kaosmark2
-
Posts
20,536 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
42
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by kaosmark2
-
-
4 minutes ago, SalviaPlath said:
I didn't. I was making fun of your "please be more polite about Israeli drone strikes" approach.
You're dismissing the impact of micro-aggressions and their dehumanising elements. That is how racism perpetuates and festers.
To give a comparative possible conversation:
Someone brings up a stabbing.
Another person starts talking about gang violence and knife crime.
Someone then responds, using the word "thug".
Someone explains why "thug" is racially coded, why people should be careful about using the term, and how it ties into institutional racism, hatred, and is problematic.
There's further discussion of anti-black racism, including discussion around different micro-aggressions.
Someone then quotes that final phrase, and says "tell that to the family of this stabbed white boy".
When asked to explain how they're associating, that person then says "I was making fun of your 'please be polite about stabbings' approach".
You are banned for 1 month. Racism and minimising racism is not welcome on eFestivals. Educate yourself so you can behave after this ban.
-
Just now, SalviaPlath said:
Who said they do? Don't think I did friend.
Then why on earth did you tie micro-aggressions into Israeli warcrimes?
-
1 minute ago, Neil said:
probably a bigger effect this year with lots of small businesses struggling. the extra wages can be a big addition to running costs. (and most places can probably cover the work with the other staff.)any responsible business will work out if they can cover the extra cost. and will bin the employee(soon-ist) if they can't.
Commercial landlords have been upping costs on small businesses in retail/hospitality by between 12-45% in Bristol across 24m in Bristol
Energy bills have gone up to businesses by ~ 60% on average across 24m.
Minimum wage is 10% in that time.
Yes, cutting staff is the only one businesses can get away with doing, but minimum wage going up is NOT the reason for price increases or businesses struggling.
-
23 minutes ago, SalviaPlath said:
I'd love to go to Gaza (well I wouldn't but hey) and talk to a Palestinian family, who have lost their home, members of their family and have been forced into a refugee camp which the Israeli's are bombing, about "micro-aggressions". 🙄
Do you understand that Jewish people do not have to answer for Israel's crimes?
-
29 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:
As the Tory plan is not working properly and will likely keep not working properly - no.
I'd say it's hard to be sure. When Labour have announced detail of any policy, they've either been chastised (rightly) for changing their commitment, or the Tories have attempted to steal their ideas and do a watered-down pointless variant that creates a load of exceptions for themselves and their mates. With this history, I don't think it's actually ridiculous for Labour to say "we'll keep the commitments then review the scheme and potentially make changes after".
However, the problem, is that it's Labour saying "trust us, you can trust us! Trust that you can trust us!" and... well... given how many commitments they've already rolled back on, and how they've continued to demonstrate a lack of regard to people's lives, and a cynical view of voters, I find it incredibly hard to trust them.
-
2 hours ago, steviewevie said:
But I think this would be too divisive within Tory party and government itself...Cameron for example would not support, not sure about likes of Gove, Mordaunt, Cleverly etc.
While Gove was Justice Secretary, despite direction from the rest of the cabinet, he largely ignored the Tory campaign to exit ECHR and produce a "British Bill of Rights", treating it as an unnecessary distraction from doing actual work.
I don't like praising Gove, but while he hates the EU, he's very aware that the ECHR is entirely separate from the EU, and he's the only Justice Secretary we've had who would have been able to get a replacement proposal through the House of Lords.
I don't believe there's any chance Alex Chalk is capable enough of doing the background leg work for the political machine to get it pushed through before an election - even if that election isn't until January.
-
6 minutes ago, steviewevie said:
Blimey..I was just thinking of the book..no idea that it was antisemitic.
The book isn't antisemitic (to my knowledge), but the concepts within it have been picked up by antisemitic conspiracy theorists and used to perpetuate a lot of obnoxious bullshit.
It's one of those things, that if it had been said to do with US drones, is completely normal and makes sense, but wrt to Israeli drones/AI/targeting, it becomes slightly sketchy. It really f**king sucks for everyone in society that anti-semitism over the last 2500 years has been so prominent and developed so many tropes.
It's kind of like the things with Nazi symbols, they adopt so many different ones - and adopt them from other cultures and parts of mythology and history - that if you see one symbol it doesn't necessarily actually mean that person is a Nazi, but if you see 5 it almost certainly does.
I'm not Jewish, but I do frequently have to deal with racism and micro-aggressions myself, and I've listened to Jewish people about what they know to be tropes and micro-aggressions. It's just another of those things, that on its own looks like nothing, but if it ties into a further pattern, it's problematic.
