Black Mercedes.

[longblackcoat]

LucyP said:

longblackcoat said:

You keep posting things that are untrue. BLM is not a Marxist organisation. Some of the members are, certainly, but that’s not the same thing.

Get your facts right.

Read the links that I posted. The organisation has openly Marxist aims. Every commentator is saying the same thing, because it's on their website as plain as day and it's why people are now distancing themselves from BLM.

Yes, I read the links. I'm ignoring what commentators say, because that's their opinion, and when one of them is Nigel Farage, you'll forgive me for dustrusting his statement as being anything close to fact.

I'm asking you to provide evidence that they're openly Marxist. You're the one asserting this, it's for you to prove it.

To help you, here's a link to the BLM website. Having read through, I can't see Marxism mentioned once, though if I've missed that reference I'll apologise. BLM is a collective of pressure groups with a specific purpose - to stop discrimination. I fully accept that some (possibly many) of the leaders are left-leaning and may well be Marxist, but that doesn't mean that the organisation is.

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

[TheDeuce]

LucyP said:

So why is it suddenly black? Are you really so naive? It's utter virtual signalling of the worst kind because they are supporting a Marxist organisation and the backlash against BLM has already started.

Is the timing of Mercedes initiative a little virtuous? Yes.

Are BLM pushing a socialist agenda? Yes.

Does Mercedes timing in getting involved with the equality debate = support for BLM? No.

You're mashing facts together and the result is catastrophically flawed logic. If you said that BLM's efforts were a prime factor in why the movement for equality is across the global media, and by extension a major factor in why Mercedes have decided at this time to have their own initiative in support of equality, I would agree. But you can't be that balanced can you? As I said earlier, you seek the extreme and most dramatic elements of each situation.

[longblackcoat]

LucyP said:

So why is it suddenly black? Are you really so naive? It's utter virtual signalling of the worst kind because they are supporting a Marxist organisation and the backlash against BLM has already started.

When you're trying to use alt-right words, watch out for the spelling otherwise people might think you don't know what you're talking about.

Or is 'virtual' signalling something new?

[DOCG]

HustleRussell said:

The statistics indicate that the representation of BAME people and also women within engineering is low compared to the pool.

Why is that?

I have seen a number of initiatives which attempt to address the overwhelming male majority.

The initiatives launched by Hamilton attempt to investigate the first part.

Just because those groups are underrepresented doesn't mean it is the fault of the industry for being exclusive, I would think it much more likely that there are societal reasons as to why those groups are much less likely to pursue engineering as a career. It's not a problem the industry can solve by simply changing its recruiting methods.

I am also not particularly keen on the term "BAME" as it lumps all minority groups in together, I don't believe Asians are unrepresented in engineering considering the huge success of Korean and Japanese firms, countries which probably have far more engineers per capita than the UK.

[Nampahc Niloc]

So having read more of this thread I am now even more confused than before.

Because some people involved in the Black Live Matter movement have other agendas, it means everyone who wants to drive our racism must also support those agendas. Do you really believe that all those protesting around the world don’t care about racial equality and actually want Marxism?

I’ll go back to my poppy analogy. Support for the Armed Forces is generally pretty high amongst the far right. Does this make everyone who wears a poppy a Nazi supporter?

[Nampahc Niloc]

DOCG said:

HustleRussell said:

The statistics indicate that the representation of BAME people and also women within engineering is low compared to the pool.

Why is that?

I have seen a number of initiatives which attempt to address the overwhelming male majority.

The initiatives launched by Hamilton attempt to investigate the first part.

Just because those groups are underrepresented doesn't mean it is the fault of the industry for being exclusive, I would think it much more likely that there are societal reasons as to why those groups are much less likely to pursue engineering as a career. It's not a problem the industry can solve by simply changing its recruiting methods.

I am also not particularly keen on the term "BAME" as it lumps all minority groups in together, I don't believe Asians are unrepresented in engineering considering the huge success of Korean and Japanese firms, countries which probably have far more engineers per capita than the UK.

You’re right, it probably isn’t the fault of the industry. But changes need to happen at all levels of society for real change to happen. It is actually in the industries interest to have a more diverse pool for selection, as it gives you a better chance of getting the best people. Also if a company is solely made up of while middle aged males for example, they’re less likely to make a product that appeals to all sectors of society since they won’t have any experience of what non-white middle aged males want. Market research helps obviously but they workforce will be biased by their own experiences.

[Europa1]

TwentyFive said:

I watched a BBC show last night all about Monaco. It is a 3 part series and the first one took a look at the F1 weekend but interestingly it touched on a similar point to what you said regarding Malaysia.

They spoke with the air traffic controller who runs the helicopters in and out of the principality. He said that because he is a Monegasque citizen as opposed to a resident he gets 'perks' as he put it that other do not. He only pays €700 per month to rent an apartment that would cost anyone else €4,000 in Monaco as the state subsidise him massively.

However for me the most worrying aspect was that he said he also got the air traffic job despite being less qualified than other candidates who applied. This concerned me greatly given the level of responsibility the role carries.

