Google has enabled a system for identifying “black owned” businesses. This can not be morally or rationally defended. It is obviously a response to a credible threat.https://t.co/bStLYPFEYQ
— Bret Weinstein (@BretWeinstein) August 2, 2020
३ ऑगस्ट, २०२०
I don't agree that it takes a threat to motivate Google to do this.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
११३ टिप्पण्या:
Singling out businesses based upon the skin color of the proprietors is the very definition of racism.
Maybe it's a heart.Maybe it's also the profile of a sofa or easy chair.
Symbols matter? They did this previously when they weaponized the rainbow. Google, under its umbrella corporation Alphabet, are well-established for steering.
So now we're labeling business on the race of the owner of the business?
So we're all good deciding on what businesses to patronize based on race?
Just want to be clear on the new rules.
Google is doing "women-led" as well.
They can do "LGTB+-led" as well, but the plus/hyphen sign might mess people up.
Google should google 'unintended consequences'.
I'm so opposed to choosing businesses by the race of it's owners, I will avoid any business listed as owned by a privileged class. I noticed this and have already avoided a restaurant because of it.
Them: Make minority businesses and business owners more visible!
Us: OK, here's what Google's doing to hel...
Them: Not like that!
I actually applaud Google for this. Good for them.
I don't either. Given their behavoir of late it seems fairly reasonable to infer that the decision makers at Google (of whom no doubt are predominantly vacuous millenial progs) did this without any prompting from any outside forces.
I know that these vacuous millenial progs mean well, but it certainly seems a little sinister to go out of their way to lable business based upon a race or ethnic group. That sort of thing has happened... elsewhere in the past. At minimum it seems a bit divisive rather than inclusive.
“So we're all good deciding on what businesses to patronize based on race?
Just want to be clear on the new rules.”
I recall seeing advertisements for business who labeled themselves as “Christian owned”. Why is it wrong to label businesses as being black owned, but not Christian owned?
easier to avoid them? anyone think of that?
Do these people realize that Black people are only 13% of the population?
Go woke, go broke.
Can we find the jewish owned businesses too?
-XC
PS - Flair!
Bret W is a little too sure that other people share his morality.
This though is another example of what I mean when I say “the return of John C Calhoun.”
I agree with him that this is an odious thing.
Progressive apartheid.
"Maybe it's a heart."
Or a nice, round, spankable thing.
Who confirms it? What if that crazy white lady who was posing as black a few years back started a business?
Is there a committee or something? Because choosing a name for THAT would be delicate.
"I will avoid any business listed as owned by a privileged class."
This. Seems like this shit always backfires.
gspencer said...
Maybe it's a heart.Maybe it's also the profile of a sofa or easy chair.
Or boobs. Or a big ol' bubble butt when viewed from above.
According to my google machine: "🖤 Black Heart. A heart shaded completely black. May be used to express morbidity, sorrow, or a form of dark humor.
We are so going down the wrong path.
Correction: THEY are so going down the wrong path. I refuse to have anything to do with this morally reprehensible movement.
First they labeled black businesses, but because I wasn't black, I didn't speak out.
Good. Now we can boycott black-owned businesses. Or target them — just sayin’.
And the Urban Dictionary (via google) says this:
"A black heart has a completely different meaning from a red heart. A black heart is often associated with death, evil, or being emotionally cold (without compassion, feeling or love)."
Why is Google such a cesspit of racism? Equating black business owners with death, evil, and, worst of all, emotional coldness? As the intellectual and political leader of the Democrats says, C'mon man!
Blogger Severin said...
I'm so opposed to choosing businesses by the race of it's owners, I will avoid any business listed as owned by a privileged class. I noticed this and have already avoided a restaurant because of it.
8/3/20, 1:37 PM
------------------
Yep..me too.
If Google would only identify some black owned search engines that I could patronize.
Govt has been identifying minority-owned businesses for decades. I believe it's public info.
What is the "threat" though? They're not the ones being extorted by BLM.
Oh I get it now.
NM.
Why only black owned businesses? Jew owned, Muslim owned, white owned, gay, lesbian or trans owned. Woman owned, hispanic white and hispanic POC owned, asian by nationality owned ( they all aren't alike). I'm sure there are others I overlooked. That way the members of the public can patronize or avoid whom they wish.
