• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Why I Disagree With The Racial Divide

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Yeah, but, why do so many people here label you or consider you to be a racist?
I've called you a racist, probably multiple times.
I don't generally call people racist. But you give off that impression. At least that is my perception of your posts and threads and position.

I think a lot of the white community, maybe without realizing it, grew up in a way where any criticism of a black person was taboo because it so often came from racism or could lead to one. A lot of white people are so concerned about seeming racist that they wouldn't even consider it.

I don't think I'm racist. I don't care enough about the way others see me to treat a black person differently just to protect the way I'm seen by other white people.

It's strange to me that people would rather denigrate themselves by accepting whatever problems exist in the black community are caused...even unconsciously....by the white community, rather than discussing the mere possibility of problems in the black community.

I think it's bizarre. I don't think you're racist stevil. I don't think the vast majority white people here are racist, regardless of political affiliation or belief. It does seem like many on the left would rather blame themselves then dare talk about any black person's faults.

It's not out of them being faultless or the somehow whites being less human. It's done out of comfort in my opinion . They seem more comfortable blaming themselves...or perhaps they imagine there exists some vast group of other white people working hard to repress minorities.

I remember that thread. I tried hard to participate in it, but it was tough going. I find it difficult to have such conversations with you. Obviously my impression of you and your impression of yourself are different.

I think the entire first page were personal attacks. Not one answer or attempt at an answer. One asked me to define a word. I did. Some discussion began....but quickly turned to personal attacks.

That's the left's political terminology. It appears they all agree on it....but none can define it. I once was told systemic racism was "attitudinal" as if one could correctly assess the attitudes toward race in millions of people.

I've been down this rabbit hole with you before. I spent significant effort trying to explain to you my views on what "systemic racism" is and I ended by suggesting you also talk to others to get their views on what it is.

That's ok, I won't press you on it.

I think perhaps the whole thing needs to be stripped right back.
The thing is, there are problems in society. Not just USA but other countries around the world. NZ too.

Sure, there always had been.

If you look at statistics, you often find a race of people (typically a minority) do very poorly on certain stats. Like poor grades in school, poor health stats, poor employment stats, poor criminal rates.

As a society, I think we should be looking to demographics and finding where society is letting down groups of people, I think as a society we should put effort in towards trying to fix these issues.
I don't think certain people "races" or cultures are necessarily dumber, or more criminal. But then why do certain groups come up poorly in the stats? And what can we as a society do about it? Should we be doing something, or should we ignore the problems?

I think the root causes are many and are entertwined so it is a complex thing to try and solve.
I think any solution or attempts at a solution need to be multifaceted and some "solutions" can cause other problems too.

I think solutions are complex too....which is why when I hear simplistic answers that lay blame upon an entire race, it's pretty disgusting to me. I'm not saying that no blame on others exists. I am saying that we cannot possibly help the black community without a real examination of the black community....by which I mean something far deeper than statistical outcomes.
 
Upvote 0

stevil

Godless and without morals
Feb 5, 2011
8,548
6,729
✟293,653.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I think a lot of the white community, maybe without realizing it, grew up in a way where any criticism of a black person was taboo because it so often came from racism or could lead to one. A lot of white people are so concerned about seeming racist that they wouldn't even consider it.
People are reluctant to generalise. When comes to criticising individuals for their own actions, people are more willing to criticise.
I doubt many people (including on the "left") would defend Bill Cosby and his drug raping of women. I doubt many people (including on the "left") would defend Michael Jackson. Fans of his music excluded.
But criticisms of these prior much loved public figures did not have anything to do with race.

Your gloating about the leader of BLM did not come across that well (not in my mind). I don't know this person, I have no vested interest either way. But it doesn't look good that the person who almost exclusively post things propping up whites and shooting down blacks, starts a thread to gloat about the downfall of the leader of a black movement. Have you ever gloated about the downfall of any White leader or public figure?
When Bill Cosby got found out as a rapist, it wasn't something to gloat about, it was something to be shocked about, disappointed even. I am not sure why someone would appear happy at the downfall of such public figures, especially when these revelations appear contradictory to what people prior believed about the person.

