward--and attempting to equal things out actually produces a very unfair result. We should be looking for equal going forward, but trying to shift existing things to "equal" actually is extremely unfair.

The fundamental problem here is that there should be no concept of equality with groups. It's individuals that matter. If Adam has $10, Amy has $10, Bob has $15 and Barbara has $5 the As are equal to the Bs, but the people certainly aren't equal. And creating a Bob in the name of fairness for the Barbara makes the situation more unfair, not less.

That’s like saying that if you break your leg, don’t bother going to the doctor because even if your bones are set and properly casted and you do all the things you’re supposed to do: elevate, rest, use crutches, etc. until your bone heals, you will still have had a broken leg.

A broken leg can heal. We don't have a time machine, we can't fix what's happened.

I note that you are completely not addressing that Bob and Barbara are equally unfair. And you haven't helped Barbara one bit. You have pretended to help by making the Bs equal to the As but that's just perpetuating the wrong, not fixing anything. You need to quit caring about A vs B, just look at individuals.

 

[lostone]

I found this very interesting

70% of the land in Britain is still owned by 1% of the population, largely descended from William the Conqueror’s army​

70% of the land in Britain is still owned by 1% of the population, largely descended from William the Conqueror's army

Norman descendants are still doing very fine in today's Britain.

www.zmescience.com

It suggests that the effects of privilege have long lasting, permanent effects that can last hundreds of years. If this is true, the claims of black people that they are still damaged by the effects of slavery should be taken very seriously.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I’m not even going to entertain that bullshit about helping other Black people doing nothing to fix the past, or that time machine head ass argument. Nobody is talking about that, thinking that, or even suggesting it. Where the hell did you even come up with that Loren? What I’m saying is that Black people are still struggling because of what happened in the past, and we’re working on it. The last thing we need is ignorant or racist people (who are a continuation of that past) getting in the way— focusing only on the criminals in our community, arguing like we all want a free ride, or thinking our success is just because of Affirmative Action or DEI. Bitch, those things were meant for YOU, not us.

It's a pattern that problem "solvers" use repeatedly.

We have problem XY, we have no good answers. Add Z to the group, now we have problem XYZ. Fix a lot of the Z problem. Claim success. But really XY remains basically untouched. Giving a hand up to a bunch of people who share the same skin color as a group of disadvantaged helps them, it helps the average but it doesn't do squat about the harm people suffered. Look at individuals.

Edit for Clarity: Affirmative action policies were created in response to racist white people, not because of Black people. They were put in place due to the actions of white people, not as a result of Black people. So don’t go around blaming Black people for affirmative action policies. Blame the racist members of your community.

While I don't exactly like it I do think Affirmative Action was the right course of action at the time. I believe it's already accomplished everything it can, though. Adding more and more will perpetuate the problem, not help it.

 

[Toni]

You realize the 70s ended 45 years ago?

You realize that some of those people are still alive today, and their descendants are still impacted by the horrific racism they endured? Just look at this "culture" that I've seen racist white people bitching about across the internet. Racists white people helped create that regardless of how hard many try to distance themselves from this reality.

And helping other blacks will do nothing to undo the damage they suffered. Unless you have a time machine you can't fix the past. All we can do is try to be fair going forward--and attempting to equal things out actually produces a very unfair result. We should be looking for equal going forward, but trying to shift existing things to "equal" actually is extremely unfair.

The fundamental problem here is that there should be no concept of equality with groups. It's individuals that matter. If Adam has $10, Amy has $10, Bob has $15 and Barbara has $5 the As are equal to the Bs, but the people certainly aren't equal. And creating a Bob in the name of fairness for the Barbara makes the situation more unfair, not less.

That’s like saying that if you break your leg, don’t bother going to the doctor because even if your bones are set and properly casted and you do all the things you’re supposed to do: elevate, rest, use crutches, etc. until your bone heals, you will still have had a broken leg.

A broken leg can heal. We don't have a time machine, we can't fix what's happened.

