Hate crime nonsense

Annasopra · 18-04-2021 10:27pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If someone shouts "you fat bastard" while stabbing someone, should it have less of a sentence than someone shouting "you black bastard"? Or is it the same?

If someone remains mute while stabbing someone, should they get a lesser sentence than someone who was being a big meany with his words as he was plunging a knife into someone.

Whatabout whataboutery

18-04-2021 10:30pm

Annasopra wrote: »

Whatabout whataboutery

Funnily enough yes. I am asking "what" you would do "about" the sentencing of crimes with regards to hate crimes.

You seem to believe that using racist language while stabbing someone, is deserving of a harsher penalty than plain old friendly stabbing.

I just wanted you to clarify your interpretation of the word "hate" in "hate crime"

Tell me how · 18-04-2021 11:05pm

Deleted User wrote: »

If someone shouts "you fat bastard" while stabbing someone, should it have less of a sentence than someone shouting "you black bastard"? Or is it the same?

If someone remains mute while stabbing someone, should they get a lesser sentence than someone who was being a big meany with his words as he was plunging a knife into someone.

Sentencing is intended to serve a number of functions which include;
The criminal is penalised for their action by losing their freedom.
It serves as a deterrent to others who may consider carrying out such a crime. There are more, but let's leave it at that for now.

In the instance you described, calling someone a Black B while stabbing them may indicate that the motivation for the stabbing was something to do with the person being black.
Considerations of race are a sensitive subject in society for s vast number of reasons and so the emergence of the news that someone was attacked for possibly this reason may provoke others of different race backgrounds to further inflame sentiment with either words, or actions of their own.
This is not going to be the case if someone was stabbed while the perpetrator screamed about their weight although it would still be seen as an irrational and baseless reason for which to possibly attack someone.

And so, a stabbing incident which may appear to have been motivated for particularly hateful reason, which may also provoke further public discomfort or unrest is deserving as being considered with this in mind.

davidx40 · 18-04-2021 11:19pm

This country is gone bananas , when Enda Kenny gave the travellers there license to do what ever the **** they want it was game over .....everyone has rights in this country bar the the average working Irish people earning enough to pay bills .....where is this political correctness going to end

18-04-2021 11:37pm

davidx40 wrote: »

This country is gone bananas , when Enda Kenny gave the travellers there license to do what ever the **** they want it was game over .....everyone has rights in this country bar the the average working Irish people earning enough to pay bills .....where is this political correctness going to end

Such absolute rubbish.

Tell me how · 18-04-2021 11:53pm

davidx40 wrote: »

This country is gone bananas , when Enda Kenny gave the travellers there license to do what ever the **** they want it was game over .....everyone has rights in this country bar the the average working Irish people earning enough to pay bills .....where is this political correctness going to end

Ffs.

Way to show horn a pet hate in to a different discussion with absolutely no relevance to it.

19-04-2021 3:09am

Tell me how wrote: »

Sentencing is intended to serve a number of functions which include;
The criminal is penalised for their action by losing their freedom.
It serves as a deterrent to others who may consider carrying out such a crime. There are more, but let's leave it at that for now.

In the instance you described, calling someone a Black B while stabbing them may indicate that the motivation for the stabbing was something to do with the person being black.
Considerations of race are a sensitive subject in society for s vast number of reasons and so the emergence of the news that someone was attacked for possibly this reason may provoke others of different race backgrounds to further inflame sentiment with either words, or actions of their own.
This is not going to be the case if someone was stabbed while the perpetrator screamed about their weight although it would still be seen as an irrational and baseless reason for which to possibly attack someone.

And so, a stabbing incident which may appear to have been motivated for particularly hateful reason, which may also provoke further public discomfort or unrest is deserving as being considered with this in mind.

So in other words, and just to make sure I am not misrepresenting you, you believe there should be harsher punishment if you use racist language while stabbing someone than if you stayed silent while stabbing them?

Should a crime be punished more if it was done by someone using racial slurs or by, I dunno, a jilted spouse?

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 9:18am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Funnily enough yes. I am asking "what" you would do "about" the sentencing of crimes with regards to hate crimes.

You seem to believe that using racist language while stabbing someone, is deserving of a harsher penalty than plain old friendly stabbing.