What symbol will they use for businesses owned by Juden -- or "Hong Kong Sympathisers", or Taiwanese? How will they verify these classifications -- one-drop + 51% ownership rule?
I don't believe it takes a threat either. But now I know we're not to shop
According to one leftist woman, Trump's giving out special MAGA hats to donors is a call-back to Nazi's making Jews wear yellow stars. I assume she will be equally positive that this means that Google is Hitler?
Let's segregate the races!!! What a progressive idea!! Only buy from white stores...oh wait. Way to divide us more Google!!! Way to go!!
Google is leftwing and the leftists want all this segregation and separation.
Do they see the insanity?
Here's the video on the lefty woman believing that giving out MAGA hats is just like making Jews wear yellow stars (albeit the complete opposite):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDXqWjX-suU
Given that Google failed their "Don't be evil" motto at least a decade ago, who can tell?
If you listen to BLM, America is so racist that this can only hurt black businesses. Now white people can easily find the businesses not to patronize.
Flip the scenario so that Google points out White-owned businesses. Get the picture? Shades of Old Dixie!
It is obviously a response to a credible threat.
Not obvious, but certainly possible and perhaps probable.
Here, BLACKS tried to extort money and favors from a yuppy-ized restaurant district in Louisville, and vandalized an outfit which didn't go along. (h/t Sailer)
They can do "LGTB+-led" as well, but the plus/hyphen sign might mess people up.
Everyone would understand the Pink Triangle™.
Agree. What sort of threat can be made against an entity such as Google? Other than government threats.
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
"I noticed this and have already avoided a restaurant because of it."
Don't tell us. Tell the restaurant owner.
They need to add an asterisk to denote that the business is still operational after the burning and looting. Until then I will just assume that antifa burned it to the ground.
It's all a result of Critical Theory. Tear down societal structures like color-blindness that are, at the core, oppressive and racist. Which is bewildering because when I worked at a tutoring center in Bolivar County in the 60's, I thought for sure that we were doing a good thing.
As someone else recently said about the Woke crowd, we are seeing “virtue gone clinically insane”.
- Krumhorn
So Bret Weinstein obviously feels that setting up a system to label stores based on the race or ethnicity of the owner is a bad idea and immoral. I agree. The whole point of the generations long movement against racism in America is to treat individual people like individual people and not as some representative of whatever racial/ethnic group they may belong to. However, he is engaging in an error that is common on the Left. He assumes as de facto that those on the left have no bad motivations. Therefore since labeling businesses by race/ethnicity of the owner is bad, and Google is a Left-wing institution, the motivation of Google to do this must be something else, and he surmised that there was some credible threat against Google or someone in Google to compel them to do this. He seems to ignore the much more plausible idea, that the people in Google simply don't think labeling a business by the race/ethnicity of it's owner is a bad thing to do. In fact lots of people on the left probably think this way. Given his experience with his former school where the institution itself favored some sort of racial day of exclusion where people who were not people of color were forced off campus, I'm surprised that he doesn't seem to think it a likely case that Google as an institution favors the idea of labeling businesses by the race/ethnicity of the owner.
I also assume they will be adding symbols for Asian owned, Jewish owned, Muslim owned, etc. And I'm always on the lookout for a good white supremacist eatery.
More white supremacy. Who but a racist would associate blacks (businesses!) with prison orange?
Now off to read comments if I was first to see how problematic this is.
I can't wait to see Google's design for Jewish businesses. A yellow star of David?
Didn’t Google invent an algorithm that identified black-owned faces?
Asking for a friend.
And pink for LGBQT, Yellow for Jew, Green for Criminal ...
Ask the NBA how kneeling has put so many butts-in-seats.
Inga- if a Christian owned business wants to label itself "Christian" that is a decision made by the owners of said business. And considering how hostile the collective left are to "Christian" - I'd say it's a risky decision. But it's a decision made by that particular business owner.
The collective state-google idea of dividing us all up by skin color is ... creepy.
The racial component isn't "wrong" - it's... racist.
As someone else recently said about the Woke crowd, we are seeing “virtue gone clinically insane”.
Some crazy academics claim that a biologist's dumb joke about flatworms is racist and sexist.
