Lexicus
Deity
I don't do twitter.
Neither do I, I still see screencaps of Tweets and links to Twitter threads all the time.
I don't do twitter.
Hard pass.
Like... wow... this guy manages a remarkable density of BS.
You'd need five minutes per minute to address all this manipulative junk.
Oh... and i made the mistake to check out the rest of the channel.
What a dumpster fire.
What's their plan anyway?
I mean having this loony party around is beneficial to them in the short run: They look less problematic.
But in the long run this is just competition for them, and in case of the DPP someone stealing their brand, isn't it?
So do they not have every interest to sideline them?
Anyway, our question kind of was:
What's the thing the Social Democrats are selling right now?
Like, do they have one or two big things that the campaign is supposed to be all about?
Like... "We have to reform [thing X] and spend more money on it. Because it's a nice thing for people. And we are Social Democrats and that's what we do."
Racists arent some hivemind. It's a spectrum. My mom for instance is probably slightly racist, mistrusting mainstream black culture (which to be fair many blacks also do) but she likes "hard working Africans". She'd also probably prefer I bring home a "nice" black girl than a white one who's all tatted up.
I know there are actual racists who will be against anyone not Aryan but they're a very small segment and probably shrinking, they just create a lot of noise to appear bigger than they are.
Instead of whining about how horrific the opposition are I hope the Danish left has learned from the US's mistakes and created a solid platform of their own.
so race doesn't exist until you want to call people racists?
herders get killed by farmers...its a story right out of the Bible
Interestingly enough the divide was introduced by Johan Hanning Speke, who based it on the Biblical hamite theory. Speke thought the Tutsis were the "higher race", because they were not, according to Speke, descended from Ham, Noah's son, whom Noah dooms to be slave to his other children, because Ham had the audacity to see drunked Noah passed out in his tent.
But still. I don't understand how you don't see that people can be racists, even if race has no useful basis in biology. People act out of false beliefs all the time. You can believe in the existance of unicorns, and apparently even receive "unicorn therapy", what ever that might be, all the while unicorns being non-existant.
herders get killed by farmers...its a story right out of the Bible
Interestingly enough the divide was introduced by Johan Hanning Speke, who based it on the Biblical hamite theory. Speke thought the Tutsis were the "higher race", because they were not, according to Speke, descended from Ham, Noah's son, whom Noah dooms to be slave to his other children, because Ham had the audacity to see drunked Noah passed out in his tent.
But still. I don't understand how you don't see that people can be racists, even if race has no useful basis in biology. People act out of false beliefs all the time. You can believe in the existance of unicorns, and apparently even receive "unicorn therapy", what ever that might be, all the while unicorns being non-existant.
They were divided before Europeans showed up and could be identified by appearance. Thats all it takes when stress is applied in the form of Europeans playing favorites..
I didn't know that. Now I'm wondering what form of discrimination the biblical story of Ham produced in ancient times. Were Egyptians or Nubians or both hamitic and did they ever care cuz, well, the Bible was not their genesis. I think race is generally a larger subset of humanity than tribes. There's just a lot of flexibility in the word, it can refer to the African race that includes many tribes and ethnicities or it can refer to the racial differences between Hutu and Tutsi and pygmies.
It was also the explanation favoured by European historians of the later 19th and earlier 20th centuries when Europeans were themselves conquering and colonizing black Africa. There thus evolved the so-called “Hamitic hypothesis,” by which it was generally supposed that any progress and development among agricultural blacks was the result of conquest or infiltration by pastoralists from northern or northeastern Africa. Specifically, it was supposed that many of the ideas and institutions of tribal monarchy had spread through Africa by diffusion from the ancient civilization of Egypt and the Nile valley.
no doubt racists will latch onto the 'us & them' inherent to the clash of civilizations but then why do people of the same 'race' as Muslims dislike Islam?
that was for angst
I wiki'd it, the original story may have been a justification for Israelite domination of Canaan since the curse was placed on Ham's son. Race or skin color isn't mentioned. On the other hand if the world was repopulated after the Flood by Noah's sons then the hamitic people should be very numerous. Any volunteers? I sure dont want people enslaving me much less because a hungover Noah woke up in a foul mood.
I'll go on a mini-rant here while on that subject, its possible Ham is the 'father' of African peoples and associated with slavery because Africa is our birthplace and eastward is the Garden where God took the man he made to work in paradise. Was Adam working for God in Africa too? Is that where mankind learned about slavery and how to justify it? We're slaves to God may have been literal. Worship = workship. At least those slaves working for God had time off, now we gotta be on the ball with 24/7 devotion
so instead "muslim" is used as an umbrella term for all kinds of brown people and our biggest cultural fears are projected onto them.