I just wanted you to clarify your interpretation of the word "hate" in "hate crime"

Yes I do

Because the person is clearly targeted because of the colour of their skin. I cant actually take your arguments in good faith or seriously though because you are being so insincere and facetious.

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 9:21am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So in other words, and just to make sure I am not misrepresenting you, you believe there should be harsher punishment if you use racist language while stabbing someone than if you stayed silent while stabbing them?

Should a crime be punished more if it was done by someone using racial slurs or by, I dunno, a jilted spouse?

For me I believe if someone is stabbed because of their skin colour yes then there should be harsher punishment.

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 9:23am

davidx40 wrote: »

This country is gone bananas , when Enda Kenny gave the travellers there license to do what ever the **** they want it was game over .....everyone has rights in this country bar the the average working Irish people earning enough to pay bills .....where is this political correctness going to end

Whats your point? Are arguing you should have rights to be bigoted and hateful?

o1s1n · 19-04-2021 9:24am

Annasopra wrote: »

For me I believe if someone is stabbed because of their skin colour yes then there should be harsher punishment.

It's only 9:24am but I think you've already topped out my list of 'most ridiculous things I'll read today'.

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 9:41am

o1s1n wrote: »

It's only 9:24am but I think you've already topped out my list of 'most ridiculous things I'll read today'.

Hate crimes tell people that they are not safe simply because of who they are. They tell people because of their identity that they are of lesser value to society than others. The psychological impacts and social isolation resulting from racist abuse and violence and the financial impacts for people forced to leave jobs and move homes are illustrated clearly in Irish Network Against Racisms 2020 Hate Crime report. I think its a good thing that we are bringing in Hate Crime Legislation. It seeks to address that imbalance where people are treated as lesser human beings because of their identity.

ExMachina1000 · 19-04-2021 9:51am

Annasopra wrote: »

Hate crimes tell people that they are not safe simply because of who they are. They tell people because of their identity that they are of lesser value to society than others. The psychological impacts and social isolation resulting from racist abuse and violence and the financial impacts for people forced to leave jobs and move homes are illustrated clearly in Irish Network Against Racisms 2020 Hate Crime report. I think its a good thing that we are bringing in Hate Crime Legislation. It seeks to address that imbalance where people are treated as lesser human beings because of their identity.

I understand and can admire how we must constantly update and change our laws as the demographics of the country change.
Hate crime laws when for example 1.6% of the population are black people. We should continue to change our laws, thoughts, traditions etc etc as the makeup of a population changes to accommodate those from around the world who decide to move here.
With demographics being destiny it makes sense to change Ireland early and consistently.

Plus nobody in this country has a right to attack others because of where they come from, their culture or the colour of their skin. Irish people must adapt to the changes

Hector Savage · 19-04-2021 10:41am

StemCell wrote: »

I was beaten by an African on a bus, 90 witnesses, CC tv etc...
Caught by the guards. He didn't even get charged.

I'd nearly vote for Sinn Fein if I taught their historic vigil ante justice would clean up the country.

Surely this is a hate crime ?
To the people that support this hate crime legislation , is the above a hate crime ?

if not - why not ?

My own view is it's not, it's an assault , thats the crime and should have been dealt with.
The problem is with the hate crime angle, it appears to be a one way street.

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 11:44am

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

I understand and can admire how we must constantly update and change our laws as the demographics of the country change.
Hate crime laws when for example 1.6% of the population are black people. We should continue to change our laws, thoughts, traditions etc etc as the makeup of a population changes to accommodate those from around the world who decide to move here.
With demographics being destiny it makes sense to change Ireland early and consistently.

Plus nobody in this country has a right to attack others because of where they come from, their culture or the colour of their skin. Irish people must adapt to the changes

This first bit that I put in bold misses the point a bit. We are not only talking about hate crimes against black people but against people based on their : Race, Colour, Nationality, Religion, Ethnic or national origin, Sexual orientation, Gender, Disability

The second bit is more to the point. The reality is that many people are attacked because of their identity and this is growing. I think thats an important point that Irish society must examine how it reacts to people who are seen as different or othered by the majority. Also there seems to be sometimes this perception that you cant be black and Irish.

