Musia
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2020
- Messages
- 1,073
@the_mother_thing Thank you so much for all the time you devoted to posting in this thread. I will continue to read everything, every word. Happy Independence Day to you!
Healthcare IS accessible ... that is the ‘human right’; not ’free healthcare for life with a guarantee of debt- & death-avoidance’.
+1 to everything that you said in the post.
I myself am not pro open borders or pro the redistribution of wealth. Resources are finite. If you give away things for free, the cost will come from somewhere else. There is nothing truly free.
I am against social revolution, so I'm adamantly against Bernie Sanders and what he stands for.
I sympathize with liberals against discrimination based on gender or race. I don't think this should be conflated with the more "out there" ideas of open borders.
The social change I would support is celebrating diversity, whether in the form of experiences of women or trans or people of color, not a social revolution. It can be a swift mild change, not sweeping broad change like a social revolution would be.
There is nothing inherent about social change that says it HAS to be slow. Some of you believe it has to be slow, but that's opinion because the rate of social change is not something that can be scientifically measured, objectively determined.
I asked for proof that this was so in the form of a clay tablet that she had received on which this was engraved. She referred me to this:
"Article 25.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."
My response is that what is written in article 25 is NOT what she said.The UN statement implies that people actually get health care. I knew she didn't have a clay tablet with her definition on it. She was interpreting. And her interpretation was mean spirited, certainly not what the United Nations intended! Always ask for proof!
Yep, I summarized something ... for brevity sake ... sue me!
Maybe now you can dig into your own stack of clay tablets and show us all where it says “everyone gets a bunch of free stuff for life” because ‘basic human rights’.
Sorry for the confusion, this earlier comment that you made denies systemic racism which is in itself a racist act. Note your use of underline and italics to really emphasize that point.
“There has never been a time in our country where there is more opportunity to succeed; the only thing holding people back is personal choice, and decades of academic & elite snobs telling others they cannot improve their circumstances, what they cannot do, that something is not possible, making excuses for them to not succeed ... blaming society, the ‘system‘, their skin color/ethnicity, their family, their gender, their address, etc. Is that how people should raise kids?”
@the_mother_thing Thank you so much for all the time you devoted to posting in this thread. I will continue to read everything, every word. Happy Independence Day to you!
Yes, I do. I have something to add right now. It is interesting that you found Musia so respectful and polite, so unlike many other posters. Perhaps it was because she told you how wonderful she found you and that she would read every word you wrote in the future. I have no problem with that. She can enjoy your postings. But you do seem to complain a lot about the other posters here. Maybe you should think about why you have trouble with so many of us.
No, that statement doesn’t ‘deny systemic racism’. You cannot (or will not) answer my very simple, specific question to you. Or you know I am right.
Whatever ... not my bandwagon begging for riders.
Thank you; and thank you for your civil, respectful participation as well. If only everyone could be so kind & play nice in the sandbox.
Actually it does. You said the only thing holding people back is personal choice. You underlined the word only (which is incredibly passive aggressive by the way).
Your statement denies systemic racism.
The USA is an anomaly when it comes to basic human rights.
Why can’t healthcare and quality education be accessible to everyone? The system is set up in a way that exacerbates generational poverty. There is a segment of the population who are treated like their lives, their futures, are worth less.
There can be positive change without full blown socialism.
So you’re saying systemic racism exists? That the system is set up in such a way that BIPOC are denied opportunities enjoyed by others? Now it’s not only personal choice, but a combination of social issues?This thread is not (solely) about POC or systemic racism; neither was your first post in this thread (reposted below) to which I responded; and neither was my post.
I think that’s where you’re mistaken and assuming every human rights issue is centered on race/ethnicity; it’s not. Human rights exist despite any discriminatory factor.
You said:
You referenced ‘generational poverty’; that along with healthcare and education access are not issues isolated to only POC; therefore, to attribute the lack of those things as ‘systemic racism’ is inaccurate.
PS - underlining something doesn’t make it passive aggressive; it’s for emphasis. If you’re not sure what someone means by something, asking them to explain it further is far more cordial & constructive (and less passive aggressive) than accusing them.
This is completely false. It’s negating systemic racism.
