Army Rumour Service

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Extreme anti-Woke among the young

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
5 equally qualified people with similar experience apply for a job, they are of different racial backgrounds, genders and sexual orientations, maybe one or more are disabled - The person who gets the job gets it because they're the best fit, NOT because they're the one legged black lesbian, but they had the OPPORTUNITY to all compete, it might be the unipod, melanin enriched rug muncher just as easily as the ordinary white bloke from Barnsley.

Lol no, though congratulations on learning angry capital letters!

Picking the candidate that the company thinks is the best fit / will make them the most money has almost zero to do with equality of opportunity. That is merely capitalism.

1000 people applied for the above job and the 5 you mention were shortlisted and interviewed. All were Harvard graduates, all from private schools and all from rich familes. The one who got the job was the daughter of a company director. Is that still equality of opportunity? Merely the opportunity to apply? The opportunity to interview if sufficiently monged in some category or other might be, as in a guaranteed interview due to said mongness...

She was the best fit as she would intrinsically be trusted.

You accuse me of not knowing what the terms mean and your own example isn't even an example. At best it would be equality under the law, that no candidates were actually barred from applying in the first place. What if the job were only advertised in the Harvard alumni magazine?

In fact you are merely defining it in opposition to equality of outcome, and therefore conflating the two.

You can split equality of opportunity into formal and substantive. Formal is merely the sufficiency of opportunity roughly analagous to your idealistic wibble above, it does not deal with the systemic inequalities which lead to your 5 equally qualified people and 995 lesser qualified. Though as I pointed out this is just the company's self interest anyway... And therefore irrelevant.

Substantive equality of opportunity on the other hand attempts to deal with the way the candidates are prepared both through experience and any other ways and means, such as education, which might impact upon their success... It is a spectrum.

Both are theories of equality of opportunity.

What you miss here is that no-one truly knows why they are turned down. The 4 equally qualified people who missed out will consider this to merely be nepotism, the 995 who didn't get an interview will assume it is rigged, that they were discriminated against because they went to a different university. The successful candidate will feel that her years of hard work were rewarded and that the interviewers gave her the job despite hating her Dad.

In the actual real world if 5 equal candidates existed then the best looking would likely get the job. Should we have equality for ugly people?

Merely the right to have your CV thrown straight in the bin, to apply, is not in itself an example of equality of opportunity. Opportunities are not equal in the real world, and neither are candidates or people.

Then again you seem to live in a world furnished by particularly naive, angry and shouty unicorns who shit rainbow dust so....
 
Last edited:

ste14w

Old-Salt
Seemed very unbanned when I was allowed to watch it on BBC1 back in the '80s.

I've got it on DVD now. Might dig it out for a re-watch tomorrow...
Sorry, I may have got it confused with the American film that came out around the same time. I remember watching Threads in 1984 during basic, so I'm probably wrong.
 
There was an Army lass based in Yeovilton (AAC?) on the BBC local News - she was featured because apparently she challenged the Army hair Regs (?) and won a ‘major concession’ to allow her to wear her Afro.
We seem to be getting more like the Dutch Army - they’ll be allowing drugs next and disbanding the CDT team for abusing their ‘human rights’! :smile:
View attachment 504900

Yeovilton? Sure it's not RNAS?
 

ste14w

Old-Salt
I remember going to see a film-show of The War Game at a local CND meeting, around 82 or 83. They were showing it at a nearby school hall, with the hope of recruiting new members. As we settled down to watch, some lass was passing around a petition for unilateral disarmament. As an "I will if you will" kinda guy, it's gotta be a two-way thing or not at all. I refused. She got a right strop on, asking, "Well, why have you come here?"
"Just cos I don't agree, doesn't mean I won't listen. This film is your chance to convince me."
They failed. I reckoned if I was gonna get killed, then so should the other side.
I saw Threads around 1984 or 85, on the tv. How depressing was that? It didn't matter how rich or important you were, you still died. Even my gf couldn't cheer me up, when we met up later on.
With you all the way on that one. Even as a kid I couldn't figure out why all the 'Ban the whale, save the bomb' types were only protesting at Greenham Common. Why weren't they also protesting outside the Soviet embassy, I used to ask myself. They made us watch Threads during basic....obviously they didn't think we were depressed enough.
 

ste14w

Old-Salt
Do yourself a favour and instead of projecting what you want onto the two phrases (you're actually conflating the two) try to comprehend what each actually MEANS. You're also throwing in specious arguments to muddy the waters.