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 11:46am

Hector Savage wrote: »

Surely this is a hate crime ?
To the people that support this hate crime legislation , is the above a hate crime ?

if not - why not ?

My own view is it's not, it's an assault , thats the crime and should have been dealt with.
The problem is with the hate crime angle, it appears to be a one way street.

I dont know.

If in this case the Black man targeted this person based on their Race, Colour, Nationality, Religion, Ethnic or national origin, Sexual orientation, Gender or Disability then it possibly is.

o1s1n · 19-04-2021 11:50am

Annasopra wrote: »

Hate crimes tell people that they are not safe simply because of who they are. They tell people because of their identity that they are of lesser value to society than others. The psychological impacts and social isolation resulting from racist abuse and violence and the financial impacts for people forced to leave jobs and move homes are illustrated clearly in Irish Network Against Racisms 2020 Hate Crime report. I think its a good thing that we are bringing in Hate Crime Legislation. It seeks to address that imbalance where people are treated as lesser human beings because of their identity.

I think you're overthinking this somewhat in relation to your earlier point, I don't disagree the impact of racist crimes. They're terrible. However, assaults such as stabbings shouldn't be 'graded' because of skin colour/motivation. It shouldn't enter into the equation.

If I was stabbed by someone in the city centre in a robbery, I'd horrified if I heard my assaulter receiver a lesser sentence than another stabber because the victim in that case happened to have a different skin colour.

The human impact of such an assault is awful, be it racially motivated or not. I remember being mugged as 14 year old teenager in Dublin city centre many moons ago and it had me absolutely terrified to go back in for a long time as I thought I'd be targeted again.

TomTomTim · 19-04-2021 12:19pm

Annasopra wrote: »

This first bit that I put in bold misses the point a bit. We are not only talking about hate crimes against black people but against people based on their : Race, Colour, Nationality, Religion, Ethnic or national origin, Sexual orientation, Gender, Disability

The second bit is more to the point. The reality is that many people are attacked because of their identity and this is growing. I think thats an important point that Irish society must examine how it reacts to people who are seen as different or othered by the majority. Also there seems to be sometimes this perception that you cant be black and Irish.

Points like this are somewhat dishonest, because there's two different approaches to "Irishness". Genetically, an African is not an Irish person. It's an absolute statement of fact. Culturally though, they can be Irish. It's a very new, and modern view, that says that cultures have nothing to do with ethnic groups. It's literally a product of the last 5 years or so. So in my view the former is a statement of fact without any malice, whereas if I said that they can't be culturally Irish, then you could argue that there's an element of hatred. To some people, there's no distinction, both statements are hateful, even though they are very different.

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 12:24pm

o1s1n wrote: »

I think you're overthinking this somewhat in relation to your earlier point, I don't disagree the impact of racist crimes. They're terrible. However, assaults such as stabbings shouldn't be 'graded' because of skin colour/motivation. It shouldn't enter into the equation.

If I was stabbed by someone in the city centre in a robbery, I'd horrified if I heard my assaulter receiver a lesser sentence than another stabber because the victim in that case happened to have a different skin colour.

The human impact of such an assault is awful, be it racially motivated or not. I remember being mugged as 14 year old teenager in Dublin city centre many moons ago and it had me absolutely terrified to go back in for a long time as I thought I'd be targeted again.

But if you were black and that attack was also targeting you because you were black then the impact on you would be even worse again. So I actually disagree with you when you say that you dont disagree on the impact of racist crimes because you actually do seem to think that the impact of a crime against you versus the impact of a racially motivated hate crime has the same impact.

19-04-2021 12:24pm

TomTomTim wrote: »

Points like this are somewhat dishonest, because there's two different approaches to "Irishness". Genetically, an African is not an Irish person. It's an absolute statement of fact. Culturally though, they can be Irish. It's a very new, and modern view, that says that cultures have nothing to do with ethnic groups. It's literally a product of the last 5 years or so. So in my view the former is a statement of fact without any malice, whereas if I said that they can't be culturally Irish, then you could argue that there's an element of hatred. To some people, there's no distinction, both statements are hateful, even though they are very different.

