|
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. |
On September 24 2016 05:31 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:29 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:44 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:31 ChristianS wrote:On September 24 2016 01:21 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Racial realism is an idea from the alt right that there are differences between the races that should be recognized and accounted for as opposed to washing over those differences with the artificial (ie "the not real") construct of liberal/progressive egalitarianism. Depending upon how you define the alt right, different factions of the alt right reach different conclusions from this perspective, ranging from advocacy for western culture to advocacy for white nationalism. So if I understand correctly: -Racial realism is the idea that there are innate differences between races (sometimes called essentialism). Unclear whether these essentialist classifications imply a superior/inferior dynamic (although historically they almost always have). The bolded part is more or less correct. The one thing left out is that the racial realist does not believe it to be taboo to discuss these things -- ie current paradigms of political correctness are no hindrance to the conversation. As for the unbolded part, racial realism doesn't imply any sort of out of outcome to the inquiry. It's a merely a perspective on the debate. Think of it as the equivalent to Marxism and history. -Danglars believes there is a campaign against this essentialism, and considers it a sobering thought that this campaign might not stop at some point. I'll leave it to Danglars to explain what he thinks on this point. -xDaunt considers this the part that people on the "other side of the issue" like me always struggle with. To be very precise, what I believe that the PC crowd struggles with is understanding how their racial policies of the past few generations have impacted the types of people who are now supporting Trump or who are turning to things like the alt right and its derivatives. Are xDaunt and Danglars actually arguing that innate differences between races exist such that we should treat members of different races differently? Is that not an absolutely textbook definition of racism? I'll let Danglars speak for himself. As for me, I'm merely pointing out why there's a large contingent of Americans who are bucking the current PC norms. Again, race means essentially nothing to me as a politically significant classification. Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? As I have said repeatedly, I think that it is utterly retarded to consider color blindness to be racist, and I think that this is where the left jumped the shark on the racial debate. I sorta get this, but the issue with color blindness is: "we brought over a bunch of people over against their will and treated them like animal for a couple hundred years, then systematically oppressed them when we can't anymore, but it has NOTHING to do with why they are poorer, less educated, and more likely to commit crime now! equality!"
So why do you presume that being color blind necessarily precludes understanding that perhaps something should be done to help black people given their current situation in the country?
|
On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:44 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:31 ChristianS wrote:On September 24 2016 01:21 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Racial realism is an idea from the alt right that there are differences between the races that should be recognized and accounted for as opposed to washing over those differences with the artificial (ie "the not real") construct of liberal/progressive egalitarianism. Depending upon how you define the alt right, different factions of the alt right reach different conclusions from this perspective, ranging from advocacy for western culture to advocacy for white nationalism. So if I understand correctly: -Racial realism is the idea that there are innate differences between races (sometimes called essentialism). Unclear whether these essentialist classifications imply a superior/inferior dynamic (although historically they almost always have). The bolded part is more or less correct. The one thing left out is that the racial realist does not believe it to be taboo to discuss these things -- ie current paradigms of political correctness are no hindrance to the conversation. As for the unbolded part, racial realism doesn't imply any sort of out of outcome to the inquiry. It's a merely a perspective on the debate. Think of it as the equivalent to Marxism and history. -Danglars believes there is a campaign against this essentialism, and considers it a sobering thought that this campaign might not stop at some point. I'll leave it to Danglars to explain what he thinks on this point. -xDaunt considers this the part that people on the "other side of the issue" like me always struggle with. To be very precise, what I believe that the PC crowd struggles with is understanding how their racial policies of the past few generations have impacted the types of people who are now supporting Trump or who are turning to things like the alt right and its derivatives. Are xDaunt and Danglars actually arguing that innate differences between races exist such that we should treat members of different races differently? Is that not an absolutely textbook definition of racism? I'll let Danglars speak for himself. As for me, I'm merely pointing out why there's a large contingent of Americans who are bucking the current PC norms. Again, race means essentially nothing to me as a politically significant classification. Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is.
