Justification of racism

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Islamsmylife, Nov 29, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bells Staff Member

    Which would probably have been the case even if there was no equal opportunity employment or if the company you work or contract for had no quota to fill.

    What should matter more to you? The colour or "race" of the people sent to you for the work? Or their work ethic?

    Yet, the first thing you seem to focus on was their colour and/or "race". Why is that?

    Iceaura and Tiassa have already addressed this point.

    But it applies to you. If you don't believe me, read the first post you made in this very thread as a prime example.

    I'll put it this way, if you see someone who is biracial, do you consider them to be white? Or Black/Hispanic/Asian?

    When you drive through areas that you so charmingly declared were "racial hoods", do you see someone who is biracial there, to be white, like you? Or another "race"?

    This is why I asked if you look at colour first, as in physical appearance, or do you look at the one drop rule and determine that if someone is biracial or is mixed "race", then they are not white?

    For example, your current President is biracial. Do you consider him to be white or black? Or do you not bother to look at or consider his colour at all?

    Ermm.. Congratulations?

    You mean you judge by colour first when you stereotype them?

    Let me ask you a question. If black people moved in across the road from you, and to either side of you, would you find this troublesome? Or just carry on and not bother to even think about it, because they are just your neighbours, like anyone has neighbours?


    You do realise that your racism stems from the fact that you:

    a) Stereotype others by their ethnic backgrounds
    b) Make distinct comments about people's colour and say that people of other colours make you uncomfortable because apparently they aren't like you..
    c) You make derogatory comments and stereotypes based on their colour and where they happen to live

    I could go on and on.

    Hence, the one drop rule. If someone is half African American and half white, would you be as uncomfortable around them because they are not purely white? Would you ignore the black part and focus solely on the white part? Or would you treat them as you expect to be treated, like a human being that is just like you in that sense?

    I'll put it this way. I have French, Dutch and African ancestry. Which colour would you focus on with someone like me, for example? I have light olive skin that sunburns easily, I have curly black hair and brown eyes. Would I be white in your opinion? Or black?

    Would the black part of me make you uncomfortable because you wouldn't know how to speak to me (as per your first post in this thread)?

    See how entrenched the racism is in your statements in this thread? See how offensive it is?

    I see..

    Comments about "racial hoods" and complaining about what you deemed to be equal opportunity hiring aside:

    You were saying?

    So I'll ask again. If you are faced with a mixed race person, would you consider them white, like you? Or a different race because their colour is different? Would you feel just as included with them as you would "with a bunch of white folk"?
    Spellbound likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Bells Staff Member

    It is, isn't it?

    Using white privilege to argue that white privilege does not exist.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. sunnevershines Registered Member

    So there is absolutely zero truth to stereotypes? Non whatseoever?
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bells Staff Member


    Was that a response to me? Because if it is, then it makes no sense.
  8. wellwisher Banned Banned

    The problem with discussing racism is there is no one definition of racism, that applies to all people from all races. The NAACP is not considered a racist organization. But if white people formed the NAAWP that would be considered racist, even if they were careful to mirror the other. There is dual standard, created by the Democrats, that assures racism. This is expected since the Democrats were the political party of slavery. They have come up with a way to perpetuate the past; dual standard separates the races by treating each differently. This means they are not the same.

    Let me give an example, say I can call you names, because this is allowed. However, you can't call me names, because that would be mean. Could this dual standard ever create peace between us? The answer is the dual standard will create tension that will keep us divided against each other.

    I have a right to call you names, so I am not doing anything wrong, if I call you x$%&&^&. Since I am in the right calling you that, I can't see why that should make you upset. There is nothing socially wrong with my calling you names, by PC definition. But if you say the very same thing to me, there will be hell to pay, because this is very different; PC says so. This is not even rational.

    What would happen is you would resent me for mistreating you, even if the dual standard allows me to do this and therefore it should be OK by definition. I would sense that you don't seem very happy with me and even avoid me. It can't be the name calling since this OK by definition. Therefore, it has to be because you are prejudice against me.

    Picture if we said, all races will for now on, have to play by the same set of rules. If there is a black pride day there will be white pride day. If there is NAACP there can also be a NAAXP. People are less resentful if there is one set of laws. I am not saying some people will not be envious but that is a human flaw. The problem with this fairness approach is the racism industry and the politics of division, needs a dividing strategy, with a dual standard able to create resentment for that divide.
  9. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    A curious paradox arises; to the one, our neighbor seems to argue a certain sense of necessity about segregation; to the other, these others are apparently similar enough that our neighbor knows what and how they think.