There are black Irish people born in Ireland to an Irish parent.
So nothing to do with your 'culturally ' irish.

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 12:27pm

TomTomTim wrote: »

Points like this are somewhat dishonest, because there's two different approaches to "Irishness". Genetically, an African is not an Irish person. It's an absolute statement of fact. Culturally though, they can be Irish. It's a very new, and modern view, that says that cultures have nothing to do with ethnic groups. It's literally a product of the last 5 years or so. So in my view the former is a statement of fact without any malice, whereas if I said that they can't be culturally Irish, then you could argue that there's an element of hatred. To some people, there's no distinction, both statements are hateful, even though they are very different.

Ah ok so Paul McGrath and Phil Lynott are African. :pac::pac::pac: And you're trying to say my point is dishonest :pac::pac::pac:

Eric Cartman · 19-04-2021 12:29pm

Annasopra wrote: »

Ah ok so Paul McGrath and Phil Lynott are African. :pac::pac::pac: And you're trying to say my point is dishonest :pac::pac::pac:

they're both half Irish. As user bubblypop has made the point loads of times, just being born in a country doesn't make you native to there. Two African parents having a kid here doesn't make that kid Irish, the same as two Irish parents having a kid in Egypt doesn't make the kid Egyptian.

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 12:31pm

bubblypop wrote: »

There are black Irish people born in Ireland to an Irish parent.
So nothing to do with your 'culturally ' irish.

Its an absolute nonsense point. There are people who are black and Irish. Genetics are not the sole determinant of a persons nationality.

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 12:34pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

they're both half Irish. As user bubblypop has made the point loads of times, just being born in a country doesn't make you native to there. Two African parents having a kid here doesn't make that kid Irish, the same as two Irish parents having a kid in Egypt doesn't make the kid Egyptian.

A persons nationality is not determined by their genetics. This is more about coded white supremacy to say to black people that they cant be Irish which is completely untrue.

19-04-2021 12:38pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

they're both half Irish. As user bubblypop has made the point loads of times, just being born in a country doesn't make you native to there. Two African parents having a kid here doesn't make that kid Irish, the same as two Irish parents having a kid in Egypt doesn't make the kid Egyptian.

But one parent being Irish makes that child automatically irish.
Any child born here to foreign parents, can become an Irish citizen, when they have children, those children are automatically Irish. So there are plenty of black irish. And that's not even counting those that are Irish in all but name.

Eric Cartman · 19-04-2021 12:41pm

Annasopra wrote: »

A persons nationality is not determined by their genetics. This is more about coded white supremacy to say to black people that they cant be Irish which is completely untrue.

nobody ever said black people can't be Irish. But if neither of your parents are Irish , you are not Irish, if one of your parents is Irish you're half Irish. Nothing to do with colour.

One eyed Jack · 19-04-2021 12:43pm

TomTomTim wrote: »

Points like this are somewhat dishonest, because there's two different approaches to "Irishness". Genetically, an African is not an Irish person. It's an absolute statement of fact. Culturally though, they can be Irish. It's a very new, and modern view, that says that cultures have nothing to do with ethnic groups. It's literally a product of the last 5 years or so. So in my view the former is a statement of fact without any malice, whereas if I said that they can't be culturally Irish, then you could argue that there's an element of hatred. To some people, there's no distinction, both statements are hateful, even though they are very different.

No it’s not. It’s wooly nonsense that attempts to associate biology with politics? A person’s genetics or ancestry has no bearing on their nationality, or vice versa.

How far back do you think you can go with your idea before you run into trouble explaining dark skinned Irish people?

First Irish populations had dark skin similar to Cheddar Man, DNA research suggests

Early Irish people were dark skinned with blue eyes – documentary

It’s a statement made in complete ignorance is what it is, nothing factual in it whatsoever, never mind malice or hatred. It doesn’t even get to that level before it can be dismissed as nonsense.

19-04-2021 1:16pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

nobody ever said black people can't be Irish. But if neither of your parents are Irish , you are not Irish, if one of your parents is Irish you're half Irish. Nothing to do with colour.

