Mr Dutton has made me sad

[stuie 7,374]

1 minute ago, dieter said:

A, I've never claimed the Ottomans were a race.

Neither did I. But surely you have learned by now that "Biffen" will just attribute whatever he feels like to others and pass it off as fact, goes with his whole ethos on history.

 

[dieter 3,325]

4 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Your lack of genuine understanding is exceeded only by your noble ability to obfuscate it.

You have a tendency to ignore the facts in favour of turning everything into the Jerry Springer show.

The British Empire subjugated the Middle East  and controlled it's waters,and its spices and drugs.

America now controls these waters and the flow of its oil, which is the primary reason The Ottoman Empire is imploding as it question its Bedouin belief systems by comparison.

You are also implying that it ought to be 'our' oil because, after all, the natives are just Bedouins. I would have thought the Middle east is imploding precisely because it has been ruled by vile Colonialists like France, Britain and now the USA and its proxy ( maybe that ought to be the other way around ) Israel.

[Biffen 12,323]

Just now, dieter said:

A, I've never claimed the Ottomans were a race.

Secondly, just as Istanbul was once Greek, Australia once belonged to the people who lived here. Kallinigrad was once Konigsberg, Danzig was Gdansk, Texas was Mexican, Los Angeles was a Mexican city. . 

Also, I fon't understand why you want to defend Western Colonialism as a superior form of Colonislism. Surely they were all alike, rotted to the core.

I wouldn't question the heart of an Empirical system or see history as anything but the emergence of new ideas and knowledge eventually dominating those cultures less advanced in objective Science.

The big winner of Ww1 was America, the real winner of the Cold War was in fact China .

 I argue not that it is necessarily preferable to be born in a British Colony, it is an extreme bit of luck for those born in it.

I think the freedoms of Western civilisation are its benefits but I can enjoy the conversation without discussing race as we are actually talking about the melding and interaction of culture when we discuss history.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

31 minutes ago, dieter said:

A, I've never claimed the Ottomans were a race.

Secondly, just as Istanbul was once Greek, Australia once belonged to the people who lived here. Kallinigrad was once Konigsberg, Danzig was Gdansk, Texas was Mexican, Los Angeles was a Mexican city. . 

Also, I don't understand why you want to defend Western Colonialism as a superior form of Colonialism. Surely they were all alike, rotten to the core.

More like imperialism.  Perhaps even closer to home, it is worth considering the opium wars and boxer rebellion.  People who, rightly or wrongly, feel disenfranchised over centuries, will at some point rise up against what they perceive to be injustice.  That said, misguided retribution is no answer.

[dieter 3,325]

11 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

More like imperialism.  Perhaps even closer to home, it is worth considering the opium wars and boxer rebellion.  People who, rightly or wrongly, feel disenfranchised over centuries, will at some point rise up against what they perceive to be injustice.  That said, misguided retribution is no answer.

I agree entirely.

[dieter 3,325]

39 minutes ago, Biffen said:

 

 I argue not that it is necessarily preferable to be born in a British Colony, it is an extreme bit of luck for those born in it.

 

Just ask the Indians, the Chinese, the Aboriginals, the American aboriginals, the Maoris, the people born sine 1919 in Palestine, so-called Jordan, so-called Iraq, so-called Syria, so-called Lebanon how lucky they are/were.

[Biffen 12,323]

47 minutes ago, dieter said:

You are also implying that it ought to be 'our' oil because, after all, the natives are just Bedouins. I would have thought the Middle east is imploding precisely because it has been ruled by vile Colonialists like France, Britain and now the USA and its proxy ( maybe that ought to be the other way around ) Israel.

Wrong .

Oil was controlled globally despite Americas attempts to stop the Rockefeller monopoly.

The British built the Suez and offered for sale a large portion of the Suez to the Egyptian government  which they rejected.

The British offered Palestine the right to control its borders in 1948.

They rejected this offer and the right to issue passports and a shared space with Israel.

Other Middle Eastern states have instability due to religious schisms.

The British bought control of the Suez and Panama.

