Corbynomics: A Dystopia

pop_gun

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

All crimes of course. Where on earth did you get this idea that all crimes do not matter to me? I was merely talking about political correctness, identity politics, the left and it's hypocrisy and danger to society now it's become so arrogant to deny its own failings.

Regarding myself, nothing I said is clear to you or you wouldn't have had such a 'rebuttal' as suggesting that I don't care about the institutional child abuse inquiry, I never suggested anything of the sort. Yet you felt compelled to try to play the man and not the ball.

Instead of thinking you see clearly that I have a bias, which obviously I do not on this particular issue, do you not agree that political correctness played a role in the perpetrators of these crimes not being apprehended earlier? You'd be at odds with official reports if you disagreed. You'll also be at odds with what appears to be one of your own in the journalist from the Huffington Post. Who accurately describes how I feel about the left and also accurately predicts the rise of Trump and accurately demonstrates that turning a blind eye for fear of being branded a racist or xenophobe is absolutely correct in that it is wrong.

Everyone who lives in this country should expect all others to abide by the law, those who do not are punished, correctly so. But when the perception of prejudice gets in the way of justice there is a problem with society. The speech & thought police have gone too far, and it's been this way for far too long now.

The perception of prejudice is something minorities have to deal with all the time. Are you saying you would like to see an even playing field for all, regardless of race or nationality?

Political correctness just means I can't say crass and offensive things to you and neither can you to me. It's about taking responsibility for our actions. I treat you as I wish to be treated. What's wrong with that?

p.s. I played the ball. You're just hurt I went off and scored.

TrickyTree83

pop_gun wrote: »

The perception of prejudice is something minorities have to deal with all the time. Are you saying you would like to see an even playing field for all, regardless of race or nationality?

Political correctness just means I can't say crass and offensive things to you and neither can you to me. It's about taking responsibility for our actions. I treat you as I wish to be treated. What's wrong with that?

p.s. I played the ball. You're just hurt I went off and scored.

No, you didn't 'score' at all my friend. I absolutely believe that we should have an even playing field for all and that all crime matters. You brought up a completely irrelevant point to the one I was raising and claimed it was proof positive of me having a bias. Clearly that logic is flawed. If anything it was more of an own goal.

What I am talking about is the stubborn denial of the left and the political correctness movement in having gone so far as to make government officials and employees scared to tell the truth, scared to pursue the truth for fear of being branded a prejudiced individual, institution or group.

Also, there should be no quotas for police force recruitment (or any type of recruitment!), the fact we need black, asian, or any specific race quota in the police force to police minority communities is a problem in itself. These communities should not have a problem being policed by white people, if these white people are not prejudiced towards these people where is the problem? I would suggest the communities themselves. If these white people are indeed prejudiced then they should be prosecuted as such in accordance with law, probably resulting in being booted off the police force. But choosing one ethnicity over another because of positive discrimination is just as wrong as overt racism itself. Just as turning a blind eye to crimes committed by minorities just because they are minorities and you fear social justice reprisal is also wrong. Just as turning a blind eye to institutional child abuse is wrong. All of these things are wrong. But only some of them are a result of a political ideology.

Moby

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Also, there should be no quotas for police force recruitment (or any type of recruitment!), the fact we need black, asian, or any specific race quota in the police force to police minority communities is a problem in itself. These communities should not have a problem being policed by white people, if these white people are not prejudiced towards these people where is the problem? I would suggest the communities themselves. If these white people are indeed prejudiced then they should be prosecuted as such in accordance with law, probably resulting in being booted off the police force. But choosing one ethnicity over another because of positive discrimination is just as wrong as overt racism itself.

This is so naive....I know this because I work in this field. Young black men suffer daily discrimination by the police. It is a problem for them if you happen to care about it or not! They are targeted.....even Theresa May acknowledged this and changed the stop and search rules! White people are not prosecuted in such situations because the institutions are controlled and governed by other white people with similar attitudes. Positive discrimination was an attempt to redress the imbalance. It is imperfect as a solution but that it is because attitudes are deeply ingrained. When I started working in criminal justice there were very few black prison officers; in prisons I visited Prison Officers openly wore NF badges....what chance did a young black prisoner have. Thankfully huge progress has been made since these days.....but there is no room for complacency!

Just as turning a blind eye to crimes committed by minorities just because they are minorities and you fear social justice reprisal is also wrong. Just as turning a blind eye to institutional child abuse is wrong. All of these things are wrong. But only some of them are a result of a political ideology.

As Pop Gun says these men are behind bars for many years. Of course turning a blind eye against crime because it is committed by minorities is wrong ......what evidence do you have that this is an issue apart from Rotherham?

