Are You a 'Racist' Test" - Orwellian 'Thought Police' Satire or Real?

[ExomatrixTV]

"Are You a 'Racist' (BS) Test" - Orwellian 'Thought Police' Satire or Real? z1XlD7m_Nqk

Here's an actual list of things that according to the University of Wisconsin are racist; - Asking someone where they are from or where they were born. - Telling someone they speak good English. - Telling someone that you have several black friends. - Saying that you're not a racist. - Complimenting an Asian person by telling them they are very articulate. - Asking an Asian person for help with science or math. - Uttering the phrase "There is only one race, the human race." - Saying that you think America is a melting pot and that when you look at someone you don't see race. - Believing that the most qualified person, regardless of race, should get the job. - Thinking that every person, regardless of race, can succeed in society if they work hard enough. - Telling a black person who is being too loud to be quiet. - Telling an Asian or Latino person who is too quiet to speak up. - Mistaking a person of color for a staff member when you're in a store. - Calling something "gay". - Doing an impression of someone's dialect or accent.

[Flash]

LOL the whole city of Montréal is racist by those définitions. We are such a melting pot that one cannot avoid those questions. I was asked by an immigrant (the accent gave it up), in English, if I had the permits to work in Canada. He did not recognize my French Canadian accent (ancesters have been in Canada since 1550 lol - I do not have the rights to work elsewhere!). To tell the truth, it did bother me, I told him, but also I understood.


"Are You a 'Racist' (BS) Test" - Orwellian 'Thought Police' Satire or Real? z1XlD7m_Nqk

Here's an actual list of things that according to the University of Wisconsin are racist; - Asking someone where they are from or where they were born. - Telling someone they speak good English. - Telling someone that you have several black friends. - Saying that you're not a racist. - Complimenting an Asian person by telling them they are very articulate. - Asking an Asian person for help with science or math. - Uttering the phrase "There is only one race, the human race." - Saying that you think America is a melting pot and that when you look at someone you don't see race. - Believing that the most qualified person, regardless of race, should get the job. - Thinking that every person, regardless of race, can succeed in society if they work hard enough. - Telling a black person who is being too loud to be quiet. - Telling an Asian or Latino person who is too quiet to speak up. - Mistaking a person of color for a staff member when you're in a store. - Calling something "gay". - Doing an impression of someone's dialect or accent.

[Violet]

Same for Belgium, LOL.

When they ask where are you from, I say Belgium, like doh, but for them it's like: the appearance doesn't match and they go: No, I mean, where are you really from...

Ow-kaay...:confused:

And, semi-syncing, I was about to open a thread about the thin line between racism and country-love. How can you express love and worry for your country without being labelled racist? It's a very thin line and it causes a lot of frustration in people who aren't racist, and some of them end up active racists as a result, but that's a side-track, off-topic.

I like this vantage point too. I understand where people come from when they ask the questions as listed in the video. You can't see from somebody's foreign appearance whether they were born here or just came in. And it's not fair to expect such a complex skill.

But perhaps more tact could be applied. For instance, when you ask someone where they are from and they say they were born here, then I guess saying they speak the local language very well might not be taken as a compliment.

[Ellisa]

I wonder if it matters in an informal, presumably friendly, setting--- and I think I would find find the question "Where do you come from?" very racist and also rude, as well as confronting. It doesn't matter, and should be left to the person themselves to bring up the situation if they want to. It really is none of my business where anyone comes from. They are here and that is what matters.

I, whilst in the US, was complimented on my British accent, (and yes, I thought it was bad manners for a stranger to comment). I explained I was Australian and the person got very cross with me and argued that I wasn't! Luckily I was with my lovely Aussie husband who calmed the situation down! I just think that personal remarks are very confronting.

[Flash]

Well, i have learned to forgive for 4 reasons:

1. I have been exposed to different countries and cultures early enough and I have made cross cultural mistakes myself (I even told a group of young people, while learning Spanish, within an exchange work project in my late teens, to wait for me before taking a group decision, I was going to f ck! no need to tell you I was the target of crispy jokes for days and days after this, until a young Salvadorian explained to me what I had said).

2. I know how different cultures react to information, to humour, to peace - example: for me, Italians were always angry and bitching loud, while in fact they are in friendly discussion, it is the tone and pitch that is higher in Italian. I saw a French movie (my mother tongue) in El Salvador and was laughing were nobody was, and was not laughing where everybody was + they pass comments in the theater, shout at each other some jokes, smoke, name it. All culturally forbidden in America.

3. I have had people argue about my writing or ways of talking my own mother tongue by foreign speakers (and to my shame, I did the same to some Americans). This is the high stance as far as I am concern.

