I have not mentioned racism as a topic on any side.
In that case, what do you mean when you say:
That was the concerning part. Defining, very permanently, a group of people from all the others based on race. That's literally anti-equality.
If you think the gap is genetic, you're a racist motivated by racism, and the solutions are irrelevant. If the issue is systemic racism, what's anti-equality about targeting the affected group to bring their outcomes to a more equal level?
I have not mentioned racism as a topic on any side. Though you say I have and that's all you're talking about? Why?
Beyond the points above, the specific options presented seem irrelevant. There's no pleasing the racists that see indigenous people as genetically inferior, it seems you'd label any targeted solution as racial anti-equality (racism by another name), and we're not taking a transition to a socialist utopia to a referendum any time soon.
The solution taken to the referendum was a product of the Uluru statement from the heart and associated activity, developed in partnership with the indigenous community, and supported by ~80% of the indigenous population. I figure they understand "how Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and their nations work, (and) the history of support to this point." better than anyone.
The solution presented was inadequate in my opinion, but a start. What solution would effectively deliver something resembling racial equality without being targeted "racial anti-equality"?
I don't think you quite understand what racism fundamentally is. And I still don't understand how anything you're saying has anything to do with what I've said. You're simply looking for a fight, but there is none there.
Any effective solution to racial equality does not allow people to have things that others don't based on race; whether intended for good or bad, no exception. We are all equal.
If you can't understand that, it's a worry. Constantly dropping the racism card is just mind-blowing levels of misunderstanding and showing an "us" and "them" mindset, even if your intentions are good. This is the kind of behaviour that damages progress and puts a bad taste in people's mouth; it is division where there should be unity. Societies cannot move forward and build on foundations that have a divide. That has and never will fundamentally work in the long-term; we know this.
Perhaps instead of being so upset, trying to start arguments, and dropping the racism card completely out of context, you start doing something proactive. Everyone else already is, especially Elders of both sides of the vote. Why did this not work? Do Australians care that much? How do we unify and move together as a people? This is the main objective and where your energy is best placed.
Any effective solution to racial equality does not allow people to have things that others don't based on race; whether intended for good or bad, no exception. We are all equal.
Except by just about any metric you choose to look at, indigenous Australians are materially worse off. We're factually not equal, and defence of the status quo that led to that perpetuates that inequality, again begs the question of whether the inequality is genetic (absurd, and racist, but if taken at face value could possibly be used to defend the status quo), or systemic - demonstrating that the system is currently racist and needs to be fixed.
How do we unify and move together as a people?
We start with a clear idea of the problem (which it seems you've failed to do if you're not recognising the current inequality or it's cause), and work on solutions from there (the process that was followed with the statement from the heart) rather than tossing out any targeted solutions immediately and without assessment because you think they're racist anti racial equality.
Again, you're in full attack mode. It won't work on a person that recognises the wild division and refuses to participate in any form of division.
Seeming as you know nothing about meāwho I am, what I have done, what I do, and what I'm involved ināplease, I'd love to hear what makes you say something like this...
We start with a clear idea of the problem (which it seems you've failed to do if you're not recognising the current inequality or it's cause)
I'm clearly not participating and am refusing to get into the box you're trying to put me in. I hope you don't try to do this to other people as it is of no help. It's a good thing I'm aware and know what I advocate forāthe irony is phenomenal right nowābut if this were another person, you could be damaging the cause. It's feeding that division we don't need right now and perhaps it has swallowed you up too. Move on with that energy, get better at using it proactively and effectively. I don't know how many times I have to say that, but if anything gets through, it's clearly that.
Where exactly have I attacked you or told you what you believe?
Asking people to pick their box is a pretty quick and effective way of shaking out peoples positions, and either understand why my framing is wrong, or shake out peoples' positions quickly.
In response to you saying indigenous represesentation in the constitution is racist, I pointed out the existing racial inequality, and pointed to the 2 possible root causes. I assume you don't think the gap is genetic, so how do we address the gap, and racism baked into the system without mention of race (or whatever you belive crosses the line into racism) - this is straight to the point, and you ran from it.
So far, you've told me I don't understand your positions as you've dodged just about every question I've asked about them, and made assertions like I don't understand the definition of racism while failing to point out where my definition is wrong or provide an alternative. This is bad-faith behaviour, and the kind of nonsense I see from the likes of closet Nazis who will turn up, 'just ask questions', and sow seeds of doubt while trying to hide their beliefs because they know it'll scare away any sane person, but will drop straight to the JQ when you ask a couple of questions. I don't think you're a Nazi, but I do wonder why you're sticking around to use so many words to say so little.
I'm perfectly happy being hostile toward racists, and want division between myself and Nazis - they didn't reason themselves into the racism, so I'm not going to be able to reason them out of it, so chasing them off and ridiculing then seems reasonable enough. If you're carrying on like a bad-faith actor, dodging my questions about what you believe while making unsubstantiated claims about me, where does that leave us?
You called the man a racist and in this responce called him a nazi and a facist.
You fail to understand that the world canot be divided into boxes of black and white and in fact consists upon a spectrum of grey.
Again you are assuming the root cause is in some sence based upon race, ironicaly the stolen generation disproves that (its a tragedy and never should have happened but go measure those metrics ur so concerned with). He ran from no point u raised that without adressing his original points.
Again calling the man a nazi for asking questions and calling that bad faith is itself bad faith and sowing seeds of doubt in his charecter (not a good look when someone is trying ti engage with you and understand and question ur point of view).
You then wrap this all up by straight up assuming this dude is a full blown nazi and that its you duty to ridicule them. I think if you go and look at a certain angry mustache man from history you will find he got his original support from speaches where he quite literaly reason people into being nazis. Assuming its ur goal to reduce rasism (im assuming ur not just part of a false flag opperation) it is in ur interest to engage with them in good faith to try change their mind.
You finish with
If you're carrying on like a bad-faith actor, dodging my questions about what you believe while making unsubstantiated claims about me, where does that leave us?
