Akira

Sticking to the truth is not just about persuasion friend It's about providing a solid ground we can stand on as a civilisation and about not deluding and radicalising those already on our side into a mob of fury which only stokes the fire... I'm all for bold action but it would be better if it were fronted with a battering ram of truth rather than than a brigade of ideologues please do check out the podcast if you would like more details on the kind of approach I'm advocating for ps I swear to you I personally know people who were pretty progressive people who have been somewhat radicalized and voted for trump as a result of the tactics and rhetoric used by black lives matter

Nope... check out that podcast, he goes over some data regarding police shootings if I remember correctly... nobody would ever suspect that was the actual data if their source of information was Black Lives Matter... this is actually an important point... because many people see Black Lives Matter, then they look at the actual data and then they say to themselves: "ah see, I knew I was right all along" and they feel justified in dismissing the case outright which is unfortunate indeed! Those on your side are on your side. You need to win over some of those who are not on your side unless you want more Trumpism and civil unrest. Since the evidence is strong do not taint it at all! Never ever! Stick to that evidence with tenacity and don't creep one step beyond it

Be nice dude... I believe it exists... I think the world will be better when it no longer exists. I think an important part of getting there is by building a more robust case by being scrupulous with the truth so people cannot poke holes and ultimately feel justified in dismissing the case. I think Sam Harris does a pretty good job of the kind of thing I'm talking about in this podcast https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmgxtcbc4iU

@Forestluv I don't mean treat them exactly the same I mean hold them to a similar standard of fairness. I'm not going to be more harsh or more forgiving regarding someone's conduct based only on their group identity. If a white person's conduct is X and I chastise them for it I will also chastise a black person when their conduct is X. Treating people unequally based only on group identity leads to resentment, division and backlash, which ultimately retards progress. Of course there may be exceptions and individual circumstance must be taken into account. Regarding systemic racism, I'll start with this. Identify specific facets of it, describe each carefully with the overriding principle being honesty and truth and good will rather than political ideology. Once we've found a facet gather the evidence that supports it by trying to disprove it rather than beginning with our conclusion. Then present a robust case winning people over to the cause with clear evidence, love, even language and empathy. Not anger, divisive language and rhetoric. e.g. if black lives matter would reach out to white people by at least acknowledging their existence by using the term white folk as they might refer to themselves as black folk instead of using the term allies (which some might interpret as patronizing) they might win over some non allies instead of preaching to the choir. Lead by example. Put your case with ruthless honesty and then make moves to treat those with the same respect you wish to be treated with(whilst still pushing your case). Acknowledge them in the way you wish to be acknowledged and still ruthlessly push your case. If someone disagrees with you do you win them over by alienating them further or by GENUINILEY including them as you would include yourself? Of course there has been and will be the need for stronger tactics at certain times and in certain situations; I do not believe this is the case in the western world today. Such an approach would still probably work in the end after years of misunderstanding and hate and division and backlash. However an approach of: here is my case, I won't back down, I will tenaciously present the TRUTH. I acknowledge you I want the best for you, now acknowledge me and help me too - will be more effective as the primary approach

I try to look at what the person is saying regardless of which side they are coming from and try to see if it correlates with reality (as far as I can make reality out, trying to be aware of my own bias, and probably failing)... then I apply the same principles and give an honest response regardless of what group or political persuasion that human being may belong to. Although I don't always succeed in this I think we should hear each human being out applying the same principles, affording each the same dignity and the same respect regardless of what so called group they belong to... since chances are we are wrong ourselves about many things

@Forestluv "Yet for those toward the narcissistic end, empathy can be counter-productive. Narcissists don't come in good faith and are energy vampires." "Yet that doesn't mean I give a pass on poor behavior and let them manipulate me and others." should these principles be applied impartially in all directions or only towards those on the other side of the debate?