I suspect you're being deliberately dense, I do hope you actually aren't be so dim you can't understand the difference.

Equality of OPPORTUNITY example:-

5 equally qualified people with similar experience apply for a job, they are of different racial backgrounds, genders and sexual orientations, maybe one or more are disabled - The person who gets the job gets it because they're the best fit, NOT because they're the one legged black lesbian, but they had the OPPORTUNITY to all compete, it might be the unipod, melanin enriched rug muncher just as easily as the ordinary white bloke from Barnsley.

Equality of OUTCOME example:-

5 equally qualified people with similar experience apply for a job, they are of different racial backgrounds, genders and sexual orientations, maybe one or more are disabled - The person who gets the job gets it because they're the most "disadvantaged" or the right demographic to fit some quota, NOT because at interview and testing they performed the best.

The same scenario, radically different result.

It really isn't a difficult concept. Taking your example, it doesn't matter a hoot if the brain surgeon is a Somali or the basketball player is a pygmy if they are the BEST and have not been denied the OPPORTUNITY to compete to get the job and won it on merit.
It's true that the wealthy can afford private schools, but making an effort to provide all kids with a similar quality of education by improving teachers and facilities at state schools (not artificially farking with the results or forcing Oxbridge to take in less qualified kids) is about Equality of OPPORTUNITY not OUTCOME.
One of my mates at school was from a council estate, his dad was a binman and his mum a cleaner, he ended up at Liverpool Uni, got a Nuclear Physics degree (and a scouse accent that made me rip the piss out of him ever since) and is a professional designer of reactors. Another was the son of a Knighted civil servant and a wealthy socialite, huge house with a real tennis court in the garden, he's never worked at anything much past gardening and general labouring, he's far from thick, just bone idle. They both had the same educational opportunities, one took advantage of them, one didn't.

I've mentioned this before on ARRSE, one of the absolute best project team leads I've ever worked with was a Flt Sgt who was a self confessed utter scrote, numerous convictions for car theft, burglary and god knows what by the time he was 15, also more or less illiterate. Some youth worker talked him into trying out for the RAF (apparently he took a punt at all 3, but RN and Army told him to feck off) he had a tough time in basic which shook him a bit, got working with some grizzled old Sgt who wouldn't let him slack and he made something of himself.
He's retired as a WO1, but his ability to lead teams checking on priorities, but not needing hand holding, making suggestions to improve his team and the whole project, deal with paperwork, awkward customer types and just get shit done effectively with zero fuss was brilliant. The RAF gave him the opportunity as did the old bastard of a Sgt that made him stop being a useless scrote and made him a useful bod to the point he got promoted all the way as a noncom, he'd been recommended for Officer repeatedly, but he never wanted it which pissed off his CO's on a few occasions.
Ecellent post, but unfortunately, and more so in the wake of recent demonstrations, positions are being filled based on what boxes are ticked, rather than ability. Even worse, as in Sue Barkers case, people are being replaced for the same reason. If the Flt Sgt you mentioned was bumped to make way for the one legged black lesbian, then all his, and others hard work and grit counts for nothing.
 
Meh, pussy.
Being exposed to all those micro organisms and strange smelling paper banknotes quickly got your immune system fired up. However, I was banned from taking any back home to the UK.

I imagine the weight of anything you would want to be more valuable than the cost of a penny sweet would prevent the aircraft taking off.
 

Tyk

LE
Ecellent post, but unfortunately, and more so in the wake of recent demonstrations, positions are being filled based on what boxes are ticked, rather than ability. Even worse, as in Sue Barkers case, people are being replaced for the same reason. If the Flt Sgt you mentioned was bumped to make way for the one legged black lesbian, then all his, and others hard work and grit counts for nothing.