Without realising you arw the one who has been making unsubstantiated claims aboit charecter and engaging in bad faith i suggeat you think criticaly about everything you think and say to try break down your arguments from all perspectives. To argue with yourself in the shower to take nothing at face value to use that noggin of urs to find the incentives for why people act the way they do. And maybe in this proccess you will leaen something about human nature and yourself. Heres hoping anyways
Only read this after you have sent ur responce:
!im betting on u flippin ur lid having a tantrum and calling me a nazi!<
You don't actually expect to be taken seriously, do you?
You've seen me ask this person questions to shake out their views, then when they're repeatedly dodged, noted that I frequently see this particular brand of evasiveness from the likes of Nazis while explicitly saying I don't think they're a Nazi.
You've jumped in like some kind of weird white knight, as though they can't speak for themselves, tell me I'm calling them a Nazi Then with that moronic, dishonest interpretation of what I've said on the table (a big ol' lie), you then saw fit to whine about nuance, then move to telling me I'm making unsubstantiated claims.
Why do you act the way you do? Having spent the time to use that noggin of yours to find my incentives as you preach, what do you hope to achieve with these lies?
I was simply pointing out ur hypocracy. I jumped in to ridicule ur utter lack of critical thinking perhaps to help you understand that by advocating for such a thing can just as easily be returned upon u.
Why do i act the way i do? Because im an engineer who when faced with an issue choose to look at numbers, statistics, and history. Hard facts. I then attempt to come as close to an objective framework as possible. From that point i simply apply the scientific method and gradient decent to find a solution that makes the most change in the most effective manner.
I am simply trying to emplore you to think about issues criticaly and not just spout the same retoric you have been told to think. I do not lie i draw a perspective from reality same as everyone.
What hypocrisy did you point out?
You led about me calling them a Nazi - I did the opposite, stating outright that I don't think they're a Nazi.
You lied about me assuming the root cause is race - I never said this, and heavily implied it's systemic (rather than genetic).
You lied about the unsubstantiated bad-faith claims - I tied this firmly to the evasiveness - particulary when asked if the root cause is genetic or systemic
You made incorrect assumptions about me losing it and calling you a Nazi.
You lied about not lying.
So much for those "Hard facts". For you to then tell me to think critically and that you draw your perspective from reality after grounding everything you have to say in utter bullshit is laughable.
I'll concede on the lying point if you bite the bullet and admit you're just a moron, but sadly that doesn't make you any less wrong, or worth listening to.
U said and i quote "This is bad-faith behaviour, and the kind of nonsense I see from the likes of closet Nazis" pretty clearly implying they are a nazi ill concede u didnt outright call em a nazi if u bute the bullet and admit u just used the same bad faith inplication that you accused them of. Sounds hyporcritcal to me.
So according to u its systematic which would imply the system is working against them. Would a system without racism not equally effect everyone whos part of it? If so then either ur wrong and the syatem isnt agains them or u are implying racism and therefore race is the root cause. Im not sure u truely beleive in anything except that which fits the natative u already have in ur head.
No i knew u would read it before responding and thus to prove me wrong would not lose it and call me a nazi (i like to think of it as reasonability insurance).
Lied about lieing now thats just a catch 22 at best and a logical paradox at the worst.
The only thing my entire argument is grounded in is u having no ability to understand any perspective other than ur own and that i dont beleive we should make any division based on race. You just called both tgese lies so please demonstrate otherwise.
If ur willing to concede thinking im a lier that would mean ur willing to concede on what u think is reality, thats prerry telling of u as a whole.
Ur welcome to call me a moron i emplore you to continue to use schoolgrpund insults and demonstrate ur superior intelect.
ill concede u didnt outright call em a nazi if u bute the bullet and admit u just used the same bad faith inplication that you accused them of. Sounds hyporcritcal to me.
Any ambiguity about this "implication" gets cleared up pretty damn quickly when I explicitly said "I don't think you're a Nazi", no?
So according to u its systematic which would imply the system is working against them. Would a system without racism not equally effect everyone whos part of it?
Call it what your like - the system has measurably different outcomes for people of different races - do you deny the disparity in outcome, or do you behove the disparity is genetic? Either position is ridiculous. Alternatively, feel free to bring an alternative forward. In any case, in a racist system, the victims of that racism aren't the problem - the racism is - whether it be a product of active malice, or just the well-intentioned product of a carelessly designed system. Where are you going with this?
No i knew u would read it before responding and thus to prove me wrong would not lose it and call me a nazi (i like to think of it as reasonability insurance).
Totally non-falsifiable, and irrelevant. You're awfully concerned about being called a Nazi by someone on the internet that isn't calling you a Nazi or even saying anything that implies anything of the sort. You presumably know you're not a Nazi - even if I were to call you one, it would change nothing, and I'd look dumb if I didn't substantiate it. It's weird - get past it.
Lied about lieing now thats just a catch 22 at best and a logical paradox at the worst.
I am from the moon. I never said I was from the moon - a lie about a lie. No paradox... Unless you'd like to join the dots there?
The only thing my entire argument is grounded in is u having no ability to understand any perspective other than ur own and that i dont beleive we should make any division based on race.You just called both tgese lies so please demonstrate otherwise.
The system as it stands has massive disparities in outcomes along racial lines. To defend the status quo is to defend the materially worse outcomes for indigenous Australians. That's an existing, measurable divide along racial lines that I'd like to bring to a place of equality. The closest I came to a comment about not being able to understand a perspective other than my own was to mock the notion that your perspective was based on reality after pointing out that it's based on lies. There's yet another lie. Again, quote me if I'm wrong.
If ur willing to concede thinking im a lier that would mean ur willing to concede on what u think is reality, thats prerry telling of u as a whole.
I've pointed to the clear lies (or the alternative idiocy explanation) - with this in mind, one of the following is true...
