What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! 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!

New Zealand 2 will deal a massive blow to NZ rugby

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
5,223
Absolute nonsense. There's huge social and cultural pressure for people to categorise by ethnicity and race in our society at the moment, and only the wilfully blind would pretend otherwise.

At the last RLWC alone there were significant groups of people, including public figures, openly accusing players of being race and cultural traitors, and others openly lamenting the fact that players chose to play for their country rather than their "heritage" for 'the good of the game' and other such nonsense. You've also had blatant mercenary behaviour in international RL for a few years now, with many players making themselves available for whoever has a spot and/or is offering the biggest pay check, over their nation.

Frankly, the whole concept of national identity has been conflated with ethnic identity, and national teams are rapidly being replaced with glorified ethnic teams as a result.

All of that behaviour is disgusting and would have been called out if the victims and culprits identities were slightly different. The two tier policing of these issues in the mainstream culture is very unhealthy as well.
Calm down mate, To'o, Crichton (actually Samoan born) and Luai actively chose Samoa. Tino and Haas actively chose Australia. You are reading into it too much
 

Matua

Bench
Messages
4,448
No, you're just parroting semantic word game arguments, that you clearly don't even truly understand, that I frankly can't be bothered with anymore.

Your argument, or rather the argument you are repeating, is inherently race essentialist because, whether you realise and accept it or not, you're arguing that there're intangible elements of a person's cultural identity that is handed down by birth that can't be escaped. In other words you're saying the nature of e.g. Luke Keary's grandmother being Irish ipso facto makes him Irish as well, which is false on face value.
Let's move away from sport to a clearer historic example for a second; you would argue that the nature of her birth and ancestry, i.e. her race, means that, e.g., Cynthia Ann Parker (Google is your friend) was a "white" (a loaded term in of itself in this context) American despite the fact that she had little to no memory of her American family, lost her ability to speak English fluently, completely abandoned Texan cultural norms, assimilated completely into Comanche culture and society, had a Comanche family and children, and the attempt to reassimilate her into Texan society after she was recaptured totally failed. I would not, I'd say she was a Comanche.

E.g. Samoan Australian, and other dual cultural identities, are oxymorons. A nonsense facade of contradictory terms that can only exist in ideal conditions. At a base level you cannot be both, and let's not flaff around and jump straight to the extreme example of why; unfortunately the worse has happened and Samoa and Australia are at war, Now what? Are the Samoan Australians picking up their guns for Samoa or Australia? No matter how much you may want to, you cannot be both, and you are not both. Which leads into a much deeper discussion of what are you then, that I simply don't have the time for at the moment.

You are the one with screwy ideas on citizenship, culture, etc, you just don't realise it because you, others that think like you, and the philosophical and intellectual traditions that these ideas are derived from, have been a protected species in the mainstream public arena for far too long now...
Hilarious that you're claiming semantics and word games when you've written two responses of world salad that even Jordan Peterson would look at and blush.

My argument is simply this, and has always been simply this - culture is not zero sum, hell even nationality is not zero sum. If you're honestly claiming it is then you don't live in reality.

Your Commanche analogy is frankly stupid and has no relation to what we're discussing. Luai grew up in Australia with his parents who retained their culture. He didn't grow up with a fair dinkum Aussie couple whose ancestors came out here in chains in the 1800s and not knowing either of his other cultures.

Cultural identities are not oxymorons at all, Australia is full of mixed cultural identities. I'm really confused about what Australia you're living in as your comments suggest it's a different one than I live in. I've been to Greek clubs where they celebrate their Greek and Aussie heritage, I have ABC friends who celebrate their Asian cultures while having the thickets accents outside of my mate from Perth, etc etc.

