Total Posts:43|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

racism and RACISM

Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 5:17:18 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

Oddly the word does come with some negative conotations. For example I like black people and jews and stuff. I mean I like Cam Newton a lot and I've had sex with black chicks, but I still think they're inferior. For example I have never nor will I ever lose a debate to a black person
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 5:45:52 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 5:17:18 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

Oddly the word does come with some negative conotations. For example I like black people and jews and stuff. I mean I like Cam Newton a lot and I've had sex with black chicks, but I still think they're inferior. For example I have never nor will I ever lose a debate to a black person

So what would you do if you found out someone was black halfway through the debate, and then they were winning on votes and it was only a few hours before voting closed?
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 6:03:42 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 5:45:52 AM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:17:18 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

Oddly the word does come with some negative conotations. For example I like black people and jews and stuff. I mean I like Cam Newton a lot and I've had sex with black chicks, but I still think they're inferior. For example I have never nor will I ever lose a debate to a black person

So what would you do if you found out someone was black halfway through the debate, and then they were winning on votes and it was only a few hours before voting closed?

I'd beg them to call it a tie because my mom just died and I fpund out I have cancer
Jovian
Posts: 1,719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 10:58:39 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

The person with the racist statements in this case is trying to condone himself, in order to protect themselves against guilt. A strategy very common in for example rapists (wow just one exchanged letter) as well. To defend himself against guilt, the rapist points at "she asked for it" etc.
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 4:57:14 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

There's a difference between being deliberately racist and pointing out deficiencies in character that are consistent with the majority of a race. For example, I go to a public High School where minority groups make up 80% of the school. You could say the school is segregated by choice, there's the IB program where only 10-15 minority students are enrolled out of nearly 100, and then there's the lower level academic courses like AP and Honors. The farther you go down, the more % of minority students there are until you get to Honors level which is 100% minority. So it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school.

Also, after 4 years of observing minority group behavior, particularly the blacks, I have concluded that these people are the worst mannered people I've ever encountered. They have no respect for authority, no respect for the rules, and no respect for other people. They do have utmost respect for themselves though. Friday someone's weave was left on the floor of my English classroom, and that's not the first time that has happened. They're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit, and our school is nasty in some areas because of it and it pisses me off a lot.

So after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites. There's nothing racist about this, it's the black people's fault that I have concluded this.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 5:48:15 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 4:57:14 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

There's a difference between being deliberately racist and pointing out deficiencies in character that are consistent with the majority of a race. For example, I go to a public High School where minority groups make up 80% of the school. You could say the school is segregated by choice, there's the IB program where only 10-15 minority students are enrolled out of nearly 100, and then there's the lower level academic courses like AP and Honors. The farther you go down, the more % of minority students there are until you get to Honors level which is 100% minority. So it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school.

Also, after 4 years of observing minority group behavior, particularly the blacks, I have concluded that these people are the worst mannered people I've ever encountered. They have no respect for authority, no respect for the rules, and no respect for other people. They do have utmost respect for themselves though. Friday someone's weave was left on the floor of my English classroom, and that's not the first time that has happened. They're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit, and our school is nasty in some areas because of it and it pisses me off a lot.

So after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites. There's nothing racist about this, it's the black people's fault that I have concluded this.

I'm a junior in the IB program at my school. I can attest that even though the minority status isn't as high in my school as it is in yours, there's still quite a lot of minorities in the IB. I would say that Latinos are dominant here in Chicago, because the demographic mix is 33% white, 33% black, and 33% Latino, or something around those numbers. I wouldn't be surprised if the blacks and latinos out shadowed the whites, since they breed endlessly.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 8:26:31 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 4:57:14 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

There's a difference between being deliberately racist and pointing out deficiencies in character that are consistent with the majority of a race. For example, I go to a public High School where minority groups make up 80% of the school. You could say the school is segregated by choice, there's the IB program where only 10-15 minority students are enrolled out of nearly 100, and then there's the lower level academic courses like AP and Honors. The farther you go down, the more % of minority students there are until you get to Honors level which is 100% minority. So it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school.

Also, after 4 years of observing minority group behavior, particularly the blacks, I have concluded that these people are the worst mannered people I've ever encountered. They have no respect for authority, no respect for the rules, and no respect for other people. They do have utmost respect for themselves though. Friday someone's weave was left on the floor of my English classroom, and that's not the first time that has happened. They're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit, and our school is nasty in some areas because of it and it pisses me off a lot.

So after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites. There's nothing racist about this, it's the black people's fault that I have concluded this.

Yeah, this is exactly what I was talking about!

So imagine you were to become racist. What would need to change?
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 8:32:28 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 8:26:31 PM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:57:14 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

There's a difference between being deliberately racist and pointing out deficiencies in character that are consistent with the majority of a race. For example, I go to a public High School where minority groups make up 80% of the school. You could say the school is segregated by choice, there's the IB program where only 10-15 minority students are enrolled out of nearly 100, and then there's the lower level academic courses like AP and Honors. The farther you go down, the more % of minority students there are until you get to Honors level which is 100% minority. So it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school.

Also, after 4 years of observing minority group behavior, particularly the blacks, I have concluded that these people are the worst mannered people I've ever encountered. They have no respect for authority, no respect for the rules, and no respect for other people. They do have utmost respect for themselves though. Friday someone's weave was left on the floor of my English classroom, and that's not the first time that has happened. They're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit, and our school is nasty in some areas because of it and it pisses me off a lot.

