MAGA

[Dill]

(07-16-2019, 06:26 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Perhaps.  If only we had specific examples of someone making a negative statement about an entire ethnicity and gender.  Or maybe someone posting a picture full of negative racist stereotypes?  I'm sure you'd agree if a poster was engaged in this type of behavior then labeling their behavior as racist, much like Tucker Carlson's, would be entirely appropriate.  Right?

Maybe.  Or perhaps people actually engaged in racist behavior, specific examples of which were called out as they occurred, and said people refuse to acknowledge their culpability, instead trying to deflect by pontificating about how the other side is the real problem?

What do you, the viewers at home think?

This viewer completely agrees with what you agree with.  As to the rest . . .

The accusatory practice of "calling out" posters is not what I've had in mind in previous posts when speaking of definitions and explanations and examples and citations and other bases of rational argument.

E.g., just pointing to a picture and calling it "full of negative racist stereotypes" doesn't accomplish much.  Is the poster criticizing or endorsing the stereotypes, criticizing or endorsing racism?  If so, how can we tell--are there supplementary comments about vile immigrants of color? Or not? Is recognition of stereotypes part of the point? 

And what counts as "racism" in such determinations? That is especially critical on this message board, where usage ranges from "calling out" anyone who mentions race ("I'm a white person") to reliance on more precise and practicable definitions which have developed over the last 50 years in the work of professional historians and social scientists. One can "call out" statements all day, but if one can't explain why they are racist then it is not clear at all that one has produced and example thereof.  If one calls out enough such "examples," though, someone else might figure what the criteria actually are and articulate them.