The Goons of the Right

Post Reply New Topic

You don't understand the concept of being balanced very well.
If valuing The Truth is being biased, then so be it.

It seems that Marxist ACTIVISTS tend to be.
I have a particular problem with virtue-signalling egomaniacs who are more interested in their celebrity than justice.
BTW, I despise Neo-Nazis also.
f**k all extremists, no matter the politics.

What an odd reply.

Hmmm...
Your arguments are getting weaker and weaker, IMO.
You know you don't HAVE TO argue with me just for the sake of it, right?

If the man has no aboriginal "blood"/heritage and is pretending to be something he is not, he is fake.
He has no aboriginal lineage, and this has been investigated.

If I identify with being a Native Amerrian, are you OK with that?

Falsely identifying as being aboriginal is a big problem over here.
Many aboriginals are angry about it because true aboriginals may miss out on benefits.
I posted an article recently about that.

Not only does having some aboriginal lineage gain social prestige here in Australia, but there are also many perks involved.
Here in Australia, there is "Black Privilege".
Odd that some ppl think Australia is more racist than Aameria.

Is it?
Could you elaborate?

You seem to have a bad case of "Confirmation Bias".

Cancel culture...
Collectivist zombyism...
Destruction of individualism...
Potential appropriation of hard-won personal wealth...

BTW, I have issues with the right of politics, also.
I hate big business. "Power corrupts...Absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely".
I have no time for religion, not that all conservatives are religious.
Senior health care was pathetic under successive conservative governments.
Morrison unnecessarily provoked China, the ninny.

One more time for the dummies:
I will never vote for ANY party ever again.
A pox on ALL their houses.

Has it been proven, or have your preferred sources decided it's been proven?

But more broadly, it's reasonable for indigenous people to have discussions over who is and who isn't a part of their community. It really doesn't look so good when people who aren't a part of that community insist on using line of attack because it's not their issue to weigh in on. For some reason it's always a certain bloc that makes a stink over the ancestry of people like Colin Kaepernick or of people who mention connections to indigenous ancestry without meeting a certain blood quantum.

It's not to suggest that there isn't anyone who doesn't either claim heritage they don't possess, or exaggerate aspects of their heritage - it's that the bitter hostility from people who don't actually have a dog in the fight serves to dissuade people from exploring their ancestry or seeking to further connections to it.

I've got loved ones who deal with the ramifications of the attitude you're peddling because apparently someone can't look Parsi but also be First Nations.

You've made that claim of 'black privilege' before, but it seems to be substantiated with trust me bro.

This is just another issue where you're peddling tabloid hysteria. Peak emotionalism.



That's the thing though, you consistently demonstrate that you don't value truth, you value having your biases reinforced.

There's a difference between being balanced and insisting unequal things are equal. Insisting unequal things are equal because acknowledging otherwise would hurt the team you cheer for has to be well within the definition of hyperpartisan and it isn't at all within the realm of balanced. It isn't rationalism, it's emotionalism.

The Shaman of Critical Thinking has spoken.

And hows that going? white people are ridding themselves from the planet by choosing not to have kids

"Read my lips".
Yes, it has been proven.
The registry of "Births, Deaths & Marriages" has been investigated.
Bruce Pascoe has no aboriginal blood at all.
He is of colonial stock.

In addition to this, aboriginal leaders, plural, deny that he has a connection to the communities that he says he is a member of.
Aren't you being a little politically incorrect in saying they are liars?
Or is it that you simply didn't know the complete story regarding Pascoe?



To be klear to the audience, I don't do that.

I think you are still confused.
Pasco is a pure-blood colonialist, proven.
Can't you see the irony?
What he should do, IMO, is simply have a genetics test like Warren did.
Oddly enough, he chooses not to do that.
I wonder why?



What part of "Pascoe's lineage has been checked and he is ONLY of colonial stock" don't you understand?



Trust the EVIDENCE, bro.
The aboriginal community has privileges that non-aboriginals don't.
And when I say "non-aboriginals" I mean any other ethnic community.

You probably think I have a problem with that.
Why else are you arguing this way?

