|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
I myself have an implicit bias against people on how they dress because that's how people choose to present themselves to the world. T-shirt and jeans says your casual.
NO YOU'RE A CASUAL.
On June 10 2016 01:14 NukeD wrote:
Whoa this got blown way out of proportion. I am not racist lol. My point was people are different and that races are different. Not worse, different. If that makes me racist than i guess i am.
The thing is - and I mean this without malice - you don't get to decide whether you a racist or not. Much like I don't get to decide whether I am an asshole or not. You may not feel like you are being racist, that doesn't mean you're not. (and I'm not saying you are.)
On June 10 2016 01:26 biology]major wrote:
Yeah it's a complicated multi factorial issue that requires a massive effort. the genes argument doesn't do anything to help them anyways, ok so if they have genes that lead to impulsive behavior now what? There is no solution for that. The solutions exist culturally. Get rid of gang/hood culture, and have good leadership for black people. Their leadership is horrible, Obama could have guided the discourse better, but other than that he was their best role model. They need more role models, more leaders emphasizing the important things like working hard and education. Unfortunately those topics aren't as sexy as drugs and hoes so hip hop/rap artists have basically taken over. No fathers to guide the kids either, which is pretty essential.
"Getting rid of gang culture" is a) impossible and b) not a solution. Gang culture is a sympton, not a cause. Besides, without gang culture, we couldnt listen to the notorious big!
|
On June 10 2016 02:06 Surth wrote:
The thing is - and I mean this without malice - you don't get to decide whether you a racist or not. Much like I don't get to decide whether I am an asshole or not. You may not feel like you are being racist, that doesn't mean you're not. (and I'm not saying you are.)
I like how people with dicks get to self-identify as women, but when it comes to whether someone is racist, we'll let the community decide.
|
On June 10 2016 02:06 Surth wrote:Show nested quote +
I myself have an implicit bias against people on how they dress because that's how people choose to present themselves to the world. T-shirt and jeans says your casual.
NO YOU'RE A CASUAL. Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 01:14 NukeD wrote:
Whoa this got blown way out of proportion. I am not racist lol. My point was people are different and that races are different. Not worse, different. If that makes me racist than i guess i am. The thing is - and I mean this without malice - you don't get to decide whether you a racist or not. Much like I don't get to decide whether I am an asshole or not. You may not feel like you are being racist, that doesn't mean you're not. (and I'm not saying you are.) Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 01:26 biology]major wrote:
Yeah it's a complicated multi factorial issue that requires a massive effort. the genes argument doesn't do anything to help them anyways, ok so if they have genes that lead to impulsive behavior now what? There is no solution for that. The solutions exist culturally. Get rid of gang/hood culture, and have good leadership for black people. Their leadership is horrible, Obama could have guided the discourse better, but other than that he was their best role model. They need more role models, more leaders emphasizing the important things like working hard and education. Unfortunately those topics aren't as sexy as drugs and hoes so hip hop/rap artists have basically taken over. No fathers to guide the kids either, which is pretty essential. "Getting rid of gang culture" is a) impossible and b) not a solution. Gang culture is a sympton, not a cause. Besides, without gang culture, we couldnt listen to the notorious big!
But more importantly, how do we get rid of this rape culture!
|
On June 09 2016 15:51 SK.Testie wrote:I already told you the definition of racism. Your professors disagree with me because they are idiots. You can't change the definition of racism to "privilege + power". It's "I hate you because you're white or some shit in history" or "I hate you because you're black or some shit in history". Progressives attempting to redefine racism is retarded. This is racism. This is how it works. Show nested quote +prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. Why would white people become incredibly inbred? What sense does that make?
This a million times.
The absurd notion that you can't be racist against 'white people' is possibly the dumbest thing to come out of universities ever.
It's not just stupid, it's an extremely dangerous idea to propagate and inherently racist itself as it indirectly leads to this absurd behavior in these riots of attacking peaceful Trump supporters and them victim blaming them that they deserved to be violently attacked for their beliefs.
It's fucking retarded.
|
On June 10 2016 01:36 Slaughter wrote:
The problem with your theory Testie is you are ignoring the developmental effects of an individuals environment on those "internal" factors like behavior.
You are not your genes only is the consensus and what we are increasingly finding out is that what happened with your parents and grand parents can be passed down as well through epigenetics. Now look at African Americans in the US who have had a really hard time historically. This effect snowballs not just from a socioeconomic standpoint (making it harder for them to move upward and out of poverty because the system is biased against them) but also the tolls on their biology from these shitty conditions that can have impacts through multiple generations. These things can impact their minds and bodies in adverse ways. Couple that with a system that does them no favors and their own developed cultural attitudes in reaction to all this? Its a cluster fuck for the poor. As a side point about violence and poor whites? Well you bring up Appalachia and that is rural area, not really comparable to the much higher densities of urban ones which poor blacks are mostly in.
This is a very complex problem that incorporates a shit ton of factors. That is not to say elements of what you are saying aren't wrong, personal responsibility has a role to play as well as some elements of black culture being counter productive. But place those things into the historical and current place of African Americans in this country and you can easily see why some of those self destructive elements of culture arose and how overall they have a lot of extra barriers and factors working against them that make it harder for the average person to succeed. You have to think on a larger scale here
I brought up that it was a global pattern though Slaughter. I still am 100% certain that you judge each individual by the content of their character and you do not discriminate the person by their race. But in London, UK, the pattern of black violence repeated itself at a rate that was eerily similar to the USA. In Brazil and so on. So time and time again in places that have the largest multicultural of communities, we see the most strife. In smaller communities, there isn't much strife where things are "gentrified".
There was a point where I pushed boundaries earlier in the thread where I wanted to get a reaction and point out something that progressives do which is just shout down people who have natural curiosities and questions that aren't 'concern trolling' nor have an 'agenda'. A new mind coming to the debate needs to be explained these things calmly. Whether the man is 40 years old and he lived in a homogeneous community and he was introduced to the struggles of multiculturalism. Or whether the person simply grew up around it.
Anyone coming upon the information would be like, "woah why is this happening?!" imagine a progressive simply shouting, "STFU YOU FUCKING RACIST". Your calm and collected approach is far better than what you see in the dismissive comments on facebook. Cynical and dismissive from both sides. SJWs and progressives actually contribute to racism far more than calm minds that debate, "well is it genetic? is it not? If so why?" There are SJW's that simply say bringing it up alone is racist. That we should all fear bringing it up for fear of social persecution. And I think that's disingenuous and harmful to public discourse and in fact makes matters far, far worse. It's divisive while preaching unity.
You'll see scientists debate it in a calm and collected manner and discuss differences from the less controversial like this:
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/29/match4lara-mixed-race-marrow-search-thats-going-viral/ (marrow)
http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1993074,00.html (bone marrow transplants)
to the much more controversial like this:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912003741
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB115040765329081636
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/10/news/la-heb-genetic-study-intelligence-20110809
People who talk about this in a calm and rational matter are the proper way to discuss this matter because it eases everyone. But it's a long conversation every time, because there's a lot of genuine questions and you can't expect everyone to have read the same books or studies on it. I don't know what has been discredited or what has not myself. It's difficult and time consuming to look up every study and go through research and cross reference.
In any case, it's a long process of reading for people to fully understand the issue and a lot of people are
A: Not interested.
B: Have made up their minds.
C: Quite simply are unaware
D: Don't have the time
E: Actually there's too many reasons to list why people may not fully understand the issue, but you get the point. ;p
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
obama may be identified as 'black' but he is more than that. he's spent signfiicant time outside of the u.s. as a youth, has an elite education in the orthodoxy of politics and economics, and is also influenced by pragmatism, the other chicago tradition.
here's an article by my old professor on it: http://pos.sagepub.com/content/39/2/127.abstract
there is no simple obama the black president in the american imagination of black culture. he's done his part in the black community, but he is approaching it as an outsider without that strong identity attached. he's approached the black poverty problem like a clinton.
|
On June 10 2016 02:12 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2016 15:51 SK.Testie wrote:I already told you the definition of racism. Your professors disagree with me because they are idiots. You can't change the definition of racism to "privilege + power". It's "I hate you because you're white or some shit in history" or "I hate you because you're black or some shit in history". Progressives attempting to redefine racism is retarded. This is racism. This is how it works. prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. Why would white people become incredibly inbred? What sense does that make? This a million times. The absurd notion that you can't be racist against 'white people' is possibly the dumbest thing to come out of universities ever. It's not just stupid, it's an extremely dangerous idea to propagate and inherently racist itself as it indirectly leads to this absurd behavior in these riots of attacking peaceful Trump supporters and them victim blaming them that they deserved to be violently attacked for their beliefs. It's fucking retarded.
I agree completely, and it's a part of the reason I can't relate with the sjw movement. Shit like that is flat out retarded.
|
On June 10 2016 02:08 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 02:06 Surth wrote:
The thing is - and I mean this without malice - you don't get to decide whether you a racist or not. Much like I don't get to decide whether I am an asshole or not. You may not feel like you are being racist, that doesn't mean you're not. (and I'm not saying you are.) I like how people with dicks get to self-identify as women, but when it comes to whether someone is racist, we'll let the community decide. I don't care about the community. Still, an excellent point (and note that I never said that people with dicks get to self-identify as a woman - though I also never said that they don't get to). But first things first: would you agree that whether someone is a racist or not is up to whether that person consciously thinks he or she is a racist?
|
On June 10 2016 02:08 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 02:06 Surth wrote:
The thing is - and I mean this without malice - you don't get to decide whether you a racist or not. Much like I don't get to decide whether I am an asshole or not. You may not feel like you are being racist, that doesn't mean you're not. (and I'm not saying you are.) I like how people with dicks get to self-identify as women, but when it comes to whether someone is racist, we'll let the community decide.