    And it's true, after all these years it occurs to me that the answer might be important: If we're so different, why do the people harping on the differences think they know the others so well?

    Note also the nature of our neighbor's latest inquiry; instead of making an affirmative argument on behalf of stereotyping, it seems retreat to consant undefined inquiry is all the racist argument has going for it on this occasion.

    Here's a stereotype: American Chrsistians envy Islam and want to be Muslims.

    I can tell you where I find my grain of truth in that, but neither is it an assertion I would stand on in any context of formal academics. Politics? Sure, but still, it's risky, since the people the line targets just aren't smart enough to figure out what it means, anyway.

    Still, the part that I observe in order to formulate that hit is according to my priority. I can't promise it works for anyone else, especially the people taking part. They really do seem set on vendetta, and seem to think that religious freedom is some manner of special right to be envied when possessed by a Muslim. As near as I can tell, the question of privilege versus equality is more relevant to that neurotic mess.

    Observing our neighbor's apparent failure to distinguish between the comfort of familiarity to the one and open hostility to the other, a similar phenomenon seems in play.

    One of the consistent failures of empowerment majorities is to recognize the inherent contradiction between wanting something of others and complaining about getting it.

    We see this in diverse expressions of supremacism. Slight alterations of detail over time do little, if anything at all, to mask the underlying themes.
  10. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    One may not be superior in skin color or anything. One may be inferior in terms of certain hang-ups which are problematic (note: due to being a victim of white power, but I must understand the irrelevance of not merely not caring, which is a transitional mood in itself, but of believing in it as the reality of the moment, because it is not).
  11. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Supremacism is interesting. It is where people attempt to gain self esteem, but finding irrational ways to associate themselves to groups. As an example, say I have wild hair. This could get me odd reactions, that may not be good for my self esteem. One day I notice Albert Einstein also had wild hair. I irrationally conclude, that people with wild hair, although odd, can be very smart. This makes me feel smarter and builds my self esteem.

    If my race is the best race on the planet, that has the potential to make me one of the best people. All I need to do is base my self esteem on my race. I need to place my self esteem, outside me, instead of inside me. The price for this irrationality, is further irrationality. If someone insults my race, I will take it personally, because my self esteem is on the line. I am empty beneath this and need to keep my race as superior as possible or else!

    If you have internally generated self esteem; character and actions, you don't need to fabricate self esteem, through external associations, which are endowed with the qualities you wish to have.

    I don't belong to any race, except the human race. On bad days, this will allow me to attach my self esteem to the best qualities of all humans.. On better days I am an island, with my self esteem flowing from within. Now I can be objective.
  12. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Referring to the OP, I'm not certain how to reply. I've never lived in an all-white society, so I haven't any experience with such. It would seem to reason that European culture has dominated much of history, but even that was influenced by external elements. What would interest me is the possibility that people of color feel the same towards their racial heritage. I have no problem with people wanting to live with "their own," it just seems like an impossibility in our time.
  13. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    What a dull life though.

    I grew up in a megalopolis, but I've spent time in towns that were overwhelmingly my own colour. What a snooze, to be surrounded by the banal.
  14. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Which ones? There are people who think one can classify homo sapiens into different biological "races" according to skin color, and the members of a given "race" will have inherent sociological features in common. There isn't much truth to that.
  15. sunnevershines Registered Member

    So your able to pick and choose which stereotypes are vaild and which ones arent? Im pretty sure stereotyping is not racially intent on only to further segregation, loss of privilege, etc. Its just a quick way to catergorize and intercept data from the world.
  16. sunnevershines Registered Member

    No, this is not true...the job posting had a requirment of 2 years experience (no transferable soft skills) and/or journeyman level skills. Along with a woman, a few other minorities rounded out the work force....
    To each according to their skills and abilities! Errr, nope. But, I dont hold these folks at fault for getting in over their heads, a few actually learned a thing or two....what I dont understand is the part about sending undereducated and inexperienced to do important safety construction! What kind of society do we exsist in that puts safety before our feel good intentions? Well, Ill tell you....a society that bangs over our head that we are racist! When I mention the fact that I feel comfortable among the people I grew up with my family/friends and because the majority are caucasian, Im seen as an unabashed racist. Not once In my posts have I denigrated other races or minorities. And because I SEE groups of the same race living in close proximate neighborhoods, the racist branding comes out. Seriously, wtf is Crenshaw?? I guarantee if you are a caucasian you would not be caught dead walking in the heart of this LA. 'hood. If you dont agree, your living in fantasy land...this is not me putting forth a racist agenda or stereotype but a simple and observed truth...
  17. Bells Staff Member

    This does not make sense.