Coyne said "'Any Internet argument will eventually devolve to comparisons with Hitler.' Now it’s 'systemic racism' instead of Hitler."
Singling out businesses based upon the skin color of the proprietors is the very definition of racism.
The federal government has been practicing exactly that sort of anti-white racism and anti-male sexiam for years, e.g.:
"The 8(a) Program offers a broad scope of assistance to firms that are owned and controlled at least 51% by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals.
"socially and economically disadvantaged" = Newspeak for "everyone except white men".
So if I claim to identify as black like Shaun King or Rachel Dolezol and Hispanic/Puerto Rican can I get double google love for my business?
And someone mentioned "led". Is it led or LED? Never heard of that group before but seems to have something to do with LGBetc. How can I claim that privilege? Do I get a a triple helping of googlejuice?
John Henry
Wait!!.....Has someone threatened Google that if they don't promote the symbol, then.......nice little business you have here.
Thanks for the heads up Google you fucking pieces of racist shit.
'I recall seeing advertisements for business who labeled themselves as “Christian owned”. Why is it wrong to label businesses as being black owned, but not Christian owned?'
Perhaps because race and religion aren't the same thing? And a business self-identifying as Christian isn't the same thing as an advertising platform singling out certain businesses for advancement because of the race of their ownership.
maybe not a direct threat
...but they exist in a climate of threat
...and here we are again!! 1/8th drop of African blood??
Inga:
When I see a business card highlighting what a swell Christian the owner is, I immediately place a hand over my wallet. Experience dictates such. YMMV.
But in your link there were two key words,"labeled themselves". It makes a difference.
Shakedown: BLM Demands Protection Fees from Louisville Business
https://trends.gab.com/visit?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Fcrime%2F2020%2F08%2F02%2Fblm-demands-cut-louisville-businesses-profits-protection%2F
Blogger stevew said...
Agree. What sort of threat can be made against an entity such as Google? Other than government threats.
Boycott them. Don't use their services. Use Bing, DDG or other search engines. Use LibreOffice instead of Google Docs. BitChute instead of YouTube. WordPress instead of blogger and so on.
If enough people boycotted them, it would get their attention. I don't have much hope of it happening, though.
There are lots of Google alternatives. Here's a list
https://www.techspot.com/news/80729-complete-list-alternatives-all-google-products.html
What could the credible threat really be? I don't see it. BLM is going to stop using Google? Sounds OK to me. They have delusions of being The Chinese Communist Party.
Expat(ish) said...
Can we find the jewish owned businesses too?
They'll use yellow stars for the Jewish-owned businesses.
Inga: The issue is not about how businesses describe themselves, but about whether Google should approvingly, or disapprovingly, label them.
Do black-owned businesses opt in to this? Or do they opt out?
Just want to be clear on the new rules.”
I recall seeing advertisements for business who labeled themselves as “Christian owned”. Why is it wrong to label businesses as being black owned, but not Christian owned?
Inga is so stupid she does not realize the threat implicit in the "Black Owned" thing. They are already extorting businesses. Get out of your all-white suburb, Inga and see the world.
Amazon does this crap too. They give you filters for everyone but one racial group and sex. That sounds like blatant discrimination to me.
What they need to add would be "patriarchy owned".
I worked for a guy whose mother was Bolivian, but he was as white as you get, a ginger really, and he was born and raised a wealthy American. He always listed his company legally as minority owned and took advantage of all the perks you get from that. I don't blame him. I blame the government. It was totally unnecessary help at someone else's expense, and based on racism.
How does one see google's racist symbology?
I did teh google [detroit, booksellers], and found the Verge's example racist business, "Source Booksellers" and can see the address, hours, phone, etc, but no funny symbols.
The image in the Verge article isn't an honest screen capture because the background image, which is similar to what I see, is tilted and the overlaid "Highlights" image with the racist symbols isn't tilted.
"Why is it wrong to label businesses as black-owned but not Christian owned?"
Because when you see a business labeled "Christian owned," which incidentally I'm not entirely sure I've ever seen in real life, you know that the business owner went to some trouble to put that physical message up there. And the reason only a few businesses do that is in part, aside from the owner not wanting to do it, that most non-Christians would see such a message as an invitation to go elsewhere.