There is a difference between having racial biases and being a racist. Everyone has the biases but not everyone is racist. However you guys on the right like to group them as one to construct a strawman to argue against.
|
On September 24 2016 05:33 Slaughter wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:44 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:31 ChristianS wrote:
[quote]
So if I understand correctly:
-Racial realism is the idea that there are innate differences between races (sometimes called essentialism). Unclear whether these essentialist classifications imply a superior/inferior dynamic (although historically they almost always have). The bolded part is more or less correct. The one thing left out is that the racial realist does not believe it to be taboo to discuss these things -- ie current paradigms of political correctness are no hindrance to the conversation. As for the unbolded part, racial realism doesn't imply any sort of out of outcome to the inquiry. It's a merely a perspective on the debate. Think of it as the equivalent to Marxism and history. -Danglars believes there is a campaign against this essentialism, and considers it a sobering thought that this campaign might not stop at some point. I'll leave it to Danglars to explain what he thinks on this point. -xDaunt considers this the part that people on the "other side of the issue" like me always struggle with. To be very precise, what I believe that the PC crowd struggles with is understanding how their racial policies of the past few generations have impacted the types of people who are now supporting Trump or who are turning to things like the alt right and its derivatives. Are xDaunt and Danglars actually arguing that innate differences between races exist such that we should treat members of different races differently? Is that not an absolutely textbook definition of racism? I'll let Danglars speak for himself. As for me, I'm merely pointing out why there's a large contingent of Americans who are bucking the current PC norms. Again, race means essentially nothing to me as a politically significant classification. Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is. There is a difference between having racial biases and being a racist. Everyone has the biases but not everyone is racist. However you guys on the right like to group them as one to construct a strawman to argue against.
No, it's not a strawman. What's really being argued by the left is that what makes me a racist is my inability to admit or recognize my "racial bias." If I simply admitted my racial biases, then I'd be able to discard the stigma of being a racist. This is simply an incomprehensibly stupid distinction to make, which is why I reject it, and distill down the left's position to "everyone is a racist."
|
|
|
On September 24 2016 05:36 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:33 Slaughter wrote:On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:44 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
The bolded part is more or less correct. The one thing left out is that the racial realist does not believe it to be taboo to discuss these things -- ie current paradigms of political correctness are no hindrance to the conversation. As for the unbolded part, racial realism doesn't imply any sort of out of outcome to the inquiry. It's a merely a perspective on the debate. Think of it as the equivalent to Marxism and history.
[quote]
I'll leave it to Danglars to explain what he thinks on this point.
[quote]
To be very precise, what I believe that the PC crowd struggles with is understanding how their racial policies of the past few generations have impacted the types of people who are now supporting Trump or who are turning to things like the alt right and its derivatives.
[quote]
I'll let Danglars speak for himself.
As for me, I'm merely pointing out why there's a large contingent of Americans who are bucking the current PC norms. Again, race means essentially nothing to me as a politically significant classification. Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is. There is a difference between having racial biases and being a racist. Everyone has the biases but not everyone is racist. However you guys on the right like to group them as one to construct a strawman to argue against. No, it's not a strawman. What's really being argued by the left is that what makes me a racist is my inability to admit or recognize my "racial bias." If I simply admitted my racial biases, then I'd be able to discard the stigma of being a racist. This is simply an incomprehensibly stupid distinction to make, which is why I reject it, and distill down the left's position to "everyone is a racist."
It's a strawman because that's not what's being argued. It's not just your inability to admit or recognize your racial bias, but that's certainly part of it.
