Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

This is the Aboriginal perspective they DO NOT want you to s

Page 6 of 6 [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Previous topic | Next topic

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

13 Jan 2021, 6:55 pm

cyberdad wrote:
Pepe wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Isn't Rebel News (who made the video in the OP) the same company that employed Gavin McInnes, the founder of the Proud Boys?


Oops, Pepe you might need a different source mate, seriously embarrassing,


Why aren't I feeling embarrassed, my friend?

And I have provided several sources where aboriginals are giving there point of view.

BTW,
So, what is it that you have a problem with in the video?


Rebel news is linked to the proud boys. I mean for me that's a "no thanks".


Did you view the video?
Did you view the other two videos?
If not, your opinion has little value, unfortunately, my friend. ;)



magz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

13 Jan 2021, 7:30 pm

 ! magz wrote:
We talked about the OP video in the mod space and I believe we should share our conclusions.

1. Why is the OP video interpreted as racist?
mod1 wrote:
The lady talking about their communities issues -> not racist
The narrator using that ladies words to make a somewhat subtle argument in favor of assimilation policies -> very racist

I've seen others make this same argument bluntly before on WP.

Q: What are the problems in the community?
A: Criminal black culture.

Q: So how then do we solve the problem?
A: Breakup and assimilate the criminal black community so their culture is 'whiter'. (not usually directly answered but strongly implied).


2. Why can the video not be interpreted as racist?
mod2 wrote:
I just related to these Outback ladies and didn't think much about other figures there.


Now, I ask everyone who feels somehow involved: try to acknowledge both points of view. The video has at least two layers: the interviews and the comment. Our cultural backgrounds are likely to nail our attention to only one of them. Please, try to understand other people may notice mostly the other one.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

13 Jan 2021, 7:40 pm

Pepe wrote:
The woman interviewed was worried about youth crime *and* crime.
I can give you the exact time when she said that, if you like.

Presumably, she was referring to domestic violence also.
In the other video/s, domestic violence was *the* main concern.

But one of the main points of why the video was presented was to show the concerns of the outback community, in general, did not revolve around things such as changing one word of the national anthem or changing the date of Australia day.

I am not saying the person making the video doesn't have a political agenda.
I am saying I think he has a valid point that activists are directing attention away from the more pressing issues of the outback aboriginal communities.


I don't think anyone is disputing the underlying point that safety/heath/education is more of a priority than the national anthem.

However, the rebel media dude has a transparent agenda to make it look like the national anthem and changes in the constitution to recognise aboriginal self-determination is not important to all aboriginal people which is not true. All of these issues are important to first nation people.

The rebel media guy is presenting a picture that advocates aren't concerned about crime and safety issues such as domestic violence. However crime is a national issue, so is domestic violence, drug addiction and child abuse.



Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

13 Jan 2021, 10:03 pm

Off Topic
magz wrote:
We talked about the OP video in the mod space and I believe we should share our conclusions.


Thank you for letting us into the thinking.

What I find 'interesting' is that honest and open discussion can identify where the video is questionable, but some people don't want to do that.
Some people are focused on casting aspersions and creating 'straw men' rather than making enquiries to establish clarification.

It is astonishing that there are so many mind readers who have access to my motivations and intents that I am not aware of myself. [irony]
Unfortunately, it seems they aren't very good at what they do. [understatement]

This happens all the time, on websites.
Hardly an intellectual approach to discussions.
Emotion-driven discussions can be interesting but they can become vindictive.
The amount of hate I am seeing in certain threads, recently, is not adding to the health of the website and I am curious as to why it is allowed to continue.

While I truly understand the value of venting, there is a thread dedicated here, for this: viewtopic.php?t=28605#p536778

What would be 'nice' is to be able to have civil discussions rather than a hate-fest.
I like the idea of a haven style set up where personal attacks, innuendos, and sarcasm is prohibited.
I would even be willing to forego my much-loved irony/satire with the intension of sharing ideas for the purpose of mutual growth, rather than point-scoring and exercises in virtue signalling.