We know the point of these message is to encourage people to discriminate on the base of identity. Now that is what the modern left wants us to do.
But if you are not left-wing you're probably going to see this as a step in the wrong direction. And the bad part here is that Google is actively encouraging this.
It's called "white privilege". The privilege of being singled out for discrimination without any redress.
I'm wondering why this matters, and what the purpose is: am I not supposed to patron businesses by the content of their wares, but by the color of the masters skin?
Judging by the people I met when I interviewed there, I think Google is perfectly capable of doing this on their own without threats, unless he means threats from the employees.
Anyway, can we identify Jewish owned business with little yellow stars? Asking fur einen Freund.
Blogger Inga said...
“So we're all good deciding on what businesses to patronize based on race?
Just want to be clear on the new rules.”
I recall seeing advertisements for business who labeled themselves as “Christian owned”. Why is it wrong to label businesses as being black owned, but not Christian owned?
8/3/20, 1:52 PM
So are you agreeing that it is acceptable to choose based on race, as it is to choose based on religion? Because it seems that there are a lot who 'boycot' chik-fil-a based on religion.
Again, just want to be clear on the rules.
Like all the MLK Blvd signs, it lets Whitey know he's in the wrong part of town.
I can envision a future USA where blacks are once again segregated.
Except this time it's gonna be voluntary on their part.
I guess they are using a red heart because the yellow star has already been done?
What! You say, the yellow star had a completely different expected outcome?
Really? And we know this, how?
Inga said...
I recall seeing advertisements for business who labeled themselves as “Christian owned”. Why is it wrong to label businesses as being black owned, but not Christian owned?
If a business wants to label themselves as [FILL IN THE BLANK] owned, they're free to do so.
Why does Google have to go out of their way to get involved in this labeling? And why just for black-owned businesses?
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
[sarc]Wow. MLK was a simpleton, wasn't he?[/sarc]
Progs: America is racist!
Progs: let’s clearly label all black owned business so Americans can patronize them!
Non-progs: uh...
They did need to be threatened by the Feds to stop allowing people to target their real estate ads by race.
Well, if the country is as racist as claimed, that means the tens of millions of racists out there will have an easier time identifying the businesses to avoid.
Alinsky Rule 12 reversed. They want to single out and doxx the vulnerable in order to extort concessions? Fine: here, where they single out their favored ones, we can now track and trace them and make a point of boycotting them. They have done the hard work of identifying and authenticating the proper targets. Not that we have anything personal against these owners and they’re employees —any more than the gay couple had any personal trouble with the owner of Mastercraft Bakers, it’s all very civilized. But there IS the principal of the thing...
If only we had protected the freedom of association that caused younger Althouse to weep. Negroes could have their own businesses already or shop where they were welcome. Which would be nearly everywhere that they behaved.
What percent of a businesses owners have to be black in order to qualify for this? Does the one-drop rule apply?
Inga said, "I recall seeing advertisements for business who labeled themselves as “Christian owned”. Why is it wrong to label businesses as being black owned, but not Christian owned?"
Was there a search engine that promoted those Christian businesses? Did Christian businesses get free advertising from google? It is entertaining watching you do the limbo.
C'mon people. It's as plain as the nose on your face. Teevee watchers are told that POCs are disadvantaged and wipipo are a'coastin' to success so we must all do our part to drag down the privileged and raise up the downtrodden. It's only fair! And they won't spit in your coffee because they're better than you. Makes perfect sense. And you can brag to your friends about what a good person you are. You can even write ecstatic reviews on Yelp. And pan the wipipo's joint. Social justice here we come. I feel better already.
Makes the looting a more guilt free activity.
If black owned businesses did not want the labeling/promotion from Google, we would be hearing about lawsuits. If they thought it was racist, they would say so. This isn’t an insult or threat to black businesses, nor have black businesses threatened Google to promote them this way. So it’s a win/win except for rightists who just don’t like the fact that some black owned business may now see more traffic.
Igna said...
"I recall seeing advertisements for business who labeled themselves as “Christian owned”. Why is it wrong to label businesses as being black owned, but not Christian owned?"
I just want to make sure I'm following you here, Igna. Are you saying that both are "wrong", or that neither is "wrong"?