You don't believe the perspective you're putting forward
You believe the perspective, but need to lie to defend it (this is what I suspect), meaning it's indefensible at worst, or it's not worth hearing from you at best
You're too dumb to comprehend simple statements I've made (e.g. I don't think you're a Nazi), or engage with reality - worthless either way.
What idiot would take a position they've proven is based on lies seriously?
Ur welcome to call me a moron i emplore you to continue to use schoolgrpund insults and demonstrate ur superior intelect.
Thanks for the post-hoc permission, but there's no pride in clearing such a low bar.
I'm never going to know if I'm right that you're lying to defend your genuine perspective, but I'll ask anyway - if you need to lie to defend your positions, why do you cling to them... Why not just take an honest position? It makes life far simpler, and if you're refining those positions when you learn they're indefensible, they'll get better over time.
Any ambiguity about this āimplicationā gets cleared up pretty damn quickly when I explicitly said āI donāt think youāre a Naziā, no?
Absolutely not that's like me saying i punch anyone who is a Nazi then proceeding to punch you then say well i don't think you a Nazi. The implication still stands now its just ass-covering in the shallowest form.
Previously u said "You lied about me assuming the root cause is race - I never said this, and heavily implied itās systemic (rather than genetic)." i used logic to prove it being systemic is a race issue hence without race the issue would not exist therefore it is a problem of race/racism. You talk a lot about how "the system has measurably different outcomes for people of different races" without race you cannot make that measurement hence you are either unnecessarily defining an issue by race or the race itself is the issue I highly doubt its the race itself and in fact would actively fight against such a notion. I was simply pointing out how the Lie I allegedly told was actually just the logical extension of your very own assertion.
Totally non-falsifiable, and irrelevant. Youāre awfully concerned about being called a Nazi by someone on the internet that isnāt calling you a Nazi or even saying anything that implies anything of the sort. You presumably know youāre not a Nazi - even if I were to call you one, it would change nothing, and Iād look dumb if I didnāt substantiate it. Itās weird - get past it.
I was simply defending some innocent person (who did not appear to be a Nazi) who you implied was a Nazi. It is not falsifiable hence why i said i think of it as insurance (seems to be working). My perspective believes that implying something is just the cowards way of saying something hence didn't lie you called him a Nazi (Or don't have balls to actually say it).
I am from the moon. I never said I was from the moon - a lie about a lie. No paradoxā¦ Unless youād like to join the dots there?
Ok so its a catch 22 like a fee fee or a punishment for being punished.
The system as it stands has massive disparities in outcomes along racial lines. To defend the status quo is to defend the materially worse outcomes for indigenous Australians. Thatās an existing, measurable divide along racial lines that Iād like to bring to a place of equality. The closest I came to a comment about not being able to understand a perspective other than my own was to mock the notion that your perspective was based on reality after pointing out that itās based on lies. Thereās yet another lie. Again, quote me if Iām wrong.
so the system effects the race and to fix the system you wish to address the race is that is that a solution to a symptom or are you not simply separating the way u refer to the same thing would that not mean that it is one in the same would that not also mean it is a different same way of refer to the root cause of the issue. I only assumed you believed the root cause was race/racism because I though u where smart enough to address a root cause not a symptom.
I have never defended the status quo simply that there should not be a divide of race within the constitution. As i said many many replied ago its a correlation to argue anything else is to argue that its race (the system as u put it see paragraph above). So far I have logically proven why every aspect of my perspective you have called a lie is in fact based in reality, will it be perfect no! But then again nobodies perspective is. You might find this hard to comprehend but 2 perspectives can be based in the same reality same facts and fundamentally disagree.
Iāve pointed to the clear lies (or the alternative idiocy explanation) - with this in mind, one of the following is trueā¦
You donāt believe the perspective youāre putting forward
You believe the perspective, but need to lie to defend it (this is what I suspect), meaning itās indefensible at worst, or itās not worth hearing from you at best
Youāre too dumb to comprehend simple statements Iāve made (e.g. I donāt think youāre a Nazi), or engage with reality - worthless either way.
so i just went back to make it abundantly clear why every so called "lie" i have allegedly told is in fact the logical extension of ur beliefs or in fact grounded in reality/common inference.
Youāre too dumb to comprehend simple statements Iāve made (e.g. I donāt think youāre a Nazi), or engage with reality - worthless either way.
Ive never said u called me a Nazi i simply ensured that ur ego would prevent u from falling back on it and force u to rely on logic. Now we have established you calling me a lier was in fact one of 3 options u provided above please enlighten me to when when i have failed to engage with reality (make sure to include this as a list will make it easier for me to cut strait to the point and disprove them).
Now let me explain the fourth option you have failed to provide.
I provided a perspective that dividing race in the constitution goes against equality and can be argued is in fact racist itself. You where unwilling to accept this perspective and tried to steer the argument away from this to focus on other issues (the system). I agree the system is broken and actively argued we should address it and not race. You still pushing that we should address race than blamed the system and called me a lier for assuming by the system u meant race/racism. You then completely derailed the entire discussion preferring to take moral high ground and leave my whole original point alone because you cannot reconcile that perhaps dividing based upon race is in fact all the things you stand against while actively defending such a decision.
Absolutely not that's like me saying i punch anyone who is a Nazi then proceeding to punch you then say well i don't think you a Nazi. The implication still stands now its just ass-covering in the shallowest form.
Nazis drink water. I drink water. Did I just call myself a Nazi? Moron.
i used logic to prove it being systemic is a race issue hence without race the issue would not exist therefore it is a problem of race/racism. You talk a lot about how "the system has measurably different outcomes for people of different races" without race you cannot make that measurement hence you are either unnecessarily defining an issue by race or the race itself is the issue I highly doubt its the race itself and in fact would actively fight against such a notion. I was simply pointing out how the Lie I allegedly told was actually just the logical extension of your very own assertion.
If you want to draw racism as a conclusion from what I've pointed out, fill your boots - but to say that's what I said is a lie.