A little Greek man named Onassis helped the USA out with his oil tankers and that is the basics of how the West controls international oil supply and numerous governments.

The Middle East and the gulf had no use for oil , nor a market, nor any refining knowledge.Standard oil and the British certainly did and whilst the deal looks unfair one has to view it in the historical context in which it was drawn up.

[Bitter but optimistic 21,238]

Just been reading the above discussion. Most interesting and informative and it leads me to further investigate some of the matters raised.

Interesting to note that Biffen, who seems to hold unpopular and probably politically incorrect views on certain subjects is denigrated as a racist.

Thank god (or someone) for freedom of speech.

[stuie 7,374]

13 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

Just been reading the above discussion. Most interesting and informative and it leads me to further investigate some of the matters raised.

Interesting to note that Biffen, who seems to hold unpopular and probably politically incorrect views on certain subjects is denigrated as a racist.

Thank god (or someone) for freedom of speech.

"Denigrated"? You mean a bit like saying coloured people would never have gotten out of the dark ages if it wasn't for whites? That kind of denigrated?

 

[Bitter but optimistic 21,238]

8 minutes ago, stuie said:

"Denigrated"? You mean a bit like saying coloured people would never have gotten out of the dark ages if it wasn't for whites? That kind of denigrated?

 

No Stu, I mean "denigrated as in calling a person racist.

If you disagree with someone stick to facts logic and rhetoric to defeat their argument rather than resorting to cheap labels. 

[stuie 7,374]

15 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

No Stu, I mean "denigrated as in calling a person racist.

If you disagree with someone stick to facts logic and rhetoric to defeat their argument rather than resorting to cheap labels. 

So what you're saying then, is that stating that people of colour would all still be living in caves if it wasn't for the superior white man isn't racist?

Going to have to disagree with you on that one.

Besides, isn't "calling a spade a spade" something you old fashioned right winger types spout constantly?

 

Edited January 6, 2017 by stuie

[Biffen 12,323]

1 hour ago, dieter said:

Just ask the Indians, the Chinese, the Aboriginals, the American aboriginals, the Maoris, the people born sine 1919 in Palestine, so-called Jordan, so-called Iraq, so-called Syria, so-called Lebanon how lucky they are/were.

These people you mentioned sbove have been self governing for a long  time and with the exception of Australian aboriginals who were devastated by White arrival,   Were given access to and control of their mineral wealth and other assets such as timber, fisheries, gems and land.

Hong Kong is not so happy about the British lease expiring in recent years but the Chinese are pleased to have the international access it provided.

Let's remember The borders of the Middle Eastern states have been fairly fluid throughout history and this is no more Napoleons fault than it is Alexander the Greats.

One could argue Palestine is a fictitious creation in itself.

The Nile Delta has seen many cultures come and go .

The Palestinian  State can blame others for this fact until it faces inevitable extinction but I can't see Israel retreating.

You could blame Britain,France,Holland,Germany etc for this but I'm not convinced that Britain is still to blame for it.

Egypt may as well keep blaming Britain or France for their problems as well but it won't fix the problems there.

This is my point re history.

White dominamce is not so influential as it was so it is pointless to keep assigning fault to What were essentially corporations made up of many nations willing to trade with the British Navy and its Privateers.

 

[Bitter but optimistic 21,238]

15 minutes ago, stuie said:

So what you're saying then, is that stating that people of colour would all still be living in caves if it wasn't for the superior white man isn't racist?

Going to have to disagree with you on that one.

Besides, isn't "calling a spade a spade" something you old fashioned right winger types spout constantly?

 

Stu you have a habit of trying put words into another's gob. My comments in this matter have only referred to the unnecessary labelling of Biffen as a racist. I stand by those comments.

BTW it is my understanding that the old saying "calling a spade a spade" had nothing to do with racial abuse but rather indicated being blunt in speech. Racist connotations to the phrase are something that has been gathered under the pc banner.

And Stu - I think it a tad rich that can complain about personal abuse on this site yet happily label another poster as a racist.