So after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites. There's nothing racist about this, it's the black people's fault that I have concluded this.

Yeah, this is exactly what I was talking about!

So imagine you were to become racist. What would need to change?

Obviously he'd have to be out there in a hood and burning crosses and lynching blacks. Anything less than that, and of course he's not a racist. Just a realist.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
YYW
Posts: 36,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 9:38:13 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

What you're missing is the difference between necessity and sufficiency; which is perfectly clear based on the posts you've been making.

But again, that's a reading comprehension/logical issue more than anything else.
Tsar of DDO
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 10:49:31 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 9:38:13 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

What you're missing is the difference between necessity and sufficiency; which is perfectly clear based on the posts you've been making.

Maybe you could explain that difference?

But again, that's a reading comprehension/logical issue more than anything else.

How do you mean?
YYW
Posts: 36,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 11:31:32 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 10:49:31 PM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/7/2016 9:38:13 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

What you're missing is the difference between necessity and sufficiency; which is perfectly clear based on the posts you've been making.

Maybe you could explain that difference?

But again, that's a reading comprehension/logical issue more than anything else.

How do you mean?

The problem is that a person's being black and suffering some kind of negative social experience is, for you, enough to cry racism. Except that's not racism. A person's bring black was not necessarily what caused the negative social experience. There, race is necessary, but not sufficiently linked to the negative outcome.

Suppose a person's being black is the reason for some negative social experience; meaning, the only reason, or at least the principal consideration in some negative social experience, was the person's being black. That's racism. There, race is sufficient; meaning, it's enough to bring about the negative social experience.

Let's play this out in the context of, say, hiring someone:

Say that I interview a black woman and a white man; both went to Harvard, both have degrees in communications, both are qualified for the job they're seeking. The black woman participated in some kind of black sorority while she was in college, but the white guy was in my fraternity.

I interview both of them. I hit it off with the white guy, but the black woman makes some comments in the interview that concern me... makes me think she would not fit in with the company's culture. Sure, she was qualified, but just because she was qualified doesn't mean that she's an ideal candidate. White guy hits it off with me, and he seems like he could make it work.

I hire the white guy. Black girl finds out, and sues my company, and me individually, for racial discrimination.

Does she have a case? She could probably survive summary judgment under McDonnell-Douglass, but she's not going to win because I will be able to show that she would not have gotten the job but for her being what's called a "member of a protected class" (read: black).

She's also never going to get hired in the industry because she made the mistake of crying wolf. An employee who sues any company for not being hired is an employee who presents too much legal risk to hire them.

(The reality is that my industry peers would have ran a background check on her right after they got her resume, and her litigation history would have been on the results, and she would never have even gotten a callback.)

But that's not racism. Her being black was not the dispositive factor (read: but-for cause) in my decision not to hire her.

NOW.... here's another scenario:

Suppose I've got three candidates for a job; a gay black guy, an indian guy and an asian chick.

They all are qualified candidates, they all do well in their interviews and I can't decide who I like more. Suppose I'm a straight pig and I hire the asian girl because I want to see if I can sexually harass her once I hire her because I have a yellow fever fetish (i.e. a fetish for asian women).

That's racism; but it's the kind of racism that benefitted a candidate over other candidates. Race, there, was the dispositive factor. Suppose the gay black guy sues me, because he found out that I hired an Asian chick. The indian guy doesn't care, because he's gotten another job by now.

Does the gay black guy have a case? Suppose his incompetent attorney assumes that the reason I didn't hire him was because he was gay. No case. But suppose his attorney just brings an employment discrimination suit and pleads that his client was discriminated against because of his race, or because he was gay. Then he might have a case. After all, HIS race AND gender were a the dispositive factors (together) in my decision not to hire him. It could go either way... but he's definitely got a right to file a law suit. Whether race was sufficient there... it's going to be for a jury to decide.

Suppose I am an administrator for the Stormfront website. For some unknown reason, a black candidate applies, and I don't hire him because he's "a rootin-tootin naggra," and I tell him so in his job interview. Well, obviously that's manifest racism; race is without question the dispositive factor.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 11:41:38 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
And it's got nothing to do with "connotations." That's a word that you learn in english classes in high school which is nice or whatever... but it's not what you're missing.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 11:45:28 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

And that is not the definition of racism, either.
Tsar of DDO
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 2:37:08 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 8:26:31 PM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:57:14 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

There's a difference between being deliberately racist and pointing out deficiencies in character that are consistent with the majority of a race. For example, I go to a public High School where minority groups make up 80% of the school. You could say the school is segregated by choice, there's the IB program where only 10-15 minority students are enrolled out of nearly 100, and then there's the lower level academic courses like AP and Honors. The farther you go down, the more % of minority students there are until you get to Honors level which is 100% minority. So it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school.

Also, after 4 years of observing minority group behavior, particularly the blacks, I have concluded that these people are the worst mannered people I've ever encountered. They have no respect for authority, no respect for the rules, and no respect for other people. They do have utmost respect for themselves though. Friday someone's weave was left on the floor of my English classroom, and that's not the first time that has happened. They're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit, and our school is nasty in some areas because of it and it pisses me off a lot.