Your argument, or rather the argument you are repeating, is inherently race essentialist because, whether you realise and accept it or not, you're arguing that there're intangible elements of a person's cultural identity that is handed down by birth that can't be escaped. In other words you're saying the nature of e.g. Luke Keary's grandmother being Irish ipso facto makes him Irish as well, which is false on face value.
You're just making up bollocks here. I haven't said anyone has to adopt an ancestral culture. To go back to our usual example, if Luai wanted to ignore his Samoan and/or Maori background then that's up to him, but he is happy to embrace them both, also up to him, and not for you or I to decide. Same with Luke Keary.
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
20,433
Why can't people be proud of their ethnicity and nationality?

I'm an Aussie of Eastern European descent. I'm proud of my ancestral heritage. I'm proud to say I was born in Australia.
Dane is against it because it means his beloved rugby union has been overtaken in samoa and tonga by rugby league

dealing with the collapse of the brumbies crowds was bad enough now he’s seeing league taking over the Pacific
 

Gobsmacked

Bench
Messages
2,649

"You can talk about the lure of the black jersey all you like, but many of those who wear it seem content to do so on a part-time basis. They certainly don’t appear to have a huge appetite for Super Rugby.
I get this from a NZR and Sky Television point of view.
They need Super Rugby to be attracting eyeballs. They use stars to sell the game to viewers and the fewer the stars, the fewer the eyeballs."
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
20,433

"You can talk about the lure of the black jersey all you like, but many of those who wear it seem content to do so on a part-time basis. They certainly don’t appear to have a huge appetite for Super Rugby.
I get this from a NZR and Sky Television point of view.
They need Super Rugby to be attracting eyeballs. They use stars to sell the game to viewers and the fewer the stars, the fewer the eyeballs."
“Funding club rugby isn’t sending NZR broke. It’s not the cost of staging the Heartland Championship that forced NZR into a deal with private equity firm Silver Lake.

Trying to pay All Blacks their market value is by far the greatest drain on their resources.

That’s partly why they sweeten deals with lucrative sabbaticals.”
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,605
Hilarious that you're claiming semantics and word games when you've written two responses of world salad that even Jordan Peterson would look at and blush.
Nah, you just don't understand a bunch of it because you're not equip for the discussion.

You don't truly understand the ideas we're discussing, or have any basis in the ideological traditions they sprout from, and are just parroting garbage you've heard from talking heads.
My argument is simply this, and has always been simply this - culture is not zero sum, hell even nationality is not zero sum. If you're honestly claiming it is then you don't live in reality.
I never claimed that they were. In fact I went to great lengths to show that they weren't.
Your Commanche analogy is frankly stupid and has no relation to what we're discussing. Luai grew up in Australia with his parents who retained their culture. He didn't grow up with a fair dinkum Aussie couple whose ancestors came out here in chains in the 1800s and not knowing either of his other cultures.
The analogy works fine, you're just attempting to avoid addressing the substance of the argument because your scripted dialogue has run out.

BTW, you clearly didn't look into Cynthia Ann Parker's story, let alone other relevant examples lol.
Cultural identities are not oxymorons at all, Australia is full of mixed cultural identities. I'm really confused about what Australia you're living in as your comments suggest it's a different one than I live in. I've been to Greek clubs where they celebrate their Greek and Aussie heritage, I have ABC friends who celebrate their Asian cultures while having the thickets accents outside of my mate from Perth, etc etc.
Another point, another dodge.

Either address the substance or maybe, by some miracle, you could reflect on the fact that you can't.
You're just making up bollocks here. I haven't said anyone has to adopt an ancestral culture. To go back to our usual example, if Luai wanted to ignore his Samoan and/or Maori background then that's up to him, but he is happy to embrace them both, also up to him, and not for you or I to decide. Same with Luke Keary.
I never said that you were attempting to force people to adopt their ancestral culture, not directly anyway, but that's a different discussion. Either way it's totally irrelevant to the fact that your argument is race essentialist.

The fact that you are saying that ethnicity is inherited by birth at all makes your position race essentialist. Whether or not people choose to identify with that ethnic inheritance is totally irrelevant.

So yeah, that was a waste of time. It'd be nice if you'd take your cosmopolitan soft bigotry elsewhere from now on.
 
Last edited:
Top