With regards to the BLM movement, I know there was reporting on right wing media (perhaps Foxnews) about the leader being Marxist etc. But typically there is a lot of outlandish propaganda coming from far right media. It's like the boy who cried wolf. When they cry about so many things, it's hard to take new outlandish claims seriously, but eventually, one or two claims turn out to be true.


It's strange to me that people would rather denigrate themselves by accepting whatever problems exist in the black community are caused...even unconsciously....by the white community, rather than discussing the mere possibility of problems in the black community.
I reckon that many people see the issue as multifaceted.
Not exclusively a white cause, not exclusively a black cause.
Admitting that there is "systemic racism" is not saying that that is the only problem.


It does seem like many on the left would rather blame themselves then dare talk about any black person's faults.
I don't think that the people on the "left" think the problem is only about the way whites treat blacks.
I don't think that the people on the "left" think that the majority of whites are racist or that racism can only be something that whites do.

They seem more comfortable blaming themselves...or perhaps they imagine there exists some vast group of other white people working hard to repress minorities.
But that is not what systemic racism is. Certainly not what those who believe in "systemic racism" think it is.

I think the entire first page were personal attacks. Not one answer or attempt at an answer. One asked me to define a word. I did. Some discussion began....but quickly turned to personal attacks.
Your thread started off arrogantly, and with gross generalisations of the "left" and cynically about the "left". There was much gloating by you in that thread, not much listening. Maybe your approach comes across as "full on" rather than respectful and genuinely inquisitive????


I think solutions are complex too....which is why when I hear simplistic answers that lay blame upon an entire race, it's pretty disgusting to me.
But that's not their position.
They aren't laying blame on an entire race.

I'm not saying that no blame on others exists. I am saying that we cannot possibly help the black community without a real examination of the black community....by which I mean something far deeper than statistical outcomes.
Statistics shows that there is a problem, but it doesn't give the root cause.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
If the young black man's intention is merely to steal her purse and her race is irrelevant then it would not make much sense to describe the attack as racist. If his intention was to attack an Asian it must be a racist attack whether or not he stole her purse.

Agreed.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Since when did enforcing our immigration policies become racist?

If it was a muslim ban, it would have banned all muslim countries and not just those deemed terrorist states

Again; immigration laws are not racist

That was the truth! There were good and bad people on both sides.

Did those protesters go through the legal means and fill out the application to protest? Or did they just show up.

Calling 3rd world countries s-hole isn't racist

The proud boys had a black immigrant as their leader; hardly a white supremist organization

I appreciate your input on this, but I'd rather not turn this thread towards Trump.

I'm trying to open my views to criticism here. I don't want it to dive off in another direction.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Yes.

How do you recognise [racism].

The test is always to look at the intention.

(Sorry to be late with this. I meant to make this response some time ago.)

It's possible that insult is intended, but it's also possible that it isn't.

Consider that if such a person sees everything racially, then reference to race is normal....nuetral in their mind.

Perhaps then, whiteboy is said because whiteman would evoke in the speaker some negative feelings of deference or shame.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
People are reluctant to generalise. When comes to criticising individuals for their own actions, people are more willing to criticise.
I doubt many people (including on the "left") would defend Bill Cosby and his drug raping of women. I doubt many people (including on the "left") would defend Michael Jackson. Fans of his music excluded.
But criticisms of these prior much loved public figures did not have anything to do with race.

Right...and you don't worry about being called racist for such criticisms because the significant evidence of wrongdoing.

Do you treat white people the same? Do you require significant evidence of wrongdoing....or do you make assumptions about motives or intents?

Your gloating about the leader of BLM did not come across that well (not in my mind). I don't know this person, I have no vested interest either way. But it doesn't look good that the person who almost exclusively post things propping up whites and shooting down blacks, starts a thread to gloat about the downfall of the leader of a black movement.

Consider the question above. Would you assume such things about me as you do if I weren't white?

I've actually explained my reasoning here in the first post. Is it so unbelievable?

Have you ever gloated about the downfall of any White leader or public figure?

I've made multiple legitimate criticisms of Trump, Hillary, and others. I don't consider it gloating.

Generally speaking though, I tend to attack bad arguments in hopes of getting people to think harder.

When Bill Cosby got found out as a rapist, it wasn't something to gloat about, it was something to be shocked about, disappointed even. I am not sure why someone would appear happy at the downfall of such public figures, especially when these revelations appear contradictory to what people prior believed about the person.

Well consider the for a moment that this public figure claimed righteousness and employed a vast amount of moral shaming towards those who did nothing more than stand aside. You didn't need to be opposing BLM to be it's target. Silence is violence. Your with us or against us. You're complicit with injustice or fighting for justice.

These are attacks that are not only untrue, but generally speaking....pretty stupid. By what claim did these people have to speak down to me from some high horse while they attacked police, burned and looted?

Was I happy I was right? Yeah. It should be a learning experience for those who followed her. If they employ shame to teach their lessons, I feel no guilt in doing the same.

They should be ashamed.

With regards to the BLM movement, I know there was reporting on right wing media (perhaps Foxnews) about the leader being Marxist etc. But typically there is a lot of outlandish propaganda coming from far right media. It's like the boy who cried wolf. When they cry about so many things, it's hard to take new outlandish claims seriously, but eventually, one or two claims turn out to be true.

Yeah I had doubts myself. The claim of Marxism is employed too often. I am however, a political scientist by degree, and I actually have some understanding of Marxism. I wasn't surprised when she said she was a Marxist openly.


I reckon that many people see the issue as multifaceted.
Not exclusively a white cause, not exclusively a black cause.
Admitting that there is "systemic racism" is not saying that that is the only problem.

I can understand why you see it that way...

But I cannot admit something that I cannot understand nor can anyone explain to me.

As I see it....systems are complex but not so complex they cannot be understood. If we strip away all that cannot be racist in the systems...the buildings, the tools, the equipment, and such...we're essentially left with things written down, like policies, rules, laws, etc. We're also left with practices, training, instruction, etc. Finally, we're left with people.

That's it. There's no other places this systemic racism can hide. Do you think the police are systemically racist? This is a problem we can confirm. Examine all the written rules and policies....I sincerely doubt you'll find it there. We can send people, into the police academies, and have them look for the racist training and practices as hard as they can. We might find some and be able to remove them...but that probably won't be widespread.

We're left then with the police themselves. If they are known spreading racist beliefs or statements, I see no reason why they shouldn't be punished or removed appropriately.

That's it. It might take a couple of years....but we could be done with this, all without defunding the police.

Why hasn't that happened?

I don't think that the people on the "left" think the problem is only about the way whites treat blacks.
I don't think that the people on the "left" think that the majority of whites are racist or that racism can only be something that whites do.

Really? I've never seen you push back against accusations of "white fragility" or any similar moral condemnation of the entire white community.

But that is not what systemic racism is. Certainly not what those who believe in "systemic racism" think it is.

If I ask many different people and get many different answers.....what am I to think except that no one knows what it is?

Your thread started off arrogantly, and with gross generalisations of the "left" and cynically about the "left". There was much gloating by you in that thread, not much listening. Maybe your approach comes across as "full on" rather than respectful and genuinely inquisitive????

Early on the movement explained that it only focused on police killings of black people. It didn't discuss black men killing black men. They asserted correctly that everyone has a right to choose to pursue whatever concerns they have. I agreed with this.

Later in the movement, they claimed that not supporting them was equal to being a part of "the problem". Silence is violence they said. Obviously, that's a complete contradiction of their previous position where they claimed that everyone has a right to pursue whatever they want.

If I speak to them like they're foolish or moral hypocrites, that's why. I promise though, if they ever apologize for condemning me and so many others needlessly, I'll forgive them and change my tone appropriately.



But that's not their position.
They aren't laying blame on an entire race.

I can be wrong on this...

Has any other race been blamed for systemic racism in the US other than whites?

Statistics shows that there is a problem, but it doesn't give the root cause.

Actually statistics just show a disparity. Nobody considers it a problem that more black men become professional basketball players than any other race. That's a statistical disparity though, and one that comes with a lot of wealth and privilege.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Ah, we have agreed about something.

It's part of a larger point...

I have no problem with giving consideration to things like motive or intent....and if sufficient evidence of a motive or intent can be found, passing judgment accordingly.

I thought it was rather obvious that we can't read minds.

Yet, because this is hard to understand or difficult to remember....people believe they can easily extrapolate intent or motivation behind someone's actions with almost no knowledge of the person. Often, they have no evidence of intention or motives at all. Despite this, they are all too willing to pass judgment based on the imaginary motives they ascribe to behavior.
 
Upvote 0

stevil

Godless and without morals
Feb 5, 2011
8,548
6,729
✟293,653.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Right...and you don't worry about being called racist for such criticisms because the significant evidence of wrongdoing.
And because I don't gloat about someone's downfall.
And because I don't have a track record of almost being singularly focused on this narrow topic


Do you treat white people the same? Do you require significant evidence of wrongdoing....or do you make assumptions about motives or intents?
Let's just talk about people in general.
At first I was reluctant to accept that Bill Cosby would rape women. I loved watching the Cosby show and Bill in particular, he seemed kind, gentle and funny.
At first I was reluctant to accept that Lance Armstrong was doping, I wasn't really into cycling, but he kept denying it and the evidence against him was just some peoples word.

In terms of D Trump, I'm less likely to give him the benefit of the doubt. His character and demeanour mean that I think it is quite within his character to do some of the things he has been accused of, but of course I would want a fair investigation and a fair trail. It's just that internally, I think he is worth investigating.
I think OJ Simpson did it!



Consider the question above. Would you assume such things about me as you do if I weren't white?
I didn't know you were white.


Generally speaking though, I tend to attack bad arguments in hopes of getting people to think harder.
Rather than in an attempt for you to understand them better?


Well consider the for a moment that this public figure claimed righteousness
I don't really get "righteousness". I self associated as a moral nihilist.

and employed a vast amount of moral shaming towards those who did nothing more than stand aside. You didn't need to be opposing BLM to be it's target. Silence is violence. Your with us or against us. You're complicit with injustice or fighting for justice.
I don't know much about this.
I support the idea that Black lives matter. I support the idea that all lives matter as well, but I understand the special plight of blacks and minorities.


These are attacks that are not only untrue, but generally speaking....pretty stupid. By what claim did these people have to speak down to me from some high horse while they attacked police, burned and looted?
I don't support attacking of police or arson or looting. I don't accept that violence, arson or looting were a feature of BLM protests, from what I gather the vast majority of the protests were peaceful.

But I cannot admit something that I cannot understand nor can anyone explain to me.
You don't have to accept that systemic racism exists. It would just be reasonable for you to try and understand why others think it exists.

...Finally, we're left with people.

That's it. There's no other places this systemic racism can hide. Do you think the police are systemically racist?
This question shows to me that you don't understand what systemic racism is.


This is a problem we can confirm. Examine all the written rules and policies....I sincerely doubt you'll find it there. We can send people, into the police academies, and have them look for the racist training and practices as hard as they can. We might find some and be able to remove them...but that probably won't be widespread.
Inspecting the documented rules and policies won't lead you towards uncovering systemic racism.


We're left then with the police themselves. If they are known spreading racist beliefs or statements, I see no reason why they shouldn't be punished or removed appropriately.
It's not about individuals being blatantly racist. I've explained this to you before.

That's it. It might take a couple of years....but we could be done with this, all without defunding the police.
I don't support defunding the police. Biden doesn't support defunding the police. are you sure this is a "left" thing?

Really? I've never seen you push back against accusations of "white fragility" or any similar moral condemnation of the entire white community.
I haven't felt attacked or haven't felt that white people in general have been blanket attacked, so I didn't have anything to defend.

If I ask many different people and get many different answers.....what am I to think except that no one knows what it is?
Yip, this is why I advised you to also discuss the idea of systemic racism with others and not just myself. We might not all be 100% aligned, but I think the gist of it will be similar.

Later in the movement, they claimed that not supporting them was equal to being a part of "the problem". Silence is violence they said. Obviously, that's a complete contradiction of their previous position where they claimed that everyone has a right to pursue whatever they want.
I guess from my perspective I don't care if a person has said the above. I can still get behind the concept that black lives do indeed matter.

Has any other race been blamed for systemic racism in the US other than whites?
The blame isn't any particular race and the blame isn't racists either.


Actually statistics just show a disparity. Nobody considers it a problem that more black men become professional basketball players than any other race. That's a statistical disparity though, and one that comes with a lot of wealth and privilege.
I'm not sure if having whites underrepresented in proffessional basketball teams is as much of a social problem as having blacks over represented in poverty, in school drop out rates, in crime.

But then again, I don't watch basketball.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
And because I don't gloat about someone's downfall.
And because I don't have a track record of almost being singularly focused on this narrow topic.

I don't really understand what you're saying here.

If someone posts frequently about President Trump in the past five years....would you consider that odd?



[/QUOTE]
Let's just talk about people in general.
At first I was reluctant to accept that Bill Cosby would rape women. I loved watching the Cosby show and Bill in particular, he seemed kind, gentle and funny.[/QUOTE]

Ok.

At first I was reluctant to accept that Lance Armstrong was doping, I wasn't really into cycling, but he kept denying it and the evidence against him was just some peoples word.

Right.

In terms of D Trump, I'm less likely to give him the benefit of the doubt. His character and demeanour mean that I think it is quite within his character to do some of the things he has been accused of, but of course I would want a fair investigation and a fair trail. It's just that internally, I think he is worth investigating.

Sure, you have an easier time accepting negative views of people you don't like...

They require less evidence because they confirm what you already feel. That's normal, we all do it.

I think OJ Simpson did it!

I don't think it matters....he was found innocent.



I didn't know you were white.

When I said I'm told I'm mostly Irish, Scottish, Polish...what did you think?

Rather than in an attempt for you to understand them better?

If their reply leads to better understanding....that's great.

That's a rare case though.


I don't really get "righteousness". I self associated as a moral nihilist.

Imagine then, your interactions with people of some religions (maybe Christians?) acting as if they were in a position to tell you how you should behave or act to be seen as a good person in their eyes.

Definition of RIGHTEOUS

Hope that helps.

I don't know much about this.
I support the idea that Black lives matter. I support the idea that all lives matter as well, but I understand the special plight of blacks and minorities.

Ok. What's the special plight?

I don't support attacking of police or arson or looting. I don't accept that violence, arson or looting were a feature of BLM protests, from what I gather the vast majority of the protests were peaceful.

There's a percentage that gets trotted out by the left wing media. 93%? 97? I forget. I looked up the raw data to see what that actually meant.

Over 500 riots, and over 3 billion in damages. Business insurance in Portland apparently no longer covers riots and protests.

It's an extreme amount of damage unlikely to be restored in our lifetime. There are parts of LA that never recovered from the LA riots.

You don't have to accept that systemic racism exists. It would just be reasonable for you to try and understand why others think it exists.

Tell me why?

Maybe it would be easier to tell me how you spot it? How can you tell if it occurs?

This question shows to me that you don't understand what systemic racism is.

Ok.


Inspecting the documented rules and policies won't lead you towards uncovering systemic racism.

Ok...


It's not about individuals being blatantly racist. I've explained this to you before.

Well what's it about then? I'm sorry if you think that I've got it wrong....but another poster in this thread described it as norms and rules that perpetuate racism....as if we'd be able to find it by examining norms and rules...

You and that poster clearly agree systemic racism is a thing, but you also don't agree on what it is.

Could you at least tell me how you identify it? You must be able to do that....how else can you be sure it exists?

I don't support defunding the police. Biden doesn't support defunding the police. are you sure this is a "left" thing?

Absolutely. Defund the police didn't come from the political right. Obviously it's a bad idea, that's why it was rarely spoken of...the left didn't want to lose the votes that it appealed to.

I haven't felt attacked or haven't felt that white people in general have been blanket attacked, so I didn't have anything to defend.

Really? Have you not seen or heard anything about white people in the news?

Yip, this is why I advised you to also discuss the idea of systemic racism with others and not just myself. We might not all be 100% aligned, but I think the gist of it will be similar.

And accept it on faith?

I'm an atheist. I do everything I can to avoid believing poorly defined, broadly spoken, and generally incomprehensible ideas that people tell me I should just "accept as true cuz they say so".

If all you have is a gist....how are you so certain of it?