So after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites. There's nothing racist about this, it's the black people's fault that I have concluded this.

Yeah, this is exactly what I was talking about!

So imagine you were to become racist. What would need to change?

For me to be racist I'd have to intentionally hate all black people because of their skin color. Annnnnnd I don't. If any other kind of person engaged in the same activities the blacks at my school engage in, I'd be saying the same thing about them and would hold the same opinion.
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 2:39:17 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 8:26:31 PM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:57:14 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

There's a difference between being deliberately racist and pointing out deficiencies in character that are consistent with the majority of a race. For example, I go to a public High School where minority groups make up 80% of the school. You could say the school is segregated by choice, there's the IB program where only 10-15 minority students are enrolled out of nearly 100, and then there's the lower level academic courses like AP and Honors. The farther you go down, the more % of minority students there are until you get to Honors level which is 100% minority. So it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school.

Also, after 4 years of observing minority group behavior, particularly the blacks, I have concluded that these people are the worst mannered people I've ever encountered. They have no respect for authority, no respect for the rules, and no respect for other people. They do have utmost respect for themselves though. Friday someone's weave was left on the floor of my English classroom, and that's not the first time that has happened. They're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit, and our school is nasty in some areas because of it and it pisses me off a lot.

So after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites. There's nothing racist about this, it's the black people's fault that I have concluded this.

Yeah, this is exactly what I was talking about!

So imagine you were to become racist. What would need to change?

For me to be racist I'd have to intentionally hate all black people because of their skin color. Annnd I don't. If any other kind of person engaged in the same activities the blacks at my school engage in, I'd be saying the same thing about them and would hold the same opinion.
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 2:39:52 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 2:39:17 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 8:26:31 PM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:57:14 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

There's a difference between being deliberately racist and pointing out deficiencies in character that are consistent with the majority of a race. For example, I go to a public High School where minority groups make up 80% of the school. You could say the school is segregated by choice, there's the IB program where only 10-15 minority students are enrolled out of nearly 100, and then there's the lower level academic courses like AP and Honors. The farther you go down, the more % of minority students there are until you get to Honors level which is 100% minority. So it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school.

Also, after 4 years of observing minority group behavior, particularly the blacks, I have concluded that these people are the worst mannered people I've ever encountered. They have no respect for authority, no respect for the rules, and no respect for other people. They do have utmost respect for themselves though. Friday someone's weave was left on the floor of my English classroom, and that's not the first time that has happened. They're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit, and our school is nasty in some areas because of it and it pisses me off a lot.

So after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites. There's nothing racist about this, it's the black people's fault that I have concluded this.

Yeah, this is exactly what I was talking about!

So imagine you were to become racist. What would need to change?

For me to be racist I'd have to intentionally hate all black people because of their skin color. Annnd I don't. If any other kind of person engaged in the same activities the blacks at my school engage in, I'd be saying the same thing about them and would hold the same opinion.

Don't know why this posted twice
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 9:21:28 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 2:39:17 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 8:26:31 PM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:57:14 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

There's a difference between being deliberately racist and pointing out deficiencies in character that are consistent with the majority of a race. For example, I go to a public High School where minority groups make up 80% of the school. You could say the school is segregated by choice, there's the IB program where only 10-15 minority students are enrolled out of nearly 100, and then there's the lower level academic courses like AP and Honors. The farther you go down, the more % of minority students there are until you get to Honors level which is 100% minority. So it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school.

Also, after 4 years of observing minority group behavior, particularly the blacks, I have concluded that these people are the worst mannered people I've ever encountered. They have no respect for authority, no respect for the rules, and no respect for other people. They do have utmost respect for themselves though. Friday someone's weave was left on the floor of my English classroom, and that's not the first time that has happened. They're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit, and our school is nasty in some areas because of it and it pisses me off a lot.

So after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites. There's nothing racist about this, it's the black people's fault that I have concluded this.

Yeah, this is exactly what I was talking about!

So imagine you were to become racist. What would need to change?

For me to be racist I'd have to intentionally hate all black people because of their skin color. Annnd I don't. If any other kind of person engaged in the same activities the blacks at my school engage in, I'd be saying the same thing about them and would hold the same opinion.

Okay. Thx for explaining.

I never heard of anyone hating anyone because of their skin color, though. That's just a metaphor for what you're experiencing, I think. So, if you had to partner up with a new student, and he was white, you'd feel differently than if you had to partner up with a new black student. That's not because of skin color, but because of what you associate and expect from different groups of people, and skin color is just one of the signs you use to figure out group membership.

Even the really insane racists, who argue that we're different species, don't hate on black people because of skin color specifically, but because of what they believe it represents. So I think that nobody would be racist according to your definition of it. Or do you know anybody racist that way?
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 9:51:49 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 11:31:32 PM, YYW wrote:
The problem is that a person's being black and suffering some kind of negative social experience is, for you, enough to cry racism. Except that's not racism. A person's bring black was not necessarily what caused the negative social experience. There, race is necessary, but not sufficiently linked to the negative outcome.

Yes, I agree that a black person having a bad social experience is not sufficient for it to be racism, same as if any person had a bad social experience.

Suppose a person's being black is the reason for some negative social experience; meaning, the only reason, or at least the principal consideration in some negative social experience, was the person's being black. That's racism. There, race is sufficient; meaning, it's enough to bring about the negative social experience.

