"Racism"

[GMDino]

(03-14-2018, 08:02 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Okay. I don't care what anyone says.

That thing is definitely an "illegal alien"!!!!

Are you sure it is illegal?  Maybe there is some intergalactic agreement that allows it to be living in there! 

[*michaelsean*]

(03-14-2018, 07:15 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Nobody is manipulating me. I don't feel the need to describe any human brother as illegal alien.

This is crazy.

Oh after looking a bfines post I think I get it. It could be a translation thing. You and hollerdero are so good at the English thing I forget there could be the occasional translation issue. Was it alien that was bothering you? Like we were comparing them to someone from another planet?

[Bengalzona]

(03-14-2018, 08:51 PM)GMDino Wrote: Are you sure it is illegal?  Maybe there is some intergalactic agreement that allows it to be living in there! 

Damn, Obama! Making laws so aliens can legally incubate in our tummys!!!1!!

[Dill]

(03-14-2018, 07:29 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote:

See, aliens are not so different from us if you just give them a little time, get to know them.

[Dill]

(03-14-2018, 01:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: Now if they are marching in a large group and are in agreement with it they will get painted with that broad brush.  Everyone at the cross burning is a racist IMHO. 

Everyone?

[treee]

Just wanted to step in and let you all know that I think this thread has gone particularly well and is an example of what I think PnR should be like in general.

[Arturo Bandini]

(03-14-2018, 09:23 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Oh after looking a bfines post I think I get it. It could be a translation thing. You and hollerdero are so good at the English thing I forget there could be the occasional translation issue. Was it alien that was bothering you?  Like we were comparing them to someone from another planet?

Yes ! 

Like he wasn't legitimate to just you know ... be on Earth and just breathing.

[Arturo Bandini]

(03-14-2018, 07:23 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well it's most likely because you are getting your definition of alien from a movie.

Alien= relating, belonging, or owing allegiance to another country or government

Illegal= contrary to law.

Nobody is talking about the creature that came out of dude's stomach. 

I didn't know I was an alien too. 

[fredtoast]

(03-14-2018, 07:40 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:   I am curious, and know you won't answer, but why didn't you address the point I made about your racist assumption based on a "positive stereotype"?  You made a racist statement, I hope unwittingly, and I pointed that out.  Why would you ignore that?

I don't think I made any racist statement because I never applied a stereotype to an individual.

Doesn't matter if it is positive or negative You should not judge any individual based on a stereotype about their race.

Saying that African Americans have a higher ratio of fast twitch muscle fiber is no more racist than saying than Hispanics are on average shorter.

It does get complicated when people point to higher test score by Asians.  That could be culteral, but it could also be genetic.  Their brains could just be on average better than other races.  But that does not mean I am going to think my asian friend is automatically better at math than my non-asian friends.  I don't judge individuals base on racial stereotypes.

[GMDino]

(03-15-2018, 04:56 AM)treee Wrote: Just wanted to step in and let you all know that I think this thread has gone particularly well and is an example of what I think PnR should be like in general.

[fredtoast]

(03-14-2018, 07:52 PM)Benton Wrote: To Fred's post, I'd disagree. Racist minorities can have an impact on majorities of another race.

I am not talking about Sout Africa.  I am just talking about here in the US.

Unless you are in the Rap/Hip Hop music industry white people control all the real power and wealth here.  It may be possible for an white person to be effected in a specific situation on an individual basis, but whites are not victims of the systematic racism that oppresses blacks and other minorities here.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-15-2018, 09:17 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't think I made any racist statement because I never applied a stereotype to an individual.

Doesn't matter if it is positive or negative You should not judge any individual based on a stereotype about their race.

Making sweeping generalizations about any ethnicity invites racism.  As you admitted even positive stereotypes are harmful.  Thus, saying blacks are superior athletes and then claiming that you said nothing racist seem rather contradictory.

Quote:Saying that African Americans have a higher ratio of fast twitch muscle fiber is no more racist than saying than Hispanics are on average shorter.

Hispanics are, on average, shorter due to nutritional deficiencies in the diet of most Central and South American countries.  Americans of hispanic descent are, on average, much taller than those from Central and South America.