Are you sure? I would imagine that most people aren't talking about sikhs, hindus etc when they talk about muslims.
Are you sure? I would imagine that most people aren't talking about sikhs, hindus etc when they talk about muslims.
that is exactly the point I was trying to make. Islamophobes don't give a hoot about Sikhs, they aren't even aware that Sikhs or Shia muslims or Sufi muslims EXIST, Islam is a monolith to them (it is to most people, to be completely honest, just like Christianity might be a monolith for most Chinese for example). they hate them because they're not the ingroup. yes, I'm fairly sure, having lived in the German racist capital and routinely seen Indian/SEAsian kids called "******* muzzie".
Sikh's and Hindus have been on the recieving end of hate crimes because the perpetrators were so ignorant they thought they were Muslims, despite there being vast differences in terms of religion and even culture.
1. Defending Sarkeesian is pretty much a non-starter.[...]
My point is: He's still stealing their support. Like, i presume most of his voters would be former DPP voters. (?)They were actually initially like "this is completely unacceptable and we won't work with it" and then when he was expected to win a seat, they went "well, we can't promise whether we'll work with him or not", over like a week. So there you go. Also, Danish politics work in blocs outside the governing coalition so even if they lose voters to Stram Kurs, he'll be part of the "blue" right wing bloc.
Well, what it is?"easier access to ... efteruddannelse" (I don't know the English word for it. In-service education?)
They sell keyboards starting at 4.99.don't invest the neccessary time
See, that was your first mistake.having lived in the German racist capital
Emphasis mine.this is a bad post and you should feel bad. if you genuinely think that the colonial racist regime was not the direct cause of the genocide then you're massively ignorant. for some reasons those herders and farmers lived together for centuries without much of a problem. then, suddenly, racist science defines the everyday minutae of their lives and they go on a racist murder spree.
[...]
this is a bad post and you should feel bad. if you genuinely think that the colonial racist regime was not the direct cause of the genocide then you're massively ignorant. for some reasons those herders and farmers lived together for centuries without much of a problem. then, suddenly, racist science defines the everyday minutae of their lives and they go on a racist murder spree.
1. Defending Sarkeesian is pretty much a non-starter.
Virtually everything the dude said about her is... well... not a lie, but a "subtruth" at best.
"Alternative truth".
You know, like Trump being a successful businessman
2. I looked at the channel suggestions there.
That was worse than derping into a channel and the Rec's are mic. and Buzzfeed.
This had cotton-ceiling-busting Riley in and goddamn Big Joel. and some other persons of that ilk.
3. Because i'm a nice person i checked out the channel anyway.
And the issue remains the same as with the original video: He is doing the very things he is criticising. Non-stop. Like, if i actually did a rebuttal of 5 minutes of his material i'd need 25 minutes. Like, you have to stop virtually every second with this guy, because every clause has manipulative purpose. He's virtually incapable of saying something that is not moving goal posts, equivocating etc.
I finally lost it with his Ship of Theseus. Like: "Get a mirror, buddy!"
4. The Eboshi thing is where i got officially annoyed.
But, hey, what did i expect...
My point is: He's still stealing their support. Like, i presume most of his voters would be former DPP voters. (?)
So they'd rather have him implode in a couple years, before the next election anyway. No?
Well, what it is?
I was pondering asking questions about Danish education anyway.
So if you have the time, feel free to elaborate.
whenever someone mentions "clash of civilizations" my pseud bells ring aloud
Sure. All I said in my 1st post is Islam isn't a race. I'm not denying what you're saying.if people are racist, not matter how little, they necessarily develop their own system of racial categorization. the point I (and others) were trying to make is that these underlying systems of classifying humans are still intact in many peoples minds (western = white = good / eastern = brown = bad), but we now use different vocabulary for it, because talking about race publicly has been stigmatized. so instead "muslim" is used as an umbrella term for all kinds of brown people and our biggest cultural fears are projected onto them.
I never called you that. I was talking to Lexy. I don't need to invest too much time to understand him, his every opinion is predictable, he's like an algorithm. And he basically called me a racist for not agreeing w him. Hence idiot.kinda silly going out of your way to call other people "idiot" when you, on the regular, don't invest the neccessary time to really try and understand what other people are saying. I was pretty clear in my post I think, even added a quote from a paper, yet it seems you still didn't get the gist of it. dialogue works better if you don't see bad intentions around every corner.
So why are bigots mistaking Sikhs and Hindus for Muslims?