We were taught to never underline, use italics, capitalize, or bold a word unless we were including the time of a meeting or location. This is because it is often viewed as passive aggressive or combative. This was high school, university communications class, and my workplace.
So you’re saying systemic racism exists? That the system is set up in such a way that BIPOC are denied opportunities enjoyed by others? Now it’s not only personal choice, but a combination of social issues?
@the_mother_thing
I'm sure you won't really care what I think, since you value your own opinion so highly.
Underlining, italics, caps, bold words are used as emphasis, no doubt. They're not really an indication of passive-aggressiveness; however, REPETITION of these things does set a rather pedantic tone, as though not trusting the intended audience to be able to latch on to what you'd want to emphasize. The use of such visual tricks can be interpreted as condescending because overuse of these effects presumes that the audience needs you to emphasize the main points, instead of being able to pick up the main points on its own.
You remind me a lot of my father, actually. He's good at debate but insists I filter out his tone of voice whenever we have an argument. He says to mind his words no matter if he utters them calmly at 40 dB or at the top of his lungs at 90 dB. His words may be fine, but excuse me if I happen to be affected by the manner and tone the words are communicated. My father is completely deaf to how his tone of voice sounds to others and affects others. He actually can come across as quite pedantic, in a "I know better and I'm going to school you" kind of way.
I don't mean to disrespect you. Merely to point out that the way you are making your points is rubbing quite a lot of people in the wrong way. I myself sometimes agree with what you say, but don't care for the way that you say it. If you just care about airing your own opinions without the intent to "enlighten" anyone to your own viewpoint, carry on as you are. If you hope to change anyone's mind, you should take into consideration the impact of your tone when communicating.
Interesting; in what country was your education/workplace? Underlining (for emphasis) & italics (in lieu of normally-verbalized ‘exaggerated’ speech) are commonly used in casual online conversation in both my professional & personal circles to minimize misunderstandings or convey intent since it is often difficult to discern meaning in writing, especially across our multiple cultures. YMMV, but I (and most in my circles) don’t believe in judging or making petty assumptions based on informal online communications. Instead, I/we respect that people have different dialects or ways of communicating even if not considered “proper” nor part of my language or education.
@jaaron You are conflating “social change” and “basic human rights”, but those terms and their meaning are not synonymous.
@jaaron
Now back to the thread topic:
Social change cannot and should not just ‘happen’ overnight. It takes time because it must be thoughtfully and thoroughly researched, studied, vetted, and where possible/necessary, voted on to ensure the proposed change does not create an unintended consequence or negative impact on others, nor strips them of their rights. T
@jaaron
Now back to the thread topic:
Social change cannot and should not just ‘happen’ overnight. It takes time because it must be thoughtfully and thoroughly researched, studied, vetted, and where possible/necessary, voted on to ensure the proposed change does not create an unintended consequence or negative impact on others, nor strips them of their rights. That is what we HAVE learned from history; and failing to do so leads to rushed policy ineffectively enacted with negative consequences. Case in point: CHAZ/CHOP.
Those deaths are but one example and directly related to this “social change” idea of defunding the police. Those protestors wanted a cop-free zone, and they got one in six small blocks of Seattle ... and two families got two dead men with no justice/answers in less than 3 weeks, not to mention the residents & business owners who were also impacted and intimidated into submission against their will. It may not be possible to prevent every murder, but it is entirely possible and critical to ensure justice is served when it happens. That scores the ‘defund’ movement a major FAIL in my book because it IS also a basic human right to feel safe & secure in one’s community, but ‘defunding’ removes that right.
People who advocate for that kind of “social change” are but one reason people like me own firearms ... to preserve MY basic human right to safety & security when extreme radical ideologists want to strip it away - either intentionally or unintentionally.
Healthcare and education are accessible to everyone in the U.S. We have a right to equal opportunity, not a right to equal quality.
“Quality” is subjective, and varies from person/community to person/community. If one does not like the quality of the options available to them where they live (or in their budget), it is incumbent on them to either demand better (e.g., from their elected local leaders who manage budgets, educators or health care professionals), or effect change in their personal circumstances to facilitate other/better options.