What sense is there in being so oblivious as to pretend you don't have them though?
|
United States43755 Posts
On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:44 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:31 ChristianS wrote:On September 24 2016 01:21 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Racial realism is an idea from the alt right that there are differences between the races that should be recognized and accounted for as opposed to washing over those differences with the artificial (ie "the not real") construct of liberal/progressive egalitarianism. Depending upon how you define the alt right, different factions of the alt right reach different conclusions from this perspective, ranging from advocacy for western culture to advocacy for white nationalism. So if I understand correctly: -Racial realism is the idea that there are innate differences between races (sometimes called essentialism). Unclear whether these essentialist classifications imply a superior/inferior dynamic (although historically they almost always have). The bolded part is more or less correct. The one thing left out is that the racial realist does not believe it to be taboo to discuss these things -- ie current paradigms of political correctness are no hindrance to the conversation. As for the unbolded part, racial realism doesn't imply any sort of out of outcome to the inquiry. It's a merely a perspective on the debate. Think of it as the equivalent to Marxism and history. -Danglars believes there is a campaign against this essentialism, and considers it a sobering thought that this campaign might not stop at some point. I'll leave it to Danglars to explain what he thinks on this point. -xDaunt considers this the part that people on the "other side of the issue" like me always struggle with. To be very precise, what I believe that the PC crowd struggles with is understanding how their racial policies of the past few generations have impacted the types of people who are now supporting Trump or who are turning to things like the alt right and its derivatives. Are xDaunt and Danglars actually arguing that innate differences between races exist such that we should treat members of different races differently? Is that not an absolutely textbook definition of racism? I'll let Danglars speak for himself. As for me, I'm merely pointing out why there's a large contingent of Americans who are bucking the current PC norms. Again, race means essentially nothing to me as a politically significant classification. Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is.
Just as a reminder, the reason that the understanding of what was racist or sexist or whatever else -ist has expanded is not because it has changed, it is because the people defining it changed. It used to be that Roger Ailes/Donald Trump etc used to define what counted as sexual harassment and they would argue that anything short of rape didn't count because after all, they could have just quit.
I would like to think she would find another career or find another company if that was the case.
- Donald Trump
Then we got a bunch of black people in the civil rights era and feminists around the same time sharing what they thought about the white male definitions of these -isms. Saying that calling black employees "boy" or female employees "honey" wasn't actually okay. What we're now experiencing is a backlash where the white men are correcting African Americans and explaining that black people don't really understand racism the way that white men do and that the narrow white male definition of racism is the correct one and that they hope one day black people will learn enough about racism to understand that what was just said wasn't actually racist. Same with the others. That's why the definition has ballooned. The people who experienced it became sufficiently empowered within society to explain how they experienced it.
Or to explain it in a more triggering way to the right
White privilege is maintaining that your understanding racism is the only valid experience of racism and having people take you seriously.
|
On September 24 2016 05:33 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:31 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:29 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:44 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:31 ChristianS wrote:
[quote]
So if I understand correctly:
-Racial realism is the idea that there are innate differences between races (sometimes called essentialism). Unclear whether these essentialist classifications imply a superior/inferior dynamic (although historically they almost always have). The bolded part is more or less correct. The one thing left out is that the racial realist does not believe it to be taboo to discuss these things -- ie current paradigms of political correctness are no hindrance to the conversation. As for the unbolded part, racial realism doesn't imply any sort of out of outcome to the inquiry. It's a merely a perspective on the debate. Think of it as the equivalent to Marxism and history. -Danglars believes there is a campaign against this essentialism, and considers it a sobering thought that this campaign might not stop at some point. I'll leave it to Danglars to explain what he thinks on this point. -xDaunt considers this the part that people on the "other side of the issue" like me always struggle with. To be very precise, what I believe that the PC crowd struggles with is understanding how their racial policies of the past few generations have impacted the types of people who are now supporting Trump or who are turning to things like the alt right and its derivatives. Are xDaunt and Danglars actually arguing that innate differences between races exist such that we should treat members of different races differently? Is that not an absolutely textbook definition of racism? I'll let Danglars speak for himself. As for me, I'm merely pointing out why there's a large contingent of Americans who are bucking the current PC norms. Again, race means essentially nothing to me as a politically significant classification. Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? As I have said repeatedly, I think that it is utterly retarded to consider color blindness to be racist, and I think that this is where the left jumped the shark on the racial debate. I sorta get this, but the issue with color blindness is: "we brought over a bunch of people over against their will and treated them like animal for a couple hundred years, then systematically oppressed them when we can't anymore, but it has NOTHING to do with why they are poorer, less educated, and more likely to commit crime now! equality!" So why do you presume that being color blind necessarily precludes understanding that perhaps something should be done to help black people given their current situation in the country?