Shakedown: BLM Demands Protection Fees from Louisville Business
They even want to post a rating system.
Big letters that could be confused with health inspection ratings plus coercion, what could go wrong?
John Borell said...
So now we're labeling business on the race of the owner of the business?
I guess the alternative was to make White businesses put a White Cross in their windows. Jewish businesses would, of course have a Yellow Star.
What could go wrong?
“Inga is so stupid she does not realize the threat implicit in the "Black Owned" thing. They are already extorting businesses. Get out of your all-white suburb, Inga and see the world.”
Michael K is so senile he doesn’t understand that a company as powerful as Google wont be extorted by anyone.
I'd prefer KOREAN owned businesses
because of the QUALITY
Inga said...
Michael K is so senile he doesn’t understand that a company as powerful as Google wont be extorted by anyone.
Inga has such poor reading comprehension that she doesn't understand who is being extorted.
That's our model Democrat - dumb and obedient to the cause.
In fairness, I think she just wants to be admired for what she thinks is a good person. She will never ever take the red pill.
Just like MLK Jr pictured it: using race alone to decide which businesses to patronize.
The reason Google did this should be as fucking obvious as the nose on ones fucking face pre-COVID. Here is the explanation. If one cares to do the work, one can find a lot of examples like that one from Minneapolis and elsewhere, like this example.
Rioters needed an easy way to tell which businesses to loot without being racist in doing it. Google has stepped up to the plate.
george floyd arrest bodycam footage leaked
Am I the only one who remembers the "Blackout" that happened earlier this summer when Black people were supposed to not use the main economy and only spend their money in Black businesses to show their buying power?
That worked almost as well as the Goya boycott.
John Henry said. .
There are lots of Google alternatives. Here's a list
Thanks John Henry. I use Bing religiously, but haven't had time to research further on "avoiding Google whenever possible". This will be a big help.
What kind of person Googles a business before they loot it?
Michael K is so senile he doesn’t understand that a company as powerful as Google wont be extorted by anyone.
Inga is so stupid she thinks the intimidation and extortion were directed at Google instead of small businesses.
What is the legal definition of a black owned business? All owners required to be black or the majority are black or do they have to calculate the percentage black each owner is, etc.
It used to be if a person was part black and part white, they were considered black. So if my ancestry is 2% sub-Ssharan Africa and 98% European, am I white or black?
As a country, we are going backwards. Focusing on skin color over character is a dangerous road to travel.
If The Magic Negro opened a store, since he's half-black, what design and color would his heart be?
THEOLDMAN
"So if my ancestry is 2% sub-Ssharan Africa and 98% European, am I white or black?"
One drop rule baby...you might as well be the ace of spades according to Democrats.
6:52 Yancey=
you got it.
Andy NGO shows us Portland and the white left's toddler mafia in action.
Not found on CNN
Miachael K is so senile he doesn’t know that it is Google under discussion here. As if Google could be extorted.
Bret Weinstein is losing it:
Killer Mike (from the excellent interracial rap group Run The Jewels) has a TV show where he tries to live his life through supporting black-owned businesses, showing how difficult it can be to even FIND them.
I think Google merely saw the show.
"What kind of person Googles a business before they loot it?"
The smart looters. I don't think it's real common thing, but I'm pretty sure this has been many times in recent lootings. Today's youth doesn't take a piss without consulting Google for the latest instructions on how to do it in proper woke fashion.
Why would a potential customer care about the (so-called) race of business owners? How does that compute amidst the legitimate competitive factors, which are Price, Quality, Service, Integrity, Convenience, Customer Reviews, Location, and (for some)contribution to the community(ies) in which the business operates? According to my PhD spouse with credentials in evolutionary theory and genetics (she supervised molecular genetics research) there is no science-based foundation for the concept of “race”. We would be well-served to deep-six the term. What Google is reportedly doing is absolutely ill-conceived. Just stop it.
It looks like something that would be used in the credits of a blaxploitation film. Makes me uncomfortable. Black people apparently have to be marked with something really groovy, man.
Terry Ott said...
Why would a potential customer care about the (so-called) race of business owners?
[Rolls eyes]
It'll be interesting to see whether that helps or hinders the businesses that show the symbol.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा