I would just however push back on the implicit hierarchy in the way you write it, where cultural prejudice is a smaller degree of prejudice compared to racist prejudice. For example, a black American tourist in, say, N. Ireland, will probably face less prejudice than a white Romanian immigrant. It's all intersections.
But it is based on race, just an older definition of race. There was a time when southern Europeans were classified as the "olive race". In the bollocks scientific racist hierarchies of the time, that put them below the Aryans, but above the Semites and the blacks. The Nordicist racists of course considered themselves the apex, and looked down on the rest. In the US you guys still remember how the Irish, the Italians, the Greeks, the Poles, the Jews, were very slowly integrated into the category of White, meaning they were not always considered White.
The caricatures of the lazy southerners are indeed racist stereotypes of this past era and to claim that they do not persist in the modern era is kind of weird, seeing how so many other racist stereotypes persist.
Iran for sure does have sectarian tensions under the surface. There are Kurds, Azeris, Arabs, Balochs etc. Shias, Sunnis, secularists, workers, capitalists, etc etc. There are all the ingredients for a big big chaos.
"Semites" as a description of a set of people is as much antiquated a terminology as the word "Aryans". In fact it was Ernest Renan that first made that distinction in the 19th century to specifically frame history as a tension between Semites and Aryans (cf Hannah Arendt). It's of course just a bunch of scientific racism bollocks. And it is precisely because of that that the term "antisemitism" has always meant hatred of Jews in particular (in the "Jews vs Aryans" sense).
The only term that persists in the sciences today is the term "semitic languages", which is basically similar to "indo-european languages", and which of course has nothing to do with antisemitism.
I suspect this is even worse. If these idiots succeed at forcing an externally imposed regime change, Iran (a country of 90 million people) might go the way of Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq, i.e., total fucking chaos for at least a decade if not more. If you thought Daesh and the refugee crisis was bad, just you fucking wait.
And this all happened while the Iranians were supposedly negotiating with the US. Why should anyone ever negotiate with the West ever again if it is just a stalling tactic until you get stabbed in the back? So not only is this a collapse of international law, it is even collapse of the basic capacity for international diplomacy. And it does send a hugely hugely strong message to the Saudis, the Turks, the Emiratis, basically anyone and everyone: get nukes asap, see what happened to Iran?.
Not to mention that the Israelis are causing US imperial over-extension, when the US fascist right (Bannon, MTG, etc) are already distancing themselves from zionists. So who do you think the fascists will blame for US decline once immigrants and democrats are no longer adequate scapegoats? Who is always the scapegoat of last resort for the fascists?
The 20th century was monstrous. Well, fellow monkeys, welcome to the 21st...
Remember kids, this is cheapening the word anti-Semitism and making it more and more meaningless. In the long run, this will hurt Jews. (Who do you think will be blamed by the fascists for US imperial over-extension?)
The big difference is that the original article actually points to the study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35379616/ where as the cmu.fr plagiarized version makes no reference whatsoever to the study. Just vague slop about "scientists".
That said, I think that even the original article miscaracterizes the paper. Here is the paper abstract:
Objectives: To investigate the impacts, on mental and physical health, of a mandatory shift to working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Design: Cross sectional, online survey.
Setting: Online survey was conducted from September 2020 to November 2020 in the general population.
Participants: Australian residents working from home for at least 2 days a week at some time in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Main outcome measures: Demographics, caring responsibilities, working from home arrangements, work-related technology, work-family interface, psychosocial and physical working conditions, and reported stress and musculoskeletal pain.
Results: 924 Australians responded to the online questionnaire. Respondents were mostly women (75.5%) based in Victoria (83.7%) and employed in the education and training and healthcare sectors. Approximately 70% of respondents worked five or more days from home, with only 60% having a dedicated workstation in an uninterrupted space. Over 70% of all respondents reported experiencing musculoskeletal pain or discomfort. Gendered differences were observed; men reported higher levels of family to work conflict (3.16±1.52 to 2.94±1.59, p=0.031), and lower levels of recognition for their work (3.75±1.03 to 3.96±1.06, p=0.004), compared with women. For women, stress (2.94±0.92 to 2.66±0.88, p<0.001) and neck/shoulder pain (4.50±2.90 to 3.51±2.84, p<0.001) were higher than men and they also reported more concerns about their job security than men (3.01±1.33 to 2.78±1.40, p=0.043).
Conclusions: Preliminary evidence from the current study suggests that working from home may impact employees' physical and mental health, and that this impact is likely to be gendered. Although further analysis is required, these data provide insights into further research opportunities needed to assist employers in optimising working from home conditions and reduce the potential negative physical and mental health impacts on their employees.
acargitz @ theacharnian @lemmy.ca Posts 130Comments 2,385Joined 2 yr. ago
I think that's exactly the reference here.