Because that's the definition? The color blind assume that everyone has a equal start and thus should be addressed according to their current condition rather than historical background.
Well, that's not the original intend of color blind, but it is the consequences. I believe the concept of color blind had good intentions and was progressive for its day, but 1: it's fault in practice is pretty major, 2: it's being hijacked by people who has less good intentions.
|
On September 24 2016 05:29 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:44 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:31 ChristianS wrote:On September 24 2016 01:21 xDaunt wrote:On September 23 2016 22:50 ChristianS wrote:
[quote]
If by "struggles with" you mean "has trouble figuring out what he's getting at," you're absolutely right. I mean I've been puzzling over the term "racial realism" and I still can't figure out what it is supposed to mean. Racial realism is an idea from the alt right that there are differences between the races that should be recognized and accounted for as opposed to washing over those differences with the artificial (ie "the not real") construct of liberal/progressive egalitarianism. Depending upon how you define the alt right, different factions of the alt right reach different conclusions from this perspective, ranging from advocacy for western culture to advocacy for white nationalism. So if I understand correctly: -Racial realism is the idea that there are innate differences between races (sometimes called essentialism). Unclear whether these essentialist classifications imply a superior/inferior dynamic (although historically they almost always have). The bolded part is more or less correct. The one thing left out is that the racial realist does not believe it to be taboo to discuss these things -- ie current paradigms of political correctness are no hindrance to the conversation. As for the unbolded part, racial realism doesn't imply any sort of out of outcome to the inquiry. It's a merely a perspective on the debate. Think of it as the equivalent to Marxism and history. -Danglars believes there is a campaign against this essentialism, and considers it a sobering thought that this campaign might not stop at some point. I'll leave it to Danglars to explain what he thinks on this point. -xDaunt considers this the part that people on the "other side of the issue" like me always struggle with. To be very precise, what I believe that the PC crowd struggles with is understanding how their racial policies of the past few generations have impacted the types of people who are now supporting Trump or who are turning to things like the alt right and its derivatives. Are xDaunt and Danglars actually arguing that innate differences between races exist such that we should treat members of different races differently? Is that not an absolutely textbook definition of racism? I'll let Danglars speak for himself. As for me, I'm merely pointing out why there's a large contingent of Americans who are bucking the current PC norms. Again, race means essentially nothing to me as a politically significant classification. Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? As I have said repeatedly, I think that it is utterly retarded to consider color blindness to be racist, and I think that this is where the left jumped the shark on the racial debate.
So yes you do not see that 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family' are the classic racist defense. Glad we established that.
Every single person everywhere ever is subconsciously biased in some form or order. That doesn't make everyone a racist but the fact that you deny having any bias at all is a giant red alarm going off that you lack any form of self reflection at all.
Which, combined with your posts, most certainly gives people the impression that you are indeed a racist.
|
On September 24 2016 05:36 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:33 Slaughter wrote:On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:44 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
The bolded part is more or less correct. The one thing left out is that the racial realist does not believe it to be taboo to discuss these things -- ie current paradigms of political correctness are no hindrance to the conversation. As for the unbolded part, racial realism doesn't imply any sort of out of outcome to the inquiry. It's a merely a perspective on the debate. Think of it as the equivalent to Marxism and history.
[quote]
I'll leave it to Danglars to explain what he thinks on this point.
[quote]
To be very precise, what I believe that the PC crowd struggles with is understanding how their racial policies of the past few generations have impacted the types of people who are now supporting Trump or who are turning to things like the alt right and its derivatives.