I was simply defending some innocent person (who did not appear to be a Nazi) who you implied was a Nazi. It is not falsifiable hence why i said i think of it as insurance (seems to be working). My perspective believes that implying something is just the cowards way of saying something hence didn't lie you called him a Nazi (Or don't have balls to actually say it).
This shit again? Albert Einstein breathed air - so do you... You're a weird moron, not a genius. Stop being weird and dumb. The empassioned white-knighting of a total stranger that I didn't call a Nazi is so strange. I'm not touching this further - it's dumb, irrelevant, obsessive, and boring. I'm clearly not afraid to call people names.
Ok so its a catch 22 like a fee fee or a punishment for being punished.
You don't know what catch 22 or irony mean. No matter. Why would a lie about a lie be a logical fallacy, as you seem to imply? When it comes to pointing out your lies, it's just another to count.
so the system effects the race and to fix the system you wish to address the race is that is that a solution to a symptom or are you not simply separating the way u refer to the same thing would that not mean that it is one in the same would that not also mean it is a different same way of refer to the root cause of the issue.
That's... A sentence. In what way does the voice "fix" anyone's race? If I shoot someone, the victim of the shooting isn't the "root cause" - the shooter is. If a system is racist, the victim of the racism isn't the root cause, the racism is. This just looks like victim blaming - would you just get to the point on this one, please? It seems you're working overtime failing to set something up here.
I have never defended the status quo simply that there should not be a divide of race within the constitution.
No voice to parliament is the status quo - are you for the voice to parliament?
As i said many many replied ago its a correlation to argue anything else is to argue that its race (the system as u put it see paragraph above). So far I have logically proven why every aspect of my perspective you have called a lie is in fact based in reality, will it be perfect no! But then again nobodies perspective is. You might find this hard to comprehend but 2 perspectives can be based in the same reality same facts and fundamentally disagree.
I don't care about the correlation - I care about the fact that we have a group we've robbed and genocided, leaving them materially worse off by almost any metric you'd like to look at. The system has materially worse outcomes for these people - unless you'd like to blame their genetics. When you have a system that creates this situation, what do you do to fix it? Again, there's a reason I'm saying you're defending the status quo - you're pushing against change without offering an alternative, condemning us to the perpetuation of the current gap. The gap isn't something you can credibly disagree with.
so i just went back to make it abundantly clear why every so called "lie" i have allegedly told is in fact the logical extension of ur beliefs or in fact grounded in reality/common inference.
You did a piss-poor job of drawing those links - I stand by the fact that you lied - hell - you conceded you lied.
Ive never said u called me a Nazi i simply ensured that ur ego would prevent u from falling back on it and force u to rely on logic. Now we have established you calling me a lier was in fact one of 3 options u provided above please enlighten me to when when i have failed to engage with reality (make sure to include this as a list will make it easier for me to cut strait to the point and disprove them).
Christ - you're a fridge-temp IQ logic lord. The lies were the non-reality you based your argument on. I'll also point out that your argument so far seems to be "I don't like to acknowledge race when dealing with problems - don't call me a Nazi", which... Sure.
Now let me explain the fourth option you have failed to provide.
I provided a perspective that dividing race in the constitution goes against equality and can be argued is in fact racist itself. You where unwilling to accept this perspective and tried to steer the argument away from this to focus on other issues (the system).
That's not an explanation of the cause of the problem, it's a prescription about the solution. Yes, in talking about the problem, I chose to talk about the problem.
You then completely derailed the entire discussion preferring to take moral high ground and leave my whole original point alone because you cannot reconcile that perhaps dividing based upon race is in fact all the things you stand against while actively defending such a decision.
You've failed to present any solution to the massive division along racial lines that results from the system - I know you don't want to divide people based on race, but I've shown they are already - what's your solution? The rest of this is irrelevant bullshit, and a product of the lies I felt compelled to point out. Drop the irrelevant bullshit and present a solution a solution, or fuck right off - I've got no interest in the rest.
Oh look - I didn't call you a Nazi either.
Wonderful im glad your working towards not being so unesaasarily hostile. You did call me a lier tho maybe you can work on that next.
I called you a liar because you were lying. I not only didn't call them a Nazi, I actively said I don't think they're a Nazi. If you'd like to quote me calling them a Nazi, I'll happy walk that back with an apology.
If you get upset about your lies being called out, just don't tell them. It makes life far simpler.
I'm sorry you don't have the balls to call someone a Nazi and must rely on heavy implication.
Must be taught being that spineless.
If I wanted to call them a Nazi, I would have called them a Nazi (same way I'm calling you a moron, having demonstrated it), rather than actively saying I don't think they're a Nazi.
I thought I told you to get past this nonsense - it's deeply weird for you to jump in and get obsessive about me not calling someone a Nazi, and pointing out what a moron you are is getting tired.
In response to you saying indigenous represesentation in the constitution is racist
This is your problem. You have made this up in your head and the rest is subsequently unrelatable. Your questions are to that person in your head, certainly not me. What I have said has never altered or been unclear and this is what I find disheartening abiut your actions and behaviour.
I wish you well.
Once again missing the entire point division based upon race within the constitution cannot and will never be equality. I give zero flying fucks what the cause is I will fight inequality at any point I possibly can. I am not willing to compromise on equality off all peoples and if you would like to argue that its a necessary evil for the greater good i know of a very angry, very dead Austrian, who used those exact same arguments.
Sir i beleive what u just did was conflate correlation with causation. U outlined the issue perfwctly urself.
We're factually not equal, and defence of the status quo that led to that perpetuates that inequality, again begs the question of whether the inequality is genetic
Worse by which metrics is a very important point. Lower educarion for instance is correlated with being indiginouse but its also correlated with bwing poor which is also correlated with a million other things.
Fundamentaly by framing it as an issue of race we arent making anything better. And we for sure arnt making equality. What you are implying is by tackling the racial issue we are takling the causational root of all these issues.