Nobody is half anything.
If parents are two different nationalities then their child will be both. (If their country has that rule obvs)
Nobody can be half a nationality

gw80 · 19-04-2021 1:18pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No it’s not. It’s wooly nonsense that attempts to associate biology with politics? A person’s genetics or ancestry has no bearing on their nationality, or vice versa.

How far back do you think you can go with your idea before you run into trouble explaining dark skinned Irish people?

First Irish populations had dark skin similar to Cheddar Man, DNA research suggests

Early Irish people were dark skinned with blue eyes – documentary

It’s a statement made in complete ignorance is what it is, nothing factual in it whatsoever, never mind malice or hatred. It doesn’t even get to that level before it can be dismissed as nonsense.

I believe cheddar man was debunked,

gw80 · 19-04-2021 1:26pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No it’s not. It’s wooly nonsense that attempts to associate biology with politics? A person’s genetics or ancestry has no bearing on their nationality, or vice versa.

How far back do you think you can go with your idea before you run into trouble explaining dark skinned Irish people?

First Irish populations had dark skin similar to Cheddar Man, DNA research suggests

Early Irish people were dark skinned with blue eyes – documentary

It’s a statement made in complete ignorance is what it is, nothing factual in it whatsoever, never mind malice or hatred. It doesn’t even get to that level before it can be dismissed as nonsense.

Sorry but you put up two links to say irish people were dark skinned and one is from the irish times and the other is from the journal, I'll pass thanks,
Considering in almost the first sentence it refers to cheddar man and irish people being "likely" to be the same,

Eric Cartman · 19-04-2021 1:46pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No it’s not. It’s wooly nonsense that attempts to associate biology with politics? A person’s genetics or ancestry has no bearing on their nationality, or vice versa.

How far back do you think you can go with your idea before you run into trouble explaining dark skinned Irish people?

First Irish populations had dark skin similar to Cheddar Man, DNA research suggests

Early Irish people were dark skinned with blue eyes – documentary

It’s a statement made in complete ignorance is what it is, nothing factual in it whatsoever, never mind malice or hatred. It doesn’t even get to that level before it can be dismissed as nonsense.

Absolute crap written by people with an agenda.

One eyed Jack · 19-04-2021 2:03pm

gw80 wrote: »

I believe cheddar man was debunked,

gw80 wrote: »

Sorry but you put up two links to say irish people were dark skinned and one is from the irish times and the other is from the journal, I'll pass thanks,
Considering in almost the first sentence it refers to cheddar man and irish people being "likely" to be the same,

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Absolute crap written by people with an agenda.

It’s obviously written by people with an agenda, otherwise what’s the point? That’s like me saying that Tom’s post was written with an agenda, or your posts were written with an agenda, hell my own posts are written with an agenda - to dismiss the nonsense notion that biology has anything to do with nationality.

Tom suggested it was scientific fact, it isn’t. I asked Tom how far back does he want to go before he runs into trouble trying to explain the idea of dark skinned Irish people, which is what scientists and archaeologists have suggested our genetic ancestors of that era would have looked like. I guess they weren’t big on taking selfies unfortunately :pac:

EDIT: There was good reason for my asking Tom how far back do they want to go before they run into trouble trying to explain dark skinned Irish people (or more specifically their idea that Irish people aren’t genetically African) -

Rethinking our human origins in Africa

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 2:23pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Absolute crap written by people with an agenda.

Theres also a bit of a white supremicast agenda going on in this thread basically saying that nationality is defined by skin colour and that you can only be Irish if you are white

JimmyVik · 19-04-2021 2:25pm

Annasopra wrote: »

Theres also a bit of a white supremicast agenda going on in this thread basically saying that nationality is defined by skin colour and that you can only be Irish if you are white

You have to have freckles and turn beetroot red if you go out in the sun without sunblock to be irish

Sleepy · 19-04-2021 2:27pm

Haven't read through the entire thread but isn't this ultimately likely to backfire? It seems to me at least that it's much harder to convict someone of a hate crime where you have to prove that the crime was motivated by a particular attribute of the victim than to simply convict someone of the crime they've committed?

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 2:33pm

Sleepy wrote: »

Haven't read through the entire thread but isn't this ultimately likely to backfire? It seems to me at least that it's much harder to convict someone of a hate crime where you have to prove that the crime was motivated by a particular attribute of the victim than to simply convict someone of the crime they've committed?