I think the pretty widely argued brightline is if your decision harms someone else. Which is why I am less convinced that everyone that self-identifies as a woman should be allowed to compete as a female athlete than I am that everyone that self-identifies as a woman should be allowed to poop in a women's room, and I'm less convinced of that than that people should be able to say they identify as a woman when socializing.
+ Show Spoiler +It's also interesting that these discussion are nearly ALWAYS framed around penises identifying as women rather than vaginas identifying as men-there's a sociological paper in there somewhere, I think.
Whereas if we accept carte blanche people's assessment of their racism it can very much lead to real societal harms in their future actions that could be corrected were they to have a better understanding of it. I mean, it's not like telling someone with a dick they're a man helps society in ANY way-but informing people that a powerful figure is a racist against their own objectives can indeed improve society. And heck, sometimes telling people something is out of line can actually change their minds (look at how Trump walked back his comments).
|
Systematic Racism against white people is possible in China. Or another area where non-whites control the system of power. A black person can be bigoted against a white person in the US.
But systemic racism against whites as a whole does not exist in the US at any significantly measurable scale. We hold the majority of power in the country and that benefits us over other demographics.
|
racism in any meaningful sense of the word comes from a place of power and is perpetuated by institutions, the police, the education system and so on. In this case you cannot really be racist against white people because what ever you're going to do is always going to stay at the individual level without any wider social repercussions.
|
So then is it okay for me to be a racist (hold racist beliefs) if I never act upon it?
|
well you can hold whatever beliefs you want, nobody is able to punish you for your beliefs.
|
On June 10 2016 02:22 NukeD wrote:
So then is it okay for me to be a racist (hold racist beliefs) if I never act upon it?
If you never act on them, then only you know you hold them. Why would you need anyone's approval? And isn't asking for approval acting on those beliefs in some small way?
|
Just curious, no point to be made here.
|
On June 10 2016 02:17 Surth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 02:08 xDaunt wrote:On June 10 2016 02:06 Surth wrote:
The thing is - and I mean this without malice - you don't get to decide whether you a racist or not. Much like I don't get to decide whether I am an asshole or not. You may not feel like you are being racist, that doesn't mean you're not. (and I'm not saying you are.) I like how people with dicks get to self-identify as women, but when it comes to whether someone is racist, we'll let the community decide. I don't care about the community. Still, an excellent point (and note that I never said that people with dicks get to self-identify as a woman - though I also never said that they don't get to). But first things first: would you agree that whether someone is a racist or not is up to whether that person consciously thinks he or she is a racist?
Sure. I am not a fan of subjectivism and its bastard son, moral relativism. I like the objective -- the black and white.
And my comment wasn't necessarily aimed at you (I have no idea what you think about tranny rights). Think of it as a scud missile aimed at the left in general.
User was warned for this post
|
Now we're getting somewhere! 
|
On June 10 2016 02:18 Plansix wrote:
Systematic Racism against white people is possible in China. Or another area where non-whites control the system of power. A black person can be bigoted against a white person in the US.
But systemic racism against whites as a whole does not exist in the US at any significantly measurable scale. We hold the majority of power in the country and that benefits us over other demographics.
I find your attempts to redefine these terms wrong descriptively and normatively.
If a black woman in BLM is tweeting that white people are all selfish and evil and that we should kill all whities, that is racist.
There is no systematic structure required to be a racist here (The most powerful political figure in the country is black for christ sake)
She is both a racist and a bigot. It should be shamed just as much if a white supremacist did it. The fact of the matter is, it isn't. The white individual here would be punished more.
So someone example of "the criticism of cops killing blacks is all other things equal, they wouldn't have been killed if black" is pretty much reversed in this situation and many others.
|
On June 10 2016 02:19 Nyxisto wrote:
racism in any meaningful sense of the word comes from a place of power and is perpetuated by institutions, the police, the education system and so on. In this case you cannot really be racist against white people because what ever you're going to do is always going to stay at the individual level without any wider social repercussions.
This is extremely wrong when racist ideas are being propagated throughout an entire culture with immunity to criticism.
|
I think it is dangerous to say an entire group of people cannot be racist. You're basically giving people the right to treat anyone however they want with immunity. That in itself will foster a terrible culture.
While I believe the intent of those statements are generally good, i think it is going in the wrong direction and the repercussions of such beliefs are dangerous. We shouldn't be resenting or making any group feel guilty or hated. For example, white guilt.
Unfortunately, humans always need a new group to hate or blame thus the cycle repeats itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