4. Even non verbal language often differ amongst cultures (ex: in Turkey, when I was presenting and moving my hand as French do it, it was perceived as agressive, you should remain pretty much immobile when presenting over there).

Therefore, understanding, efforts to communicate, forgiveness, open mindedness and knowing they woke up in the morning thinking they will do their best (not thinking they will be at their worst) all this created and automatism in me. As soon as I am in contact with other cultures I now start to make an extra effort and be real forgiving for "mistakes" that may not be in their world.

PS: in Britain I would not say thanks every 5 seconds and was told not to be rude (in Canada, you say one warm thank at the end of the service, plus another one if there is someting special). Simon Parkes and I counted the thanks of ONE other client to the cashier while waiting for fish and chips, I think there were 15 in five minutes. Daughter and I were finding it hilarious.


I wonder if it matters in an informal, presumably friendly, setting--- and I think I would find find the question "Where do you come from?" very racist and also rude, as well as confronting. It doesn't matter, and should be left to the person themselves to bring up the situation if they want to. It really is none of my business where anyone comes from. They are here and that is what matters.

I, whilst in the US, was complimented on my British accent, (and yes, I thought it was bad manners for a stranger to comment). I explained I was Australian and the person got very cross with me and argued that I wasn't! Luckily I was with my lovely Aussie husband who calmed the situation down! I just think that personal remarks are very confronting.

[ghostrider]

in todays world , it's almost like this , when you are asked where are you from = UH FROM EARTH ... everyone is offended or they lay in wait for someone to say something politically incorrect to pounce on them ... humanity is in an uproar ...black against white , Muslim against Christian , poor against rich , citizens against government , the young against the old , the educated against the uneducated , so many divisions ... you can get labelled a racist just by being curious about another person ...where are you from ??? Hey are you married ??? How many kids do you have ??? Are you religious ??? Do you believe in God ??? How old are you ??? the ET's have it right , it's all in how we think ... you can ask these questions just out of being friendly and wanting to get to know someone ...with incorrect thinking these questions take on a different light ... as always it's about perspective and the glass being half full or half empty ...if you have manners and are a true human being you'll want to ask the hard questions as not to offend others , if they are from the North , no yankee jokes , if they are from Asia , you bow instead of shaking hands , if they are from the middle east , you don't wear shoes in their house ... humanity is under assault when it comes to personal relationships , they want us connected by the interweb and the electronic meam but , not personal , face to face connected ... the technology designed to connect us , has divided us ...we will talk on the phone to someone while another person sits at the table with us ... anyhoo I'm rambling again , it was a long day , sorry ...

[delfine]

It´s very strange...when westerners are travelling in third world countries, and the locals ask "where you from", it is almost always taken as innocent and friendly curiosity. But when a westerner at home asks a foreigner the same question, it is taken as racism. Why?
Out of honest interest I´ve asked a few times foreigners where they were from, and recieved only an off-handed remark like "yeah, where are we all from" or just a hostile scowl.
To top it off I´ve experienced twice that africans in my own home-country Denmark, (in english) asked me where I was from. I wonder what kind of -ism that amounts to.

[T Smith]

This is absolutely ridiculous. I've had enough. If there wasn't the very real threat of comeuppance, including being disappeared in the night, I'd simply own it before I allow social engineers to refine me to very small box that has absolutely nothing to do with reality. Yes, I'm racist. You happy? The University of Wisconsin says so. Can we move on now? (By the way, I don't have one shred of bigotry in me, but because I'm a human being, I am a racist).

[Deega]

Well, under this definition, I wouldn't pass the test!

[T Smith]

I was asked by an immigrant (the accent gave it up), in English, if I had the permits to work in Canada. He did not recognize my French Canadian accent (ancesters have been in Canada since 1550 lol - I do not have the rights to work elsewhere!). To tell the truth, it did bother me, I told him, but also I understood.



I would submit we all need to step back and remind ourselves to exercise the language, despite the continual and relentless programming we are all subject to 24/7.

"Racist" is one of the hot topic newspeak words of our times. In 1984, the goal of newspeak is to render language down to something like 800 words, all with specific meanings and behavioral cues that limit what people are capable of formulating and expressing. Taken in context, these words also elicit desirable social behavior for the powers that be, such as obedience, docility, consumption, fecklessness to resist, etc., kind of like how Pavlov's bell elicits a drooling response from his dogs. The political agenda is thus to control the language (e.g. "racist" to mean everything the University of Wisconsin says it means), to control our understanding of reality and also render it nearly impossible to conceive of disobedient or rebellious thoughts. Simply, there are no appropriate or acceptable words to even think these thoughts, let alone express them. The ultimate goal is a dumbed-down mass of enslaved and impoverished people, with a boot stamping on a human face forever.