Let's play this out in the context of, say, hiring someone:

Say that I interview a black woman and a white man; both went to Harvard, both have degrees in communications, both are qualified for the job they're seeking. The black woman participated in some kind of black sorority while she was in college, but the white guy was in my fraternity.

I interview both of them. I hit it off with the white guy, but the black woman makes some comments in the interview that concern me... makes me think she would not fit in with the company's culture. Sure, she was qualified, but just because she was qualified doesn't mean that she's an ideal candidate. White guy hits it off with me, and he seems like he could make it work.

I hire the white guy. Black girl finds out, and sues my company, and me individually, for racial discrimination.

Does she have a case? She could probably survive summary judgment under McDonnell-Douglass, but she's not going to win because I will be able to show that she would not have gotten the job but for her being what's called a "member of a protected class" (read: black).

She's also never going to get hired in the industry because she made the mistake of crying wolf. An employee who sues any company for not being hired is an employee who presents too much legal risk to hire them.

(The reality is that my industry peers would have ran a background check on her right after they got her resume, and her litigation history would have been on the results, and she would never have even gotten a callback.)

But that's not racism. Her being black was not the dispositive factor (read: but-for cause) in my decision not to hire her.

That's really interesting. I think it would count as discrimination - although it would be impossible to prove on one case. But suppose you made a habit of hiring people from your fraternity, and suppose the people in your fraternity happened to be mostly white males, then it would count as indirect discrimination.

But we're not talking about whether it's illegal or not, but whether or not it's racist, and the action is racist (if you make a habit of hiring white males from your fraternity). The intention may or may not be racist, but I think in your case, from what you've said, that the intention would be racist even if you don't recognize it to be. I think that because you have commented about categories of people being different, and you have made particularly unfavorable comments about a particular category of black Americans.

As you said somewhere else, it's the culture of these black Americans that you have a problem with, not their race. You like people from other cultures with black skin. Nevertheless, when you're meeting someone for the first time, if they have black skin they're more likely to be assigned by you into the unfavorable black category, because you would use skin color as one of the signs of group membership.

Idk. I was thinking about this another way, because I often prefer people who travel a lot and who've lived in different countries. It occurred to me a few weeks ago, that this may make me a snob, because people from poor backgrounds are much less likely to be able to afford a lifestyle that involves a lot of travel. It may even make me indirectly racist because white people are more likely to be rich and therefore be able to afford the sorts of lifestyles that make them more interesting to me. It's an unpleasant idea to accept, because there are lots of rich white people that I can't stand, so to believe that I'm prejudiced in their favor is not something I'm okay with. But we all have preferences and make distinctions between people, so we're probably all racist. Some a lot more than others though.

NOW.... here's another scenario:

Suppose I've got three candidates for a job; a gay black guy, an indian guy and an asian chick.

They all are qualified candidates, they all do well in their interviews and I can't decide who I like more. Suppose I'm a straight pig and I hire the asian girl because I want to see if I can sexually harass her once I hire her because I have a yellow fever fetish (i.e. a fetish for asian women).

That's racism; but it's the kind of racism that benefitted a candidate over other candidates. Race, there, was the dispositive factor. Suppose the gay black guy sues me, because he found out that I hired an Asian chick. The indian guy doesn't care, because he's gotten another job by now.

Does the gay black guy have a case? Suppose his incompetent attorney assumes that the reason I didn't hire him was because he was gay. No case. But suppose his attorney just brings an employment discrimination suit and pleads that his client was discriminated against because of his race, or because he was gay. Then he might have a case. After all, HIS race AND gender were a the dispositive factors (together) in my decision not to hire him. It could go either way... but he's definitely got a right to file a law suit. Whether race was sufficient there... it's going to be for a jury to decide.

Suppose I am an administrator for the Stormfront website. For some unknown reason, a black candidate applies, and I don't hire him because he's "a rootin-tootin naggra," and I tell him so in his job interview. Well, obviously that's manifest racism; race is without question the dispositive factor.

Well sure, those are cases of more direct racism.
YYW
Posts: 36,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 4:10:39 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 9:51:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/7/2016 11:31:32 PM, YYW wrote:
The problem is that a person's being black and suffering some kind of negative social experience is, for you, enough to cry racism. Except that's not racism. A person's bring black was not necessarily what caused the negative social experience. There, race is necessary, but not sufficiently linked to the negative outcome.

Yes, I agree that a black person having a bad social experience is not sufficient for it to be racism, same as if any person had a bad social experience.

Suppose a person's being black is the reason for some negative social experience; meaning, the only reason, or at least the principal consideration in some negative social experience, was the person's being black. That's racism. There, race is sufficient; meaning, it's enough to bring about the negative social experience.

Let's play this out in the context of, say, hiring someone:

Say that I interview a black woman and a white man; both went to Harvard, both have degrees in communications, both are qualified for the job they're seeking. The black woman participated in some kind of black sorority while she was in college, but the white guy was in my fraternity.

I interview both of them. I hit it off with the white guy, but the black woman makes some comments in the interview that concern me... makes me think she would not fit in with the company's culture. Sure, she was qualified, but just because she was qualified doesn't mean that she's an ideal candidate. White guy hits it off with me, and he seems like he could make it work.