I guess from my perspective I don't care if a person has said the above. I can still get behind the concept that black lives do indeed matter.

As I said before....I don't recall anyone ever saying they don't. Saying they do isn't controversial.

Also...you don't care if people are laying moral blame at the feet of the innocent? You don't see anything remotely wrong with demanding action of people who don't want to join with a racially motivated political cause?

You really don't
.
The blame isn't any particular race and the blame isn't racists either.

Perhaps you haven't looked at this hard enough.

Do you think maybe you've avoided it because racial topics are....uncomfortable for you?


I'm not sure if having whites underrepresented in proffessional basketball teams is as much of a social problem as having blacks over represented in poverty, in school drop out rates, in crime.

My point isn't that it's a problem. I repeat...

A disparity itself is not a problem.

If I told you that in 1940-1960 that people of sicilians descent were only 0.5% of the population but made up 85% of the racketeering charges....that's a tremendous disparity.

The reasons for it, happen to be the result of an organized crime culture that extended back a long time before sicilians came to the US. If I were to say "systemic racism" caused it....that would be stupid. Were people racist towards sicilians, particularly sicilian immigrants? Yes absolutely. Was that the reason they were being charged with racketeering? No....they were actually committing those crimes.

It's a disparity....but designating it a problem is a reflection of you. If you hope to understand why it's happening, I suggest you focus on the entire picture. Just looking at the police will solve nothing.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

stevil

Godless and without morals
Feb 5, 2011
8,548
6,729
✟293,653.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
When I said I'm told I'm mostly Irish, Scottish, Polish...what did you think?
My wife and children are Kiwis. They aren't Maori. My wife isn't white.

My wife's best friend (ethnic Chinese) went with us to a store once. The store keeper spoke very slowly in English to her in the hope that she would find it easier to understand him. She responded quickly (she tends to speak quickly) in her British accent (until she moved to NZ she had spent her whole life born and raised in England, you know, where they invented English, that makes her British)
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
My wife and children are Kiwis. They aren't Maori. My wife isn't white.

My wife's best friend (ethnic Chinese) went with us to a store once. The store keeper spoke very slowly in English to her in the hope that she would find it easier to understand him. She responded quickly (she tends to speak quickly) in her British accent (until she moved to NZ she had spent her whole life born and raised in England, you know, where they invented English, that makes her British)

That's interesting I guess.....

I used to be really interested in cultures throughout history and the more I learned....the less unique they looked. If you go back far enough, they all look similar, with few differences, that are mostly geographic.

It's not until the development of writing, and architecture that they start to really diverge. They begin to develop stories about themselves that become far more complex and influential in various ways than those who have to remember their stories.

Regardless, it's all location. If you were lucky enough to master animal husbandry, you went up the civilization ladder faster. If you had access to various other cultures you could trade for new goods and crafts and got exposed to new ideas...

If by some reason, you have access to a diversity of ideas, and a system that respects it, you probably end up arguing a lot. If you end up arguing a lot, you might just develop a system of discerning good arguments from bad, develop a system of evaluating truth claims based on the relationship between words and their meanings with reality.

Of course, at that point, it's a competition of ideas. Every culture has their own strong attachment to the story they tell themselves, but that's not necessarily the truth. It matters. Believing something untrue and trying to compete against another people who not only know the truth but can use it....and that's a hard fight. It's not unwinnable but it's a hard fight.

The problem is that even if a bad idea wins....and they certainly can even if they don't have the truth....you still lose. Communism for example, isn't a plan....it's an end state with a lot of speculation about how to get there and it never works. Communist revolutions have an element of truth though, so they can and have succeeded. It's an ugly truth, but still a truth.

Envy is a good motivator for revolution. Divide people into two groups, the successful and the less so....tell them the reason, and only reason, they aren't all equal is the greed and oppression of the successful. Tell them they are victims and should cast off their oppressors.

It's the only reason why communist revolutions work. It exploits the ugly truth of envy. It's easy to believe you're cheated...hard to believe you're just not as successful.

There's two studies....both were built around playing a game and perceptions of the results. One was constructed so that a player or players had an unfair advantage and eventually won the game or ended up in a dominant position. The players were inclined to state his or her success as a result of their ability despite the unfair start. People want to believe they succeeded because they are exceptional.