-
We've received moderation reports about some of the terms in this conversation. I'm going to particularly highlight "Brave New World". Given the long history of conspiracy theories equating Jews with globalism, secret world orders, and the type of dystopian control described in that novel, I agree that this is problematic.
However, it is also unfair to immediately ascribe ill intent here. Anti-Semitic tropes get passed over in a lot of society because they're tropes, and it is hard to know the user's intent. One trope can very easily be spoken out of ignorance, it's only upon seeing multiple that you can usually assume a direct attempt to foster and incite hatred.
This conversation is also directly referencing the supposed use of AI targeting systems, which is a very different dystopian issue, and criticism of that should not lead to accusations of anti-Semitism.
We have no wish to shut down conversation about the conflict in Gaza, nor to remove criticism or even speculation about the Israeli government. This is obviously an important and relevant topic. No-one in the world manages to tread this line perfectly, certainly not the users of a music forum, or its small moderation team. That said, because of the sensitive history, please try and apply a sense check when making comments. If we do spot a pattern of anti-Semitic tropes from any user, that will result in an immediate ban. Racism is not tolerated on eFestivals, and us giving the benefit of the doubt in this incidence should not be taken as an invitation to persist with potential tropes and incitement.
Also as an FYI. Going forward I'm going to use coloured bold text to indicate a "mod voice" on the rare occasion I'm speaking as a mod. If anyone has a request for a colour I'm happy to listen, particularly on accessibility grounds.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:
Modern Politics:
1) Make a sweeping statement as 'fact'
2) When proof shown that said statement is wrong change what you said
3) When it becomes obvious to you that this will not work move the goal posts
4) When this also does not work start to get angry
5) When that does not work and people who show the facts that proved your original statement to be wrong, insults are the next weapon.Imagine if the way politics happens so often was how people acted in the real or cyber world as well.
It really would be good if politicians could just admit they were wrong.This is the way capitalism, advertising, and corporate contracts with ordinary people often work.
-
2 hours ago, charlierc said:
I was excited to see Harvey Barnes so was frustrated by his injury problems, but he's already got himself some huge goodwill for that and I think he'll be eager to get it done.
Injuries is perhaps the other factor elsewhere, mind. Losing both Lascelles and Botman to ACL injuries in quick succession is a massive pain in the arse, plus Krafth, Manquillo and Trippier all being unavailable means the defence is now like the midfield in being cut to the bone. Though Lewis Hall's cameo should be a sign that Howe should give him more of a go.
I'd have thought Burn will play centrally and Ritchie/Murphy will rotate into fullback positions? It's tough though. Our defence hasn't been settled all season and it shows.
Wasn't Manquillo sold? To be honest I don't think he was ever any good, just not quite bad enough to ship out with a thin squad.
How long is Trippier out for?
-
1 hour ago, Nobody Interesting said:
New seat prediction poll out and based on the prediction for where I live I shall ignore it totally.
It predicts a Labour win where I am and Labour have been a poor third for a long time. It is Lib Dem or Tory who will win it.
Anyway, here is the poll which I personally think is very wrong.The modelling for MRP polls basically extrapolates national data with census data - ie translates how national votes go back into is it urban/rural, what groups do people identify as in an area (religion, ethnicity, etc), and tracks those.
They tend to be a little better on seat count, but sketchy for any specific seat.
Although I certainly hope they're right about Rees-Mogg's seat!
-
1 hour ago, charlierc said:
Maybe one day we'll win games 1-0. But given with 15 to go, we were 3-1 down to West Ham having lost 4 players to injury and looking like the season was over, I'll take a win abso-f**king-lutely.
Barnes coming back showing a bit of quality is important with Gordon out of the next game and us clearly needing another rotation option out wide. Hopefully after a stop start season he can play a few games and show some of what he did at Leicester.
-
1 hour ago, lazyred said:
I'm not a flag waver myself and its tricky. I don't want to wave my national flags but eqully I don't want them to be symbols of the far right. If the union and george flags can be reclaimed from the far right they can't be used to intimidate people as they heve been in the past.
The article says it is some labour activists who don't want to deliver the leaflets. That is a problem because it highlights the difference between the party and the voters they need to attract. This messaging is required to show Labour have changed after Corbyn.
Well when I stop getting the c-slur shouted at me virtually every month I'll wonder if some reclaiming of the flags can be done. As it is, I'll continue to cross to the other side of the road when I see a load of white men waving flags.
I want to emphasise, that the link between flag-waving and racism has grown massively in the last 10 years. Post-Brexit post-covid the racists have felt empowered, and have done flag-waving with it. In 2015 Miliband often stood in front of union jacks and I and others were happy campaigning with it. It's just the country's flag, it's going to be on some material saying you want to serve the country. That's fine.