To be klear, I don't.
I don't follow a narrative.
I am interested in The Truth.
I have no bias in the matter one way or the other.
Those politics don't concern me.
I will accept whatever happens with "The Voice" or "Aboriginal Treaties".
And once again, I won't be voting at the referendum at all.
You are boxing at shadows.



What exactly do you think I am peddling?
I have explained my position.
I have explained that Pascoe has been investigated and found to have a "colonialist" heritage.
There are registered birth certificates to prove it.

Why are you defending a colonialist that is pretending to be a native indigenous person?
I think you are more interested in misrepresenting me than accepting The Truth.
What an odd position to take.





Merely saying something doesn't make it so.
And THAT is The Truth.



Are you referring to me?
Exactly what team am I in?



The Oracle of Truth has spoken.

!	magz wrote:
	A post has been removed. I remind everyone that personal attacks are forbidden on WP. Attack the opinion, not the person.

Really? This seems to be one of the few issues related to indigenous concerns that you ever voice an opinion on it. Although to be fair, your overall views expressed regarding indigenous concerns seem to pretty closely mirror those expressed by Murdoch's tabloids.



What evidence? You never show evidence when repeating this claim.



Team News Corp, it would seem. Your biases generally mirror their biases.

The fixation on people pretending, combined with regularly trying to claim that 'black privilege' exists, along with the fixation on crime related to aboriginal communities really appears to be motivated by bias. Whether that's your biases, or the biases of the people you trust to inform you I can't be certain of.

Those three tropes (most of them are pretending, they all receive unfair special treatment and they're all criminals) are the general smears indigenous peoples regularly face. Maybe you're unaware of this or just insensitive to the concern, but your attempt to deflect my criticisms as being personally motivated might actually provide some insight into how little you understand my concern (as well as how little effort you've placed into trying to understand it).

Those media sources primary bias is their bottom line; appealing to racist sentiments drives engagement from their audience, whether it's viewership or clicks.

Of course, you're going to tell me I can't possibly observe your biases because I also have biases. I at least generally acknowledge my biases and attempt to control for them, rather than proclaiming myself the Oracle of Truth (even while being satirized for the behaviour).

So you are telling this skunk, who values autistic individuality that he has been brainwashed by right-wing propaganda?
"Interesting".

BTW, where have I ever indicated I was bitter towards the aboriginal community?
Could I not simply be giving an honest personal opinion based on facts?
"Curious."

Here are some opinions facts for you:


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... ebate.html

Are these aboriginals servicing a right-wing narrative or are they simply reacting to The Truth?

I have the impression that you still don't understand what is and isn't a "hyperpartisan".





<sigh>



My bias is towards The Truth.
No one has a monopoly on Truth.

Why do you consistently ignore other things I say?
I am anti-big business...
I can't stand the orange man...
I am pro-universal health care...
I am pro-Democrats and want them to win the next election.

What you are engaging in is "Confirmation Bias".
Plz stop.

I am tired of this skunk-bashing.
I may reply to the rest of you post at a later date.

Have a nice day.

Claiming to be unbiased and unaffected by one's choice of primary media outlets doesn't make it so, even if one repeats those claims and insists they're the oracle of truth.



Does one need to admit holding a negative view before one can identify that they appear to?



Why not both? Is it possible that a problem exists but is exaggerated in some media circles?
Is it possible that at least some people of mixed descent are contributing to the increase?










<sigh>

[/quote]

Are you suggesting affirmative action is the same as privilege? Go on and make that case, tell us how so.



Placing Australia's interests ahead of Trump doesn't discount my overall criticism.
I don't believe you're a MAGA type, although you're sometimes an apologist for them.

Compared to YOU, I am unbiased.
In all the time I have known you, I can't recall where you have gone off the progressive narrative.
Remind me.



You need evidence for that to be valid.
Plz provide some.

just what is so wrong with progressivism?

Progressivism = pay more tax + give up my guns + sell my petrol fueled vehicle + tighten my belt to to pay for ecofriendly policies + forced to take a vaccine + now I gotta live next door to BLM and refugees who are competing with me for jobs and who are dating my daughter who is brainwashed by CRT from school

that about sums up progressivism for a republican

^^thank you for making it more clear to me. that gives me a much better idea what all these righties are going on about.