It has bewn provwn time a rime again that u cant fix a problem rampent in any minority by simply throughing money or power at it one must methodicaly go through every single issue one by one and fix it.
Why dont we start with education then move to wealth inequality then we can reevaluate the measurable difference at that point. We have had variouse advisory bodies for many years at this point many of them have done nothing except act as a virtue signal for the holyer than thou type (you).
How aboit u propose a measurable solution instead of just calling everyone racist and getting ur nickers in a twist.
First up, sorry if I'm misunderstanding anything you're saying - I'm sure you realise your spelling is a dumpster-fire that makes it difficult to parse what you're saying at times.
Worse by which metrics is a very important point.
As I said - choose - it doesn't make much difference. They're worse off by just about any metric you care to examine - infant mortality, life expectancy, incarceration rates, wealth, homelessness, employment rates, educational attainment and outcomes to name a few...
Lower educarion for instance is correlated with being indiginouse but its also correlated with bwing poor which is also correlated with a million other things.
Correct - this is all intersectional, and don't get me wrong - I'm all for solving for wealth inequality, but why is the indigenous population's mean household income 62% of that of the non-indigenous population? Feel free to do my job for me and chase the "why"s down to genetics or systemic failures that need to be addressed with methods other than the ones in place today that clearly aren't working.
Fundamentaly by framing it as an issue of race we arent making anything better. And we for sure arnt making equality.
We have a group of people that are materially worse off by almost any metric (whose land we've stolen, and genocided them) - why is it unreasonable to isolate this problem and seek to address it, while isolating the poor and seeking to address those problems is fine? We have issues with race, gender, wealth, even fucking height - this is a particularly egregious one, and ignoring the fact that indigenous Australians are so much worse off defends the current, massively racist status-quo
What you are implying is by tackling the racial issue we are takling the causational root of all these issues.
No I'm absolutely not - what on earth gave you this impression? As far as I'm concerned, the root causes are colonialism, capitalism, and racism. All I'm doing is advocating for indigenous Australians to have a greater say in issues that affect them because they're more likely to understand those issues than some white private-schoolboy that's barely stepped outside Canberra or Sydney (while they've been in Australia, at least).
It has bewn provwn time a rime again that u cant fix a problem rampent in any minority by simply throughing money or power at it one must methodicaly go through every single issue one by one and fix it.
So "shut up and wait - we'll fix the issues we've created for you that we've failed to address over the course of two centuries without enfranchising you, investing in you, or acknowledging you as a distinct racial bloc with distinct issues"? Absolute nonsense.
Why dont we start with education then move to wealth inequality then we can reevaluate the measurable difference at that point. We have had variouse advisory bodies for many years at this point many of them have done nothing except act as a virtue signal for the holyer than thou type (you).
While I'm not opposed to helping them with education (without acknowledging them as a distinct group with distinct issues or throwing any money at the problem?) I'd rather partner with the indigenous community to do so. Deferring to the variety of current and historical advisory bodies allows the government to simply select a group that aligns with their agenda, and do whatever suits them. I'll simply point to the current, massive inequality as an indicator of how well that approach is working. If I'm being holier than thou for pointing out the current approach doesn't work and wanting to give the affected stakeholders a voice in the solutions to issues affecting them, fuck me, I guess.
How aboit u propose a measurable solution instead of just calling everyone racist and getting ur nickers in a twist.
Maybe start with the voice to parliament, eh? Was it not clear that was what I'm advocating for? You seem well meaning, but fuck me this is dumb.
In that case, what do you mean when you say:
If you think the gap is genetic, you're a racist motivated by racism, and the solutions are irrelevant. If the issue is systemic racism, what's anti-equality about targeting the affected group to bring their outcomes to a more equal level?
Beyond the points above, the specific options presented seem irrelevant. There's no pleasing the racists that see indigenous people as genetically inferior, it seems you'd label any targeted solution as racial anti-equality (racism by another name), and we're not taking a transition to a socialist utopia to a referendum any time soon.
The solution taken to the referendum was a product of the Uluru statement from the heart and associated activity, developed in partnership with the indigenous community, and supported by ~80% of the indigenous population. I figure they understand "how Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and their nations work, (and) the history of support to this point." better than anyone.
The solution presented was inadequate in my opinion, but a start. What solution would effectively deliver something resembling racial equality without being targeted "racial anti-equality"?
I don't think you quite understand what racism fundamentally is. And I still don't understand how anything you're saying has anything to do with what I've said. You're simply looking for a fight, but there is none there.
Any effective solution to racial equality does not allow people to have things that others don't based on race; whether intended for good or bad, no exception. We are all equal.
If you can't understand that, it's a worry. Constantly dropping the racism card is just mind-blowing levels of misunderstanding and showing an "us" and "them" mindset, even if your intentions are good. This is the kind of behaviour that damages progress and puts a bad taste in people's mouth; it is division where there should be unity. Societies cannot move forward and build on foundations that have a divide. That has and never will fundamentally work in the long-term; we know this.
Perhaps instead of being so upset, trying to start arguments, and dropping the racism card completely out of context, you start doing something proactive. Everyone else already is, especially Elders of both sides of the vote. Why did this not work? Do Australians care that much? How do we unify and move together as a people? This is the main objective and where your energy is best placed.
Except by just about any metric you choose to look at, indigenous Australians are materially worse off. We're factually not equal, and defence of the status quo that led to that perpetuates that inequality, again begs the question of whether the inequality is genetic (absurd, and racist, but if taken at face value could possibly be used to defend the status quo), or systemic - demonstrating that the system is currently racist and needs to be fixed.
We start with a clear idea of the problem (which it seems you've failed to do if you're not recognising the current inequality or it's cause), and work on solutions from there (the process that was followed with the statement from the heart) rather than tossing out any targeted solutions immediately and without assessment because you think they're
racistanti racial equality.Again, you're in full attack mode. It won't work on a person that recognises the wild division and refuses to participate in any form of division.
Seeming as you know nothing about meāwho I am, what I have done, what I do, and what I'm involved ināplease, I'd love to hear what makes you say something like this...