This is the likely unintended consequence of filling roles based on a set diversity percentage rather than purely on ability and qualifications just to meet a quota picked from thin air and the BBC show just happened to highlight it perfectly.

I saw that programme and shared your disquiet regarding the "more qualified" candidates comment.

However, Mercedes do not seem to be suggesting quotas. Toto Wolff's statement was "“We intend to find and attract the very best talents from the broadest possible range of backgrounds, and to creative credible pathways for them to reach our sport, in order to build a stronger and more diverse team in the future.”

[otolith]

LucyP said:

Read the links that I posted. The organisation has openly Marxist aims. Every commentator is saying the same thing, because it's on their website as plain as day and it's why people are now distancing themselves from BLM.

Can you just quote the bits of those pages you think relevant and cross reference them to the works of Marx you think they echo?

(Or are you just using the alt-right habit of calling anything progressive "Marxist"?)

[HustleRussell]

DOCG said:

HustleRussell said:

The statistics indicate that the representation of BAME people and also women within engineering is low compared to the pool.

Why is that?

I have seen a number of initiatives which attempt to address the overwhelming male majority.

The initiatives launched by Hamilton attempt to investigate the first part.

Just because those groups are underrepresented doesn't mean it is the fault of the industry for being exclusive, I would think it much more likely that there are societal reasons as to why those groups are much less likely to pursue engineering as a career. It's not a problem the industry can solve by simply changing its recruiting methods.

I am also not particularly keen on the term "BAME" as it lumps all minority groups in together, I don't believe Asians are unrepresented in engineering considering the huge success of Korean and Japanese firms, countries which probably have far more engineers per capita than the UK.

Exactly, which is why the Hamilton Commission is concerned with researching the current state of play rather than incentivizing or promoting ccertain selected demographics.

As I have said once already in this thread, that is why what is being proposed here is entirely sensible and not in the least bit objectionable.

[DOCG]

longblackcoat said:

Yes, I read the links. I'm ignoring what commentators say, because that's their opinion, and when one of them is Nigel Farage, you'll forgive me for dustrusting his statement as being anything close to fact.

I'm asking you to provide evidence that they're openly Marxist. You're the one asserting this, it's for you to prove it.

To help you, here's a link to the BLM website. Having read through, I can't see Marxism mentioned once, though if I've missed that reference I'll apologise. BLM is a collective of pressure groups with a specific purpose - to stop discrimination. I fully accept that some (possibly many) of the leaders are left-leaning and may well be Marxist, but that doesn't mean that the organisation is.

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

Quotes from your link:

"We engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contexts." The term "Comrade" is strongly associated with Marxism.

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and 'villages' that collectively care for one another"

One of the Marxist principles is that "The nuclear family unit is an economic arrangement structured to maintain the ideological functions of Capitalism".

[IforB]

LucyP said:

It's BLM support. Clear as day and a massive mistake. The Premiership has distanced itself from BLM following their extreme statements and all the Sky pundits removed the badges last night.

For those who question whether BLM are Marxist, follow the links that I posted yesterday and read for yourselves.

Mercedes have shot themselves in the foot on this one.

Why are you so angry about a car colour and why are you so angry about an organisation that wants to make the world more equal and get rid of race based hatred?

Why does that scare you so much?

[Muzzer79]

DOCG said:

longblackcoat said:

Yes, I read the links. I'm ignoring what commentators say, because that's their opinion, and when one of them is Nigel Farage, you'll forgive me for dustrusting his statement as being anything close to fact.

I'm asking you to provide evidence that they're openly Marxist. You're the one asserting this, it's for you to prove it.

To help you, here's a link to the BLM website. Having read through, I can't see Marxism mentioned once, though if I've missed that reference I'll apologise. BLM is a collective of pressure groups with a specific purpose - to stop discrimination. I fully accept that some (possibly many) of the leaders are left-leaning and may well be Marxist, but that doesn't mean that the organisation is.

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

Quotes from your link:

"We engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contexts." The term "Comrade" is strongly associated with Marxism.

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and 'villages' that collectively care for one another"

One of the Marxist principles is that "The nuclear family unit is an economic arrangement structured to maintain the ideological functions of Capitalism".

Do you seriously think that neither of the two examples you've provided could be described as tenuous?

[longblackcoat]

DOCG said:

longblackcoat said:

Yes, I read the links. I'm ignoring what commentators say, because that's their opinion, and when one of them is Nigel Farage, you'll forgive me for dustrusting his statement as being anything close to fact.

I'm asking you to provide evidence that they're openly Marxist. You're the one asserting this, it's for you to prove it.

To help you, here's a link to the BLM website. Having read through, I can't see Marxism mentioned once, though if I've missed that reference I'll apologise. BLM is a collective of pressure groups with a specific purpose - to stop discrimination. I fully accept that some (possibly many) of the leaders are left-leaning and may well be Marxist, but that doesn't mean that the organisation is.

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

Quotes from your link:

"We engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contexts." The term "Comrade" is strongly associated with Marxism.