This was a popular study in left wing media. I saw it in several publications.

I wasn't surprised the follow-up study wasn't published. The second study had people play a game alone for money. It's a 50/50 chance coin flip scenario. Guess right win a dollar, guess wrong lose a dollar.

At the end...they gave the participants a view of their results compared to a fictional group of participants. They also gave them the choice to share their earnings equally between participants....or everyone keep just what they won.

The result? If you saw that you did about the same as everyone else or slightly better....players were happy to keep what they won. If however, the majority did better than you....or even worse, a few did much better...players were inclined to choose that everyone share. Why? They decided the game must have been unfair somehow even if they weren't sure how.
 
Upvote 0

stevil

Godless and without morals
Feb 5, 2011
8,548
6,729
✟293,653.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
That's interesting I guess.....

I used to be really interested in cultures throughout history and the more I learned....the less unique they looked. If you go back far enough, they all look similar, with few differences, that are mostly geographic.
If you go back far enough then we are all Africans (That is where humanity started).

Of course, at that point, it's a competition of ideas. Every culture has their own strong attachment to the story they tell themselves, but that's not necessarily the truth. It matters. Believing something untrue and trying to compete against another people who not only know the truth but can use it....and that's a hard fight. It's not unwinnable but it's a hard fight.
It's very tricky.
You are an atheist like me. We both consider gods to be fabricated by people. But people have been believing in gods for thousands of years, and to this day, billions of people believe in gods even though there isn't a shred of evidence for gods or supernatural beings or supernatural realms. Trying to point out facts and lack of evidence to believers ultimately seems (to me) to be a frustrating and infuriating task. But ultimately, do we really need to go out of our way to change others?

I also get a bit frustration with TCM Traditional Chinese Medicine. My wife believes (kinda) in this stuff, so does her parents. I think it is all nonsense (meridians, hot and cold energy, diagnosing illneses by taking pulse) unsuppported by evidence, resulting in millions of people getting medicine that doesn't work, and leading to the extinction of many rare animals. But again, pretty hard for a Westerner to try and convince people that are very proud of their heritage and culture that a key pillar is total nonsense.

Sometimes it is better not to be a total douche and to actually be respectful of people even if you think they are wrong.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
If you go back far enough then we are all Africans (That is where humanity started).

That's the old story. Apparently, there's enough room for debate. I'm not anthropologist though.

No single birthplace of mankind, say scientists

It's very tricky.
You are an atheist like me.

I'm not sure about that.

We both consider gods to be fabricated by people. But people have been believing in gods for thousands of years, and to this day, billions of people believe in gods even though there isn't a shred of evidence for gods or supernatural beings or supernatural realms. Trying to point out facts and lack of evidence to believers ultimately seems (to me) to be a frustrating and infuriating task. But ultimately, do we really need to go out of our way to change others?

Ultimately? No.

I also get a bit frustration with TCM Traditional Chinese Medicine. My wife believes (kinda) in this stuff, so does her parents. I think it is all nonsense (meridians, hot and cold energy, diagnosing illneses by taking pulse) unsuppported by evidence, resulting in millions of people getting medicine that doesn't work, and leading to the extinction of many rare animals. But again, pretty hard for a Westerner to try and convince people that are very proud of their heritage and culture that a key pillar is total nonsense.

Sometimes it is better not to be a total douche and to actually be respectful of people even if you think they are wrong.

I can let go of attacking a harmless belief. I used to go after Christians pretty hard for creationism but ultimately, what difference does it make to the average person how life or the universe "started"? Very little.

This doesn't seem harmless. This is a part of the Democratic party platform. Whatever they imagine this racial equity is and whatever problem of systemic racism they think it will solve...they clearly intend to use racial discrimination and political indoctrination to get there. They don't even hide it.

It's not a minor harmless thing.
 
Upvote 0

stevil

Godless and without morals
Feb 5, 2011
8,548
6,729
✟293,653.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I can let go of attacking a harmless belief.
I consider TCM to be a very harmful belief system.