I'm merely proposing a path of mutual empathy... of course people can and will disagree, anyone can take any attitude they wish, whether that is ultimately productive or not is another issue... I think an attitude of mutual empathy would be most productive. one human reaching across with empathy trying to understand the position of another human in the hope that that other human might reach back across with empathy and try to understand theirs... What do you think? "One of my biggest breakdowns and breakthroughs came through a black woman I was dating. She straight-up revealed subconscious biases I had. She didn't sugar coat it and hold my hand. She ripped the band-aid off and told me sternly and directly. At this time, this is exactly what I needed. Throughout my life, people were trying to be polite as to not hurt my feelings on this issue. And I had never taken a hard look at myself. Sometimes, direct and stern is productive. It can be uncomfortable, yet can open up doors to growth. Other times, being gentle and creating a safe space is better. It's context dependent. " Being in a relationship is a very unique context that affords such straightforwardness... this is not the case when a blacklivesmatter advocate is addressing MAGA supporter or vice versa...

@Forestluv Beautiful reply! Thankyou so much for your well thought out response. This is the level of exposition required (at a minimum) to make any meaningful progress on such a nuanced and contentious subject. You have inspired me with your response as I myself am often too curt when responding to others who discuss such contentious terms with a sloppiness that is manifestly contributing to misunderstanding, division and polarisation. It's high time we (myself included) took responsibility when dealing with such subjects. I actually agree with everything you said here but because terms such as white privilege are by nature complicated, divisive, racially charged, they require delicacy, caution, elaboration, empathy (note to self) and some concession. If such terms are to be used they should be used with impartiality and humility (note to self). They should be used with the aim of reaching across and including with the ultimate end of going beyond and unifying. We must remember (as you said) that such terms denote groups, but those groups are made up of individual human beings with a great variety of lived experiences and we must be careful that we aren't blinded by abstraction to real issues suffered by real human beings. And we must ask ourselves: am I using such terms with a similar level of empathy and respect across all "groups" of human beings? example scenario (not responding to you. Just an example): here are some instances where white privilege affords you certain advantages (..........something akin to what you said.....) and why I as a non white person feel disadvantaged. However, I see your point that the term white privilege could be inflammatory and upon further introspection I notice that I would not use such a term so indelicately if I were referring to a different group of people; and this does seem to be a somewhat common trope that affords minorities a certain advantage in expressing themselves and I can see how you as a white person could feel unfairly treated in that regard. Do you see my point however? Let's try and help each other better understand each others experiences... p.s. if you make a reply I apologize if I do not get back to you any time soon as I am taking an internet sabbatical starting tomorrow and lasting for the month of February. All the best Phil

Amen to that That seems obvious to me but many seem to miss it completely or downplay it substantially...

yes and in doing so you miss the point... White men are so often lumped in together as privileged because a portion of them has and has historically had more power on average when compared to other groups... And therefore it's tolerated and usually defended by many progressives to stereotype lump all white men together in a way they would never consider, and would immediately consider bigotry, for any other group. Forgetting that each of these so called groups consists of millions of individual human beings with a huge variety and array of lived experiences.

Yes but "white men" aren't the president... one white man is the president and many many white men are homeless drug addicts with no prospects and no voice... progressives should treat such broad terms as: white men, black men, women, women of colour etc, with a cautious and even hand lest they run the risk of double standards that alienate and disenfranchise millions

The thing that never ceases to amaze me though @Fredodoow is how relative ones interpretation proves to be! And how influenced and biased it remains even when one claims to be so open minded and conscious and self aware... I'm not seeing too many concessions from the progressive people on this forum regarding their own bias and how that may or may not be blinding them or at least distorting other perspectives... Especially in the pollitical domain... It seems that often their view of themselves as open minded, highly conscious and self aware beings obscures greatly any closed minded low conscious pockets residing therein... But of course Akira would say that because he's a low conscious stage orange gaslighter who merely projects his shadow onto us more evolved beings. Let him know this, report him, disregard him and keep on keeping on with the good word... For your last thread Fredodoow I see one who is pointing towards something he is seeing but is open to how that seeing may be flawed or compromised and is at least making that known to those who do not see what he sees. Shouldn't those who are "more evolved" than you be doing more of this? Many do not seem to practice what they preach

