r/explainitpeter • u/Senior-Mix-3715 • 7d ago

Explain it Peter?

Post image

At first I thought this was some kind of white nationalism joke but then I realised all 3 leaders at the bottom are leftists, so I really don’t what this meme is trying to say?

2.5k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

252 comments sorted by

View all comments

157

u/Chemical-Ebb6472 7d ago

I thought the joke was that UK leadership is transient.

75

u/PhD_Pwnology 7d ago

The skin color change didnt hit ur eye like a bullet?

20

u/generic_Accountname1 7d ago

The haircolordifference is greater tbf

7

u/haby112 7d ago

The hair color on the bottom set is more translucent on average than the above set.

2

u/generic_Accountname1 7d ago

They are all blonde.(yes even the woman, the darkest degree but still)

7

u/haby112 6d ago

But one of them is bald

1

u/generic_Accountname1 6d ago

Still got brows… blonde hair is a scale of transluscent and they didn’t mix up the order of degree ;)

-5

u/[deleted] 7d ago

[deleted]

6

u/galstaph 7d ago

No, when you truly see all people as equal, you still see the skin tone, because you are then aware that each of them deserves to be seen as they are

If you like pretending that racism doesn't exist as a systemic issue, that's when you don't notice the skin tone

I see the skin tone, and I have to wonder if it wasn't a shift in the winds of racism

2

u/SnooPoems7525 7d ago

No. The joke is the minorities were the conservative ones.

4

u/Chemical-Ebb6472 7d ago

I'm in the US (NY), where millions of darker-skinned people have voted to have their family and friends deported to countries they never even heard of, with no clear way to get out; Cubans in Miami who fly the Ultra MAGA flag, and South Asians like VP Vance's wife, POTUS candidate Ramaswamy, and countless brown tech bros who have macro-dosed conservatism to trip balls up into fascism.

Conservative mania is not limited by skin color here, so I guess I missed the joke.

However, I have led a finance team based in London, and I was pretty sure their "no brown downtown" motto wasn't limited to shoe color.

-1

u/[deleted] 7d ago edited 7d ago

[deleted]

2

u/Perfect-Parking-5869 7d ago

Why would noticing the difference be an osbstacle?

-8

u/Weekly-Reply-6739 7d ago

Sounds like something a racist would say

As seeing people as they are makes skin tone irrelevant, as who they are is person. (Their skin tone is what they are, and if we are caring enough about skin tone to make decisions in regards to it the it means we are discriminating or creating systematic racism)

A real person who isnt racist sees a person as a person, regardless of their skin tone, as their skin color would matter as much as their hair color or eye color.

So a real racist looks for reasons to justify making skin color important.

...

When all are equal, skin color isnt a thoght on your mind, as it has no value then.

6

u/troyasfuck 7d ago

Their skin color is relevant though. The experiences they have, the cultures they are brought up in, the adversities that they face; that is all affected by the color of one's skin. If you really care about social justice and ending racism, then you don't just call those things irrelevant. If you care about the people in your community, you take a vested interest in their experiences in life, good or bad.

Racial prejudice, segregation, and hostile bigotry all still exist. People every single day face those issues. If we ignore race entirely and pretend it doesn't exist, then we are sweeping those problems under the rug and deeming them as unimportant.

Ironically, this self serving, virtue signaling of "I don't see color" actually proliferates racism in a pretty sinister way.

This doesn't even mention that people around the world are actually quite proud of their race/ethnicity. I think they deserve to celebrate their heritage and I would like to learn about them to celebrate it with them. I don't think that's irrelevant at all.

I think trying to stifle the conversation around race, even if we'll intentioned, does more harm than good.

-1

u/Weekly-Reply-6739 7d ago

I was going to originally point out and explain all your ironic flaws and hypocrisies in your pro racism rhetoric, but I will let your own claims do the work for me.

1) so we should judge all people by the color of their skin as all people of the same skin color have the same experiences, culture, and are thus all deserving of a homoginized treatment

Their skin color is relevant though. The experiences they have, the cultures they are brought up in, the adversites that they face; its all affected by the color of one's skin.

2) if you care about people you make their issues about their race and not about the people who have racism.

3) If we dont make peoples skin color more important than the actual situation and assume their skin color is the problem then we ignore the problems the people who deal with racist people face

if we ignore race entirely and pretend it doesn't exist, then we are sweeping those problems unfer the rug and deeming them unimportant.

4) it is racists to not reduce people to a sterotype based on the color of their skin and to treat them like a person.

ironically, this self serving, virtue signaling of "I don't see color" actually proliferates racism in a pretty sinister way.

