Why is the story about our new leader about his skin colour?

[JamesWales]

Totally wrong - but interesting the company you now keep.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...tity-bathrooms

Alabama governor Kay Ivey has signed a bill into law in effect banning diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs across public schools, universities and state agencies, the latest move in a wave of a Republican-led legislation that aims to restrict diversity efforts across the country.

The law, known as SB129, imposes restrictions around what it calls eight “divisive concepts”, including assigning “fault, blame or bias” to any race, religion, gender or color, or discussions of whether “slavery and racism are aligned with the founding principles of the United States”. It authorizes state agencies to “discipline or terminate employees or contractors who violate this act”.

I don't keep company with any American politicians. Haven't even been to America since 2002, although would love to go back.

I wouldn't necessarily scale back everything but I am much more aligned to their thinking than your position, which as I say I think emphasises our differences rather than what brings us together and I think will, and is, making our society far more divided, even if that wasn't your intention.

Do you have much evidence this stuff actually works by the way?

It's quite a hot topic. If it doesn't work, costs money when we are cutting services and may make our society more divided then I'm not sure it's a good idea.

https://www.bu.edu/articles/2023/are-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-initiatives-helping-workers/

[the other bob wilson]

Apologies, can you remind me what I called you divisive for? In fairness you have some very strong opinions about people who vote for a different party to you sometimes.

In the thread entitled This can’t be right.

[the other bob wilson]

It's literally dividing people into racial groups and emphasising that above their political positions, views or other parts of their history.

That's why I say it's divisive, because it is.

Same as Bulut is, I assume, our first Muslim manager. Is that what we should care about most?

How about reports on Mr Gethings policies, or just announcing him as the winner without referencing his skin colour.

The problem here is that when it's done, it's done by others too. So a criminal becomes a black criminal or a Polish criminal or a gypsy criminal etc etc.

It's not about these things not mattering. It's about whether they should be considering the most important issue, the defining part of someone's personality.

I would suggest they shouldnt.

I have no issue whatsoever when the Conservative Party embarrass the Labour Party by pointing out that they have had three woman leaders while Labour have had none, they have the first brown PM and, at one time, not one member of the four great offices of Government was a white man. To me, that’s something that the Tories should be proud of - if you feel so strongly about this subject (it was you who started the thread), why not say something when Sunak became PM?

[Citizen's Nephew]

Blimey, you make it sound as though Welsh Labour have just elected a new Messiah as our First Minister!

Welsh Labour could have Jesus as the FM and he's still be crucified.

[JamesWales]

In the thread entitled This can’t be right.

Ah yes, this was when you argued that anyone with a differing opinion there was "slavishly following the govt", or words to that effect. Maybe I misread it. That did strike me as a little divisive, as in reality, it was just taking a different position, the same one that civil service lawyers also clearly took based on precedent, so I think on that one, having a different position was reasonable. I could have worded it better, as I am sure you could have.

[JamesWales]

I have no issue whatsoever when the Conservative Party embarrass the Labour Party by pointing out that they have had three woman leaders while Labour have had none, they have the first brown PM and, at one time, not one member of the four great offices of Government was a white man. To me, that’s something that the Tories should be proud of - if you feel so strongly about this subject (it was you who started the thread), why not say something when Sunak became PM?

Sunak is of course our first Hindu PM, and that is part of the story, but it's not THE story. The story is that he is the most powerful person in the country. What are his views? His values? His positions? Why did he win? Which MPs voted for him, what does that say about his likely positions? Etc etc.

My issue with the articles was that THE story seemed to Gethings skin colour and I don't think that that's right IMO, and I also don't think it's fair on him aside from anything else. It's part of the back story, and we all want to know his life story, as that frames the person and I agree that it says something about modern Wales but it is not THE story, at least in my opinion it isnt.

[A Quiet Monkfish]

Welsh Labour could have Jesus as the FM and he's still be crucified.

No, I think he would probably do a better job..

[the other bob wilson]

Sunak is of course our first Hindu PM, and that is part of the story, but it's not THE story. The story is that he is the most powerful person in the country. What are his views? His values? His positions? Why did he win? Which MPs voted for him, what does that say about his likely positions? Etc etc.

My issue with the articles was that THE story seemed to Gethings skin colour and I don't think that that's right IMO, and I also don't think it's fair on him aside from anything else. It's part of the back story, and we all want to know his life story, as that frames the person and I agree that it says something about modern Wales but it is not THE story, at least in my opinion it isnt.

Are you seriously suggesting that in the days after Sunak was appointed Prime Minister by his party there were no stories about him being the first non white Prime Minister?

[JamesWales]

Are you seriously suggesting that in the days after Sunak was appointed Prime Minister by his party there were no stories about him being the first non white Prime Minister?

There were many. But it wasn't the main story on the day he was elected. The story was that he won, not that he was Britain's first Hindu PM. If that was the main story then I make the same point as I am here.

[the other bob wilson]

Ah yes, this was when you argued that anyone with a differing opinion there was "slavishly following the govt", or words to that effect. Maybe I misread it. That did strike me as a little divisive, as in reality, it was just taking a different position, the same one that civil service lawyers also clearly took based on precedent, so I think on that one, having a different position was reasonable. I could have worded it better, as I am sure you could have.

No, that’s not what I said. I said that there were some posters who slavishly followed the UK Government line and, lo and behold, you both came through right on cue! It’s the implication that by disagreeing with your opinion I’m being “divisive” which doesn’t sit rightwith me.

[JamesWales]

No, that’s not what I said. I said that there were some posters who slavishly followed the UK Government line and, lo and behold, you both came through right on cue! It’s the implication that by disagreeing with your opinion I’m being “divisive” which doesn’t sit rightwith me.

See I wasn't saying that. I was saying that you implying that a different opinion means someone is slavishly toeing the government line is quite divisive, as opposed for example to just respecting it's a different take on the issue.

Clearly we had our wires crossed!

[the other bob wilson]

See I wasn't saying that. I was saying that you implying that a different opinion means someone is slavishly toeing the government line is quite divisive, as opposed for example to just respecting it's a different take on the issue.

Clearly we had our wires crossed!

I would have thought saying “God, you are so divisive!” to someone meant you thought they were divisive, but there you go.

[JamesWales]

I would have thought saying “God, you are so divisive!” to someone meant you thought they were divisive, but there you go.

I did think you were divisive. But I'm happy to believe that we were misreading eachother

[the other bob wilson]

There were many. But it wasn't the main story on the day he was elected. The story was that he won, not that he was Britain's first Hindu PM. If that was the main story then I make the same point as I am here.

I would argue what did your average UK resident know about Sunak when he was elected PM? He was the guy who gave them money during lockdowns, he was very rich, married to some one incredibly rich and he’d got fined with Boris Johnson during Partygate - there were other things which could be factored in especially by the right wing press eager to portray him in a positive light. Gething on the other hand, a few may know about the controversy regarding who he takes money off and that he got in a small amount of trouble for eating some chips during lockdown, but the large majority of them would look at a picture of him and note his skin colour because it’s the only thing they know about him - that was bound to be reflected in the coverage of him becoming First Minister.

You’re talking about two different things in regard to how the two men would be perceived by the average person in the street - even in Wales.

[Citizen's Nephew]

No, I think he would probably do a better job..

I agree with you there. Can't argue with the likely outcome though can we?

[blue sky]

The crooked donor that propelled dodgy VG to power has got a date in court to answer to non-compliance charges.

Hopefully justice will be done and VG will be made to look like the talentless grifter that he actually is.

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...first-28902632