All this said, the particular example you cite makes the person who accosted you ignorant, but not necessarily racist.

[T Smith]

Same for Belgium, LOL.

When they ask where are you from, I say Belgium, like doh, but for them it's like: the appearance doesn't match and they go: No, I mean, where are you really from...

Ow-kaay...:confused:

And, semi-syncing, I was about to open a thread about the thin line between racism and country-love. How can you express love and worry for your country without being labelled racist? It's a very thin line and it causes a lot of frustration in people who aren't racist, and some of them end up active racists as a result, but that's a side-track, off-topic.




It's actually right on topic. That's the whole point. To limit your love and worry for country (insert anything counter to the controlling agenda here) by self censorship... brilliant.

[Violet]

I was asked by an immigrant (the accent gave it up), in English, if I had the permits to work in Canada. He did not recognize my French Canadian accent (ancesters have been in Canada since 1550 lol - I do not have the rights to work elsewhere!). To tell the truth, it did bother me, I told him, but also I understood.



I would submit we all need to step back and remind ourselves to exercise the language, despite the continual and relentless programming we are all subject to 24/7.

"Racist" is one of the hot topic newspeak words of our times. In 1984, the goal of newspeak is to render language down to something like 800 words, all with specific meanings and behavioral cues that limit what people are capable of formulating and expressing. Taken in context, these words also elicit desirable social behavior for the powers that be, such as obedience, docility, consumption, fecklessness to resist, etc., kind of like how Pavlov's bell elicits a drooling response from his dogs. The political agenda is thus to control the language (e.g. "racist" to mean everything the University of Wisconsin says it means), to control our understanding of reality and also render it nearly impossible to conceive of disobedient or rebellious thoughts. Simply, there are no appropriate or acceptable words to even think these thoughts, let alone express them. The ultimate goal is a dumbed-down mass of enslaved and impoverished people, with a boot stamping on a human face forever.

All this said, the particular example you cite makes the person who accosted you ignorant, but not necessarily racist.

Imposed meanings set aside for a minute, if we can't agree on the meaning of a word how can we perceive and live in a shared reality?

[T Smith]

I wonder if it matters in an informal, presumably friendly, setting--- and I think I would find find the question "Where do you come from?" very racist and also rude, as well as confronting. It doesn't matter, and should be left to the person themselves to bring up the situation if they want to. It really is none of my business where anyone comes from. They are here and that is what matters.

I, whilst in the US, was complimented on my British accent, (and yes, I thought it was bad manners for a stranger to comment). I explained I was Australian and the person got very cross with me and argued that I wasn't! Luckily I was with my lovely Aussie husband who calmed the situation down! I just think that personal remarks are very confronting.

Again, these are all cultural perspectives, not racial perspectives. I personally have asked many people, in a social setting, at a party, at a gathering, etc., where they are from if it is apparent to me their customs are not local or national. From time to time, I have also commented warmly on a friend's British accent (I absolutely love it...) Though it may have been daft of me to do so, and I will probably will not do so again after being enlightened that it may be offensive, these examples reflect my shortcomings of cultural knowledge. I could also argue taking offense to such comments also reflect the very same shortcomings of cultural knowledge. To me, commenting warmly on an accent is like paying someone a complement for having a beautiful singing voice. Asking someone where they are from is like asking what kind of music they like or what kind of literature they read. It helps me understand better who they are. Yes, this is a prejudice, in a way, but the point is, we all draw judgments from every piece of information we receive. To claim otherwise is dishonest; we all do this every single day. This is simply the human condition. Prejudice and racist are not even the same thing, yet we have been conditioned to use these two terms interchangeably.

Personal remarks can be very confronting, there is no question. We just need to keep these things in their proper perspective, imho.

[T Smith]

I was asked by an immigrant (the accent gave it up), in English, if I had the permits to work in Canada. He did not recognize my French Canadian accent (ancesters have been in Canada since 1550 lol - I do not have the rights to work elsewhere!). To tell the truth, it did bother me, I told him, but also I understood.



I would submit we all need to step back and remind ourselves to exercise the language, despite the continual and relentless programming we are all subject to 24/7.

"Racist" is one of the hot topic newspeak words of our times. In 1984, the goal of newspeak is to render language down to something like 800 words, all with specific meanings and behavioral cues that limit what people are capable of formulating and expressing. Taken in context, these words also elicit desirable social behavior for the powers that be, such as obedience, docility, consumption, fecklessness to resist, etc., kind of like how Pavlov's bell elicits a drooling response from his dogs. The political agenda is thus to control the language (e.g. "racist" to mean everything the University of Wisconsin says it means), to control our understanding of reality and also render it nearly impossible to conceive of disobedient or rebellious thoughts. Simply, there are no appropriate or acceptable words to even think these thoughts, let alone express them. The ultimate goal is a dumbed-down mass of enslaved and impoverished people, with a boot stamping on a human face forever.

