Why The Radical Left Always fail to Argue with Reason and Shout Racism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxYimeaoea0

I am really beginning to think. Some of the left have no idea how to tackle prejudice. They just seek to as racist people do. Divide people racially, when they should be looking to bring people together. This idiot in this video, proves this reality. He did not look to bring people together, but divide people by the definition of their skin tones and off the past. Showing, he never learnt a damn thing from this.

If people are determined to make people feel guilty, for no crime they have committed and based off what people did in the past. They have not learnt a damn thing about the problems of racism and in fact just make them tens times worse. As they continually seek to divide people by poor unscientific labels

The only way equality will come, is when people see each other as humans. Not by the co,lour of their skin, or ethnicity or religion. They should never play a factor in how anyone progresses in life. Though after watching this and how some people are taught to cast blame on people for the fairness of their skin. Screams of the same damn racism, that saw Africans enslaved and be viewed wrongly as inferior

Its the same bullshit over and over again, just as it is with antisemitism

People never sadly learn. Instead, they want enable racism and prejudice, by the colour of peoples skin

I am so ashamed to be now seen as a Liberal, as it now has been ruined by the radical left and Alt Right

One way to not solve it is to listen to a 2-hour youtube.

Original Quill wrote:One way to not solve it is to listen to a 2-hour youtube.

For radical leftists with an attention span of 2 seconds, you are quite right

Original Quill wrote:One way to not solve it is to listen to a 2-hour youtube.

it was actually really interesting

@ didge, do you know what the final results were?

''what you call political correctness I call progress''

it was agree @ 36% - disagree @ 64% at the start i think

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:One way to not solve it is to listen to a 2-hour youtube.

it was actually really interesting

@ didge, do you know what the final results were?  

''what you call political correctness I call progress''

it was agree @ 36% - disagree @ 64% at the start i think

Here you go Gelico

https://www.inquisitr.com/4905938/jordan-peterson-stephen-fry-defeat-michael-eric-dyson-and-michelle-goldberg-in-munk-debate

Life's too short to suffer through half-an-hour of waffling intro's and advertising to watch a 90 minute debate...

Didge wrote:

gelico wrote:


it was actually really interesting

@ didge, do you know what the final results were?  

''what you call political correctness I call progress''

it was agree @ 36% - disagree @ 64% at the start i think

Here you go Gelico

https://www.inquisitr.com/4905938/jordan-peterson-stephen-fry-defeat-michael-eric-dyson-and-michelle-goldberg-in-munk-debate

thannks didge - so they gained an extra 6% lead on this

it was a superb debate. peterson and fry made a great double act imo

the other two were described as superficial, empty soundbites and attacking peterson with personal remarks.

I agree

I'm also not going to watch such a long video, so I have no idea what was said.

Are those your own words Didge? If so, I agree with you. There was a time when the way to combat racism was to be "colour blind". Then that went out the window and was replaced by a need to take people's colour into consideration, talk about their "heritage", and generally pander to that heritage.

I haven't yet watched the video, but I think that PC as an ideal has decent intentions, but is taken way too far by a number of absolute idiots (Diane Abbott springs to mind).

I think simply not discriminating against others for whatever reason, and even having laws to ensure some minorities aren't targeted for discrimination, is no bad thing.

I also believe that recognising disadvantages is a good thing and support rightly given to under privilidged groups in a few cases.

But making out any criticism of someone is part of a minority as bigoted is silly, and I do not agree with quotas and other misguided attempts at being PC. And if there is even a shred of truth to stories of flags being banned then that is evidence of OC being hijacked by self-important twats.

Still a liberal though, I won't let the term be sullied by morons any more than being a patriot should be.

Eilzel wrote:I haven't yet watched the video, but I think that PC as an ideal has decent intentions, but is taken way too far by a number of absolute idiots (Diane Abbott springs to mind).

I think simply not discriminating against others for whatever reason, and even having laws to ensure some minorities are targeted for discrimination, is no bad thing.

I also believe that recognising disadvantages is a good thing and support rightly given to under privilidged groups in a few cases.

But making out any criticism of someone is part of a minority as bigoted is silly, and I do not agree with quotas and other misguided attempts at being PC. And if there is even a shred of truth to stories of flags being banned then that is evidence of OC being hijacked by self-important twats.

Still a liberal though, I won't let the term be sullied by morons any more than being a patriot should be.

You do agree with positive discrimination in some cases then?

The trouble is that "not discriminating against others for whatever reason" doesn't really mean what it says. Trying to make some people "equal" by positive discrimination is discrimination against others by default.

No I don't agree with positive discrimination. I edited my post since I believe a typo may have made it seem that way.

I did watch the video... the two on the left seemed more interested in trying to argue that blacks and women should have some sort of special status now, giving them more than equal rights/opportunities than others...


The bloke on the left was also misrepresenting the truth about slavery in the US, forgetting to mention that there were many blacks who were not slaves, and that there were many blacks who were themselves 'slave owners', and no mention of any of the Japanese women who were sex slaves to blacks during that time either...!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:


I did watch the video... the two on the left seemed more interested in trying to argue that blacks and women should have some sort of special status now, giving them more than equal rights/opportunities than others...

One time I was painting.  I had red and blue paints...and I wanted the color purple, so I could paint a beautiful landscape.  What to do...what to do?  So I painted only blue, and it came out too blue.  So I decided to mix in more blue and still, it came out too blue.  What to do...what to do?  

I then realized that what I wanted was not just blue, but a blend of red and blue, to create purple.  But I had so much blue on the canvas that I had to compensate with a bit more of the red, until I had the perfect shade of purple.  Without the compensation, I never would have had the perfect color.

Sometimes you have to correct what you put on the canvas in the past.  It will never be the right shade if you keep adding blue, or if you keep adding the corrected color to the blue.  It will always be too blue until you compensate for too much blue in the beginning.

You don't create good new paintings today by throwing paint over old paintings of others from the past...

Tommy Monk wrote:You don't create good new paintings today by throwing paint over old paintings of others from the past...

Nor do you throw away the canvas altogether. You've got to blend the old with the new, and that means adjustments.

Tommy Monk wrote:You don't create good new paintings today by throwing paint over old paintings of others from the past...

actually often artists painted over old painting that were just 'not right'.

lets slap on a nice 'even' undercoat and create a real masterpiece

gelico wrote:

Didge wrote:

Here you go Gelico

https://www.inquisitr.com/4905938/jordan-peterson-stephen-fry-defeat-michael-eric-dyson-and-michelle-goldberg-in-munk-debate

thannks didge - so they gained an extra 6% lead on this

it was a superb debate.  peterson and fry made a great double act imo

the other two were described as superficial, empty soundbites and attacking peterson with personal remarks.

I agree

I agree and was really impressed with Stephen Fry, who actually showed how and why PC is so wrong.

Raggamuffin wrote:I'm also not going to watch such a long video, so I have no idea what was said.

Are those your own words Didge? If so, I agree with you. There was a time when the way to combat racism was to be "colour blind". Then that went out the window and was replaced by a need to take people's colour into consideration, talk about their "heritage", and generally pander to that heritage.

They are my own words Rags. Nice that you agree with them.