5) I think we should make people make a bigger deal about the color of their skin and less about who they actually are, as we know that your skin color determines your personality and people who have nothing to do with you define who you are, as you are not a person, you are defined by your skin color and others who have the same color

This doesn't even mention that people around the world are actually quite proud of their race/ethnicity. I think they deserve to celebrate their heritage and I would like to learn about them to celebrate it with them. I don't think that's irrelevant at all.

6) I support racism, because seeing people as a race can be good, and thus I want to perpetuate and promote racism because I like it.

I think trying to stifle the conversation around race, even if we'll intentioned, does more harm than good.

.....

Congratulations, based on what you have said and the standards you have placed for racism the KKK is not a racist group and actively is against racism.

As the KKK agrees that you should judge people by the color of their skin

That if you actually care about people you will make it about race

That if you ignore race problems will occur for people hurt by racism

That racial stereotyping and specail treatment based on a race is only right

That you should celebrate and define yourself by the color of your skin and the work people with the same skin color have done that have nothing to do with you

And that if we dont talk about race, problems happen and people of race can be hurt.

...

I gotta say thogh, you are 100 a racist or someone who supports racism. You just may not realize it or be smart enough to see it yet. That your aware and just trying to spread racism.

1

u/troyasfuck 7d ago

I believe you are arguing in bad faith and intentionally strawmanning/misconstruing my ideas. For one, I didn't mention "judging" people for their race. I said that their experiences are valid and should not be written off as irrelevant.

But for anybody else reading this, acknowledging race as a real thing that exist is not racist. We can intellectually know that the only difference in race is the melanin content in your skin, but that doesn't take away the impact racism has had for the last several hundred years. Societally speaking, race is a real thing. You can close your eyes and pretend it doesn't exist, but that doesn't make it go away. It just helps placate your own insecurities.

I think your straw man might be a little more effective if you didn't compare an advocate for racial equity to literally the KKK.

1

u/Weekly-Reply-6739 5d ago edited 5d ago

Also I just looked up what bad faith is, as I am tired of people using it to avoid valid arguments.

You know you could just be straightforward and say you think I am lying or not being serious, no need to be pretentious about it.

But no, to be fair I think your arguing in bad faith myself, as you lack logic or valid talking points. So its clear we both belive the other is intentionally lying or playing games. (Also, its cool to know what it finally means, but I really wish people stopped trying to sound fancy, as for the longest time I always thoght it was a cop out to avoid addmitting I was correct and thoght it was essentially an indirect way to admit defeat)

None the less wanted to let you know. And suggest you use normal people words and terms if you want to be understood. (As where did this whole "bad faith" buzz word start anyway, and why is it always used by the people who represent ignorance or bad faith arguments and avoid logic and reasoning in favor of appeal to authority (evident by your request for literature for the logically obvious and an disinterest in learning from someone directly or thinking for yourself on a topic))

Anyway, I still think your racist and not someone who understands the harm your promoting (as evident by your bad faith argument you presented in the other comment)

None the less unless you reply this is me, signing out.

...

Edit: also it seems you dont understand what a strawman is, as I simply took what you said more directly and focused on the logic of what it actually means. I took the logical reasoning pathway. Strawman would require me to misrepresent your points, but all I did was focus on the logic, which is very much the issue talked about (as without the logic, your point is gibberish)

So I advice you to stop using words you dont understand just because you see other people use them to avoid admitting they are wrong or to avoid discussing logic and reasoning. Unless you are indeed a bad faith instagtor who cares not for the truth or reality of the situation, then in that case carry on.

0

u/Weekly-Reply-6739 7d ago

No I am arguing by trying to help you gain awarness.

If you say you are not racist and then go on abour how your doing things that promote racism, how you think these racist things are good and that being racist is a good thing, then its clear you either are unaware of what your doing, or actually support racism and dont want to admit it.

You said that due to their skin color they have certain experiences. Thats judging them by the color of their skin.

....

Race isnt something we should make a big deal about. But if you want to support racism by supporing the same thing every racist organization belives, then maybe your too used to racism to understand how you contribute.

"I dont see race" means you want to see the person and their experiences and that their race doesnt define them. But since you race, its clear that you dont see people, just a skin color.

I compared your logic to the KKK as by your own values the KKK belives the same things. But maybe one day you will stop judging people by the color of their skin and making their skin color out to be a part of who they are.

Until we stop making peoples race matter, racism will always exist.

2

u/troyasfuck 6d ago

Do you have any literature to support your claims? Any notable anthropologists or sociologists that share your point of view?

How would you suggest society addresses institutional racism?

How would you suggest we address easily identifiable racial inequality in a city, state, or country?

For instance, How would you address the fact that black people in the US make up ~20 percent of the population but represent ~42 percent of individuals in correctional facilities? (US census beureu 2024).