[quote]
I'll let Danglars speak for himself.
As for me, I'm merely pointing out why there's a large contingent of Americans who are bucking the current PC norms. Again, race means essentially nothing to me as a politically significant classification. Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is. There is a difference between having racial biases and being a racist. Everyone has the biases but not everyone is racist. However you guys on the right like to group them as one to construct a strawman to argue against. No, it's not a strawman. What's really being argued by the left is that what makes me a racist is my inability to admit or recognize my "racial bias." If I simply admitted my racial biases, then I'd be able to discard the stigma of being a racist. This is simply an incomprehensibly stupid distinction to make, which is why I reject it, and distill down the left's position to "everyone is a racist."
I'd argue the arguments made against you being a racist are not due to that fact, but are the result of some of your other thoughts. The fact that you don't think you have a racial bias is the thing that prevents you from recognizing when you are saying racially offensive things.
And yes despite your ruffled feathers, condensing it do "everyone is racist" is a ridiculous strawman and part of the reason why some people don't take you as arguing in good faith.
|
The 50-page firestorm that xDaunt set off with "vermin" is quite something.
|
U.S. intelligence officials are seeking to determine whether an American businessman identified by Donald Trump as one of his foreign policy advisers has opened up private communications with senior Russian officials — including talks about the possible lifting of economic sanctions if the Republican nominee becomes president, according to multiple sources who have been briefed on the issue.
The activities of Trump adviser Carter Page, who has extensive business interests in Russia, have been discussed with senior members of Congress during recent briefings about suspected efforts by Moscow to influence the presidential election, the sources said. After one of those briefings, Senate minority leader Harry Reid wrote FBI Director James Comey, citing reports of meetings between a Trump adviser (a reference to Page) and “high ranking sanctioned individuals” in Moscow over the summer as evidence of “significant and disturbing ties” between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin that needed to be investigated by the bureau.
Some of those briefed were “taken aback” when they learned about Page’s contacts in Moscow, viewing them as a possible back channel to the Russians that could undercut U.S. foreign policy, said a congressional source familiar with the briefings but who asked for anonymity due to the sensitivity of the subject. The source added that U.S. officials in the briefings indicated that intelligence reports about the adviser’s talks with senior Russian officials close to President Vladimir Putin were being “actively monitored and investigated.”
Yahoo
This Trump/Russia business actually has legs...I hope it sticks around in the media. This is serious if all true.
Trump and Putin both stand to benefit from further intervention by Putin. And Trump's business stands to benefit significantly from a lifting of sanctions.
|
On September 24 2016 05:42 Doodsmack wrote:
The 50-page firestorm that xDaunt set off with "vermin" is quite something.
A lot of people coming to grips with something I knew ages ago. Up until just now I thought xDaunt was far too intelligent to not see what he's doing, but seeing some of his recent posts I'm starting to think it may be one of those times when being smart gets in the way of seeing the obvious.
I think in the next 5 years xDaunt may have a genuine breakthrough where he realizes just what's been wrong with his perception this whole time.
|
On September 24 2016 05:42 Slaughter wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:36 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:33 Slaughter wrote:On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:
[quote]
Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is. There is a difference between having racial biases and being a racist. Everyone has the biases but not everyone is racist. However you guys on the right like to group them as one to construct a strawman to argue against. No, it's not a strawman. What's really being argued by the left is that what makes me a racist is my inability to admit or recognize my "racial bias." If I simply admitted my racial biases, then I'd be able to discard the stigma of being a racist. This is simply an incomprehensibly stupid distinction to make, which is why I reject it, and distill down the left's position to "everyone is a racist." I'd argue the arguments made against you being a racist are not due to that fact, but are the result of some of your other thoughts. The fact that you don't think you have a racial bias is the thing that prevents you from recognizing when you are saying racially offensive things. And yes despite your ruffled feathers, condensing it do "everyone is racist" is a ridiculous strawman and part of the reason why some people don't take you as arguing in good faith.
