Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:12 pmI agree
NationStates
Because sometimes even national leaders just want to hang out
https://forum.nationstates.net/
Right-Wing Discussion Thread
Page 20 of 498
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:12 pmPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:14 pmPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:15 pmAlyakia wrote:Lyras wrote:
A particular problem when Islam promotes the use of taqiyya (-deception-), which is not only justified but commendable, if it advances the cause of Islam (Q 3:28, 5:28).
http://www.timesofisrael.com/declassifi ... ida-image/
In an October 2010 letter to a top lieutenant, bin Laden complains about Faisal Shahzad, the militant recruited by the Pakistani Taliban to set off a car bomb in New York’s Times Square. The May 2010 bombing failed. During his trial, Shahzad — a Pakistani who gained US citizenship — told the court he “didn’t mean it” when he took his American citizenship oath, which includes a vow not to harm the United States.
Bin Laden said lying about an oath breaks Islamic law.
“This is not the kind of lying to the enemy that is permitted. It is treachery,” bin Laden wrote. He told his lieutenant to take it up with Hakimullah Mehsud, the leader of the Pakistani Taliban, and ensure it didn’t happen again.
just a counter-example
I'd argue that, to my (admittedly likely less extensive, though still considerable) reading of the requisite passages, that'd almost be exactly spot on with taqiyya's doctrinal roots, and it appears that Shahzad agrees, as does AbuBakar al-Baghdadi, and as did al-Zahawi.
The jury may be out on the broader utility of taqiyya... but it's evidently used as justification enough to make denials of Islam by previously professing muslims... suspect, as I'm sure you can agree.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:17 pmYes.
White privilege is the observation by many that due to white supremacist beliefs (both overt and unconscious), there is an institutionalized and largely unrecognized system of racism in this country that benefits white people while disadvantaging black people, Latinos, and others who are not white. It's not white supremacy. It's a comment on the effects of white supremacy. Actual white supremacists insist that no such thing exists, and that whites are actually getting the short end of the stick nowadays.
Try again.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:17 pmPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:18 pmPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:20 pm*expropriates this thread for the good of the people*
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:21 pmKauthar wrote:Kraylandia wrote:Well, as a left winger, I want to know what is all of your opinions on issues like Same Sex marriage and transgender people?
Honestly, I'm against same-sex marriage, but the state shouldn't have a say in marriage, leave it to the church/mosque/synagogue or what ever. I find transgenders weird and I don't agree with them, but they don't affect me in anyway so I don't really care.
I'm not theocratic or a supremacist.
Um, your sig and OP disagree?
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:26 pmYumyumsuppertime wrote:Ugatoo wrote:Never heard of "white privilege"?
Yes.
White privilege is the observation by many that due to white supremacist beliefs (both overt and unconscious), there is an institutionalized and largely unrecognized system of racism in this country that benefits white people while disadvantaging black people, Latinos, and others who are not white. It's not white supremacy. It's a comment on the effects of white supremacy. Actual white supremacists insist that no such thing exists, and that whites are actually getting the short end of the stick nowadays.
Try again.
Under law, at least here in Australia, whites actually DO get the short end of the stick. There are a number of acts of legislation that deliberately provide for the provision of services to non-white groups, and explicitly disallow European-descent people from utilising them. There are plenty of European-descent people who need said services, but pandering to political correctness has lead to said minority groups being granted preferential treatment, on the basis of their race.
This being racist, in my reading of it.
Don't tell me it doesn't happen. I was a youth worker. I've watched it happen in front of me. I've had bureaucrats tell it to my face, repeatedly. It certainly does happen, and is not an invention of the evil, bigoted right wing, out to get the poor and repressed minorities.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:26 pmLyras wrote:Geilinor wrote:Which is a problem. Trump says it will be "until we figure out what the hell is going on". And anyway, how do you know for sure what religion someone believes in?
A particular problem when Islam promotes the use of taqiyya (-deception-), which is not only justified but commendable, if it advances the cause of Islam (Q 3:28, 5:28).
Certainly does. I mean, provided you're under threat of significant persecution.
(Adamec, Ludwig W. (2009). Historical dictionary of Islam. Scarecrow Press. p. 73.)
http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/art ... i=0&_pos=1
Judaism has an identical concept in the Talmud. (Schabouth Hag. 6d., Szaaloth-Utszabot The book of Jore Dia 17)
I see nothing wrong with that personally. Nor do I care much that it hurts peoples feelings or makes them feel a widdle scared.
By the way, I'm not sure what not taking people of the book as your protectors has to do with anything.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:27 pmLyras wrote:Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Yes.
White privilege is the observation by many that due to white supremacist beliefs (both overt and unconscious), there is an institutionalized and largely unrecognized system of racism in this country that benefits white people while disadvantaging black people, Latinos, and others who are not white. It's not white supremacy. It's a comment on the effects of white supremacy. Actual white supremacists insist that no such thing exists, and that whites are actually getting the short end of the stick nowadays.
Try again.
Under law, at least here in Australia, whites actually DO get the short end of the stick. There are a number of acts of legislation that deliberately provide for the provision of services to non-white groups, and explicitly disallow European-descent people from utilising them. There are plenty of European-descent people who need said services, but pandering to political correctness has lead to said minority groups being granted preferential treatment, on the basis of their race.
This being racist, in my reading of it.
Don't tell me it doesn't happen. I was a youth worker. I've watched it happen in front of me. I've had bureaucrats tell it to my face, repeatedly. It certainly does happen, and is not an invention of the evil, bigoted right wing, out to get the poor and repressed minorities.
hmm... is there any reason why the non-white groups in australia might need special attention in regard to services?
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:28 pmThis seems interesting. Let me start with I am a conservative libertarian that believes in things like Freedom of speech and the right to bear arms. I also hate thinks like SJWs, political correctness and thought police. Those being people that think that only they are right and seek to enforce that on others. Also I hate overly sensitive peoples that find everything offensive (or can get offended at the slightest thing.) Also I like traditional values as well. Also I love my country which is america.
He is right. There is a thing called reverse discrmination and it happens here in america as well. I was advised repeatedly when applying for college to leave race blank because colleges have a quota of minorities that by law they have to fullfil.
I think it is wrong to discrmate againist anyone but it is wrong to stop good people from getting places and adcancing because of color, what ever it is. Black white yellow. In the end we all bleed red.
Under law, at least here in Australia, whites actually DO get the short end of the stick. There are a number of acts of legislation that deliberately provide for the provision of services to non-white groups, and explicitly disallow European-descent people from utilising them. There are plenty of European-descent people who need said services, but pandering to political correctness has lead to said minority groups being granted preferential treatment, on the basis of their race.
This being racist, in my reading of it.
Don't tell me it doesn't happen. I was a youth worker. I've watched it happen in front of me. I've had bureaucrats tell it to my face, repeatedly. It certainly does happen, and is not an invention of the evil, bigoted right wing, out to get the poor and repressed minorities.
He is right. There is a thing called reverse discrmination and it happens here in america as well. I was advised repeatedly when applying for college to leave race blank because colleges have a quota of minorities that by law they have to fullfil.
I think it is wrong to discrmate againist anyone but it is wrong to stop good people from getting places and adcancing because of color, what ever it is. Black white yellow. In the end we all bleed red.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:31 pmPatrick OConner wrote:This seems interesting. Let me start with I am a conservative libertarian that believes in things like Freedom of speech and the right to bear arms. I also hate thinks like SJWs, political correctness and thought police. Those being people that think that only they are right and seek to enforce that on others. Also I hate overly sensitive peoples that find everything offensive (or can get offended at the slightest thing.) Also I like traditional values as well. Also I love my country which is america.
SJWs are, for the most part, using social pressures that are entirely to influence society the way they want. be this through asking private companies to voluntary adopt new policies or by boycotting them, it's all legal and dandy under current law and in a hypothetical libertarian society. you might hate them but with some very small specific exceptions you can't touch them.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:31 pmThat white people are innately superior to every other group of people.
It's a disgusting belief system and it shames me to share a wing with them.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:32 pmbut that's not what the concept white privilege is
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:32 pmAlyakia wrote:Lyras wrote:
Under law, at least here in Australia, whites actually DO get the short end of the stick. There are a number of acts of legislation that deliberately provide for the provision of services to non-white groups, and explicitly disallow European-descent people from utilising them. There are plenty of European-descent people who need said services, but pandering to political correctness has lead to said minority groups being granted preferential treatment, on the basis of their race.
This being racist, in my reading of it.
Don't tell me it doesn't happen. I was a youth worker. I've watched it happen in front of me. I've had bureaucrats tell it to my face, repeatedly. It certainly does happen, and is not an invention of the evil, bigoted right wing, out to get the poor and repressed minorities.
hmm... is there any reason why the non-white groups in australia might need special attention in regard to services?
Proportionally, yes.
But I see no just reason why said provision of services could not be race-neutral, allowing all who have need of them to access it. I accept and appreciate that minority groups who have had it tough under previously existing governments have, generally, lower social demographics. But is it not more reasonable, again, to offer the services to all who require them?
EDIT: NSG. Where the Right wing argues for equal access to services for the poor of all races, and the Left argues for racially-selective provision of government services.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:34 pmWhite privilege is a set of advantages and/or immunities that white people benefit from on a daily basis beyond those common to all others. White privilege can exist without white people's conscious knowledge of its presence and it helps to maintain the racial hierarchy in this country
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:35 pmLyras wrote:Alyakia wrote:
hmm... is there any reason why the non-white groups in australia might need special attention in regard to services?
Proportionally, yes.
But I see no just reason why said provision of services could not be race-neutral, allowing all who have need of them to access it. I accept and appreciate that minority groups who have had it tough under previously existing governments have, generally, lower social demographics. But is it not more reasonable, again, to offer the services to all who require them?
it would be nice if the provision was race-neutral but you have already admitted that the need and cause for that need is not race-neutral, so it does lead us into some unpleasant territory. it would be nice if we could give it to everyone, but do those resources actually exist? what are some specific programs you were thinking of?
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:36 pmLyras wrote:Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Yes.
White privilege is the observation by many that due to white supremacist beliefs (both overt and unconscious), there is an institutionalized and largely unrecognized system of racism in this country that benefits white people while disadvantaging black people, Latinos, and others who are not white. It's not white supremacy. It's a comment on the effects of white supremacy. Actual white supremacists insist that no such thing exists, and that whites are actually getting the short end of the stick nowadays.
Try again.
Under law, at least here in Australia, whites actually DO get the short end of the stick. There are a number of acts of legislation that deliberately provide for the provision of services to non-white groups, and explicitly disallow European-descent people from utilising them. There are plenty of European-descent people who need said services, but pandering to political correctness has lead to said minority groups being granted preferential treatment, on the basis of their race.
This being racist, in my reading of it.
Don't tell me it doesn't happen. I was a youth worker. I've watched it happen in front of me. I've had bureaucrats tell it to my face, repeatedly. It certainly does happen, and is not an invention of the evil, bigoted right wing, out to get the poor and repressed minorities.
I'm not familiar enough with race relations in Australia to have an informed opinion on what you've just said.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:37 pmMost SJWs I have encounters always seem to come across as overly sensitive babies that yelled scream and cried. I always found them to be lacking in certian things like reason and logic. Always motivated my emotion at perceived threats and insults. Most of them can not take a joke and ruin the fun for everyone else. Plus they often time in gage in ad eminem attacks. If you wish for an example google 2015 hugo awards. IN a case where with control and bunch of liberal voted no award on a bunhch of catergories because they did not like the aurthers.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:39 pmUgatoo wrote:Alyakia wrote:
but that's not what the concept white privilege isWhite privilege is a set of advantages and/or immunities that white people benefit from on a daily basis beyond those common to all others. White privilege can exist without white people's conscious knowledge of its presence and it helps to maintain the racial hierarchy in this country
yes. that doesn't mean white people are innately superior to every group of people. it just means that by and large a white person, in say, the US, will have an easier life and more opportunities than a non-white person, because we spent centuries specifically making it that way. i like to use apartheid as my admittedly rather extreme example for the next part, there were well off black people and homeless poor white people but that doesn't change the fact that by and large being being white was clearly more advantageous and you would be a fool to deny it. and yes, there are countries where being white has different advantages and in many cases severe disadvantages, we do not live in those places.
just covering my bases here because white privilege discussion get toxic fast.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:40 pmAlyakia wrote:Lyras wrote:
Proportionally, yes.
But I see no just reason why said provision of services could not be race-neutral, allowing all who have need of them to access it. I accept and appreciate that minority groups who have had it tough under previously existing governments have, generally, lower social demographics. But is it not more reasonable, again, to offer the services to all who require them?
it would be nice if the provision was race-neutral but you have already admitted that the need and cause for that need is not race-neutral, so it does lead us into some unpleasant territory. it would be nice if we could give it to everyone, but do those resources actually exist? what are some specific programs you were thinking of?
The classic example in my experience is the provision of legal aid. In Australia, the right to legal representation in court is not inviolate. I have had a case where a penniless, unemployed, uneducated, homeless, breastfeeding and pregnant young woman (~18, if I recall correctly) was DENIED legal aid. I almost lost my proverbial in fury, and asked upon what possible basis legal aid would be denied to this most-cliche-of-needy cases. I was informed that the other party (whom my client was seeking an apprehended violence order against) had sought Aboriginal Legal Service representation.
ALS is a form of legal aid, granted only and exclusively to Aboriginals. Legal aid won't represent both sides of a dispute. Said aboriginal was doing ok, in every respect. Job, car, family, etc.
Race trumped need.
It's wrong.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:43 pmAlyakia wrote:Ugatoo wrote:
yes. that doesn't mean white people are innately superior to every group of people. it just means that by and large a white person, in say, the US, will have an easier life and more opportunities than a non-white person, because we spent centuries specifically making it that way. i like to use apartheid as my admittedly rather extreme example for the next part, there were well off black people and homeless poor white people but that doesn't change the fact that by and large being being white was clearly more advantageous and you would be a fool to deny it. and yes, there are countries where being white has different advantages and in many cases severe disadvantages, we do not live in those places.
just covering my bases here because white privilege discussion get toxic fast.
Yes it does. Any system that tries to place value of people based on their skin colour is a racist system.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:45 pmyes. that doesn't mean white people are innately superior to every group of people. it just means that by and large a white person, in say, the US, will have an easier life and more opportunities than a non-white person, because we spent centuries specifically making it that way. i like to use apartheid as my admittedly rather extreme example for the next part, there were well off black people and homeless poor white people but that doesn't change the fact that by and large being being white was clearly more advantageous and you would be a fool to deny it. and yes, there are countries where being white has different advantages and in many cases severe disadvantages, we do not live in those places.
just covering my bases here because white privilege discussion get toxic fast.
In my life I have yet to witness such an event. At 22 I may not have lived long enough but I doubt that is the issue. I have been discrmanted againist in my life. I have found no advantage to being white. I have fought and worked very hard to get anything at all. I find myself leaning toward the fact that "white privilege" Is just an excuse used by the lazy to justify why they have nothing.
I am not denying that racism does not exist. it surely does but in modern day america I have yet to witness anything like aparthied or Jim Crowe.
Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:48 pmLyras wrote:Alyakia wrote:
it would be nice if the provision was race-neutral but you have already admitted that the need and cause for that need is not race-neutral, so it does lead us into some unpleasant territory. it would be nice if we could give it to everyone, but do those resources actually exist? what are some specific programs you were thinking of?
The classic example in my experience is the provision of legal aid. In Australia, the right to legal representation in court is not inviolate. I have had a case where a penniless, unemployed, uneducated, homeless, breastfeeding and pregnant young woman (~18, if I recall correctly) was DENIED legal aid. I almost lost my proverbial in fury, and asked upon what possible basis legal aid would be denied to this most-cliche-of-needy cases. I was informed that the other party (whom my client was seeking an apprehended violence order against) had sought Aboriginal Legal Service representation.
ALS is a form of legal aid, granted only and exclusively to Aboriginals. Legal aid won't represent both sides of a dispute. Said aboriginal was doing ok, in every respect. Job, car, family, etc.
Race trumped need.
It's wrong.
i'm googling it and it seems that ALS is not a government thing and is community run, which massively changes the dynamics at play. i'm not sure one party seeking legal aid causes the other to be denied it though? that does seem kinda silly, period.
but yeah legal aid should be provided to everyone that needs it by the government
Ugatoo wrote:Alyakia wrote:
yes. that doesn't mean white people are innately superior to every group of people. it just means that by and large a white person, in say, the US, will have an easier life and more opportunities than a non-white person, because we spent centuries specifically making it that way. i like to use apartheid as my admittedly rather extreme example for the next part, there were well off black people and homeless poor white people but that doesn't change the fact that by and large being being white was clearly more advantageous and you would be a fool to deny it. and yes, there are countries where being white has different advantages and in many cases severe disadvantages, we do not live in those places.
just covering my bases here because white privilege discussion get toxic fast.
Yes it does. Any system that tries to place value of people based on their skin colour is a racist system.
the point isn't that they're putting value on people based on their race. the point is that the the system itself was racist is and in many cases stilland white privilege points out that the white race was deliberately placed at the top of this system. you can't examine a system with a shitload of racist history and racial baggage without talking about race, and doing so does not make you racist.