I hire the white guy. Black girl finds out, and sues my company, and me individually, for racial discrimination.

Does she have a case? She could probably survive summary judgment under McDonnell-Douglass, but she's not going to win because I will be able to show that she would not have gotten the job but for her being what's called a "member of a protected class" (read: black).

She's also never going to get hired in the industry because she made the mistake of crying wolf. An employee who sues any company for not being hired is an employee who presents too much legal risk to hire them.

(The reality is that my industry peers would have ran a background check on her right after they got her resume, and her litigation history would have been on the results, and she would never have even gotten a callback.)

But that's not racism. Her being black was not the dispositive factor (read: but-for cause) in my decision not to hire her.

That's really interesting. I think it would count as discrimination - although it would be impossible to prove on one case. But suppose you made a habit of hiring people from your fraternity, and suppose the people in your fraternity happened to be mostly white males, then it would count as indirect discrimination.

In that every hiring choice is an act of discrimination, sure. But the choice to hire the person who had a positive interview over the person who had a less positive interview is not racial discrimination. And, even if I hired only people who were in my fraternity, that's not discrimination either even if the only people I hired are white males.

Why, you ask? Because nepotism and racism are different things.

But we're not talking about whether it's illegal or not, but whether or not it's racist, and the action is racist (if you make a habit of hiring white males from your fraternity).

Nepotism is not racism; and a nepotistic environment is not enough to show that hiring decisions are racially motivated. If there were more or different facts, you might be able to say "Hey... YYW's hiring practices are racially motivated."

Suppose there was circumstantial evidence that I went out of my way to keep a highly qualified black candidate out, and hired an incompetent white guy. That's circumstantial evidence of racism; but as between equally qualified candidates, where the hiring choice came down to performance in an interview, that's not racism. It's business discretion.

The problem is that people cry racism in circumstances like what I just described; where race was not even a factor in consideration. The dispositive factor was interview performance.

The intention may or may not be racist, but I think in your case, from what you've said, that the intention would be racist even if you don't recognize it to be. I think that because you have commented about categories of people being different, and you have made particularly unfavorable comments about a particular category of black Americans.

See, now you're inventing facts and making inferences based on your own prejudices about what you think of me, rather than based on the hypothetical scenario I provided... and that's where you run into trouble. (Hint: you're conflating "hypothetical YYW in a hiring position" and "what you think you know of me based on interacting with me.")

As you said somewhere else, it's the culture of these black Americans that you have a problem with, not their race.

Here again, you're misrepresenting what I said; because you're filling the gaps with your own prejudices.

At no point did I EVER say that I have a personal problem with black culture. As it happens, I don't have a problem with black culture at all. I don't even feel uncomfortable being the only white guy in a room of only black people. (This is the story of my life every time I have to get dinner late at night in a hotel in Atlanta, for example.)

The fact that I recognize (as even Barack Obama does) the problems with black culture does not make me a racist; any more than it makes Barack Obama a racist.

You like people from other cultures with black skin.

Again... that is not what I said, nor is it a reasonable inference to draw based on what I said. If you, as tulle has consistently done, read everything I write through the lens of "YYW is a racist" (which you're doing), then you're going to draw those --provably false-- conclusions.

I don't like or dislike people on the basis of their skin color. I don't care about skin color; I care about who a person is, and what choices they make with their lives.

I can tell you this, though: what I expect from people is going to differ considerably based on their circumstances. I expect people to do the best they can with what they have, but I don't expect more than that. I also have a pretty good situational awareness of what choices are available to people, because I've worked in some very poor black areas in my life. I've worked with illegal aliens. I've worked with black men who have been brutalized by the police (almost all of whom didn't deserve it).

Nevertheless, when you're meeting someone for the first time, if they have black skin they're more likely to be assigned by you into the unfavorable black category, because you would use skin color as one of the signs of group membership.

That's false as well, and again, the fact that you're making claims like that is proof enough to me that you're reading everything I say through the lens of "he's a racist" so "therefore everything he says is going to be racist."

My objective here is to get the wool out of your eyes.

You need to learn to be able to make distinctions between actual racists, and people who speak candidly about racial politics in this country. To the extent that you fail to do that, you're blighting your cause.
Tsar of DDO
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 7:43:41 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 9:21:28 AM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/8/2016 2:39:17 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 8:26:31 PM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:57:14 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

There's a difference between being deliberately racist and pointing out deficiencies in character that are consistent with the majority of a race. For example, I go to a public High School where minority groups make up 80% of the school. You could say the school is segregated by choice, there's the IB program where only 10-15 minority students are enrolled out of nearly 100, and then there's the lower level academic courses like AP and Honors. The farther you go down, the more % of minority students there are until you get to Honors level which is 100% minority. So it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school.

Also, after 4 years of observing minority group behavior, particularly the blacks, I have concluded that these people are the worst mannered people I've ever encountered. They have no respect for authority, no respect for the rules, and no respect for other people. They do have utmost respect for themselves though. Friday someone's weave was left on the floor of my English classroom, and that's not the first time that has happened. They're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit, and our school is nasty in some areas because of it and it pisses me off a lot.

So after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites. There's nothing racist about this, it's the black people's fault that I have concluded this.

Yeah, this is exactly what I was talking about!

So imagine you were to become racist. What would need to change?

For me to be racist I'd have to intentionally hate all black people because of their skin color. Annnd I don't. If any other kind of person engaged in the same activities the blacks at my school engage in, I'd be saying the same thing about them and would hold the same opinion.

Okay. Thx for explaining.

I never heard of anyone hating anyone because of their skin color, though. That's just a metaphor for what you're experiencing, I think. So, if you had to partner up with a new student, and he was white, you'd feel differently than if you had to partner up with a new black student. That's not because of skin color, but because of what you associate and expect from different groups of people, and skin color is just one of the signs you use to figure out group membership.
Not necessarily. For me I judge people on how they conduct themselves and outward appearance, and I feel like it's like that for the people you're pointing out. If I get paired up with anyone wearing raggedy clothing with pants down to their knees who says "Man f*ck this project," I'm going get frustrated. But if I get paired with someone who clearly is concerned about the project and conducts themselves in a good manner, than it's all good no matter what the race is.

Here is "real" racism: Take the KKK for example. They intimidating any black person they wanted. They could've been as intelligent and civilized as possible, but the KKK would still despise them and attempt to intimidate or kill them based on the fact that they are black. They are taking it upon themselves to completely undermine the black race solely on their color-it doesn't matter what their other possible attributes are.
Even the really insane racists, who argue that we're different species, don't hate on black people because of skin color specifically, but because of what they believe it represents. So I think that nobody would be racist according to your definition of it. Or do you know anybody racist that way?

They're labeling all blacks as lacking compared to whites. People like me aren't doing that, we're only reflecting on personal experiences with blacks and do not generalize the entire population. I have plenty of black friends who aren't like the ones that I mentioned, and I have a lot of respect for them and like them a lot.

Honestly, I'm starting to think that as we get farther and farther away from the civil rights era, the more issue of racism is evolving into an issue of classism, if that makes sense.
Df0512
Posts: 966
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 1:02:00 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

Specifically its the mindset that our race is superior and others are superior. Looking at your own race favorably alone doesn't equal racism. For example, I dont think a person is racist if they are only attracted to members of their own race. You cont necessarily control that.

I also think that some people don't consider themselves racist because their views may not be as aggressive as other racist. But people dont really care how well you doing if your racist. It isnt a logical way of thinking and frankly people just dont want that drama.
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 1:37:12 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 7:43:41 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/8/2016 9:21:28 AM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/8/2016 2:39:17 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 8:26:31 PM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:57:14 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
There's a difference between being deliberately racist and pointing out deficiencies in character that are consistent with the majority of a race. For example, I go to a public High School where minority groups make up 80% of the school. You could say the school is segregated by choice, there's the IB program where only 10-15 minority students are enrolled out of nearly 100, and then there's the lower level academic courses like AP and Honors. The farther you go down, the more % of minority students there are until you get to Honors level which is 100% minority. So it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school.

Also, after 4 years of observing minority group behavior, particularly the blacks, I have concluded that these people are the worst mannered people I've ever encountered. They have no respect for authority, no respect for the rules, and no respect for other people. They do have utmost respect for themselves though. Friday someone's weave was left on the floor of my English classroom, and that's not the first time that has happened. They're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit, and our school is nasty in some areas because of it and it pisses me off a lot.

So after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites. There's nothing racist about this, it's the black people's fault that I have concluded this.

Yeah, this is exactly what I was talking about!

So imagine you were to become racist. What would need to change?

For me to be racist I'd have to intentionally hate all black people because of their skin color. Annnd I don't. If any other kind of person engaged in the same activities the blacks at my school engage in, I'd be saying the same thing about them and would hold the same opinion.

Okay. Thx for explaining.

I never heard of anyone hating anyone because of their skin color, though. That's just a metaphor for what you're experiencing, I think. So, if you had to partner up with a new student, and he was white, you'd feel differently than if you had to partner up with a new black student. That's not because of skin color, but because of what you associate and expect from different groups of people, and skin color is just one of the signs you use to figure out group membership.
Not necessarily. For me I judge people on how they conduct themselves and outward appearance, and I feel like it's like that for the people you're pointing out. If I get paired up with anyone wearing raggedy clothing with pants down to their knees who says "Man f*ck this project," I'm going get frustrated. But if I get paired with someone who clearly is concerned about the project and conducts themselves in a good manner, than it's all good no matter what the race is.

Here is "real" racism: Take the KKK for example. They intimidating any black person they wanted. They could've been as intelligent and civilized as possible, but the KKK would still despise them and attempt to intimidate or kill them based on the fact that they are black. They are taking it upon themselves to completely undermine the black race solely on their color-it doesn't matter what their other possible attributes are.

That's much worse than what you're doing, and I can see how you wouldn't seem racist compared with that. The way I see it though, we shouldn't be using criminal behavior as the standard of comparison, but ideal behavior. Ideal behavior would be treating people equally, and we need to compare to that. Maybe perfect equality is impossible in practice, but that doesn't mean we can't use it as a standard still.

Even the really insane racists, who argue that we're different species, don't hate on black people because of skin color specifically, but because of what they believe it represents. So I think that nobody would be racist according to your definition of it. Or do you know anybody racist that way?

They're labeling all blacks as lacking compared to whites. People like me aren't doing that, we're only reflecting on personal experiences with blacks and do not generalize the entire population.

