Those guys need to get locked up. There is no way to spin a defense for them.

An Irishman and an Aussie sharing a soapbox on a topic they’ve never been in embedded in, or a part of, lacks authenticity. ‘Mericans in here see right through the lack of good insight.

Funny satire. Guns for everyone. Unless you don’t look, talk and think like me.

Or since they are in a neighborhood maybe someone’s home?

There’s local news showing armed black militia men marching up and down McMichaels street.

https://www.wdkx.com/black-militia-patrols-home-of-suspect-accused-of-killing-georgia-jogger/

Just because two countries are considered “industrialized nations” doesn’t make them equal when considering the needs and merits of a healthcare system. Especially when considering monetary costs associated with such.

The quality of care and the efficiency of services is also a major concern to some opponents of Bernies Medicare for All proposal.

Banno-“Understanding black fellas can be hard”

Yea verily!

Rolling my eyes hard- Black guys everywhere

What's interesting too, is in a forum setting like this, that we're all "racially colorblind" or racially masked to some degree or another at least until it comes out through avatars, language use, identifying country of origin, etc. If one was savvy enough to do so, one could remain fairly "racially" ambiguous here. Privilege is then constructed more through things like moderator status, site owner and his penchants, posters who've gained clout and respect, etc. Race is almost a non factor. A type of colorblindness, if you will.

"I described it as a conceit for the privileged. The ascendency can afford to ignore race, ethnicity, gender and disability because their race, their gender, their ethnicity and their norms are taken as the default; they are the background against which others may be seen as different. So in claiming to be blind to those differences, the ascendency denies what makes those individuals who they are, and reasserts its dominance."

"Your skin colour, you aboriginality, your gender preferences, your disability, mean nothing to me."

What you don't account for is there isn't always an ascendancy thing going on in all real life settings or societal/social situations. There's plenty of people that fall into any of the various categories you keep mentioning that neither feel like they are privileged or under privileged and with good reason. What you're espousing is a limited view of how all this plays out in the real world. Racial phenotypes, ability status, gender self identification, etc are parts of who people are but not nearly the whole story; despite what your claim seems to convey.

You and 180 seem to get along marvelously. There's a racial difference. Which of you is the privileged in this setting?

I like that podcast episode. They covered a lot of stuff all apt for this thread.

That’s nonsense.

Exactly

I appreciate your comment. Perhaps we can discuss further?

In order to discriminate, on any level, one must have a difference identified between two things. You can’t discriminate ‘twixt two of the same. So, when we talk about discrimination toward people, this must be stemming from a perceived difference in said people. I deny the manifestation of genetic differences as having any ground to begin to differentiate people on any meaningful level. At least in terms of human and civil rights issues and basic “all men are created equal” values. (things like artistic, athletic, or intellectual gifts, etc. are not involved in what I mean with genetic manifestations, to be clear. Surface level bodily makeup stuff is what I’m referring to)

Meaningful differences between people start with cultural and ideological differences and thus my view avoids considering someone’s skin color or other genetic traits insofar that those traits (in and of themselves) should influence any sort of discriminatory or negative value judgement.

Labeling someone a Jew, Gypsy or mentally defective are examples of culturally constructed “types” and of course people are discriminated against for reason’s other than just “race”. I recognize not everyone holds my same view and of course I’m as vulnerable as anyone to be discriminated against.

I’m not sure I get what you mean--What do people frequently say about race and how is what they say related to social constructs like property and money?

Another thing too is people process information so fast on conscious and sub-conscious levels that surface level judgments are made extremely quickly about people. These judgments often are influenced on past experiences a person has had with that type of pervious experience. They can also be based on things you’ve heard or believe about things even if you haven’t experienced them yet. Surface level stuff is superficial and meaningless. Once you get within an experience that is past that surface level judgment humanity starts.

In my mind, the only meaningful difference between any two random people on Earth is cultural. i.e language, values, beliefs, etc.

Yes it does make sense. All of what you described would have been lost had the ending not been like that. It would have been a lot different if it simply ended when she left the bar as you suggested.

Which is why it’s interesting that the emotionally uninvolved roommate so easily types out the blunt truth and hits send on the text message.

What do you mean by “allow an absolute moral condemnation”?

I read it. Oddly enough, I can see that exact scenario playing out in real life.

There was a show on Nat Geo the other day titled, Hitler The Junkie. Apparently he liked his amphetamines and opiates- intravenously of course.

Good call on that book reference.

Meta-cognition makes it feel like yourself is trying to get outside itself to think about itself. Its a dizzying loop.

"I don't see how we can separate you from me." I wouldn't mind hearing you give some thoughts on this if you'd like.

"That patterned structure and internal relations and transformations", are dependent on and what a few pounds of grey meat can do.

The bullet example clearly shows consciousness no longer exists in any sort of way we recognize it once you disrupt the precise make up of the physical substance. Granted humans don't "recognize" everything in this world but we have nothing but religion and unfounded meta-physical theories when it comes to a concept of consciousness standing alone with no substrate.

The person is necessarily both the body and the structure and process.

It could be question begging within a specific and in my opinion, incorrect framework. It's more an example of ostensively defining it. When has there ever been a real example of consciousness that wasnt dependent upon a physical process to manifest? And, when has there ever been an instance of 'self' without consciousness?

You yourself, is a perfect example of how it's done.

I don't see how we can separate consciousness from the physical.

Being bothered by those types of questions or reactions you get from people could indicate a lack of self-confidence. Possibly addressing those areas in your life you don't feel fully confident in would eliminate those feelings you get when faced with the questions you're asking how to respond to.

Is every living body conscious of itself?

It feels sensible to think contents would always be different from being to being (varying memories and experiences). In step with your analogy, I don't see how we can possibly conclude that containers are all the same. If all living beings had the same container how could there be varying levels of consciousness?