TrickyTree83

Moby wrote: »

This is so naive....I know this because I work in this field. Young black men suffer daily discrimination by the police. It is a problem for them if you happen to care about it or not! They are targeted.....even Theresa May acknowledged this and changed the stop and search rules! White people are not prosecuted in such situations because the institutions are controlled and governed by other white people with similar attitudes. Positive discrimination was an attempt to redress the imbalance. It is imperfect as a solution but that it is because attitudes are deeply ingrained. When I started working in criminal justice there were very few black prison officers; in prisons I visited Prison Officers openly wore NF badges....what chance did a young black prisoner have. Thankfully huge progress has been made since these days.....but there is no room for complacency!
As Pop Gun says these men are behind bars for many years. Of course turning a blind eye against crime because it is committed by minorities is wrong ......what evidence do you have that this is an issue apart from Rotherham?

It's not naive to want a truly level playing field, that takes no account of race, religion or any other method of dividing people in rule making or legislation. I believe if you're the best for the job, you get the job, regardless of your skin colour, religion, beliefs or gender. If that means that a particular demographic dominates a particular service or industry that's fine. What isn't fine is when demographic prejudice rears its head ("positive" and negative), and this is not helped by enhancing the division between the groups by favouring or pandering to a set of people over and above another. If there was prejudice against these communities, the solution should have been to tackle this prejudice using the law, not to introduce another type of prejudice to counteract it.

It's odd that you should bring up the Prison Service since I too have a resource to draw upon regarding this institution. My father was a Prison Officer and a POA representative. If the officers you met were wearing NF badges, then they should have been asked to remove them. If they had a prejudice which impacted on the job they were asked to do, then they should have been disciplined for that. However, holding these views and it not affecting the job is not a cause for the thought police to mobilise. They could be neo-nazi's who want to gas jews, the disabled and !!!!!exuals, but it doesn't matter as long as those views do not creep into their working life in public service. It's an extreme example to make an important point. That what you think should not preclude you from doing a particular job as long as you discharge your duties in accordance with the law.

Stop and search which targeted a particular demographic was indeed the wrong approach.

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

As Pop Gun says these men are behind bars for many years. Of course turning a blind eye against crime because it is committed by minorities is wrong ......what evidence do you have that this is an issue apart from Rotherham?

are you being serious : can anyone be so ignorant?

TrickyTree83

CLAPTON wrote: »

are you being serious : can anyone be so ignorant?

Can you fix that?

Moby

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

It's not naive to want a truly level playing field, that takes no account of race, religion or any other method of dividing people in rule making or legislation. I believe if you're the best for the job, you get the job, regardless of your skin colour, religion, beliefs or gender.

Stating the bleedin' obvious.....not happening though is it!

If that means that a particular demographic dominates a particular service or industry that's fine. What isn't fine is when demographic prejudice rears its head ("positive" and negative), and this is not helped by enhancing the division between the groups by favouring or pandering to a set of people over and above another. If there was prejudice against these communities, the solution should have been to tackle this prejudice using the law, not to introduce another type of prejudice to counteract it.

Ignoring my reply to this doen't change the fact that you are ignoring inbuilt institutional racism......you know the thing that got talked about as being in the police during the Stephen Lawrence inquiry! Did you even hear about this inquiry!

It's odd that you should bring up the Prison Service since I too have a resource to draw upon regarding this institution. My father was a Prison Officer and a POA representative. If the officers you met were wearing NF badges, then they should have been asked to remove them. If they had a prejudice which impacted on the job they were asked to do, then they should have been disciplined for that. However, holding these views and it not affecting the job is not a cause for the thought police to mobilise

So Naive! You have to change the culture....that is the only way change happens. Prejudice was ingrained...and it was at the top....that's why no-one asked them to remove their badges!

They could be neo-nazi's who want to gas jews, the disabled and !!!!!exuals, but it doesn't matter as long as those views do not creep into their working life in public service. It's an extreme example to make an important point. That what you think should not preclude you from doing a particular job as long as you discharge your duties in accordance with the law.

There are areas of work especially in public service where people have to make decisions based on their judgement. The law doesn't apply.....like for instance working with people from minorities requires a cultural sensitivity and non judgemental approach. You have to assess people in their situation, in their world, especially in my job....I have to get people to trust me....to believe that i will not judge them.....otherwise I will be unable to effect change in behaviour. For instance.....telling someone that they can't use drugs because it's illegal is legally correct but it won't help me because this will end my engagement with them and my ability to gain trust and effect change!

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

are you being serious : can anyone be so ignorant?

Very serious....there is a difference between reality and what passes for your warped view of reality;)

Moby

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Can you fix that?

Don't you lot call it eugenics;)

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

Very serious....there is a difference between reality and what passes for your warped view of reality;)

are you denying Rotherham, Rochdale, Oxford, Alyesbury, Bristol, Banbury etc?

I'm not trying to make a political point here, nor am I ignoring that racial discrimination exists but we need to face the truth so we can have a better tomorrow.