I note that you are completely not addressing that Bob and Barbara are equally unfair. And you haven't helped Barbara one bit. You have pretended to help by making the Bs equal to the As but that's just perpetuating the wrong, not fixing anything. You need to quit caring about A vs B, just look at individuals.

Apparently you do not care at all about individuals unless they are Asian or white. Otherwise, they are relegated to average test scores and GPAs .

 

[Gospel]

If racism didn't exist, there wouldn't be a demand for DEI programs that you and many others dislike so much. How about focusing on addressing racism within your own community, just as Black people have to work on ours? That way, there would be no need for DEI initiatives in the first place.

Disagree--movements take on a life of their own and they can be useful for posturing even if they don't serve a purpose. The fact that a group is fighting XYZ isn't proof that XYZ is a problem. Same as the MAGA crowd screaming about illegal immigrants bringing in drugs.

Movements may develop a life of their own, but they rarely begin without reason.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I found this very interesting

70% of the land in Britain is still owned by 1% of the population, largely descended from William the Conqueror’s army​

70% of the land in Britain is still owned by 1% of the population, largely descended from William the Conqueror's army

Norman descendants are still doing very fine in today's Britain.

www.zmescience.com

It suggests that the effects of privilege have long lasting, permanent effects that can last hundreds of years. If this is true, the claims of black people that they are still damaged by the effects of slavery should be taken very seriously.

But what's the land value?? It's like out here in the west there's a lot of government land but most of it is pretty much useless.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You realize the 70s ended 45 years ago?

You realize that some of those people are still alive today, and their descendants are still impacted by the horrific racism they endured? Just look at this "culture" that I've seen racist white people bitching about across the internet. Racists white people helped create that regardless of how hard many try to distance themselves from this reality.

And helping other blacks will do nothing to undo the damage they suffered. Unless you have a time machine you can't fix the past. All we can do is try to be fair going forward--and attempting to equal things out actually produces a very unfair result. We should be looking for equal going forward, but trying to shift existing things to "equal" actually is extremely unfair.

The fundamental problem here is that there should be no concept of equality with groups. It's individuals that matter. If Adam has $10, Amy has $10, Bob has $15 and Barbara has $5 the As are equal to the Bs, but the people certainly aren't equal. And creating a Bob in the name of fairness for the Barbara makes the situation more unfair, not less.

That’s like saying that if you break your leg, don’t bother going to the doctor because even if your bones are set and properly casted and you do all the things you’re supposed to do: elevate, rest, use crutches, etc. until your bone heals, you will still have had a broken leg.

A broken leg can heal. We don't have a time machine, we can't fix what's happened.

I note that you are completely not addressing that Bob and Barbara are equally unfair. And you haven't helped Barbara one bit. You have pretended to help by making the Bs equal to the As but that's just perpetuating the wrong, not fixing anything. You need to quit caring about A vs B, just look at individuals.

Apparently you do not care at all about individuals unless they are Asian or white. Otherwise, they are relegated to average test scores and GPAs .

Apparently your faith doesn't allow you to see what I'm saying. I care about people. Not about their skin color.

Please explain how giving Bob $15 in any way helped the wrong Barbara suffered in getting $5? How does it make society better off rather than worse off??

 

[bilby]

I found this very interesting

70% of the land in Britain is still owned by 1% of the population, largely descended from William the Conqueror’s army​

70% of the land in Britain is still owned by 1% of the population, largely descended from William the Conqueror's army

Norman descendants are still doing very fine in today's Britain.

www.zmescience.com

It suggests that the effects of privilege have long lasting, permanent effects that can last hundreds of years. If this is true, the claims of black people that they are still damaged by the effects of slavery should be taken very seriously.

But what's the land value?? It's like out here in the west there's a lot of government land but most of it is pretty much useless.

There is very little low value land in the UK. There are 67 million people in an area the size of Michigan.

It is NOTHING like "out here in the west". At all.