You talk as if you do, though. I've put the parts where you generalized to the entire population in bold^

You said, "it's very safe to say that white people in general are intellectually superior to the minority groups at my school" because there is a higher proportion of white students in the higher classes than in the lower classes. I disagree that you can conclude intellectual superiority based on that, though. There could be all kinds of reasons for that, probably to do with opportunties and expectations. When a new student comes into the school and sees those proportions, it sets up certain expectations and attitudes which, right there, will affect how they study and interact with the school. And that's just one thing. There's certainly a lot more going on. These differences may help explain the lack of respect for authority that you've noticed. It's hard to respect an authority if you believe it's sustaining a discriminatory environment.

You also said, "they're disgusting people who don't even take the time to clean up their own $hit... so after these four years I've also concluded that blacks are socially inferior to whites." which certainly comes across as a general comment, rather than a specific one. Otherwise, why would mention race at all? If it really were about specific behaviors of specific people, there would be no need for saying black and white.

I have plenty of black friends who aren't like the ones that I mentioned, and I have a lot of respect for them and like them a lot.

I think that when we know people well, we don't see them as representing a category any more, but rather as individuals. I think you don't think of your friends as black or white or Asian people any more, but as themselves, whoever they are. However, we can't know everyone personally, and most of the human to human interactions we have are not with close friends, but with acquaintances. The nature of acquaintances is that we form judgments quickly and react quickly based on limited information, and we rely heavily on appearance for those sorts of interactions. I think that's the domain we're mostly talking about for racism.

Honestly, I'm starting to think that as we get farther and farther away from the civil rights era, the more issue of racism is evolving into an issue of classism, if that makes sense.

There are definitely classist issues involved, but it can't be the same thing because you can change class by changing your circumstances, but you can't change your skin color.
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 1:43:36 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/9/2016 1:02:00 AM, Df0512 wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:05:49 AM, Hoppi wrote:
A lot of people seem to be happy saying that particular groups of people are bad, and they make bad decisions and have a bad culture, and that people in that cultural group can be identified by their appearance, including by skin and hair color. But the people who say stuff like that often object to being called racist.

No seriously. It comes up a lot.

So I'm thinking are there all these extra connotations to being a racist that I'm missing? Maybe people think being called a racist implies that they're stupid and fat? That they secretly want to fvck their sisters? Because the actual meaning is to compare your own race favorably to another race, so if you do that you're racist.

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Tell me, please.

Specifically its the mindset that our race is superior and others are superior. Looking at your own race favorably alone doesn't equal racism. For example, I dont think a person is racist if they are only attracted to members of their own race. You cont necessarily control that.

I also think that some people don't consider themselves racist because their views may not be as aggressive as other racist. But people dont really care how well you doing if your racist. It isnt a logical way of thinking and frankly people just dont want that drama.

Yeah. I think there's something else going on, though. It's as if white people want to reach a position where they're safe, so they can recite a particular PC viewpoint or do particular behaviors and nobody will accuse them of racism again and they can relax in their moral superiority forever. Then, when it doesn't happen, they get frustrated and say, but I've done this and this and this! Where's the gratitude?

That's what I'm trying to figure out, because what's the basis for those assumptions in the first place? Nobody gets to escape responsibility, so why do they imagine it's possible? Or maybe I'm on the wrong track with that. That's why I'm asking.
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 2:03:55 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 4:10:39 PM, YYW wrote:
Let's play this out in the context of, say, hiring someone:

Say that I interview a black woman and a white man; both went to Harvard, both have degrees in communications, both are qualified for the job they're seeking. The black woman participated in some kind of black sorority while she was in college, but the white guy was in my fraternity.

I interview both of them. I hit it off with the white guy, but the black woman makes some comments in the interview that concern me... makes me think she would not fit in with the company's culture. Sure, she was qualified, but just because she was qualified doesn't mean that she's an ideal candidate. White guy hits it off with me, and he seems like he could make it work.

I hire the white guy. Black girl finds out, and sues my company, and me individually, for racial discrimination.

Does she have a case? She could probably survive summary judgment under McDonnell-Douglass, but she's not going to win because I will be able to show that she would not have gotten the job but for her being what's called a "member of a protected class" (read: black).

She's also never going to get hired in the industry because she made the mistake of crying wolf. An employee who sues any company for not being hired is an employee who presents too much legal risk to hire them.

(The reality is that my industry peers would have ran a background check on her right after they got her resume, and her litigation history would have been on the results, and she would never have even gotten a callback.)

But that's not racism. Her being black was not the dispositive factor (read: but-for cause) in my decision not to hire her.

That's really interesting. I think it would count as discrimination - although it would be impossible to prove on one case. But suppose you made a habit of hiring people from your fraternity, and suppose the people in your fraternity happened to be mostly white males, then it would count as indirect discrimination.

In that every hiring choice is an act of discrimination, sure. But the choice to hire the person who had a positive interview over the person who had a less positive interview is not racial discrimination. And, even if I hired only people who were in my fraternity, that's not discrimination either even if the only people I hired are white males.

Why, you ask? Because nepotism and racism are different things.

But we're not talking about whether it's illegal or not, but whether or not it's racist, and the action is racist (if you make a habit of hiring white males from your fraternity).

Nepotism is not racism; and a nepotistic environment is not enough to show that hiring decisions are racially motivated. If there were more or different facts, you might be able to say "Hey... YYW's hiring practices are racially motivated."