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and 'villages' that collectively care for one another"

One of the Marxist principles is that "The nuclear family unit is an economic arrangement structured to maintain the ideological functions of Capitalism".

"Comrade" = Marxist? You need to do a lot better than that. On your second point, that's hardly a central point of Marxism. Even were that to be so, the idea of community-based support is not restricted to Marxists.

I'm not saying that BLM are a right-wing organisation or anything so silly, and of course they're challenging the current system, the one which has led to the disempowerment of so many people of colour. But to say that this means they're Marxists (and therefore about to take over the world) is ludicrous.

We need to challenge the status quo - if we don't, we just end up with what we have at the moment, and that's hardly a good place.

http://www.critique-sociale.info/1148/the-basic-pr...

[DOCG]

Muzzer79 said:

Do you seriously think that neither of the two examples you've provided could be described as tenuous?

I'm simply providing you with the other side of the argument, as someone asked for clarification based on the organisation's stated aims. For most people the term comrade is strongly associated with Marxism. Tenuous they are but they do give an implication as well as the political views of the founders. All I am doing is explaining why some get that impression.

[anonymous-user]

So, given this new found humanity in F1, which is certainly well overdue, presumably we’ve seen the last GPs in China, Bahrain etc?

[TheDeuce]

REALIST123 said:

So, given this new found humanity in F1, which is certainly well overdue, presumably we’ve seen the last GPs in China, Bahrain etc?

Turn that easy criticism in to an opportunity. If they continue to race in less.. ummm... 'woke' places then those watching their home race (albeit on TV because they can't afford to get in to the venue) will tune in expecting to see a race, and in addition will receive a 2 hour lecture on how to think differently and demand equality at work.

There is an argument that the places that don't subscribe to your message, are the places you should travel to. So long as you accept that they may not give a toss about your message when you arrive.

[Exige77]

REALIST123 said:

So, given this new found humanity in F1, which is certainly well overdue, presumably we’ve seen the last GPs in China, Bahrain etc?

F1 and Daimler Benz are commercial organisations that exist only to make money.

That is fine and normal. We all benefit from commercial success.

Commercial organisations support good or political causes if it helps them achieve commercial success.

Being a responsible employer and treating their employees fairly and without discrimination is all part of good practice.

If we all stopped dealing with regimes around the world we don’t agree with, the world would be very different.

Edited for typo

Edited by Exige77 on Wednesday 1st July 13:50

[DOCG]

longblackcoat said:

"Comrade" = Marxist? You need to do a lot better than that. On your second point, that's hardly a central point of Marxism. Even were that to be so, the idea of community-based support is not restricted to Marxists.

I'm not saying that BLM are a right-wing organisation or anything so silly, and of course they're challenging the current system, the one which has led to the disempowerment of so many people of colour. But to say that this means they're Marxists (and therefore about to take over the world) is ludicrous.

We need to challenge the status quo - if we don't, we just end up with what we have at the moment, and that's hardly a good place.

http://www.critique-sociale.info/1148/the-basic-pr...

I wasn't referring to community support, but the challenge against the traditional family structure (which is hardly exclusive to the west as was claimed in the BLM manifesto).

Which "system" are you referring to?

[otolith]

DOCG said:

longblackcoat said:

"Comrade" = Marxist? You need to do a lot better than that. On your second point, that's hardly a central point of Marxism. Even were that to be so, the idea of community-based support is not restricted to Marxists.

I'm not saying that BLM are a right-wing organisation or anything so silly, and of course they're challenging the current system, the one which has led to the disempowerment of so many people of colour. But to say that this means they're Marxists (and therefore about to take over the world) is ludicrous.

We need to challenge the status quo - if we don't, we just end up with what we have at the moment, and that's hardly a good place.

http://www.critique-sociale.info/1148/the-basic-pr...

I wasn't referring to community support, but the challenge against the traditional family structure (which is hardly exclusive to the west as was claimed in the BLM manifesto).

I think that given BLM's focus and grievances, you might want to consider the relevance of this to their position on the dominance of the Western model of the nuclear family;

https://www.un.org/development/desa/family/wp-cont...

[anonymous-user]

Exige77 said:

REALIST123 said:

So, given this new found humanity in F1, which is certainly well overdue, presumably we’ve seen the last GPs in China, Bahrain etc?

F1 and Daimler Benz are commercial organisations that exist only to make money.

That is fine and normal. We all benefit from commercial success.

Commercial organisations support good or political causes if it helps them achieve commercial success.

Being a responsible employer and treating their employees fairly and without discrimination is all part of good practice.

If we all stopped dealing with regimes around the world we don’t agree with, the world would be very different.

Edited for typo

Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 1st July 13:50

So you're saying that Mercedes are only supporting the BLM movement for commercial reasons?

I believe that Mercedes were being a responsible employer and treating their employees fairly and without discrimination before recent events.

You're right, if we all stopped dealing with regimes around the world we don’t agree with, the world would be very different. Let's give it a go.