I'm clearly not participating and am refusing to get into the box you're trying to put me in. I hope you don't try to do this to other people as it is of no help. It's a good thing I'm aware and know what I advocate forāthe irony is phenomenal right nowābut if this were another person, you could be damaging the cause. It's feeding that division we don't need right now and perhaps it has swallowed you up too. Move on with that energy, get better at using it proactively and effectively. I don't know how many times I have to say that, but if anything gets through, it's clearly that.
Where exactly have I attacked you or told you what you believe?
Asking people to pick their box is a pretty quick and effective way of shaking out peoples positions, and either understand why my framing is wrong, or shake out peoples' positions quickly.
In response to you saying indigenous represesentation in the constitution is racist, I pointed out the existing racial inequality, and pointed to the 2 possible root causes. I assume you don't think the gap is genetic, so how do we address the gap, and racism baked into the system without mention of race (or whatever you belive crosses the line into racism) - this is straight to the point, and you ran from it.
So far, you've told me I don't understand your positions as you've dodged just about every question I've asked about them, and made assertions like I don't understand the definition of racism while failing to point out where my definition is wrong or provide an alternative. This is bad-faith behaviour, and the kind of nonsense I see from the likes of closet Nazis who will turn up, 'just ask questions', and sow seeds of doubt while trying to hide their beliefs because they know it'll scare away any sane person, but will drop straight to the JQ when you ask a couple of questions. I don't think you're a Nazi, but I do wonder why you're sticking around to use so many words to say so little.
I'm perfectly happy being hostile toward racists, and want division between myself and Nazis - they didn't reason themselves into the racism, so I'm not going to be able to reason them out of it, so chasing them off and ridiculing then seems reasonable enough. If you're carrying on like a bad-faith actor, dodging my questions about what you believe while making unsubstantiated claims about me, where does that leave us?
You called the man a racist and in this responce called him a nazi and a facist.
You fail to understand that the world canot be divided into boxes of black and white and in fact consists upon a spectrum of grey.
Again you are assuming the root cause is in some sence based upon race, ironicaly the stolen generation disproves that (its a tragedy and never should have happened but go measure those metrics ur so concerned with). He ran from no point u raised that without adressing his original points.
Again calling the man a nazi for asking questions and calling that bad faith is itself bad faith and sowing seeds of doubt in his charecter (not a good look when someone is trying ti engage with you and understand and question ur point of view).
You then wrap this all up by straight up assuming this dude is a full blown nazi and that its you duty to ridicule them. I think if you go and look at a certain angry mustache man from history you will find he got his original support from speaches where he quite literaly reason people into being nazis. Assuming its ur goal to reduce rasism (im assuming ur not just part of a false flag opperation) it is in ur interest to engage with them in good faith to try change their mind.
You finish with
Without realising you arw the one who has been making unsubstantiated claims aboit charecter and engaging in bad faith i suggeat you think criticaly about everything you think and say to try break down your arguments from all perspectives. To argue with yourself in the shower to take nothing at face value to use that noggin of urs to find the incentives for why people act the way they do. And maybe in this proccess you will leaen something about human nature and yourself. Heres hoping anyways
Only read this after you have sent ur responce:
You don't actually expect to be taken seriously, do you?
You've seen me ask this person questions to shake out their views, then when they're repeatedly dodged, noted that I frequently see this particular brand of evasiveness from the likes of Nazis while explicitly saying I don't think they're a Nazi.
You've jumped in like some kind of weird white knight, as though they can't speak for themselves, tell me I'm calling them a Nazi Then with that moronic, dishonest interpretation of what I've said on the table (a big ol' lie), you then saw fit to whine about nuance, then move to telling me I'm making unsubstantiated claims.
Why do you act the way you do? Having spent the time to use that noggin of yours to find my incentives as you preach, what do you hope to achieve with these lies?
I was simply pointing out ur hypocracy. I jumped in to ridicule ur utter lack of critical thinking perhaps to help you understand that by advocating for such a thing can just as easily be returned upon u.
Why do i act the way i do? Because im an engineer who when faced with an issue choose to look at numbers, statistics, and history. Hard facts. I then attempt to come as close to an objective framework as possible. From that point i simply apply the scientific method and gradient decent to find a solution that makes the most change in the most effective manner.
I am simply trying to emplore you to think about issues criticaly and not just spout the same retoric you have been told to think. I do not lie i draw a perspective from reality same as everyone.
What hypocrisy did you point out?
You led about me calling them a Nazi - I did the opposite, stating outright that I don't think they're a Nazi.
You lied about me assuming the root cause is race - I never said this, and heavily implied it's systemic (rather than genetic).
You lied about the unsubstantiated bad-faith claims - I tied this firmly to the evasiveness - particulary when asked if the root cause is genetic or systemic
You made incorrect assumptions about me losing it and calling you a Nazi.
You lied about not lying.
So much for those "Hard facts". For you to then tell me to think critically and that you draw your perspective from reality after grounding everything you have to say in utter bullshit is laughable.
I'll concede on the lying point if you bite the bullet and admit you're just a moron, but sadly that doesn't make you any less wrong, or worth listening to.
U said and i quote "This is bad-faith behaviour, and the kind of nonsense I see from the likes of closet Nazis" pretty clearly implying they are a nazi ill concede u didnt outright call em a nazi if u bute the bullet and admit u just used the same bad faith inplication that you accused them of. Sounds hyporcritcal to me.
So according to u its systematic which would imply the system is working against them. Would a system without racism not equally effect everyone whos part of it? If so then either ur wrong and the syatem isnt agains them or u are implying racism and therefore race is the root cause. Im not sure u truely beleive in anything except that which fits the natative u already have in ur head.
No i knew u would read it before responding and thus to prove me wrong would not lose it and call me a nazi (i like to think of it as reasonability insurance).
Lied about lieing now thats just a catch 22 at best and a logical paradox at the worst.
