AllHazzardi
Experimental Member
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Posts
- 338
- Media
- 76
- Likes
- 18
- Points
- 163
- Location
- Palm Springs, California
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Male
AllHazardi, the Scots are NOT a race of people. Are you kidding me?
Plus, I am not talking about the goddamnm SCOTS, I am talking about the Scots-Irish and if you don't know the flipping difference between them, then why the heck are you interjecting?
By your standards there is a race of Italian people and a race of Polish people, am I supposed to take you seriously?
As I said, even if you don't consider it a race or racism, the exact same behavior goes on regardless; exclusion, stereotyping, unfairly good or ill treatment, unfairly good or ill selection for positions. Just because we don't flag it as the same thing, doesn't mean it's not just as bad.
EG, Everybody hates the French. Everyone treats the French, on average, with a regard of a certain stereotype in which the French are happy to oblige and represent. Even the French(especially those descended of those tossed out), hate the French.
In the end, none of it matters fuck all because the French hate everyone.
We say racism and segregation are bad, but in truth, the world could work perfectly fine in a segregated way; So long as treatment is fair and equally available between them- All segregated areas are equally maintained, presentable, clean, and receive completely equal service at completely equal cost. In truth, the world could've worked out just fine without anyone trying to take in and accept other viewpoints; so long as the treatment and interaction is not unfair based on the segregation. So, in truth, the segregation itself is only bad in the sense that less people in less diversity groups are interacting overall; less sharing of ideas, so overall slower advancement. In the long term, removing segregation was the overall more beneficial solution; segregation was effectively outlawed in the 1960's, although technically Jefferson already declared that in the Declaration of Independence 184 years prior, "All men are created equal" - men being the plural of man. The same result came about with women's suffrage, "men" in previous statement reinterpreted to include women, and moving us a little bit closer to the same interpretation and spirit it was written in. A time prior, the same result came about with the slaves, and so on.
So in the long run, eventually the phrase "All men are created equal" will mutate into "All humans are created equal". Interaction with other sentient species would inevitably lead to "All beings are created equal". Then inevitably out of respect for non-sentient life(After all, it's possible it could eventually evolve into sentience, and be considered a being), it will become "creatures", and when we understand more about our reality, probably change to "things".
The bad just happens to force the system to change for the better or die off such that it may be cannibalized and a better system may thrive. Inevitably, no matter which way you choose to act, either aiding in oppression, or aiding those seeking freedom and equality, eventually after a certain point, the system is forced to change or die off by the hand of the echoes of its own decisions. The longer oppression is continued, the greater the pressure becomes, and the more violent and bloody the revolution which breaks it. Given the technological might encompassed by the current world powers and criminal organizations, the next time the pressures come to bear, we will have a simple choice on our collective plate. That choice is either to respect equality, and CHOOSE to make a truly EQUAL society work such that we reap the massive benefits it presents WITHOUT losing INDIVIDUALITY in the process, or it is to disrespect equality, and take our chances with whatever may come to pass.
Whether or not they are even genetically tied, a group of individuals which live in the same region, have similar beliefs, states of mind, culture, and reproduce amongst each other is a society. Given sufficient time and cause for physical evolution(mutation, nutrition-based, or otherwise), these individuals would eventually be either selected into their own race based on their environment(isolation whether intentional or unintentional), or selected into another society and intermingled.
So what I'm saying is that treatment should be equal regardless of race, likewise as should judgment. By considering every individual of unique geneology a "race", unfair treatment to ANY individual is covered by the stigma of "racism".
What this means is that tests should not use information or examples which are of culturally-specific knowledge. Officers should treat individuals as individuals without regard to color. If you must use diversity-identifying variables(eg skin color, descent, name, class, age, gender, nationality, affiliations, fame), those variables must be eliminated from consideration in any action taken by an equal and impartial society.
Don't hate the scots-irish gun nut who is causing problems, hate the individual who is choosing to cause problems. Don't hate the young black mugger in New York, hate the individual who is choosing to physically harm and steal from people within territory governed by the principles of equality. Don't hate the greedy white pig who's destroying lives to line his pockets with the labor of others, hate the individual who's choosing to deny the right to happiness, health, or freedom to others.
On that note, overall, rather than hate, we can say that they are individuals too, so instead of hate, how about we build an outlet for the so-called "problem". If there are people who want to harm, maim, and possibly kill other people, put them in an environment where there is voluntary participation. If there are people who want to use wit to slash at another person's emotional fortitude, put them in an environment where there is voluntary participation. The former would be Colliseum-style arena, the latter would be a rap/insult stage fight.
Even if there are people who want to seek out, stalk, and kill others, if the environment created for it is VOLUNTARY and contained, it is covered by the rights of freedom of the individuals in question. In a tribal culture, the same individuals who would be serial killers in civilzation are considered dangerous, but valuable soldiers. So long as they don't turn on their own, they're valuable.
So in the end, we get a choice, and that choice determines which way we go. It's like a Karma version of Judgment Day, just without the exterior influence(It's all us, baby).