I left this discussion on a good note Do what you will All the best everyone

@Preety_IndiaNo you're right it was intentional. That's just my devious trickster subpersonality sneaking out for taste! Get back trickster! Get back! Seriously don't listen to a word I say! I'm full of it! Lets all love each other more and try to adopt each others point of view (if only for a brief moment) rather than use it as a dart board! In all sincerity all the best! Really Love from Phil

@Keyhole Ah well... if there was abuse there I'm sorry for that. That's messed up I have to admit that there is a trolling element to my venom this morning... that negative confrontational energy packs quite a kick when you are sleep deprived hahaha! It's no good though! haha! Anyhow your composure has pacified and roused me all at once! All the best folks!

@Preety_India I didn't call you a brown mouth... I said the words came out of a brown mouth.... with the intention of highlighting how that effects people's response to what was said and how that response might be different had it have come out of a white mouth... that's all... nothing more nothing less... I apologise for the curtness of it. you have the privilege I mentioned... Just look at how people respond to black lives matter: people getting down on their bellies without first really understanding the issue... look at the Jussie Smollett incident etc You did indicate that white men are basically a joke for highlighting issues relating to them as a group. I'm sorry but here in the UK the vast majority of homeless are white men and because of identity politics imported from the US they are more and more overlooked because of their "privilege"

@Preety_India Who said you said all white people are racist? I'm saying you have "brown privilege" to tell me about how hard life is for you whilst downplaying any struggle I might have as a white man based wholly on what racial group each of us belongs to, rather than the substance of our lives. This seems to be a toxic trend that is leading to support for demagogues like Trump across the world. Please be aware of that. With all due respect. ps I didn't call you a brown mouth... I said the words came out of a brown mouth.... with the intentions of highlighting how that effects peoples response to what you said and how that would be different if it had come out of a white mouth... that's all... nothing more, nothing less... I apologise for the curtness of it.

@Preety_India You interpret it as degrading not me! I interpret it in the way I described... If I said something akin to what you said people's response would unlikely be " Jesus Christ. You’ve gone through a lot." it would be a response more closely resembling indifference, since it isn't such a big deal... But because you aren't white I'm supposed to act as though it is (to show people how good I am)... seems pretty facile to me

@Preety_IndiaI'm not "degrading" you... I think the word you are looking for is "disagreeing" I just think people need to hear things expressed frankly sometimes especially if people tend not to challenge them on a particular issue... but I could be wrong about that

@Preety_India I'm not racist you are

@Preety_IndiaWhy is that degrading? I see absolutely nothing wrong with brown mouths... you made that association not me. I find brown mouths just as beautiful and entitled to expression as all other coloured mouths... I was referring to colour only in relation to how people are treated unequally based upon it (either favourably or unfavourably)... In this case you have brown privilege to whinge about how hard it is for you whilst I do not have that same privilege (which is only fair because of my privilege) I think we should treat each other equally as much as possible and as far as is reasonable put race aside

@How to be wise which part of that sounds like "a lot"? Sounds like another case of overblown whinging taken seriously because it came out of a brown mouth I've had worse than that for being ginger in the UK haha

Yeah! White men should just shut up! We should sneer at and hold in contempt any white man who points out any indignity directed at him whilst simultaneously extoling all individuals in other groups who point out similar indignities directed at them. Because a white man could never understand being on the receiving end of unequal treatment or bigotry. He should simply accept his role as racist misogynistic exploiter of brown people even if he is a homeless heroin addict. He could never relate to my suffering as a non white

@Leo GuraAnyway, enough... No point arguing with people who already have the truth I know I don't have it And I know I am biased I believe I'm honestly open to the possibility of my being flat out wrong And I'm not joking Enjoy your echo chamber of truth Leo It seems to be serving your open political investigation well (and that is a joke) Love you and your work though for realz and hope you keep up the good search peace ps @Rilles good shout words of widom double peace

Did you explore whether what you thought could be flat out wrong? did you explore whether you could be deluding yourself? Or is that one of the 10 commandments you just enlightened me with? One of god's truths if you will?