    Because you are contradicting yourself.

    If the work was so precise as you are saying it was, why not seek out only Master carpenters? 2 years experience and/or journeyman level skills is what? Just out of apprenticeship?

    And oh no. You had to work with a woman and minorities. Poor you. How traumatic for you. She should have been at home, tied to the sink and barefoot where she belongs and the minorities should have been mowing your lawn.

    The same society that decided to employ people with only 2 years experience for a job that required much more experience. For all of your prattling on about how it required people with your level of expertise, because the work was so important, I am surprised you are not whining about the requirement for people with such little experience to begin with. Instead, you complain that you had to work with a woman and minorities.

    Well, sorry to break it to you, sunnevershines, you are racist. In fact, you are a white supremacist.

    But that is not what you said, was it? You have argued that because you are white, you would be unable to converse or live with people from other ethnic groups, because you are apparently so different to them.

    You don't think citing negative stereotypes is denigrating minorities? You don't think whining repeatedly that you were made to work with minorities and a woman is denigrating them? You don't think employing negative stereotypes against minorities is racist?

    Your agenda is racist because you have consistently argued for segregation based on race, not to mention stereotyping others based on their ethnicity.
  18. sunnevershines Registered Member

    Ive never made remarks of this kind: all Ive done is detail what occured....Have I said anything negative? No, but by just pointing out dangerous and backwards thinking of hiring by race and minority status....
  19. sunnevershines Registered Member

    Further, I believe if any minority, female or ufo alien knows the occupation: LET 'EM WORK!!
  20. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    I've never met a racist who wasn't black.
    But, then again, I've probably met only 6 or 7 racist in my life.

    If you delineate based on race, no matter what race you are, then you are a racist....this has been noticeably true of white "liberals" who equate poverty or disadvantage with black people.

    We all have racist, sexist ethnocentric tendencies. Which does not mean that we must be slaves to those tendencies.

    As/re segregation: do we not all segregate ourselves based on peer group identification? Years ago, I dug a frog pond. The frogs segregated themselves with green frogs on one section of bank, pickerel frogs on another section of bank, toads on another, and leopard frogs on another. When we first moved here, we had 3 distinct mouse populations in our house(before I got the cats) and each had staked out separate turfs.
    I suspect that self segregation is the natural norm.
    However, I find forced segregation repugnant.
  21. sunnevershines Registered Member

    But please, you must admit it is a dangerous to hire someone based soley on race, RIGHT? You been arguing against it for two days Bells!
    Good point, forced seg. Is repugnant...Its sooo evident that populations self segregate.... To blissfully deny this is incredible. Or to say its a racist veiw, even more...
  22. sunnevershines Registered Member

    I have never implied that any race should or shouldnt do anything...I have just described what I have witnessed....I do not think its a good idea to hire based on ethnicity or race only to fill quotas....
  23. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Perhaps if liberals think like you do.

    For many, it's a question of function and outcomes. Consider liberals of my age cohort:

    → Conservative: Southern strategy―Tacit racism intending disparate impact against nonwhites.

    → Liberal: Measure Southern strategy accordingly, demonstrate disparate impact

    ↳ Conservative: If you delineate based on race, then you are a racist.​

    It's much akin to the "all lives matter" or "what about the men" counterpoints in other issues of injustice. Such questions are not unimportant, but are both belittled and belittling when waved as an excuse to look away from specific problems.

    One need not be a conservative to say, "If you delineate based on race, then you are a racist"; however, that's what conservatives would hope you say. Measuring consumption of chocolate or vanilla ice cream discriminates, but what is the purpose?

    If one seeks to create disparate impacts based on racial and ethnic perceptions, those efforts will have measurable effects defined according to racial and ethnic perceptions; should the measurement thereof be called "racist"?

    In the end, what does the retreat to generalization accomplish?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page