The only thing my entire argument is grounded in is u having no ability to understand any perspective other than ur own and that i dont beleive we should make any division based on race. You just called both tgese lies so please demonstrate otherwise.
If ur willing to concede thinking im a lier that would mean ur willing to concede on what u think is reality, thats prerry telling of u as a whole.
Ur welcome to call me a moron i emplore you to continue to use schoolgrpund insults and demonstrate ur superior intelect.
Any ambiguity about this "implication" gets cleared up pretty damn quickly when I explicitly said "I don't think you're a Nazi", no?
Call it what your like - the system has measurably different outcomes for people of different races - do you deny the disparity in outcome, or do you behove the disparity is genetic? Either position is ridiculous. Alternatively, feel free to bring an alternative forward. In any case, in a racist system, the victims of that racism aren't the problem - the racism is - whether it be a product of active malice, or just the well-intentioned product of a carelessly designed system. Where are you going with this?
Totally non-falsifiable, and irrelevant. You're awfully concerned about being called a Nazi by someone on the internet that isn't calling you a Nazi or even saying anything that implies anything of the sort. You presumably know you're not a Nazi - even if I were to call you one, it would change nothing, and I'd look dumb if I didn't substantiate it. It's weird - get past it.
I am from the moon. I never said I was from the moon - a lie about a lie. No paradox... Unless you'd like to join the dots there?
The system as it stands has massive disparities in outcomes along racial lines. To defend the status quo is to defend the materially worse outcomes for indigenous Australians. That's an existing, measurable divide along racial lines that I'd like to bring to a place of equality. The closest I came to a comment about not being able to understand a perspective other than my own was to mock the notion that your perspective was based on reality after pointing out that it's based on lies. There's yet another lie. Again, quote me if I'm wrong.
I've pointed to the clear lies (or the alternative idiocy explanation) - with this in mind, one of the following is true...
You don't believe the perspective you're putting forward
You believe the perspective, but need to lie to defend it (this is what I suspect), meaning it's indefensible at worst, or it's not worth hearing from you at best
You're too dumb to comprehend simple statements I've made (e.g. I don't think you're a Nazi), or engage with reality - worthless either way.
What idiot would take a position they've proven is based on lies seriously?
Thanks for the post-hoc permission, but there's no pride in clearing such a low bar.
I'm never going to know if I'm right that you're lying to defend your genuine perspective, but I'll ask anyway - if you need to lie to defend your positions, why do you cling to them... Why not just take an honest position? It makes life far simpler, and if you're refining those positions when you learn they're indefensible, they'll get better over time.
Absolutely not that's like me saying i punch anyone who is a Nazi then proceeding to punch you then say well i don't think you a Nazi. The implication still stands now its just ass-covering in the shallowest form.
Previously u said "You lied about me assuming the root cause is race - I never said this, and heavily implied itās systemic (rather than genetic)." i used logic to prove it being systemic is a race issue hence without race the issue would not exist therefore it is a problem of race/racism. You talk a lot about how "the system has measurably different outcomes for people of different races" without race you cannot make that measurement hence you are either unnecessarily defining an issue by race or the race itself is the issue I highly doubt its the race itself and in fact would actively fight against such a notion. I was simply pointing out how the Lie I allegedly told was actually just the logical extension of your very own assertion.
I was simply defending some innocent person (who did not appear to be a Nazi) who you implied was a Nazi. It is not falsifiable hence why i said i think of it as insurance (seems to be working). My perspective believes that implying something is just the cowards way of saying something hence didn't lie you called him a Nazi (Or don't have balls to actually say it).
Ok so its a catch 22 like a fee fee or a punishment for being punished.
so the system effects the race and to fix the system you wish to address the race is that is that a solution to a symptom or are you not simply separating the way u refer to the same thing would that not mean that it is one in the same would that not also mean it is a different same way of refer to the root cause of the issue. I only assumed you believed the root cause was race/racism because I though u where smart enough to address a root cause not a symptom.
I have never defended the status quo simply that there should not be a divide of race within the constitution. As i said many many replied ago its a correlation to argue anything else is to argue that its race (the system as u put it see paragraph above). So far I have logically proven why every aspect of my perspective you have called a lie is in fact based in reality, will it be perfect no! But then again nobodies perspective is. You might find this hard to comprehend but 2 perspectives can be based in the same reality same facts and fundamentally disagree.
so i just went back to make it abundantly clear why every so called "lie" i have allegedly told is in fact the logical extension of ur beliefs or in fact grounded in reality/common inference.
Ive never said u called me a Nazi i simply ensured that ur ego would prevent u from falling back on it and force u to rely on logic. Now we have established you calling me a lier was in fact one of 3 options u provided above please enlighten me to when when i have failed to engage with reality (make sure to include this as a list will make it easier for me to cut strait to the point and disprove them).
Now let me explain the fourth option you have failed to provide. I provided a perspective that dividing race in the constitution goes against equality and can be argued is in fact racist itself. You where unwilling to accept this perspective and tried to steer the argument away from this to focus on other issues (the system). I agree the system is broken and actively argued we should address it and not race. You still pushing that we should address race than blamed the system and called me a lier for assuming by the system u meant race/racism. You then completely derailed the entire discussion preferring to take moral high ground and leave my whole original point alone because you cannot reconcile that perhaps dividing based upon race is in fact all the things you stand against while actively defending such a decision.
Nazis drink water. I drink water. Did I just call myself a Nazi? Moron.
If you want to draw racism as a conclusion from what I've pointed out, fill your boots - but to say that's what I said is a lie.
I was simply defending some innocent person (who did not appear to be a Nazi) who you implied was a Nazi. It is not falsifiable hence why i said i think of it as insurance (seems to be working). My perspective believes that implying something is just the cowards way of saying something hence didn't lie you called him a Nazi (Or don't have balls to actually say it).