[daisycutter 28,487]

If the new age thing is to throw around guilt for the past then i blame the colonial africans. If they had never left africa to colonise the rest of the world we wouldn't have the problems we have today.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

On 28/12/2016 at 7:22 AM, Biffen said:

Africa,India and the Middle East would be nowhere without them.A fact that irks many of them but they would still be flogging spice with an abacus if  the white colonial devil didn't come proselytising .

 

 

1 hour ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

Just been reading the above discussion. Most interesting and informative and it leads me to further investigate some of the matters raised.

Interesting to note that Biffen, who seems to hold unpopular and probably politically incorrect views on certain subjects is denigrated as a racist.

Thank god (or someone) for freedom of speech.

 

BBO, not sure if you missed Biff's post above, so I've quoted it for you.

I honestly think the term 'racist' fits his statement very, very well. Many of the other things he's said regarding history can be debated and discussed. This one though IMHO crossed the line.

You accused Stuie of putting words in Biffen's mouth, but the quote above is consistent with what Stuie was paraphrasing.

I'm not a huge fan of personal abuse either, but I don't think calling something that is demonstrably racist, racist, qualifies. Now if Stuie had said something like "put your aussie flag cape away and STFU you racist [expletive]", then yeah, that's abusive. But that's not what's going on here.

This is not a case of 'political correctness gone mad' or awkward phrasing. Biffen was quite clear about what he believes, as indicated above. Having a go at Stuie for responding to it misses the point entirely. He hasn't applied a 'cheap label'. He's called out racism, and I think he's right in doing so.

Note that he has not called for Biffen to be censured or banned. He has not berated him. He's challenged what he (and for that matter, I) believe to be racist statement made by a fellow poster. I don't see any issue with what Stuie has done, and as someone who married and has 2 children with an immigrant from a formally 'colonised' country, applaud him saying something about it. When my kids are old enough, I hope they never had to read or hear that their mother "would be flogging spice with an abacus" if not for white colonialism. It's patently untrue, and yes, racist.

It makes my blood boil when she is stopped in a shopping centre with our children and told "Your kids are gorgeous! Your husband must be white" (that is an exact quote from a few months back btw). The subtle racism of it doesn't occur to those who hold those views. But it hurts. And when it happens on a semi-regular basis, it hurts all the more.

So that's where I'm coming from, and that's why I not only don't find anything wrong with what Stuie said, I hope he does it again if he hears it IRL.

Edit: tagging @stuie because it relates to him

Edited January 6, 2017 by Choke

[dieter 3,325]

3 hours ago, Biffen said:

 

The British offered Palestine the right to control its borders in 1948.

They rejected this offer and the right to issue passports and a shared space with Israel.

Other Middle Eastern states have instability due to religious schisms.

 

That's not history, that's A/Propaganda.B/a very biased version of what happened.

[dieter 3,325]

8 minutes ago, Choke said:

 

 

BBO, not sure if you missed Biff's post above, so I've quoted it for you.

I honestly think the term 'racist' fits his statement very, very well. Many of the other things he's said regarding history can be debated and discussed. This one though IMHO crossed the line.

You accused Stuie of putting words in Biffen's mouth, but the quote above is consistent with what Stuie was paraphrasing.

I'm not a huge fan of personal abuse either, but I don't think calling something that is demonstrably racist, racist, qualifies. Now if Stuie had said something like "put your aussie flag cape away and STFU you racist [expletive]", then yeah, that's abusive. But that's not what's going on here.

This is not a case of 'political correctness gone mad' or awkward phrasing. Biffen was quite clear about what he believes, as indicated above. Having a go at Stuie for responding to it misses the point entirely. He hasn't applied a 'cheap label'. He's called out racism, and I think he's right in doing so.

Note that he has not called for Biffen to be censured or banned. He has not berated him. He's challenged what he (and for that matter, I) believe to be racist statement made by a fellow poster. I don't see any issue with what Stuie has done, and as someone who married and has 2 children with an immigrant from a formally 'colonised' country, applaud him saying something about it. When my kids are old enough, I hope they never had to read or hear that their mother "would be flogging spice with an abacus" if not for white colonialism. It's patently untrue, and yes, racist.