Not really.

If someone is stabbed while being racially abused then the new law will look at the stabbing and the racial abuse. If they cant prove the racial abuse then the attacker would still probably be likely be convicted with the stabbing assault. Minister McEntee has already addressed that.

The Raging Bile Duct · 19-04-2021 2:42pm

gw80 wrote: »

I believe cheddar man was debunked,

Still up in the air. Can't believe I'm linking a Daily Mail article but there's a lot of far right, white supremacist organisations with articles about Cheddar Man being debunked.

Geneticist Susan Walsh at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis, says we simply don't know his skin colour.

While her computer model shows being black is his 'probable profile', DNA testing is not advanced enough to say for certain.

The 10,000-year-old bones of the ancient Briton were unearthed in Somerset in 1903, and have puzzled scientists ever since.

A team of experts, including Professor Walsh, recently created a computer model that tries to predict a person's skin pigmentation, hair and eye colour, purely from their genes.

The test focused on 36 points of comparison in 16 genes, which are all linked to skin colour.

Dr Walsh and her colleagues analysed genetic data taken from more than 1,400 people.

They were mainly from Europe and the US, but also included people from Africa and Papua New Guinea.

Part of this data was used to train their model on how to recognise skin colour by looking at links with the 36 genetic markers.

The rest of the data was used to test how well the model could predict skin colour from DNA alone.

The model came up with 'black' or 'dark black' skin for Cheddar Man based on his DNA.

Speaking to New Scientist, she said: 'It’s not a simple statement of "this person was dark-skinned".

'It is his most probable profile, based on current research.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5453665/Was-Cheddar-man-white-all.html

Eric Cartman · 19-04-2021 3:00pm

Annasopra wrote: »

Theres also a bit of a white supremicast agenda going on in this thread basically saying that nationality is defined by skin colour and that you can only be Irish if you are white

Nobody saying that at all

Sue de Nimes · 19-04-2021 3:04pm

Annasopra wrote: »

Not really.

If someone is stabbed while being racially abused then the new law will look at the stabbing and the racial abuse. If they cant prove the racial abuse then the attacker would still probably be likely be convicted with the stabbing assault. Minister McEntee has already addressed that.

If someone is stabbed because they are black, is that worse than being stabbed because "someone didn't like the look of you"?

Bad news Mr Murphy, you aren't ever going to walk again, but at least you weren't attacked over the colour of your skin!

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 3:31pm

Sue de Nimes wrote: »

If someone is stabbed because they are black, is that worse than being stabbed because "someone didn't like the look of you"?

Yes. If someone is stabbed because they are black then they are targeted because of the colour of their skin.

Annasopra · 19-04-2021 3:34pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Nobody saying that at all

Skirting around the edges of directly saying for sure. Definitely indirectly saying it.

jrosen · 19-04-2021 3:37pm

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Youd be naive not to, it's rife in many multinationals, including mine.

Big in the MN my husband works for too.

19-04-2021 3:51pm

Annasopra wrote: »

Theres also a bit of a white supremicast agenda going on in this thread basically saying that nationality is defined by skin colour and that you can only be Irish if you are white

It actually says a lot when a poster seems to be actively annoyed at geneticist's findings.... Why does it upset them so much?

19-04-2021 4:42pm

Annasopra wrote: »

Yes. If someone is stabbed because they are black then they are targeted because of the colour of their skin.

If someone doesn't like the look of you, they are targeting your appearance.

What makes it worse?

gw80 · 19-04-2021 5:45pm

Annasopra wrote: »

Theres also a bit of a white supremicast agenda going on in this thread basically saying that nationality is defined by skin colour and that you can only be Irish if you are white

Yes, I definitely feel like I stuck a blow for the white man today, hahaha, would you give over,

RandomName2 · 19-04-2021 9:05pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No it’s not. It’s wooly nonsense that attempts to associate biology with politics? A person’s genetics or ancestry has no bearing on their nationality, or vice versa.

From the first line in Wikipedia

A nation is a community of people formed on the basis of a common language, history, ethnicity, or a common culture, and, in many cases, a shared territory. A nation is more overtly political than an ethnic group;[1][2]

This isn't exactly a controversial opinion.