All this said, the particular example you cite makes the person who accosted you ignorant, but not necessarily racist.

Imposed meanings set aside for a minute, if we can't agree on the meaning of a word how can we perceive and live in a shared reality?

We can't. But once you impose meaning unto words we all agree on, we are no longer perceiving a shared reality. We are perceiving a contrived reality.

[Violet]

If we all agree on assigning agreed upon meanings isn't that an agreement rather than an imposition?

Of course we know individual realities have nuances that differ from the wider agreed upon meaning, but that's the compromise.

It doesn't necessarily mean reality is contrived. We use the wider dictionary to be able to find each other, reach out to each other, imagine each individual having their own language and standing by it, and nothing else.

We can keep our own reality and even use it creatively to infuse the general reality with hopefully more of what may be of benefit to it.

[Ted]

It's all silly nonsense to enforce conformity. Political correctness is just another con game cooked up to confuse people.
Academia is particularly susceptible to political correctness since it lacks the common sense most other people have. Conformity is also tightly adhered to, especially in the halls of higher learning. Not a good combination to entrust our children to, but what can you do.

[Flash]

I was asked by an immigrant (the accent gave it up), in English, if I had the permits to work in Canada. He did not recognize my French Canadian accent (ancesters have been in Canada since 1550 lol - I do not have the rights to work elsewhere!). To tell the truth, it did bother me, I told him, but also I understood.



I would submit we all need to step back and remind ourselves to exercise the language, despite the continual and relentless programming we are all subject to 24/7.

"Racist" is one of the hot topic newspeak words of our times. In 1984, the goal of newspeak is to render language down to something like 800 words, all with specific meanings and behavioral cues that limit what people are capable of formulating and expressing. Taken in context, these words also elicit desirable social behavior for the powers that be, such as obedience, docility, consumption, fecklessness to resist, etc., kind of like how Pavlov's bell elicits a drooling response from his dogs. The political agenda is thus to control the language (e.g. "racist" to mean everything the University of Wisconsin says it means), to control our understanding of reality and also render it nearly impossible to conceive of disobedient or rebellious thoughts. Simply, there are no appropriate or acceptable words to even think these thoughts, let alone express them. The ultimate goal is a dumbed-down mass of enslaved and impoverished people, with a boot stamping on a human face forever.

All this said, the particular example you cite makes the person who accosted you ignorant, but not necessarily racist.

Imposed meanings set aside for a minute, if we can't agree on the meaning of a word how can we perceive and live in a shared reality?

Well, my friend, apart from having bodies, some intelligence, eating and doing the rest, WE DO NOT SHARE THE SAME REALITY.

This is why words have a different impact for different people and this is why it is so difficult to communicate efficiently. Reality is based on ego for some, free soul for others, love values for some, being just as a value for others, and taking all you can for yet others.

The share reality is to accept to have a body, see the animals around, accept that we are on a planet, and even there, for some it is a flat planet

----------------

Violet, you know as well as I do that different cultures have and live different realities. For a while, before I got adapted, I was feeling like in the twilight zone while in Istanbul. Everything is somewhat the same (houses, Streets, fruits, animals, people) yet it is so different. Not the same reality as mi.e for sure.

[T Smith]

If we all agree on assigning agreed upon meanings isn't that an agreement rather than an imposition?

Of course we know individual realities have nuances that differ from the wider agreed upon meaning, but that's the compromise.

It doesn't necessarily mean reality is contrived. We use the wider dictionary to be able to find each other, reach out to each other, imagine each individual having their own language and standing by it, and nothing else.

We can keep our own reality and even use it creatively to infuse the general reality with hopefully more of what may be of benefit to it.

In general, yes. The issue, here, for me, is... we all do not agree upon meanings. Some meanings are imposed upon us without consent. For example, I do not agree it is "racist" when someone asks a stranger where they are from. The meaning of the word is thus imposed on me, per my actions that have nothing to do with the true meaning of the word. If i resist the imposition, I am guilty, by default, of the meaning ot the word itself.

I agree that the word "cold" means something less than 32 degrees fahrenheit. This we can measure, empirically, and all agree upon. I do not agree that a person is "racist" based on the definitions provided by the University of Wisconsin.

[Ellisa]

I agree--- Not racist, but certainly bad mannered.

[Pam]

I think the real question here is what is the desired outcome that our social engineers are hoping to accomplish? Since absolutely no one will pass this racist criteria, I believe this is just covert censorship. It is a prison without bars. If anything you say can be construed as bigotry one will really have to self censor. Quite cleaver really. We are building our own prisons voluntarily, one brick at a time when we buy this BS.