Undeniably true and I expect it will bite us increasingly hard and with greater frequency, it needs to be stopped.

Equality of Outcome is an evil doctrine, it's pursued (for the many not the few at the top of course) examples:-

By post revolution Russia leading to millions of Ukrainians starving to death in the 1920's,
Maoist China (millions starving to death),
Pol Pot (those that didn't starve were shot),
Venezuela (gone from oil rich to millions struggling with basic necessities, possibly some starving),
Zimbabwe (god only knows how a country that could feed the whole of Africa on its own to unable to feed itself at even a basic level)
I'm sure there are many other examples that others can come up with.

Equality of Outcome is a marxist ideal that's trotted out by the identity politicians as an easy win in the eyes of the ill informed, the reality in practice is a spiral to disaster as has been proven many, many times. Blindness to history is no excuse either, doubly so when it's wilful.
 
Fundamentally the problem, in all of the awkward squad ideologies, is the concept of equality..

Whilst it has become a buzzword for really stupid politicians it is fundamentally moronic.

Take identical twins, born into the same family, achieve the same grades at school, go into the same job. Eventually one will be promoted above the other. Ergo they haven't been treated equally. Could be merely down to one having a better sense of humour, anything... Extreme and daft example but you get the idea. It's a mathematical construct and no two humans can ever be treated equally.

Even more moronic is thinking that the state is responsible for how humans are treated by other humans. I can't intrinsically even think of a religion in which equality is a thing. You are judged by who you are and how you act tends to be the way. Even Buddhists believe that you come back as a rat, spider or scouser if you are a shit bloke.

From the state's perspective the concept, at most, should be one of sufficiency. Life isn't fair, never will be, but providing the bare bones minimum to keep someone alive is about the limit.

I'd say equality of opportunity already exists for the most part. Some do have better opportunities, but there are no rules restricting those without from working towards getting those opportunities.

The problem lies in some groups wanting special treatment and demanding equality of outcome, while groups with which they have an issue be restricted and denied equality of opportunity.
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
Equality of Opportunity is a marxist ideal that's trotted out by the identity politicians as an easy win in the eyes of the ill informed,

Fixed it for you....

As I pointed out above, admittedly post edit, your idealised view of equality is no different from market forces and a company's self interest.
 

Tyk

LE
I'd say equality of opportunity already exists for the most part. Some do have better opportunities, but there are no rules restricting those without from working towards getting those opportunities.

The problem lies in some groups wanting special treatment and demanding equality of outcome, while groups with which they have an issue be restricted and denied equality of opportunity.

Indeed, but @Flight is either trolling or too dense to understand and since he/she/whatever insists on conflating issues and resorted to a lol of all things I'm not going to discuss things further with that poster.

In the UK, prior to the last 5 or so years when identity politics really took off the equality of opportunity had largely been achieved the whining from the identitarians has, I would argue, put progress back by at least a decade, probably several, tragic really.
 
True. The problem with equality of outcome/affirmative acton is that a person from a favoured demographic will never really know if they're there on merit or because they ticked the right PC boxes.

To be honest, most won't really care. SA a good example. They've got access to all that lovely munny and the perks that come with the job, so why should they give a shit? In their minds, the fact they're getting well paid (quite often despite being unqualified and of no use at all) is an obvious indicator of how valuable they are to the organisation - classic Dunning Kruger thinking. The few with a bit of brain or a conscience may well wonder about it and feel a little demeaned. They can never be entirely sure that they're good enough and there on their own merits.

I wouldn't be surprised if that underlying insecurity is what leads to a lot of the identity politics we see today.
 
As I pointed out above, admittedly post edit, your idealised view of equality is no different from market forces and a company's self interest.

With respect, I doubt you have the foggiest idea of how deeply capitalist companies determine self interest through employment.

It's not what you imagine, and hasn't been for a very long time.
 

Bob65

War Hero
Someone born into wealth is always going to have more opportunities than someone born in a slum.

