freediver wrote on Mar 14
th, 2023 at 6:18am:
thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 13
th, 2023 at 8:40am:
Interesting that you are pressing John in this, but you have let my explanation - that the voice is racist by default, not design** - pass without comment.
There is only so many times I will (tell) you that you are posting gibberish before I expect you to figure it out for yourself....though I do agree with you that it is racist.
So let's find the gibberish in this:
1. The desire to close the gap is
not racist, accusing blacks of being "lazy abos" (Graps) is racist.
2. Of course a voice specifically designed to deal with black issues - as manifested by the gap - is "racist", by definition.
So you considered my conception of 'design' versus 'default' racism to be gibberish...ok....sorted out for you in points 1 and 2 above.
Quote:"
If we want a voice which deals specifically with issues relating to blacks only
"
What issues would they be?
The issues responsible for the (black) gap, obviously.
Quote:"
this is not "racist" in intent (design)
"
Are you saying it is not racist because it is true? The law would only reflect the fact that these "issues" only affect aborigines?
Addressed above: the black gap only affects blacks, by definition (specifically, those blacks who are affected by the egregious black-gap stats).
Quote:"
Wow, so that means the electorate, AND the government (executive) are ultimately answerable to the justices (lawyers) in the High Court, whose make up is composed of lawyers who can't agree on the law.
Something wrong there
"
Welcome to western civilisation TGD. We don't believe in benign dictatorships like the CCP who put themselves above the law.
Let's see how it plays out in Israel....the cabinet has already 'demoted' the judiciary....and the people (a majority?) are objecting..
How about the possibility of benevolent, meritocratic authority, achieved by consensus instead?
eg, I reckon MMT would largely eliminate the artificial disputes in democracies. And China wouldn't have to fend off Western nonsense about looming debt catastrophes. (The re-elected PBofC chief is a US-trained economist; doesn't bode well for China.
"It's the economy. stupid". Who gives a s**t about democratic "freedoms" when democracies preside over the most vicious entrenched inequality and poverty and disavantage.
At least Xi is promoting 'common propserity ' and 'houses for living in, not investment vehicles for rich people'.