I think this is the basis of our difference. You are using "racist" and "racially motivated" as interchangeable, but I don't see them as the same concept.

Let me give you a different example so it's not so personal. Suppose there is a black woman who is selecting candidates. She's had bad experiences with white males in the past. One of her candidates is a white male, and without intending to, she has a defensive manner with him which comes across as slightly cold, so the interview doesn't flow so well. He tries to make a joke and she doesn't really laugh. The other interviews also sense this awkwardness and feel that the interview wasn't great. The white man says that his priority is always customer outcomes, and the woman wonders if that means he's not a great team player. She expresses her reservations, which are real ones, in the discussion afterwards. The next candidate is a black woman who, by coincidence, went to the same college has her. They talk and laugh about that, and the atmosphere is more relaxed. The candidate says she works hard, she demands good results and the interviewers are impressed by her energy.

At no point did any of the interviewers intend to be racist. They were not racially motivated in any way, and thought they were being fair. Nevertheless, they brought their prejudices into the interview - as everyone does - and it affected the outcome. That's racism. Racism is often not conscious like that.

Suppose there was circumstantial evidence that I went out of my way to keep a highly qualified black candidate out, and hired an incompetent white guy. That's circumstantial evidence of racism; but as between equally qualified candidates, where the hiring choice came down to performance in an interview, that's not racism. It's business discretion.

The problem is that people cry racism in circumstances like what I just described; where race was not even a factor in consideration. The dispositive factor was interview performance.

Yes, I agree that it would be foolish to accuse you of racism in that situation. That doesn't mean you weren't racist though.

The intention may or may not be racist, but I think in your case, from what you've said, that the intention would be racist even if you don't recognize it to be. I think that because you have commented about categories of people being different, and you have made particularly unfavorable comments about a particular category of black Americans.

See, now you're inventing facts and making inferences based on your own prejudices about what you think of me, rather than based on the hypothetical scenario I provided... and that's where you run into trouble. (Hint: you're conflating "hypothetical YYW in a hiring position" and "what you think you know of me based on interacting with me.")

i was trying to separate these concepts of being racially motivated and racist. Unconsciously acting on your prejudices counts as racism. I agree that it unhelpful for this discussion to get so personal, even hypothetically, which is why I substituted a different example to illustrate this point.
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 2:08:27 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 4:10:39 PM, YYW wrote:
You need to learn to be able to make distinctions between actual racists, and people who speak candidly about racial politics in this country.

I do make a distinction. I think we are speaking candidly here, aren't we?

To the extent that you fail to do that, you're blighting your cause.

What cause is that? I'm not aware of having a cause.
YYW
Posts: 36,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 2:25:01 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/9/2016 2:08:27 AM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/8/2016 4:10:39 PM, YYW wrote:
You need to learn to be able to make distinctions between actual racists, and people who speak candidly about racial politics in this country.

I do make a distinction. I think we are speaking candidly here, aren't we?

You're talking about unconscious, nebulous, unprovable stuff... and if that's your understanding of racism... then fine. It's incorrect, but that's sort of where we are.
Tsar of DDO
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 2:26:47 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/9/2016 2:25:01 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/9/2016 2:08:27 AM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/8/2016 4:10:39 PM, YYW wrote:
You need to learn to be able to make distinctions between actual racists, and people who speak candidly about racial politics in this country.

I do make a distinction. I think we are speaking candidly here, aren't we?

You're talking about unconscious, nebulous, unprovable stuff... and if that's your understanding of racism... then fine. It's incorrect, but that's sort of where we are.

So you don't believe that unconscious prejudice counts as racism? You believe that racism only exists when it's deliberate and provable?
YYW
Posts: 36,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 2:29:42 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/9/2016 2:26:47 AM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/9/2016 2:25:01 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/9/2016 2:08:27 AM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/8/2016 4:10:39 PM, YYW wrote:
You need to learn to be able to make distinctions between actual racists, and people who speak candidly about racial politics in this country.

I do make a distinction. I think we are speaking candidly here, aren't we?

You're talking about unconscious, nebulous, unprovable stuff... and if that's your understanding of racism... then fine. It's incorrect, but that's sort of where we are.

So you don't believe that unconscious prejudice counts as racism? You believe that racism only exists when it's deliberate and provable?

I think talk of "unconscious racism" is as intellectually worthwhile as phrenology. Racism is, by definition, conscious; it is deliberate, and requires deliberate intent. You can't unconsciously intend something; the concept of "unconscious racism" is oxymoronic.
Tsar of DDO
Hoppi
Posts: 1,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 2:29:51 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/9/2016 2:25:01 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/9/2016 2:08:27 AM, Hoppi wrote:
At 2/8/2016 4:10:39 PM, YYW wrote:
You need to learn to be able to make distinctions between actual racists, and people who speak candidly about racial politics in this country.

I do make a distinction. I think we are speaking candidly here, aren't we?

You're talking about unconscious, nebulous, unprovable stuff... and if that's your understanding of racism... then fine. It's incorrect, but that's sort of where we are.

This dictionary has two definitions of racism:

1. a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 racial prejudice or discrimination
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

So according to the dictionary racism is the same as prejudice and discrimination as I've described. Perhaps you are using the first definition.