This thread is probably close to its used-by date, but if something similar is discussed, would it be possible to have it stay in the haven, rather than moved to PPR, etc?

This does go against an expressed purpose of the haven, I.E. politics-free, so perhaps another forum can be created, say "Political Discussion Haven", now that we have an *admin* onboard?
The assumption is that the new admin has the power to do so.

I doubt anything will come of my idea, but I think it is worthy of consideration.



Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

13 Jan 2021, 10:23 pm

cyberdad wrote:
However, the rebel media dude has a transparent agenda to make it look like the national anthem and changes in the constitution to recognise aboriginal self-determination is not important to all aboriginal people which is not true. All of these issues are important to first nation people.

The rebel media guy is presenting a picture that advocates aren't concerned about crime and safety issues such as domestic violence. However crime is a national issue, so is domestic violence, drug addiction and child abuse.



I would like to comment on what you have said, but I will leave it for a later time until the 'political dust' has settled and we understand what governing attitude will be adopted in this thread.



magz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

14 Jan 2021, 6:22 am

Pepe wrote:
Off Topic
magz wrote:
We talked about the OP video in the mod space and I believe we should share our conclusions.


Thank you for letting us into the thinking.

What I find 'interesting' is that honest and open discussion can identify where the video is questionable, but some people don't want to do that.
Some people are focused on casting aspersions and creating 'straw men' rather than making enquiries to establish clarification.

It is astonishing that there are so many mind readers who have access to my motivations and intents that I am not aware of myself. [irony]
Unfortunately, it seems they aren't very good at what they do. [understatement]

This happens all the time, on websites.
Hardly an intellectual approach to discussions.
Emotion-driven discussions can be interesting but they can become vindictive.
The amount of hate I am seeing in certain threads, recently, is not adding to the health of the website and I am curious as to why it is allowed to continue.

While I truly understand the value of venting, there is a thread dedicated here, for this: viewtopic.php?t=28605#p536778

What would be 'nice' is to be able to have civil discussions rather than a hate-fest.
I like the idea of a haven style set up where personal attacks, innuendos, and sarcasm is prohibited.
I would even be willing to forego my much-loved irony/satire with the intension of sharing ideas for the purpose of mutual growth, rather than point-scoring and exercises in virtue signalling.

This thread is probably close to its used-by date, but if something similar is discussed, would it be possible to have it stay in the haven, rather than moved to PPR, etc?

This does go against an expressed purpose of the haven, I.E. politics-free, so perhaps another forum can be created, say "Political Discussion Haven", now that we have an *admin* onboard?
The assumption is that the new admin has the power to do so.

I doubt anything will come of my idea, but I think it is worthy of consideration.

With all the respect: none of us, including myself and yourself, is free from getting emotional in discussions.
None of us is free from triggers and blind spots.
Yes, we explained some problems in the mod space - exactly because we geniunely wanted to understand each other's point of view, not devaluate it.

It's not casting aspersions, to say OP video was racist and to get emotional about it. It's getting triggered - maybe by the parts of it that you or me tend to overlook, because we've had different life experiences, faced different challenges, so we focus on different layers of the message.
That's why we needed more than one moderator, from different cultures, to understand what was going on in this thread.

I believe a thread like this and The Haven rules are largely mutually exclusive - The Haven is a place to retreat when you can't handle debate. This thread, from its very start, had debate as its main intention.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 73,341
Location: Over there

14 Jan 2021, 6:17 pm

Off Topic
Pepe wrote:
perhaps another forum can be created, say "Political Discussion Haven", now that we have an *admin* onboard?
The assumption is that the new admin has the power to do so.
I can do this, but I won't. It's above my pay grade to make material changes to the layout of WP. This is Alex's site with his choice of forums; it's his decision what to add or change, not mine.


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.