I don't think "we're not all like that" is a good answer to the videos of black people going round.
Everyone knows we're not ALL like that. The point is that a staggering proportion of us ARE like that and that no other race has a similar proportion of members behaving this way.
And as someone else said in relation to those videos, CRT and DEI ideologies encourage or endorse that behaviour by implying that it's somehow justified, or implying that they're victims of Systemic this and Structural that, so if they behave abominably we should just understand.
It was @JoelWBerry who said that earlier. He wrote "Congratulations Robin DiAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi! You did it!" on one of those videos.
So that's the point. The CRT ideology implicitly justifies that behaviour by describing criminal justice, police, etc, as Systemic Racism.
This is one core reason why DEI is an evil ideology, and why it's a terrible thing that it's being forced on everyone in schools, universities, workplaces, all institutions.
We're embedding this idea in society, that black people who behave this way are totally justified.
What's going on here is the usual abject failure of most people to realise that bad policies have bad consequences.
People support bad policies on grounds that "it will work very well if it's done properly" then decry the bad outcomes.
This is one bad outcome of DEI policies.
Displacing the idea of universal human nature with CRT and other forms of identity politics has been a great loss to humanity.
Now many think behaving with respect towards fellow human beings is just "performing whiteness" so if you're black you don't have to do any of that.
There have always been bad people in society, and there will always be such people for as long as there's life on earth.
The difference is when we devote all our law, policies, and institutions to supporting, endorsing and defending the bad people, and disempowering the good.
Equality before the law. It's the only way.
The "special rights for special races" system is not working.
Not saying DEI explains ALL the criminal behaviour you see in those videos, but it certainly endorses and justifies it.
The anti-racists who are to blame for this justify their position as follows:
This bad behaviour isn't because we're genetically inferior or have low IQs. Oh, no, siree. Therefore it MUST be that we're behaving badly due to Systemic Racism. Why, what other reason could there be?
CRT "antiracists" believe there are ONLY TWO CAUSES of everything: 1. Genetic inferiority 2. Systemic racism
You must choose one or the other, there are NO other causal factors.
Any other causes that anyone identifies are simply euphemisms for one of the two categories above.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Bruce Pardy explains the truth about human rights and equality law. Race equality rights promote every race except white.
Many courts now uphold CRT-derived definitions of racism as power-related. Law is woke-captured. Not surprising as law schools were long ago woke-captured.
Primark has created new “women only” spaces which would be accessible for both cis and trans women, ie any type of woman. They can't post a gender-checker at the door to check if all the women are actually women, as the EHRC advises against doing that.
People conveniently ignore the existence of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which has a statutory duty to give guidance on the meaning of "gender reassignment" discrimination: a protected ground under the Equality Act. EHRC has a website, where the guidance can be read.
Very typical voter behaviour. Support bad legislation then take potshots at retailers for enforcing the legislation.
What do they expect Primark to do? Disregard EHRC guidance and post a biologist at the door to check who is a real woman?
"While a strong system of constitutional protections is a vital prerequisite to upholding individual freedom, it is not a silver bullet. The key threat to free speech in the UK comes from voters’ unwillingness to defend the right at the ballot box"
"On free speech, most Brits are split into two groups. The first takes a Helen Lovejoy-esque approach to speech...The second group’s approach is akin to appeasement"
Appeasers are the most dangerous, and the hardest to oppose. By their nature, appeasers always seem reasonable.
"first, we have to engineer a colossal change in the culture around free speech, such that voters will no longer tolerate infringements on their freedom by MPs. If we can accomplish this, we must then repeal a gargantuan body of speech-suppressing legislation."
Everyone knows this, and what's more it has been clear since at least 1964 that this is exactly what would happen.
People simply consider the destruction of the rule of law and civilisation itself to be a price well worth paying to achieve Equality, Diversity and Inclusiveness.
Those who say the West is falling, it's the end of civilisation, etc, have failed to realise that those intent on destruction do not regard the fall of civilisation as a bad outcome.
The opposite. They would count that as a great success because at least we would all be "equal."
Well, the plebs would all be equal anyway. Our lords and masters would have to retain a few trappings of wealth to ease their path as they do their great and noble equalisation, diversifying and inclusiveness duties.
"It is very important to understand that the demand of trans activists to be defined as whatever they choose to be is a small tributary of a much larger cultural shift in our agreed understanding of what is real."
"Much more frequent – and legally problematic – cases involve hate speech and professional bullying. As the law is currently interpreted, you are a genuine victim of hate or abuse if you believe that you are"
- J. Daley
Yes. Law requires perception of the victim to be considered
"If you interpret what is said to you as hurtful, prejudiced or unfair, you are, by definition, correct because your emotional response to what happens to you is the indisputable measure of what actually did happen."
-Daley
Yes. Eg crying is evidence that you are indeed harmed.
"Misogynistic abuse should be banned online, the Government believes."
They've already banned "Why, Why, Why Delilah" for misogyny. Shows you what they intend to do with this law. Songs, books, etc, that make women feel unsafe, staring at women, etc
We have NINE protected groups in the UK. So after they've finished banning misogyny on the internet they'll move on to banning racism on the internet. Then banning transphobia on the internet, banning religious hate on the internet, etc.