Quote:It does get complicated when people point to higher test score by Asians.  That could be culteral, but it could also be genetic.  Their brains could just be on average better than other races.  But that does not mean I am going to think my asian friend is automatically better at math than my non-asian friends.  I don't judge individuals base on racial stereotypes.

But you do think blacks are better athletes.   

[Dill]

(03-14-2018, 07:00 PM)hollodero Wrote: I certainly believe the term is thrown around way too lightly, and way too often. 
As in "That's racist because [optinal: lenghthy argumentation full of rhetorical exaggerations and applying oversimplified "anti-racism" ethical guidelines]", my argumentation claims moral highground".

In addition to systemic, less personalized forms of racism, I feel there's also a lot of "real" racism around, often painted as "just honesty" and such, and it's getting increasingly loud and aggressive and attracts more and more people to lower their bar and let their own impulses free. In my country, that is, but I' suppose we aren't that different in that regard.

But in all that screaming, it sometimes gets hard to distinguish. Just sometimes... I feel being more or less rightfully annoyed with the over-sensitive rhetorics of the "left" plays its part in the so-called rise of the right, which is some kind of antidote to that. Exaggeration seldomly helps the cause.

Just a couple of points:

There is quite a long history of quality scholarship on race which is neither "just honesty" nor "screaming."  Sometimes it comes into social media at odd and unsupported angles, where it takes on a new life, glossed onto already existing unscholarly definitions and quickly shaped to uncritical, partisan purposes.

The latter happens in part because legal definitions of racism have real, institutional consequences for people's life opportunities, and in part because "the left" (as social liberals are called in social media nowadays) has momentarily won the long social/cultural struggle to define racism as an unqualified evil. I say momentarily because the Trump election signals concerted pushback against that definitional control of the terrain of social debates.

I think that is what you are marking when you refer to "lowering the bar."  Think of Bannon's embrace of the term "racist" during his recent speech in France, part of the struggle to win back the moral high ground from "the left," or at least the power to speak more negatively about racially defined groups without social/political consequences.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-15-2018, 11:46 AM)Dill Wrote: Just a couple of points:

There is quite a long history of quality scholarship on race which is neither "just honesty" nor "screaming."  Sometimes it comes into social media at odd and unsupported angles, where it takes on a new life, glossed onto already existing unscholarly definitions and quickly shaped to uncritical, partisan purposes.

The latter happens in part because legal definitions of racism have real, institutional consequences for people's life opportunities, and in part because "the left" (as social liberals are called in social media nowadays) has momentarily won the long social/cultural struggle to define racism as an unqualified evil. I say momentarily because the Trump election signals concerted pushback against that definitional control of the terrain of social debates.

I think that is what you are marking when you refer to "lowering the bar."  Think of Bannon's embrace of the term "racist" during his recent speech in France, part of the struggle to win back the moral high ground from "the left," or at least the power to speak more negatively about racially defined groups without social/political consequences.

This is a great example of how a person beholden to an ideology can't see the weaknesses of said ideology.  The left certainly deserves credit for advancing the dialogue on race in this country and exposing the evils of institutional and personal racism.  They deserve equal opprobrium for then advancing racist ideas of their own.  The concept that only white people can be racist is, itself, racist and it comes solely from the left.  The idea that a person can speak about or treat white people in a way that any logical person would conclude is racist and earn, not censure, but acceptance is as nauseating as it is racist and counter productive.  Again, this is not only advanced by the left but applauded.

I made a point in the South Africa thread that the thing Mandela deserves the most credit for is the way he handled the transition of power form the apartheid government.  By historical precedent the transition should have been a blood bath.  Mandela knew that revenge was counter productive and wrong.  He knew that reconciliation was the way forward and that holding today's people responsible for the sins of yesterday would only perpetuate division.  

If we want to truly put racism in our rear view mirror, for the majority of us, then it can't be "it's our turn now".

[fredtoast]

(03-15-2018, 11:31 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Making sweeping generalizations about any ethnicity invites racism.  As you admitted even positive stereotypes are harmful.  Thus, saying blacks are superior athletes and then claiming that you said nothing racist seem rather contradictory.

There is nothing contradictory.  Making sweeping statements about a race is totally different from judging an individual based on those general statements.