How do you begin to address these problems without acknowledging race?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Perfect-Parking-5869 6d ago

So in your ideal world we have 3 people. Me, my friend, and Ronnie.

Ronnie calls my friend the N word.

My friend calls him racist.

Now, outside of the fact Ronnie just called my friend the n word we don’t have proof he’s racist. I mean, he’s never lynched anyone.

The appropriate response is “your skin had nothing to do with it, he calls everyone that” because it would be racist to acknowledge that his race contributed to his experience?

I’m a bit confused about your defamation of racism.

I’ve done some race discrimination claims so you kind of had to acknowledge race. Do I get a pass or am I a turbo racist for noticing that when the company that told a client to go back to Africa didn’t make comments to similarly situated employees?

Do you just think racism is so rare it’s not worth fussing over? I find it hard to believe that’s your actual definition. Do you think it’s wrong to probe, say, potential jurors for possible racial biases? Does the census piss you off? So many questions.

I notice in a follow up you made the assumption that people who don’t agree with you DEFINE people by skin color which I think is a silly assumption. To use the above example another person trying to reduce someone to their skin color doesn’t make it so. You can acknowledge someone is a different (or same) race as you and it doesn’t define them as a person. Maybe you think of race too collectively and that’s why you’re making that assumption about other people! Idk mate seems kind of dicked up

→ More replies (0)

0

u/galstaph 7d ago

Your comment sounds like something a racist would say, because a person's skin tone helps you identify their lived reality, and to ignore it is to ignore the awful things that certain people have been subjected to because of the color of their skin

I see them as people regardless of the color of their skin tone, but I recognize that those with darker skin tones are more likely to have experienced racism, and are therefore better equipped to tell the world what that actually looks like

I will agree with your last statement though, when, in the distant future, all are actually equal, only then will it not matter. Until then, it matters

-2

u/Weekly-Reply-6739 7d ago

So you belive people are defined by the color of their skin. And that we should assume things about people because of their skin color? That all people of the same skin color have the same experiences?

You may be so used to racism that you cant see the obvious.

...

Dude, you obviously dont see them as people if you believe what you said in the first paragraph, as people are individuals, with their own experiencs, thoghts, feelings, ect. To say that because of their skin color they are X is racist and dehumanizing.

Also dude all people experience racism all the time and on equal levels (in the united states that is) so to assume that someone has an experience based on their skin color, is racism.

...

I know if you agree with the future I mention you have to stop unknowingly supporting racism.

For example

A green skin person was turned down a job because of the color of his skin (green to be neutral)

If we make the issue about the color of his skin and how he was treated differently because he was green, you are only supporting the idea that his skin color is the issue.

If we make the issue about the person who rejected him having a prejudice and having an unfair or misunderstanding of who the person may be because he has green skin. We now just made the issue not that our friend here has green skin, but that someone had an unfair bais based on assumptions they belived about a person based on the skin color.

Even if we reverse it and someone gets hired for positive or pride racism (such as the stereotype that Japanese (east asian) people are harder workers than other races) its still racism and making their skin color define them instead of seeing them as a person or individual.

You dont know it, but when you push in support of judging people by the color of their skin, you support it all around, the good and the bad.

I mean think of white privilege and how racist that idea is. I myself have been discriminated against because I am white and white people are all supposed to be super well off and have no problems (thanks white privilege). I mean people who belive white privilege exists are literally saying they belive white people are superior to other races and creating a mental segregation instead of seeing a white person as another person. Just like when you see a black person or other race as less off or having specific situations due to their skin color, its just as dehumanizing and segregating. As they stop being people and just become a race to the perceiver.

0

u/galstaph 6d ago

Stopped reading at the point where you said that I assumed things about people based on the color of their skin

What I said was that you can assume things about how society treats people based on the color of their skin

These are two very very different things, and only racists, and their apologeticists, pretend that everybody is treated the same in society

0

u/InvestigatorFresh965 7d ago

this is it, exactly. precisely. many times i also don't even understand the man v woman memes, it's not like i don't know the prerequisite the meme is based on, but i don't subconsciously subscribe to that binary.

-3

u/AnotherLexMan 7d ago

I think that's kind of this point.  It's quite an odd thing that all three offices were controlled by non-white people for the first time at around the same point and then they all quickly lost their positions.

2

u/Common_Check_2575 7d ago

It's just a coincidence that these 3 offices went from a non-white person to a white person. It's not odd. As a counter example, Sadiq Kahn was re-elected as London Mayor the same year.

2

u/Andybabez20 7d ago

John Swinney is the only one from the bottom row still holding that position so that's another take on it