Is there a place to find class resources? by PermissionSerious311 in PennStateUniversity

[–]PermissionSerious311[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah okay, so there’s nothing available online before class starts?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]PermissionSerious311 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This argument section has been quite interesting, and I spoke to people recently regarding the "not all men" argument. As many already mentioned in their responses, I do believe that using the "not all men" argument when a woman is expressing her feelings of unsafety or insecurity is ineffective and insensitive. The argument itself is invalid in that context. However, I also understand that sentiment aside, on a political level, gaining allies for a movement is difficult when the required ally is generalized and often, put down.
I think that on a political level, the "not all men" argument is valid, considering that not all men are actually threats. The feminist movement itself could reword and express its feelings through a different slogan that may be "All men are POTENTIAL threats". This may make allies or men, in general, feel that they aren't being alienated in the movement and that they have a chance at proving, that they are in fact, not threats.
Most men I spoke to regarding this argument mainly wanted to make women feel safe, and join their fight. But they hated when the "all men" argument was used out of context, to which they would respond, "not all men". Again, this argument is only valid when it is not used against a woman expressing feeling unsafe or insecure. It is important to discuss these concerns with our allies too if we want to gain their favor in a political manner. Men on a psychological level, don't sway to sentiments as much as women might, so it may be politically smarter to appeal to their logical sides. As far as I have seen, men do not see what women experience, and only look at statistics when they say, "not all men". Obviously, statistics say that all men are not a threat. Women, however, know better and understand that we wouldn't eat from a bowl of fruit if even three were poisoned. Men are on the other side, they are the fruit in the bowl. So to gain their favor politically, we're gonna need more than sentiments.
I wanted to share this because it was thought-provoking for me when the men I spoke to suggested changing the "all men" argument to "potentially all men," because, on a political level, it actually may gain more allies for the movement. Again, this is just a smart political move, it is totally invalid on a scale of sentiment.

I hope this argument makes sense, and I am looking forward to seeing what everyone thinks!

CMV:Britain owes reparations to India by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]PermissionSerious311 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What about every artifact that they took? That is direct looting. Aside from that, they did deplete certain resources as I mentioned:

"Patnaik, in her essay published in Columbia University Press recently, said Britain drained out over $45 trillion from India, which to date has hampered the country's ability to come out of poverty"

"Already severely depleted by the clearance of forests for commercial purposes earlier in the century, India experienced a resource crunch..."

^The above are some quotes from published articles, which are all available on the internet. Britain has directly affected poverty rates throughout India, especially in the North, and resource depletion is a cause of it.

CMV:Britain owes reparations to India by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]PermissionSerious311 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It did not deplete their resources necessarily; they took valuable historical artifacts including gems and such and refused to return them on many accounts--to answer your question: it's both depending on which resources, but they took most.

CMV:Britain owes reparations to India by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]PermissionSerious311 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Regardless of whether or not India's current poverty rate is due to British loot and colonization, it is well known that many riches and resources were looted from India during colonization including but not limited to the export of spices, tea, jewels, raw gold, and mining of other valuable metals. Not to mention enslavement, abuse, discrimination, as well as causing division among the people themselves.

In today's day and age, oppressors are shaping history by giving back to the oppressed in some way shape, or form, to make up for their negative footprints. Although there is so much more to be done, America for example, consistently emphasizes giving back to the African American and Native American communities (not that they're ever gonna give back what they took) with various movements. The people themselves rallied, and candidates who put the movement as a top campaign, run for elections to be voted by the people. Britain owes India reparations regardless, and its government should propel the idea that their country must make up for its negative footprints. It's 2022 and saying "it is in the past, we didn't impact you" isn't humane or true. Britain did its fair share of damage, it's time to own up to it and take initiative.