How?
Why shouldn’t we get more women and non whites to vote? why shouldn’t we have more women and non whites running for office?
Advertisement
by San Lumen » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:00 am
by La Xinga » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:04 am
by Nobel Hobos 2 » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:08 am
by San Lumen » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:11 am
La xinga wrote:San Lumen wrote:
Why shouldn’t we get more women and non whites to vote? why shouldn’t we have more women and non whites running for office?
Because caring about the race or sex of a person just leads to the minority being sexist or racist. Why should we get only more women and non whites to vote and not do the same for white males? Do they not matter? Do you actually care about a person's sex or race when he/she comes out to vote or run for office?
by Nobel Hobos 2 » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:11 am
La xinga wrote:San Lumen wrote:
Why shouldn’t we get more women and non whites to vote? why shouldn’t we have more women and non whites running for office?
Because caring about the race or sex of a person just leads to the minority being sexist or racist. Why should we get only more women and non whites to vote and not do the same for white males? Do they not matter? Do you actually care about a person's sex or race when he/she comes out to vote or run for office?
by La Xinga » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:20 am
San Lumen wrote:La xinga wrote:Because caring about the race or sex of a person just leads to the minority being sexist or racist. Why should we get only more women and non whites to vote and not do the same for white males? Do they not matter? Do you actually care about a person's sex or race when he/she comes out to vote or run for office?
I’m not seeing how your drawing any of these conclusions from what I said
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:La xinga wrote:Because caring about the race or sex of a person just leads to the minority being sexist or racist. Why should we get only more women and non whites to vote and not do the same for white males? Do they not matter? Do you actually care about a person's sex or race when he/she comes out to vote or run for office?
Do they not matter? Of course they do. They matter as much as any other candidate. BUT NO MORE.
There's a system which for some reason favors white men. To any attempt to redress that, necessarily reducing the number of white men, you will object that we're discriminating against white men. When all we're doing is reducing the positive discrimination towards white men.
It's white privilege in a nutshell. "You can't take away my right to get an unfair advantage, it's not fair"
by Rojava Free State » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:23 am
La xinga wrote:San Lumen wrote:I’m not seeing how your drawing any of these conclusions from what I said
Why should we encourage only non whites and women to vote?Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
Do they not matter? Of course they do. They matter as much as any other candidate. BUT NO MORE.
There's a system which for some reason favors white men. To any attempt to redress that, necessarily reducing the number of white men, you will object that we're discriminating against white men. When all we're doing is reducing the positive discrimination towards white men.
It's white privilege in a nutshell. "You can't take away my right to get an unfair advantage, it's not fair"
It doesn't favor men, the people CHOOSE men, that's what democracy is about. It's not necessary to reduce the number, why should it be? Do we really care about race?
White privilege? I could say the same as T the I said, that he's white and male, but he has no privileges, cuz he ain't rich. It's $, not race or sex.
Rojava Free State wrote:Listen yall. I'm only gonna say it once but I want you to remember it. This ain't a world fit for good men. It seems like you gotta be monstrous just to make it. Gotta have a little bit of darkness within you just to survive. You gotta stoop low everyday it seems like. Stoop all the way down to the devil in these times. And then one day you look in the mirror and you realize that you ain't you anymore. You're just another monster, and thanks to your actions, someone else will eventually become as warped and twisted as you. Never forget that the best of us are just the best of a bad lot. Being at the top of a pile of feces doesn't make you anything but shit like the rest. Never forget that.
by San Lumen » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:23 am
La xinga wrote:San Lumen wrote:I’m not seeing how your drawing any of these conclusions from what I said
Why should we encourage only non whites and women to vote?Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
Do they not matter? Of course they do. They matter as much as any other candidate. BUT NO MORE.
There's a system which for some reason favors white men. To any attempt to redress that, necessarily reducing the number of white men, you will object that we're discriminating against white men. When all we're doing is reducing the positive discrimination towards white men.
It's white privilege in a nutshell. "You can't take away my right to get an unfair advantage, it's not fair"
It doesn't favor men, the people CHOOSE men, that's what democracy is about. It's not necessary to reduce the number, why should it be? Do we really care about race?
White privilege? I could say the same as T the I said, that he's white and male, but he has no privileges, cuz he ain't rich. It's $, not race or sex.
by La Xinga » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:25 am
Rojava Free State wrote:La xinga wrote:Why should we encourage only non whites and women to vote?
It doesn't favor men, the people CHOOSE men, that's what democracy is about. It's not necessary to reduce the number, why should it be? Do we really care about race?
White privilege? I could say the same as T the I said, that he's white and male, but he has no privileges, cuz he ain't rich. It's $, not race or sex.
Whites are on average more privileged than minorities. True, there are rich black and brown people and poor whites but on average more whites have access to wealth than minorities do.
San Lumen wrote:La xinga wrote:Why should we encourage only non whites and women to vote?
It doesn't favor men, the people CHOOSE men, that's what democracy is about. It's not necessary to reduce the number, why should it be? Do we really care about race?
White privilege? I could say the same as T the I said, that he's white and male, but he has no privileges, cuz he ain't rich. It's $, not race or sex.
A lot of times only white men run. All anyone is saying is for more women and non whites to become candidates. How that becomes what your saying is beyond me
by San Lumen » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:38 am
La xinga wrote:Rojava Free State wrote:
Whites are on average more privileged than minorities. True, there are rich black and brown people and poor whites but on average more whites have access to wealth than minorities do.
So instead of having people run cuz not white or woman MAYBE we could have poorer people run, since class does matter, unlike race or sex.San Lumen wrote:A lot of times only white men run. All anyone is saying is for more women and non whites to become candidates. How that becomes what your saying is beyond me
And why is that a problem that only white men run?
by La Xinga » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:39 am
by San Lumen » Sun Jul 26, 2020 8:11 am
by La Xinga » Sun Jul 26, 2020 8:13 am
by Rojava Free State » Sun Jul 26, 2020 8:27 am
Rojava Free State wrote:Listen yall. I'm only gonna say it once but I want you to remember it. This ain't a world fit for good men. It seems like you gotta be monstrous just to make it. Gotta have a little bit of darkness within you just to survive. You gotta stoop low everyday it seems like. Stoop all the way down to the devil in these times. And then one day you look in the mirror and you realize that you ain't you anymore. You're just another monster, and thanks to your actions, someone else will eventually become as warped and twisted as you. Never forget that the best of us are just the best of a bad lot. Being at the top of a pile of feces doesn't make you anything but shit like the rest. Never forget that.
by San Lumen » Sun Jul 26, 2020 8:30 am
by La Xinga » Sun Jul 26, 2020 8:34 am
San Lumen wrote:
A white man knows what its like to be pulled over and harassed by police? A man can understand what sexism and having medical decision and things like loans requiring fathers or spousal consent?
There is no issue with having mostly white men in elected office?
by Ors Might » Sun Jul 26, 2020 8:51 am
San Lumen wrote:
A white man knows what its like to be pulled over and harassed by police? A man can understand what sexism and having medical decision and things like loans requiring fathers or spousal consent?
There is no issue with having mostly white men in elected office?
by Picairn » Sun Jul 26, 2020 8:52 am
Duvniask wrote:The fuck are you talking about? People in this thread consistently display it. They see the makeup of elected officials and then immediately assume it's natural and the way things should be. No thought given to how it got to that point.
First, you need to practice your reading comprehension. I think it should be pretty clear from what I said that I was especially talking about forces that are unconscious. People may be disinclined to admit they prefer male leaders, but their attitudes toward leadership says otherwise. That and the structural barriers in the form of political gatekeepers.
Second, it has nothing to do with gripes about democracy, you just don't understand what the issue is. The issue is that election results are influenced by biases in voter preferences and biases in candidate selection on the part of parties, meaning the result could have been different, and our politics more representative, if these biases did not influence the outcome. It's like asking a doctor if they have an issue with your healthy body when they diagnose a disease impeding the functions of said body; no, they're telling you there is a problem with it that needs to be fixed for it to run optimally.
Someone has misunderstood the entire point.
by San Lumen » Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:00 am
La xinga wrote:San Lumen wrote:
A white man knows what its like to be pulled over and harassed by police? A man can understand what sexism and having medical decision and things like loans requiring fathers or spousal consent?
There is no issue with having mostly white men in elected office?
1. To the first one, no. To all the rest, yes. And if one race is harassed more than others, even if they are not the one committing more crimes to proportion, does not mean they need more people in the gov.
2. No issue at all.
by La Xinga » Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:04 am
San Lumen wrote:La xinga wrote:1. To the first one, no. To all the rest, yes. And if one race is harassed more than others, even if they are not the one committing more crimes to proportion, does not mean they need more people in the gov.
2. No issue at all.
Its quite astounding how luxurious your ivory tower is.
No one is calling for people to vote for someone because of their gender or race.
Do you know how LGBT rights came to the forefront? People like Harvey Milk became advocates and got elected to office.
Without him the Briggs Initiative would have likely passed and the implications of that would have be horrifying.
He inspired other LGBT people to run for office.
by San Lumen » Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:08 am
La xinga wrote:San Lumen wrote:
Its quite astounding how luxurious your ivory tower is.
No one is calling for people to vote for someone because of their gender or race.
Do you know how LGBT rights came to the forefront? People like Harvey Milk became advocates and got elected to office.
I'm the one living in an ivory tower?
And you think only LGBT people want rights for LGBT people?Without him the Briggs Initiative would have likely passed and the implications of that would have be horrifying.
An opinion which I disagree with.He inspired other LGBT people to run for office.
Neither good nor bad, unless people voted specifically because he/she was LGBT.
by La Xinga » Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:16 am
San Lumen wrote:La xinga wrote:I'm the one living in an ivory tower?
And you think only LGBT people want rights for LGBT people?
An opinion which I disagree with.
Neither good nor bad, unless people voted specifically because he/she was LGBT.
I never said that only LGBT people wanted it. Milk was the first openly gay man elected to office in the United States. Had he not been assassinated he likely would have become the first openly gay mayor.
Do you know what the Briggs Initiative was? I explained above what it would have done.
by Duvniask » Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:24 am
Picairn wrote:Duvniask wrote:The fuck are you talking about? People in this thread consistently display it. They see the makeup of elected officials and then immediately assume it's natural and the way things should be. No thought given to how it got to that point.
Strawman and mischaracterization. They are arguing that these politicians are voted in by their constituents' judgements on their policies and character, which is the way things should be. What it shouldn't be is voting purely on race or gender without regard to policies or character. "I'm a woman" or "I'm a Hispanic" shouldn't be the only reason to vote for a candidate.
First, you need to practice your reading comprehension. I think it should be pretty clear from what I said that I was especially talking about forces that are unconscious. People may be disinclined to admit they prefer male leaders, but their attitudes toward leadership says otherwise. That and the structural barriers in the form of political gatekeepers.
Second, it has nothing to do with gripes about democracy, you just don't understand what the issue is. The issue is that election results are influenced by biases in voter preferences and biases in candidate selection on the part of parties, meaning the result could have been different, and our politics more representative, if these biases did not influence the outcome. It's like asking a doctor if they have an issue with your healthy body when they diagnose a disease impeding the functions of said body; no, they're telling you there is a problem with it that needs to be fixed for it to run optimally.
First, you need to stop lying. "Unconscious forces" that you originally cited, many are people's personal criterias on how they would vote for a politician i.e. "who the voters view as accurately representing their interests, who the voters view as being better on the issues (i.e. issue ownership) along with other things such as the person-factor (what kind of person is the candidate?)", like what you said.
Second, don't try to portray yourself as holier-than-thou with that smug, condescending "display" of intellectual supremacy.
Every single person is biased towards a candidate they like, from their own judgements and criterias on the field of candidates available. Those biases form their decisions to vote accordingly, which is a part of democracy itself. That's why I asked if you had any gripes with democracy.
Someone has misunderstood the entire point.
And someone else is lying. Stop making excuses for your own gripes with people independently making up their own minds about who to vote for.
by San Lumen » Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:26 am
La xinga wrote:San Lumen wrote:I never said that only LGBT people wanted it. Milk was the first openly gay man elected to office in the United States. Had he not been assassinated he likely would have become the first openly gay mayor.
Do you know what the Briggs Initiative was? I explained above what it would have done.
1. You have no evidence that f he was not elected, LGBT rights would never have happened.
2. I see, doesn't seem horrific, represents my views.
by La Xinga » Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:28 am
San Lumen wrote:La xinga wrote:1. You have no evidence that f he was not elected, LGBT rights would never have happened.
2. I see, doesn't seem horrific, represents my views.
That fact that you think the Briggs Initiative should have passed says it all about why you have no issue with a legislature or municipal government made up of almost all white men.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Emotional Support Crocodile, Hidrandia, IC-Water, Singaporen Empire, Soul Reapers, The Astral Mandate, The French National Workers State, Tiami, Tungstan
Advertisement