The cheapest land in the UK (in the Scottish Highlands) sells for around £4,500/acre (~US$5,700).

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If racism didn't exist, there wouldn't be a demand for DEI programs that you and many others dislike so much. How about focusing on addressing racism within your own community, just as Black people have to work on ours? That way, there would be no need for DEI initiatives in the first place.

Disagree--movements take on a life of their own and they can be useful for posturing even if they don't serve a purpose. The fact that a group is fighting XYZ isn't proof that XYZ is a problem. Same as the MAGA crowd screaming about illegal immigrants bringing in drugs.

Movements may develop a life of their own, but they rarely begin without reason.

True, but that doesn't mean that a movement has a current cause.

And it doesn't mean it ever had a true cause. Look at the "Tea Party". Obviously a false flag Republican operation. And look at how many groups appear to be dancing to Moscow's tune. It used to be mostly those on the left but these days Moscow pretty clearly is trying to help the right. (Not to say they have stopped with the left.)

Actions speak louder than words. It's pretty obvious with the "pro life" movement--you can count on the right to take the position that makes sex dangerous over the position that reduces problems. Do they actually care about life?!?! It's not so blatant on the left but it's there. (Although the internet has so splintered things that trying to identify such patterns is much harder than it used to be.)

 

[ZiprHead]

I found this very interesting

70% of the land in Britain is still owned by 1% of the population, largely descended from William the Conqueror’s army​

70% of the land in Britain is still owned by 1% of the population, largely descended from William the Conqueror's army

Norman descendants are still doing very fine in today's Britain.

www.zmescience.com

It suggests that the effects of privilege have long lasting, permanent effects that can last hundreds of years. If this is true, the claims of black people that they are still damaged by the effects of slavery should be taken very seriously.

But what's the land value?? It's like out here in the west there's a lot of government land but most of it is pretty much useless.

There is very little low value land in the UK. There are 67 million people in an area the size of Michigan.

It is NOTHING like "out here in the west". At all.

The cheapest land in the UK (in the Scottish Highlands) sells for around £4,500/acre (~US$5,700).

That's what I immediately thought.

 

[Toni]

You realize the 70s ended 45 years ago?

You realize that some of those people are still alive today, and their descendants are still impacted by the horrific racism they endured? Just look at this "culture" that I've seen racist white people bitching about across the internet. Racists white people helped create that regardless of how hard many try to distance themselves from this reality.

And helping other blacks will do nothing to undo the damage they suffered. Unless you have a time machine you can't fix the past. All we can do is try to be fair going forward--and attempting to equal things out actually produces a very unfair result. We should be looking for equal going forward, but trying to shift existing things to "equal" actually is extremely unfair.

The fundamental problem here is that there should be no concept of equality with groups. It's individuals that matter. If Adam has $10, Amy has $10, Bob has $15 and Barbara has $5 the As are equal to the Bs, but the people certainly aren't equal. And creating a Bob in the name of fairness for the Barbara makes the situation more unfair, not less.

That’s like saying that if you break your leg, don’t bother going to the doctor because even if your bones are set and properly casted and you do all the things you’re supposed to do: elevate, rest, use crutches, etc. until your bone heals, you will still have had a broken leg.

A broken leg can heal. We don't have a time machine, we can't fix what's happened.

I note that you are completely not addressing that Bob and Barbara are equally unfair. And you haven't helped Barbara one bit. You have pretended to help by making the Bs equal to the As but that's just perpetuating the wrong, not fixing anything. You need to quit caring about A vs B, just look at individuals.

Apparently you do not care at all about individuals unless they are Asian or white. Otherwise, they are relegated to average test scores and GPAs .

Apparently your faith doesn't allow you to see what I'm saying. I care about people. Not about their skin color.

Please explain how giving Bob $15 in any way helped the wrong Barbara suffered in getting $5? How does it make society better off rather than worse off??

I have zero idea what you are talking about with Bob and Barbara.

I don't really care.