I didn't see any donkeys in the race .
Printable View
I didn't see any donkeys in the race .
The man to whom l gave the tree had a tan complexion, his facial structure seemed hispanic of the northern american origin, he was perhaps a Mexican.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
Yep, Europe's multiculturalism is doing really well. We are all getting on like a house on fire.
My house is bigger than yours.....
Probably
I also thought of Peru and especially Ecuador , as his face was roundish in shape .Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
My son thought he was one of our local native Ojibwa .
But , it didn't matter , and I hope you got that point .
So , who did you see as donkey of the race ?
You miss the point my friend, but hopefully you would get it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
I would agree with that. because it makes my point. There are a number of different reasons people would not wish to have society go predominately multicultural and to brand all of them as racist because of a few who are is not recognizing reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Also known as a "comfort zone". The vast majority of people everywhere prefer to spend a majority of their time inside that zone. That's just human nature.Quote:
"the way of life, especially the general customs and beliefs, of a particular group of people at a particular time"
Completely disagree. Most countries have a historical pattern of predominance of one culture. Wanting to continue with that as "mainstream" in that country is hardly extremist. Most countries have also been historically tolerant of minorities and their cultures. It's when recent immigrants, or other groups, try to force everyone else to give their (minority) culture equal standing to the predominant one that trouble starts.Quote:
Anti-Multiculturalism in the western civilization is seeking to go the other way of becoming like these extremist cultures which are very intolerant of other cultures which are different to their own. And the suppression of exhibition of cultures contrary to the predominant culture.
Existing in a world of different cultures is one thing. Forcing people to embrace cultures they are not comfortable with is a different thing.Quote:
You can call it whatever name you want to call it, its Mode of Operation is similar to these extremist cultures. How l see it is, Anti-Multiculturalists are individuals with difficulty of existing in a world of multiple differences.
Cultures have always evolved over time. The question is over how much time? It's one thing for people to accept incremental change, which results in large changes over time, and a different thing to try and force large changes over relatively short periods - that goes completely against human nature. What is a natural inertia (and healthy too since it dampens wild swings) becomes active resistance and hostility. That's what you are seeing now. Ignore it at your peril.Quote:
What l am getting at here is, at the point where cultures intercepts, they change each other wittingly or unwittingly. Hence a culture at one point in time is not the same as one when you look back in time.
If you read my post carefully, you will see that l have not advocated against the existence of a predominant culture in a single social system. What l have argued against is the predominant culture refusing to accommodate minority cultures within its society. In an anti-multicultural society, the predominant culture would seek to stamp out these minority cultures. I think the saying is; when in Rome act as the Romans. Which is the natural manifestation of things anyway otherwise people from minority cultures would not be able to function in the society. But the reality is, any hint or exhibition of cultures outside the predominant culture by an individual is frowned upon and that person soon finds themselves systematically excluded from society. This affects them when trying to find jobs or use social amenities like hospitals and schools. Their plight is not noticed by anyone and nobody represents their particular circumstances. This is one of the reasons why minority group in society form the poorest groups in most countries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
But it cuts both ways. Forcing people to abandon their cultures is the other side of your inability to embrace the existence or presence of the minority cultures in the society. This is the face off and where the prejudices emanate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
I completely agree. It is natural to push back in this circumstances.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Cut this, back to the topic.
Race discussion , or donkey of the race discussion ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
You choose .
Donkey = Donkey?
No mods around anymore and since I haven't been one for a while I no longer have the permissions to move this part of the discussion to 'chit chat' where it belongs.
Apologies chaps and gals. I shall not say another word on the topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
DONKEY of the race is still very much Mercedes in my view.
The feeling's mutual :kiss: :DQuote:
Originally Posted by driveace
In the immortal words of René Descartes: :angel:
"I think therefore I am (a donkey)"
Is that an ass ertion? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tazio
I took it more as an ass ignation :confused: :D
In the kingdom of the blind asses, the one-eyed donkey rulez :p
Well I think most of us all agree the Donkey was Toto and MercedesQuote:
Originally Posted by driveace
Who have now decided there will be no harsh words spoken to Hamilton over him slowing in the race to enable others to pass Rosberg ,which would have helped Hamiltons Championship
Amen
Lets put this thread to bed
And my post above meant ,should we really call "The Post" Donkey of the race ?
Can we all have a sense of humour ,and not rev up on others when they misunderstand what the poster really means
Fair comment buddy. It was all light conversation as far as l was concerned. No hard feeling, just jist.Quote:
Originally Posted by driveace
http://www.autosport.com/news/report...o-instructionsQuote:
Originally Posted by driveace
I purposely stayed off this forum for a while to let sanity prevail and I'm glad that mercedes have issued a mea culpa.
The amount of vitriol i read towards Hamilton about the incident, including the likes of Prost, Stewart, and on other forums was kinda ridiculous.
I would hope that mercedes have learned from this, but i fear as long as paddy lowe and toto wolff are sitting at race control on race day, they will always try to interfere with each side of the garage and orchestrate an outcome they (foolishly and in short sight) think the team requires. We shall see
Quote:
Originally Posted by truefan72
I saved the tin foil myself, as I don't find those hats comfortable at all. :laugh:
As much as people like the conspiracy theories, nobody knows for sure the motivations behind the team orders. To me it makes complete sense to preserve both cars even if one of their two drivers would remain WDC. And in that sense alone, Lewis backing Nico up into the mix did allow for more potential for carnage of some really expensive equipment.
I'd have to think that finishing the last race with a 1-2 finish and preserving both cars would be the greater priority for the team. As for all the talk about sacking Lewis and such, I think any team has to realize that if they start sucking the fight out of their drivers it will at some point come back to bite them. I'm glad they seem to see that now.