Are you honestly saying that Poland tends to be ethnically and culturally Polish is merely coincidental? Repeat argument with roughly 180 countries.

One eyed Jack · 19-04-2021 9:43pm

RandomName2 wrote: »

From the first line in Wikipedia

A nation is a community of people formed on the basis of a common language, history, ethnicity, or a common culture, and, in many cases, a shared territory. A nation is more overtly political than an ethnic group;[1][2]

This isn't exactly a controversial opinion.

Are you honestly saying that Poland tends to be ethnically and culturally Polish is merely coincidental? Repeat argument with roughly 180 countries.

I thought I was explicitly clear in what I was saying? Nationality has nothing to do with biology, and vice versa.

That’s not a controversial opinion either.

Tom was trying to make out there are two different approaches to nationality, and suggesting that one of those approaches had something to do with biology, the other with politics. I simply refuted the idea of their first approach based upon the idea that it is apparently scientific fact.

Hitler had similar ideas.

Tell me how · 19-04-2021 11:00pm

Gucciblues wrote: »

The grey squirrel is considered an invasive species in many parts of the world. In the UK it was introduced over a century ago, but it's still classified as invasive. They are separate and distinguishable from the native red squirrel.

It isn't possible for grey squirrels to become red squirrels. The next best thing is to change the very definition of the red squirrel, reduce it, attack it, make it meaningless. Then any squirrel can be the native squirrel, because the definition has changed.

Not a great deal for the red squirrel though, is it?

There's a similar thought pattern behind many crazy things these days. Certain vested interests/lunatics can't cope with reality so they attempt to change reality itself. It's a very strange phenomenon, alternately hilarious and sad.

It'll age like milk.

Check out Darwins theory of evolution. It will blow your mind.

But I do get your point about certain lunatics not being able to cope with reality.

Tell me how · 19-04-2021 11:19pm

Gucciblues wrote: »

There's nothing mind-blowing about the acceptance of reality.

As for the lunatics you so readily identified with, from a Darwinist point of view, its quite the phenomena to see a miniscule group of easily differentiated organisms attempt to dictate to a vastly outnumbering population that could readily destroy them.

Like a million slaves and one guy with a whip. It doesn't take long to recognise the power differential and the results of that outcome.

Reality is that since day dot, humans have travelled and migrated and interacted with those within the species even though people on both sides not exactly identical in appearance in terms of skin colour. Or language, or culture, or history etc. While initially it was accompanied with fear and violence, as societies progressed they realised that they had more to gain from interacting peacefully than with violence.

And it will continue to happen irrespective of some peoples desire that it didn't.

Why don't you focus on enriching whatever culture it is you wish to instead of being fearful that not everyone is limiting their own experiences as you are.

RandomName2 · 19-04-2021 11:56pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I thought I was explicitly clear in what I was saying? Nationality has nothing to do with biology, and vice versa.

That’s not a controversial opinion either.

Tom was trying to make out there are two different approaches to nationality, and suggesting that one of those approaches had something to do with biology, the other with politics. I simply refuted the idea of their first approach based upon the idea that it is apparently scientific fact.

I hadn't read the post you replied to carefully.

Essentially there's two ways to define nationality, either through ethnicity or legal definition.

Anyone can be a Saudi national. Only ethnically Saudi people can be ethnically Saudi though.

Most countries are defined by common nationality. This is particularly important in modern democracies (as opposed to empires). Because democracies are, by definition, the dictatorship of the majority, having countries being relatively nationally homogeneous works well, in a way that we can clearly see wasn't present across the border. There's a reason why people say that Palestinians should have their own country instead of saying they should just be considered Israeli.

The way to safeguard large, distinct minorities in large countries was to either support bids by them to form their own countries (as has happened throughout Europe). In this sense nationalism and politics is inseparable. Of course integration and assimilation of minorities also plays a very important part.

The rejection of both these approaches to instead protect minorities by policing people's opinions seems well meaning but flawed. While such an approach may aid integration, it is more likely to stifle debate while simultaneously having no effect on the behavior of scummy people who already don't care about the law.

Hate crime nonsense

Comments