It makes my blood boil when she is stopped in a shopping centre with our children and told "Your kids are gorgeous! Your husband must be white" (that is an exact quote from a few months back btw). The subtle racism of it doesn't occur to those who hold those views. But it hurts. And when it happens on a semi-regular basis, it hurts all the more.

So that's where I'm coming from, and that's why I not only don't find anything wrong with what Stuie said, I hope he does it again if he hears it IRL.

Edit: tagging @stuie because it relates to him

Wonderfully put.

 

[Biffen 12,323]

Choke you may not like the phrasing or my descriptor  of middle eastern merchants selling spice to to the British but I hAve made no slander against any race.

I have no control over what people say to you in the mall.

The assumptions and add ons you and Stuie have derived from this are out of control but you have no idea of my thoughts on matters of race .

Dont presume to.

[Biffen 12,323]

1 hour ago, dieter said:

That's not history, that's A/Propaganda.B/a very biased version of what happened.

I have no reason to invent anything on the matter.

Its another example of a failed Arab state unable to deal sensibly with the modern world despite being given the opportunity to  manage itself and police itself.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

6 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Choke you may not like the phrasing or my descriptor  of middle eastern merchants selling spice to to the British but I hAve made no slander against any race.

I have no control over what people say to you in the mall.

The assumptions and add ons you and Stuie have derived from this are out of control but you have no idea of my thoughts on matters of race .

Dont presume to.

Yeah, you have. The fact that you don't realise it is why I told the story about the mall.

[dieter 3,325]

7 minutes ago, Biffen said:

I have no reason to invent anything on the matter.

Its another example of a failed Arab state unable to deal sensibly with the modern world despite being given the opportunity to  manage itself and police itself.

Ah, Mr Biff. I was about to post: And anyway, just what right did the British have in the first place to offer terms to the people who had been living there for 2 thousand years?

I thought only god was a real estate dealer.  According to some, after all, god gave this land to a certain itinerant tribe who got lost there for 40 years, so the saying goes.

[dieter 3,325]

12 minutes ago, Biffen said:

I have no reason to invent anything on the matter.

Its another example of a failed Arab state unable to deal sensibly with the modern world despite being given the opportunity to  manage itself and police itself.

This sounds like a sound bite from an Israeli propaganda film.

[Biffen 12,323]

20 minutes ago, Choke said:

Yeah, you have. The fact that you don't realise it is why I told the story about the mall.

I don't view your story inthe mall as relevant to the subject which was white colonialism and its influence on the Middle East .

My points were to do with a trendy and lazy tendency to knock  white or Euro colonists and my point is that the dominant traders in fact changed the status quo.

It has nothing to do with supremacy or  superiority but it was all to do with trade and commerce .

I empathise with you personally but I've never slandered your relatives mate.

I won't say anymore except that the Ottoman Empire is over and was never that wonderful .

Also,the colonialists were never that terrible.

 

 

[nutbean 8,837]

On 1/6/2017 at 5:17 PM, dieter said:

Ah, Mr Biff. I was about to post: And anyway, just what right did the British have in the first place to offer terms to the people who had been living there for 2 thousand years?

 

If you want to talk history why stop at 2 thousand years ?  Go back another 100-1000 years. There is more than one claimant to that patch of turf. 

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

On 06/01/2017 at 5:32 PM, Biffen said:

I don't view your story inthe mall as relevant to the subject which was white colonialism and its influence on the Middle East .

My points were to do with a trendy and lazy tendency to knock  white or Euro colonists and my point is that the dominant traders in fact changed the status quo.

It has nothing to do with supremacy or  superiority but it was all to do with trade and commerce .

I empathise with you personally but I've never slandered your relatives mate.

I won't say anymore except that the Ottoman Empire is over and was never that wonderful .

Also,the colonialists were never that terrible.

 

 

It's relevant because it's another instance of racism not being a conscious process, with the person in question completely unaware of how the comments were racist.

You are seemingly unaware of the implication of your own comment, just as the woman in the story. I thought telling it would help illustrate this to both you and BBO, who seemed to think Stuie was being hard on you.