I actually like "everyone is racist" part. Like I said earlier, if I'm viewed as a racist in 50 years due to social norm changes, then great, real progress has being made.
|
On September 24 2016 05:39 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:44 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:31 ChristianS wrote:
[quote]
So if I understand correctly:
-Racial realism is the idea that there are innate differences between races (sometimes called essentialism). Unclear whether these essentialist classifications imply a superior/inferior dynamic (although historically they almost always have). The bolded part is more or less correct. The one thing left out is that the racial realist does not believe it to be taboo to discuss these things -- ie current paradigms of political correctness are no hindrance to the conversation. As for the unbolded part, racial realism doesn't imply any sort of out of outcome to the inquiry. It's a merely a perspective on the debate. Think of it as the equivalent to Marxism and history. -Danglars believes there is a campaign against this essentialism, and considers it a sobering thought that this campaign might not stop at some point. I'll leave it to Danglars to explain what he thinks on this point. -xDaunt considers this the part that people on the "other side of the issue" like me always struggle with. To be very precise, what I believe that the PC crowd struggles with is understanding how their racial policies of the past few generations have impacted the types of people who are now supporting Trump or who are turning to things like the alt right and its derivatives. Are xDaunt and Danglars actually arguing that innate differences between races exist such that we should treat members of different races differently? Is that not an absolutely textbook definition of racism? I'll let Danglars speak for himself. As for me, I'm merely pointing out why there's a large contingent of Americans who are bucking the current PC norms. Again, race means essentially nothing to me as a politically significant classification. Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is. Just as a reminder, the reason that the understanding of what was racist or sexist or whatever else -ist has expanded is not because it has changed, it is because the people defining it changed. It used to be that Roger Ailes/Donald Trump etc used to define what counted as sexual harassment and they would argue that anything short of rape didn't count because after all, they could have just quit. Show nested quote +I would like to think she would find another career or find another company if that was the case. - Donald Trump Then we got a bunch of black people in the civil rights era and feminists around the same time sharing what they thought about the white male definitions of these -isms. Saying that calling black employees "boy" or female employees "honey" wasn't actually okay. What we're now experiencing is a backlash where the white men are correcting African Americans and explaining that black people don't really understand racism the way that white men do and that the narrow white male definition of racism is the correct one and that they hope one day black people will learn enough about racism to understand that what was just said wasn't actually racist. Same with the others. That's why the definition has ballooned. The people who experienced it became sufficiently empowered within society to explain how they experienced it. Or to explain it in a more triggering way to the right White privilege is maintaining that your understanding racism is the only valid experience of racism and having people take you seriously.
Just walking all over everyone who disagrees with you that isn't a privileged white male in order to feel better.
|
On September 24 2016 05:46 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:42 Doodsmack wrote:
The 50-page firestorm that xDaunt set off with "vermin" is quite something. A lot of people coming to grips with something I knew ages ago. Up until just now I thought xDaunt was far too intelligent to not see what he's doing, but seeing some of his recent posts I'm starting to think it may be one of those times when being smart gets in the way of seeing the obvious. I think in the next 5 years xDaunt may have a genuine breakthrough where he realizes just what's been wrong with his perception this whole time.
Admittedly, your post in response to mine influenced me.
|
United States43755 Posts
On September 24 2016 05:50 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:39 KwarK wrote:On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:44 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
The bolded part is more or less correct. The one thing left out is that the racial realist does not believe it to be taboo to discuss these things -- ie current paradigms of political correctness are no hindrance to the conversation. As for the unbolded part, racial realism doesn't imply any sort of out of outcome to the inquiry. It's a merely a perspective on the debate. Think of it as the equivalent to Marxism and history.
[quote]
I'll leave it to Danglars to explain what he thinks on this point.