Further, make no mistake, it’s not merely “the tone of my posts that rubs certain people the wrong way”; it’s mainly my politics, beliefs, refusal to blindly accept the majority mainstream group-think, and my willingness to challenge hypocrisy; and I know this is fact because it’s been plainly stated on PS. Despite the abundant virtue signaling, some simply refuse to accept others who actually do think differently or have a different perspective or experience. And they will continually pick apart anything when called out in a attempt to deflect & silence non-Walker conservative types like me.
You could ... or you could constructively contribute to the thread topic and respectfully explain why you think I am wrong instead of playing ‘social change’ buzzword bingo. Just a suggestion.
Healthcare IS accessible ... that is the ‘human right’; not ’free healthcare for life with a guarantee of debt- & death-avoidance’.
We’ve been throwing money and resources at these same issues for decades, yet we still have the same problems; just a new generation (or three) of ‘victims‘. There has never been a time in our country where there is more opportunity to succeed; the only thing holding people back is personal choice,
the only thing holding people back is personal choice, and decades of academic & elite snobs telling others they cannot improve their circumstances, what they cannot do, that something is not possible, making excuses for them to not succeed ... blaming society, the ‘system‘, their skin color/ethnicity, their family, their gender, their address, etc. Is that how people should raise kids? Telling them they can’t do/go/be something better/different if they want to, that they cannot choose differently? I’d call that bad parenting. So why treat fellow Americans that way?
Let me guess, there’s a study ... I’m sure that’s what they want to hear next, that they are also a statistic.
Further, make no mistake, it’s not merely “the tone of my posts that rubs certain people the wrong way”; it’s mainly my politics, beliefs, refusal to blindly accept the majority mainstream group-think, and my willingness to challenge hypocrisy; and I know this is fact because it’s been plainly stated on PS. Despite the abundant virtue signaling, some simply refuse to accept others who actually do think differently or have a different perspective or experience. And they will continually pick apart anything when called out in a attempt to deflect & silence non-Walker conservative types like me.
Thank you; and thank you for your civil, respectful participation as well. If only everyone could be so kind & play nice in the sandbox.
It’s rather disingenuous to say you “don’t mean to disrespect“ me after suggesting I “value my own opinion so highly“ as if I’m arrogant - I’m not. Assuming everyone must think/believe/perceive the same as me, have a certain education level and practice the same communication style is arrogant. Putting that aside, and giving you the benefit of the doubt, I touched on this in my reply to Chemgirl just now.
Further, make no mistake, it’s not merely “the tone of my posts that rubs certain people the wrong way”; it’s mainly my politics, beliefs, refusal to blindly accept the majority mainstream group-think, and my willingness to challenge hypocrisy; and I know this is fact because it’s been plainly stated on PS. Despite the abundant virtue signaling, some simply refuse to accept others who actually do think differently or have a different perspective or experience. And they will continually pick apart anything when called out in a attempt to deflect & silence non-Walker conservative types like me.
We just saw what a cop-free community looks like - it’s called CHAZ/CHOP, where 2 people were murdered with no justice for their families. We CAN and should deal with bad cops while ensuring the good cops are supported by communities and community leaders. Defunding the police is a dangerous, politically-motivated, ignorant ‘utopian’ idea that will result in increased crime returning especially to communities formerly plagued by it (the most vulnerable and in need of security), as well as likely injured or dead social workers and counselors who - while “educationally” capable of dealing with a mentally ill person in their office - are not physically capable of managing that situation on their own if/when it goes south. It’s quite a different environment to confront someone “on the street” vs. the couch in their clinic office. Let me guess, a cop escorts them to the scene? Not likely because there won’t be enough cops once the effects of “defunding” are realized through cuts to jobs & resources, and many are retiring in large numbers now.
This town of 170,000 replaced some cops with medics and mental health workers. It's worked for over 30 years | CNN
Around 30 years ago, a town in Oregon retrofitted an old van, staffed it with young medics and mental health counselors and sent them out to respond to the kinds of 911 calls that wouldn't necessarily require police intervention.www.cnn.com
There's one other town that was profiled a few weeks ago that did something similar. Note that the article states that other cities and towns with larger populations are asking the CAHOOTS team to advise them on adapting the system to serve the needs of larger populations.
These people want social changes to be less slow.
Hi. Can you cite the origin of this video clip?