I completely agree that Labour need to shown to voters they've changed since Corbyn. But I also think Labour has gone way too far the other way, and I don't trust the former human rights lawyer to stand up for human rights. It's not just the anti-migrant stuff and backing Coyle. It's that I also think Starmer has an incredibly low opinion of what traditional Labour voters in "the red wall" are like. I know people who live up there, they aren't anywhere near as racist as the portrayal of "Wokingham man". Starmer has sold the Labour party out to chase voters who aren't as racist as he believes they are.
-
2 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:
I know I keep harping on about him, but the fact that Neil Coyle is going to be on some of the leaflets says how happy Starmer is to exclude people and make people feel vindicated in hatred.
Oh look
-
31 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:
All flags do is make some feel excluded and others feel vindicated in their hatred of those who feel excluded.........................
and the fact we are having this discussion shows that just using a flag has distracted from what the leaflets actually say!
I know I keep harping on about him, but the fact that Neil Coyle is going to be on some of the leaflets says how happy Starmer is to exclude people and make people feel vindicated in hatred.
-
14 minutes ago, steviewevie said:
Some people like this patriotic flag waving shite, some people don't. That is the issue.
Except for a lot of us who don't, we actually feel it partially as a safety issue.
-
1 minute ago, Neil said:
its an attempt at making clear that they're working for the people of this county, no one wants their leaders to put others first.
But who are "the people of this country"?
Because personally, I get on edge around people/places waving Union Jacks and St George Flags around.
-
2
-
-
They should put the EU flag on the flyers instead.
-
Won't somebody think of the shareholders?
-
2 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:
So you can bomb and starve people to death based on who it is decided the attackers are then?
Do you have proof the government there are not connected?
If Russia now attacked the country does that make it right or wrong?Are they brown?
-
1 hour ago, Nobody Interesting said:
I wonder if all the MP's (and members of the public) who moaned loads about Just Stop Oil holding up traffic will be equally as vocal about the farmers doing the same?
I doubt it, likely will just stay very quiet and have no idea of their hypocrisy or selective anger.
Of course not, because they worry about the votes of farmers, and the media reaction, etc etc.
The thing is, while I don't think it'll hit too notably this election, the rejection of Millennials and Gen Z will come to bite both the main parties if it carries on. The endless dismissal of both our hopes and principles as "naive youthful idealism" can't sustain itself. Some Millennials are over 40!
-
5 hours ago, Ozanne said:
Labour won’t do that, they’re saying that they are gonna keep it. They might amend it further down the line but it is staying.
Labour have never said they're gonna keep something then change their minds!
-
1 hour ago, lazyred said:
But you used the article as justification for grouping LGB Alliance with white supremisists and the reported comments don't support that. Basically the reported comments (not even LGB Alliance as you implied) were feminists accusing trans activists of using the same tactics as Hitler in Mein Kampf. So they weren't postive about Mein Kampf they were negative.
I don't know about LGB alliance so I looked at their website. The list of trustees and patrons are establishment figures. They include longstanding gay rights activists and feminists and a Labour peer who used to be a trade union leader. Their main concern seems to be keeping a definiton of being gay and lesbian based on same sex attraction.
They were using the exact phrasing Hitler said about the Jews about trans people. And as a reminder, trans people were also targeted in the holocaust.
The thing is, hate groups don't publicly start their arguments by saying "lets murder our targets". They start with something softer, and usually something that actually is reasonable, and then claim their target are trying to take that away. And they are a hate group.
1 hour ago, lazyred said:Its quite sad really. Two groups of gay rights/feminist activists who probably agree on 90% of stuff shouting nazi and facist at each other.
This bit I agree with. The thing is though, LGB Alliance are defining themselves by the exclusion of trans people and the removal of intersectionality from queer rights and feminism. Their very existence is focused on fighting against trans people having rights in society. They work with literal fascists - literally with people who take away abortion rights, and equate queer people with paedos.
Maintaining intersectionality is vital when fighting for human rights and fighting against the patriarchal systems. Rejecting that leads us nowhere.
-
15 hours ago, lazyred said:
That link does not show what you said it does. The reported views are gender critcal, a viewpoint protected in law and consistent with the uk equality acts.
Mein Kampf is quoted in the context of someone accusing trans activists of telling a big lie
Saying that Mein Kampf is quoted so as to describe a target minority in the same way as Hitler described the Jews isn't a good thing?
UK Politics
in Discussions
Posted
I particularly support the one about shops who play Christmas music.