[quote]
To be very precise, what I believe that the PC crowd struggles with is understanding how their racial policies of the past few generations have impacted the types of people who are now supporting Trump or who are turning to things like the alt right and its derivatives.
[quote]
I'll let Danglars speak for himself.
As for me, I'm merely pointing out why there's a large contingent of Americans who are bucking the current PC norms. Again, race means essentially nothing to me as a politically significant classification. Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is. Just as a reminder, the reason that the understanding of what was racist or sexist or whatever else -ist has expanded is not because it has changed, it is because the people defining it changed. It used to be that Roger Ailes/Donald Trump etc used to define what counted as sexual harassment and they would argue that anything short of rape didn't count because after all, they could have just quit. I would like to think she would find another career or find another company if that was the case. - Donald Trump Then we got a bunch of black people in the civil rights era and feminists around the same time sharing what they thought about the white male definitions of these -isms. Saying that calling black employees "boy" or female employees "honey" wasn't actually okay. What we're now experiencing is a backlash where the white men are correcting African Americans and explaining that black people don't really understand racism the way that white men do and that the narrow white male definition of racism is the correct one and that they hope one day black people will learn enough about racism to understand that what was just said wasn't actually racist. Same with the others. That's why the definition has ballooned. The people who experienced it became sufficiently empowered within society to explain how they experienced it. Or to explain it in a more triggering way to the right White privilege is maintaining that your understanding racism is the only valid experience of racism and having people take you seriously. Just walking all over everyone who disagrees with you that isn't a privileged white male in order to feel better.
Racism isn't exclusive to white folks and not everyone experiences the same racism.
|
On September 24 2016 05:42 Slaughter wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:36 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:33 Slaughter wrote:On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 04:53 ragz_gt wrote:
[quote]
Are you Kellyanne Conway in disguise for Danglars? I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is. There is a difference between having racial biases and being a racist. Everyone has the biases but not everyone is racist. However you guys on the right like to group them as one to construct a strawman to argue against. No, it's not a strawman. What's really being argued by the left is that what makes me a racist is my inability to admit or recognize my "racial bias." If I simply admitted my racial biases, then I'd be able to discard the stigma of being a racist. This is simply an incomprehensibly stupid distinction to make, which is why I reject it, and distill down the left's position to "everyone is a racist." I'd argue the arguments made against you being a racist are not due to that fact, but are the result of some of your other thoughts. The fact that you don't think you have a racial bias is the thing that prevents you from recognizing when you are saying racially offensive things. And yes despite your ruffled feathers, condensing it do "everyone is racist" is a ridiculous strawman and part of the reason why some people don't take you as arguing in good faith.
Let's just put aside the paragon example of yours truly, and let's talk about average joe to get right to the point. I will admit that the average joe is going to have some inherent racial biases that are inherent in pretty much all of us. When average joe sees a man walking down the sidewalk towards him, he's going to profile that person and come to different conclusions upon whether that man is a threat based upon what average joe is able to perceive. One of the factors considered will be race. And I'll further admit that the perceived threat will be higher at the margin (to one degree or another depending upon the circumstances) if the man is black. I refuse to call average joe a racist merely for running through that calculus. It takes more than that.
|
On September 24 2016 05:57 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:42 Slaughter wrote:On September 24 2016 05:36 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:33 Slaughter wrote:On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is. There is a difference between having racial biases and being a racist. Everyone has the biases but not everyone is racist. However you guys on the right like to group them as one to construct a strawman to argue against. No, it's not a strawman. What's really being argued by the left is that what makes me a racist is my inability to admit or recognize my "racial bias." If I simply admitted my racial biases, then I'd be able to discard the stigma of being a racist. This is simply an incomprehensibly stupid distinction to make, which is why I reject it, and distill down the left's position to "everyone is a racist." I'd argue the arguments made against you being a racist are not due to that fact, but are the result of some of your other thoughts. The fact that you don't think you have a racial bias is the thing that prevents you from recognizing when you are saying racially offensive things. And yes despite your ruffled feathers, condensing it do "everyone is racist" is a ridiculous strawman and part of the reason why some people don't take you as arguing in good faith. Let's just put aside the paragon example of yours truly, and let's talk about average joe to get right to the point. I will admit that the average joe is going to have some inherent racial biases that are inherent in pretty much all of us. When average joe sees a man walking down the sidewalk towards him, he's going to profile that person and come to different conclusions upon whether that man is a threat based upon what average joe is able to perceive. One of the factors considered will be race. And I'll further admit that the perceived threat will be higher at the margin (to one degree or another depending upon the circumstances) if the man is black. I refuse to call average joe a racist merely for running through that calculus. It takes more than that.
