Quote:
Originally Posted by fatso
1. No one actually called anyone racist. There is a massive difference between pointing the way someone thinks about or discusses something is 'racist' and calling that someone a 'racist'. The former is civil and responsible imo, though the latter does have it's place. As far as I can tell it was only the former that happened here, but for some reason you can't do that without people screaming they're not a 'racist'... which brings me to my second point.
|
Actually the first time someone was called racist was post #18 and it happened several times. Others like you were less forthright and just called some comments racist. I don't think you were any more noble by avoiding addressing specific people either. Cowardly perhaps but, certainly not noble. A person who lies is by definition a liar. A person who says racist things is by definition a racist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatso
2. There's a kind of 'reverse race card' pulled through 'the p.c. card'. I have yet to see someone explain what 'truth' the politically correct conspiracy is concealing... what agenda the p.c. movement is trying to advance.... what inescapable, unalterable reality the politically correct knights templar are keeping hidden?
|
a. When someone identified the obvious problem with Indian violence within Canadian society the conversation never got off the ground because people like you were more concerned about the use of the word "Indian" and hijacked the conversation.
b. When I suggested that Natives needed to take some responsibility for the actions of their people the conversation never got off the ground. People like you thought such comments were not politically correct and therefore deemed them racist. So once again instead of talking about another valid issue the conversation turned into a discussion of whether or not it was PC to say.
c. When someone else suggested that the Canadian government carried some blame for Native violence because of the segregation of reservations and for giving Natives no personal responsibility but, rather handouts it was deemed a racist comment by people like you. So instead of discussing the validity of the statement the conversation was turned into a discussion of whether or not it was right(PC) to say such things.
So are three enough examples for you fatso?
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatso
The bad: A couple things I should let go but can't...
1. West Karma, though I genuinely feel bad about the situation, should really just stop posting. W K stopped making sense a couple pages back when he accused others of pulling the race card.
|
Well it looks like you've provided yourself a fourth example. So you reason that because WK says things you find offensive he should remain silent. People like you have got a lot of gall. Perhaps he should be instructed to email all his future posts to a person like you so he can be corrected on what to feel, think, and type.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatso
2. Calgaryborn, your right to call people what you want of course exists. I think, though, when we're thinking and talking about political identities, the individual/ group right to self-definition should trump others' rights to label those individuals and group. I think that's a big reason why there's such things as... you know... historical progress.
|
Historical progress is always preceded by frank and open discussion with people who are seeking solutions to the problems rather than the status quo. You, and people like you on this thread have demonstrated admirably why such open communication is difficult to achieve.
Move along folks... Nothing to see here... No progress at all!