Someone born into a two-parent family, where at least one parent works, and where both encourage education and taking personal responsibility. This White privilege - which is also shared by Indians, Chinese, Jews, Hispanics and many other races, funnily enough, not to mention, in the real world that the media ignores, many black families too - is very easy for anyone to pass on to their own children. And failure to do so is not the fault of anyone else.
 
My daughter and her friends have a healthy suspicion of the woke, a good job as intolerant and sanctimonious twats are not wanted in my house.

The woke are a small and noisy rabble punching far above their weight by using the tactic of loudly demonising perfectly respectable people who will (naturally and rightfully) respond to that. For me that is to ignore but I can see why a backlash is on.

They think are winning but I think they are losing. They believe they big fish in a big pond but I guess for most people around the world they are tiny (maybe even non-existent) fish in a giant ocean, irrelevant either way.

BLM and taking a knee here might be a thing but I doubt that anyone in ME, China, Asia, India, Africa, S. America knows, bothers or even cares, and that amounts to billions of people then leaving the likes of Lewis "Tax Dodger" Hamilton, Gary "smug" Lineker etc. wafting around like farts in the breeze.
 
Last edited:
I imagine the weight of anything you would want to be more valuable than the cost of a penny sweet would prevent the aircraft taking off.
Sadly, you always needed cash at the airport going out and when coming back in.
This special, 'permitted' Naira was twice sealed in separate plastic bags.
 
Last edited:

philc

LE
Indeed, but @Flight is either trolling or too dense to understand and since he/she/whatever insists on conflating issues and resorted to a lol of all things I'm not going to discuss things further with that poster.

In the UK, prior to the last 5 or so years when identity politics really took off the equality of opportunity had largely been achieved the whining from the identitarians has, I would argue, put progress back by at least a decade, probably several, tragic really.

I confess to knowing very little on the subject, which makes me a rarity here amongst all the experts, however I was struck by this interview, rather damning I thought of some concepts.



For figures such as Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, it will make challenging reading. By championing an “age of merit” as the solution to the challenges of globalisation, inequality and deindustrialisation, the Democratic party and its European equivalents, Sandel argues, hung the western working-class and its values out to dry – with disastrous consequences for the common good.

Blue-collar workers were in effect given a double-edged invitation to “better” themselves or carry the burden of their own failure. Many took their votes elsewhere, nursing a sense of betrayal. “The populist backlash of recent years has been a revolt against the tyranny of merit, as it has been experienced by those who feel humiliated by meritocracy and by this entire political project.”
 
Ecellent post, but unfortunately, and more so in the wake of recent demonstrations, positions are being filled based on what boxes are ticked, rather than ability. Even worse, as in Sue Barkers case, people are being replaced for the same reason. If the Flt Sgt you mentioned was bumped to make way for the one legged black lesbian, then all his, and others hard work and grit counts for nothing.

Why doesn't Sue Barker self identify as a black lesbian and sue the BBC for racial discrimination?, play them at their own game...
 

ste14w

Old-Salt
Why doesn't Sue Barker self identify as a black lesbian and sue the BBC for racial discrimination?, play them at their own game...
That would probably work...Gary Lineker has been self identifying as talented for years.
 
I confess to knowing very little on the subject, which makes me a rarity here amongst all the experts, however I was struck by this interview, rather damning I thought of some concepts.



For figures such as Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, it will make challenging reading. By championing an “age of merit” as the solution to the challenges of globalisation, inequality and deindustrialisation, the Democratic party and its European equivalents, Sandel argues, hung the western working-class and its values out to dry – with disastrous consequences for the common good.

Blue-collar workers were in effect given a double-edged invitation to “better” themselves or carry the burden of their own failure. Many took their votes elsewhere, nursing a sense of betrayal. “The populist backlash of recent years has been a revolt against the tyranny of merit, as it has been experienced by those who feel humiliated by meritocracy and by this entire political project.”

I'd argue someone has missed the point. If it was truly about merit the left would have the support of reasonable people instead of the howling collection of single issue loons they currently see as their base.

The only merit visible is that of ticking the correct boxes, little or nothing to do with actual skill, ability or qualifications.
 

Latest Threads

Top