(03-15-2018, 11:31 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Hispanics are, on average, shorter due to nutritional deficiencies in the diet of most Central and South American countries.  Americans of hispanic descent are, on average, much taller than those from Central and South America.

Americans of Hispanic decent are still shorter than Non-hispanics.  And I don't really care about the cause of the difference.  All I am stating is that there is a difference based on race.  I am sure there is probably some environmental reason that African Americans developed a higher percentage of fast twitch muscle fiber, but that does not mean the difference does not exist.

(03-15-2018, 11:31 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: But you do think blacks are better athletes.   

As a group they are.  On average they have a higher percentage of high twitch muscle fiber.  But if a white guy and a black guy are racing I have no idea who will win because I can not make individual judgements based on traits of a group.

[Belsnickel]

(03-15-2018, 12:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is nothing contradictory.  Making sweeping statements about a race is totally different from judging an individual based on those general statements.

It is different, I agree, but it's still racist behavior. Applying characteristics in such a general way based on race is racism, especially since there are no genetic markers for race. So even talking about "African Americans having more fast-twitch muscles" is wading into racist waters. That is a genetic trait and cannot definitively be tied to race.

[fredtoast]

(03-15-2018, 01:24 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: It is different, I agree, but it's still racist behavior. Applying characteristics in such a general way based on race is racism, especially since there are no genetic markers for race. So even talking about "African Americans having more fast-twitch muscles" is wading into racist waters. That is a genetic trait and cannot definitively be tied to race.

The whole argument that there is no such thing as race just sounds a little silly to me.

There are scientific studies that claim to show that African Americans on average have a higher percentage of fast twitch muscle fiber.  What exactly is your position on those studies?  Are you saying they are not true?  Are you saying there is no such thing as "different races"?

How can you disagree with comments "based on race" and also say there is no such thing as different races?

[GMDino]

(03-15-2018, 01:24 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: It is different, I agree, but it's still racist behavior. Applying characteristics in such a general way based on race is racism, especially since there are no genetic markers for race. So even talking about "African Americans having more fast-twitch muscles" is wading into racist waters. That is a genetic trait and cannot definitively be tied to race.

I suppose, after reading the responses, that the definition of "racism" is different that the way most people use the word.

To me that is because the word carries a weight that comes from the use of it.  I see "racism" usually tinged with hate/disgust/intolerance.  So when some is using racist language as Fred did it my be racist but not "racist" like people who say they hate a race of people due to some attribute they assign to that group.

Words are just words and yet words have "meanings" that go beyond the definition sometimes. That's why words like "savages" sound different in context of on discussion versus another I guess.

 

[Belsnickel]

(03-15-2018, 01:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The whole argument that there is no such thing as race just sounds a little silly to me.

There are scientific studies that claim to show that African Americans on average have a higher percentage of fast twitch muscle fiber.  What exactly is your position on those studies?  Are you saying they are not true?  Are you saying there is no such thing as "different races"?

How can you disagree with comments "based on race" and also say there is no such thing as different races?

Please, direct me to a statement of mine that stated there is no such thing as different races. You won't be able to, because that is not what I said. What I am implying in my statements is that there is no biological basis for race. Race is a cultural construct, not a biological one. There are many things that point to this, I'll just provide one reading that isn't too long or dense: http://courses.washington.edu/bioa101/articles/article34.pdf

The idea that race is biological is one rooted in outdated science, though as can be seen from your own statements it is pervasive in modern society.

[Belsnickel]

(03-15-2018, 01:36 PM)GMDino Wrote: I suppose, after reading the responses, that the definition of "racism" is different that the way most people use the word.

To me that is because the word carries a weight that comes from the use of it.  I see "racism" usually tinged with hate/disgust/intolerance.  So when some is using racist language as Fred did it my be racist but not "racist" like people who say they hate a race of people due to some attribute they assign to that group.

Words are just words and yet words have "meanings" that go beyond the definition sometimes. That's why words like "savages" sound different in context of on discussion versus another I guess. 

This is something that I often struggle with, because I'm very literal in some ways. Like Dill and I discussing the term propaganda, I don't assign these judgements to these words. I take them at their definitions. Racism is racial prejudice/discrimination. I don't see anything hateful in that, but as I said earlier I am not one that applies the term to individuals, either.