See, I don't think that makes joe a racist either. This is why I (and others) are saying you don't understand the argument being made.
|
I do agree to that, but that's more like 95% of population if not higher, and not 40% of population.
|
United States43755 Posts
On September 24 2016 05:57 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 05:42 Slaughter wrote:On September 24 2016 05:36 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:33 Slaughter wrote:On September 24 2016 05:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:29 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 05:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 24 2016 05:13 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 05:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2016 04:59 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
I know what Danglars was saying, but given the penchant of certain shitposters to liberally label people as racists when this topic comes up, I'd rather not say anything inadvertently that results in him dealing with a bunch of needless shit. I know you don't think you're racist, but do you at least admit to yourself that you do and say racist things? Or do you genuinely believe you are impervious to the undeniably racist culture you grew up in? I'll be the first to say that I'm politically incorrect and that I fully embrace -- and even flaunt -- that trait. But I find it particularly amusing that people accuse me of racism or white supremacy or of having grown up in a "racist culture" when my family is about as multi-racial as it gets. Europeans, Arabs, Jews, Africans, Chinese, and Indians are all represented. This is why race means nothing to me. I get why some people may think that I say racist things, but those people have the wrong definition of racism for all of the reasons that I have listed over the past couple of days (and previously). It's really as simple as that. Again with this 'I don't see race' argument. All it means to me is that your utterly blind to your prejudice. 'I don't see race', 'I have black friends/family'. They are the classic defense used by racists. Do you seriously not see this? What would a non-racist say? Because from here the presumption is everyone is racist but you're only excused if you say "I know I'm racist but I'm working on it" and proselytize at the rest of the world. And this is the problem with the over-expansive definition of racism that the PC left has adopted: if everyone is a racist, then no one is. There is a difference between having racial biases and being a racist. Everyone has the biases but not everyone is racist. However you guys on the right like to group them as one to construct a strawman to argue against. No, it's not a strawman. What's really being argued by the left is that what makes me a racist is my inability to admit or recognize my "racial bias." If I simply admitted my racial biases, then I'd be able to discard the stigma of being a racist. This is simply an incomprehensibly stupid distinction to make, which is why I reject it, and distill down the left's position to "everyone is a racist." I'd argue the arguments made against you being a racist are not due to that fact, but are the result of some of your other thoughts. The fact that you don't think you have a racial bias is the thing that prevents you from recognizing when you are saying racially offensive things. And yes despite your ruffled feathers, condensing it do "everyone is racist" is a ridiculous strawman and part of the reason why some people don't take you as arguing in good faith. Let's just put aside the paragon example of yours truly, and let's talk about average joe to get right to the point. I will admit that the average joe is going to have some inherent racial biases that are inherent in pretty much all of us. When average joe sees a man walking down the sidewalk towards him, he's going to profile that person and come to different conclusions upon whether that man is a threat based upon what average joe is able to perceive. One of the factors considered will be race. And I'll further admit that the perceived threat will be higher at the margin (to one degree or another depending upon the circumstances) if the man is black. I refuse to call average joe a racist merely for running through that calculus. It takes more than that.
Would you be willing to also add that the average Joe's perception of threat may not be based on reality but could rather be impacted by factors such as the media or learned social behaviour?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