This shit again? Albert Einstein breathed air - so do you... You're a weird moron, not a genius. Stop being weird and dumb. The empassioned white-knighting of a total stranger that I didn't call a Nazi is so strange. I'm not touching this further - it's dumb, irrelevant, obsessive, and boring. I'm clearly not afraid to call people names.
You don't know what catch 22 or irony mean. No matter. Why would a lie about a lie be a logical fallacy, as you seem to imply? When it comes to pointing out your lies, it's just another to count.
That's... A sentence. In what way does the voice "fix" anyone's race? If I shoot someone, the victim of the shooting isn't the "root cause" - the shooter is. If a system is racist, the victim of the racism isn't the root cause, the racism is. This just looks like victim blaming - would you just get to the point on this one, please? It seems you're working overtime failing to set something up here.
No voice to parliament is the status quo - are you for the voice to parliament?
I don't care about the correlation - I care about the fact that we have a group we've robbed and genocided, leaving them materially worse off by almost any metric you'd like to look at. The system has materially worse outcomes for these people - unless you'd like to blame their genetics. When you have a system that creates this situation, what do you do to fix it? Again, there's a reason I'm saying you're defending the status quo - you're pushing against change without offering an alternative, condemning us to the perpetuation of the current gap. The gap isn't something you can credibly disagree with.
You did a piss-poor job of drawing those links - I stand by the fact that you lied - hell - you conceded you lied.
Christ - you're a fridge-temp IQ logic lord. The lies were the non-reality you based your argument on. I'll also point out that your argument so far seems to be "I don't like to acknowledge race when dealing with problems - don't call me a Nazi", which... Sure.
That's not an explanation of the cause of the problem, it's a prescription about the solution. Yes, in talking about the problem, I chose to talk about the problem.
You've failed to present any solution to the massive division along racial lines that results from the system - I know you don't want to divide people based on race, but I've shown they are already - what's your solution? The rest of this is irrelevant bullshit, and a product of the lies I felt compelled to point out. Drop the irrelevant bullshit and present a solution a solution, or fuck right off - I've got no interest in the rest.
Oh look - I didn't call you a Nazi either.
Wonderful im glad your working towards not being so unesaasarily hostile. You did call me a lier tho maybe you can work on that next.
I called you a liar because you were lying. I not only didn't call them a Nazi, I actively said I don't think they're a Nazi. If you'd like to quote me calling them a Nazi, I'll happy walk that back with an apology.
If you get upset about your lies being called out, just don't tell them. It makes life far simpler.
I'm sorry you don't have the balls to call someone a Nazi and must rely on heavy implication.
Must be taught being that spineless.
If I wanted to call them a Nazi, I would have called them a Nazi (same way I'm calling you a moron, having demonstrated it), rather than actively saying I don't think they're a Nazi.
I thought I told you to get past this nonsense - it's deeply weird for you to jump in and get obsessive about me not calling someone a Nazi, and pointing out what a moron you are is getting tired.
This is your problem. You have made this up in your head and the rest is subsequently unrelatable. Your questions are to that person in your head, certainly not me. What I have said has never altered or been unclear and this is what I find disheartening abiut your actions and behaviour.
I wish you well.
Once again missing the entire point division based upon race within the constitution cannot and will never be equality. I give zero flying fucks what the cause is I will fight inequality at any point I possibly can. I am not willing to compromise on equality off all peoples and if you would like to argue that its a necessary evil for the greater good i know of a very angry, very dead Austrian, who used those exact same arguments.
Sir i beleive what u just did was conflate correlation with causation. U outlined the issue perfwctly urself.
Worse by which metrics is a very important point. Lower educarion for instance is correlated with being indiginouse but its also correlated with bwing poor which is also correlated with a million other things.
Fundamentaly by framing it as an issue of race we arent making anything better. And we for sure arnt making equality. What you are implying is by tackling the racial issue we are takling the causational root of all these issues.
It has bewn provwn time a rime again that u cant fix a problem rampent in any minority by simply throughing money or power at it one must methodicaly go through every single issue one by one and fix it.
Why dont we start with education then move to wealth inequality then we can reevaluate the measurable difference at that point. We have had variouse advisory bodies for many years at this point many of them have done nothing except act as a virtue signal for the holyer than thou type (you).
How aboit u propose a measurable solution instead of just calling everyone racist and getting ur nickers in a twist.
First up, sorry if I'm misunderstanding anything you're saying - I'm sure you realise your spelling is a dumpster-fire that makes it difficult to parse what you're saying at times.
We have a group of people that are materially worse off by almost any metric (whose land we've stolen, and genocided them) - why is it unreasonable to isolate this problem and seek to address it, while isolating the poor and seeking to address those problems is fine? We have issues with race, gender, wealth, even fucking height - this is a particularly egregious one, and ignoring the fact that indigenous Australians are so much worse off defends the current, massively racist status-quo
No I'm absolutely not - what on earth gave you this impression? As far as I'm concerned, the root causes are colonialism, capitalism, and racism. All I'm doing is advocating for indigenous Australians to have a greater say in issues that affect them because they're more likely to understand those issues than some white private-schoolboy that's barely stepped outside Canberra or Sydney (while they've been in Australia, at least).
So "shut up and wait - we'll fix the issues we've created for you that we've failed to address over the course of two centuries without enfranchising you, investing in you, or acknowledging you as a distinct racial bloc with distinct issues"? Absolute nonsense.
While I'm not opposed to helping them with education (without acknowledging them as a distinct group with distinct issues or throwing any money at the problem?) I'd rather partner with the indigenous community to do so. Deferring to the variety of current and historical advisory bodies allows the government to simply select a group that aligns with their agenda, and do whatever suits them. I'll simply point to the current, massive inequality as an indicator of how well that approach is working. If I'm being holier than thou for pointing out the current approach doesn't work and wanting to give the affected stakeholders a voice in the solutions to issues affecting them, fuck me, I guess.
Maybe start with the voice to parliament, eh? Was it not clear that was what I'm advocating for? You seem well meaning, but fuck me this is dumb.