I used to go after Christians pretty hard for creationism but ultimately, what difference does it make to the average person how life or the universe "started"? Very little.
Sure, yes. Doesn't really matter if they think the universe is 14 billion years old or less that 10,000 years.


This doesn't seem harmless. This is a part of the Democratic party platform. Whatever they imagine this racial equity is and whatever problem of systemic racism they think it will solve...they clearly intend to use racial discrimination and political indoctrination to get there. They don't even hide it.

It's not a minor harmless thing.
There are two harms.
1. The harm of doing nothing
2. the harm of doing something

If you do nothing, then you get a continuance of the problem.
A particular minority doing poorly at school, poorly on employment, poorly in criminal stats.
Others thinking that race is dumb or lazy or criminal.

That's a big society problem.

If you do something, then maybe you help get a minority out of that hole and into an even keel, where youngsters growup believing that they can make some kind of productive life and add to society, rather than believing that society is against them and giving up trying to fit in.

But yes I agree that some measures can be counter productive.
For example, in Malaysia, they lowered the standards for native Malay people to become doctors.
This resulted in the common people thinking that Malay doctors were less well educated so they tried to avoid those doctors.
 
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
4,626
3,133
Worcestershire
✟196,801.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
It's part of a larger point...

I have no problem with giving consideration to things like motive or intent....and if sufficient evidence of a motive or intent can be found, passing judgment accordingly.

I thought it was rather obvious that we can't read minds.

Yet, because this is hard to understand or difficult to remember....people believe they can easily extrapolate intent or motivation behind someone's actions with almost no knowledge of the person. Often, they have no evidence of intention or motives at all. Despite this, they are all too willing to pass judgment based on the imaginary motives they ascribe to behavior.

We cannot read minds but other people are not total mysteries. I readily recognise hostility as easily as fellow-feeling. I expect you do too.

I find your constant nit-picking unhelpful and frustrating. It is difficult to make progress when your posts are nearly always destructive in tone while you have very little to say about any opinions of your own.

I don't think I have any more to say here.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: KCfromNC
Upvote 0

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
Sep 13, 2008
22,408
13,849
Earth
✟241,642.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
Or, why I believe we are headed in the wrong direction...and the possibility of a corrective course. This will be long.

First, I realize that perhaps my posts on here are misunderstood. People are told narratives that are easy to believe because they are simplistic and those around them profess to believe the same. Perhaps it's because of my early tendency towards atheism that I view such people with suspicion and disdain wrongly. It's easier to be told what to think than to think hard, or critically, with adherence to reason and rationality. I'm guilty of it too...if such guilt exists.

Regarding racism I'm fortunate enough to have grown up with parents who expressed disdain for racists and taught me that judging people by such superficial characteristics was inherently wrong. I can, without shame, repeat the most racist thing I've ever heard my father say (though he didn't realize it) and when I corrected him around age 15, he never said it again. My mother for all the years I knew her never made a racist judgment or statement until the day she died. I'm fortunate to have grown up this way, and if anything, I made distorted assumptions that my experience was typical. I heard racist statements at the houses of friends who were white, asian, and black and many times my friends, their children, were ashamed enough to apologize for it. It always looked like progress.

That's not to say that the other didn't occur as well. Many times those same friends or others have tried to justify those beliefs as if they reflected something real. I did have hope though, that in time, more parents like mine would emerge and our society would be better off for it. I figured this was the way of societal progress and it was always slow....rules can change fast, but perception changes slowly.

That's not to say I was unaware of violent racists or cultural undercurrents that were racially motivated. I knew they existed, I had seen them in person infrequently, and on tv occasionally.

I wanted to explain this so you understand where I'm coming from as a formal student of politics and political philosophy and history, and an avid reader and informal student on culture, history, philosophy, psychology, and the myriad other topics that I have never stopped trying to learn more about.

On racism then. Racism is painfully simple in its construction and only slightly more complex in its expression. It's an idea of characteristics that superficial being entwined with characteristics that aren't. To say a black man is lazy because he is black would be racist. To say that you can identify a Jewish person by the size of their nose is racist. To say a white man is successful because he is white is indeed, racist. There is no assumption of an individual that can be made by appearance of skin tone, lip size, eye shape or any other physical characteristics that are factually correct. It stands to reason then that without factual data, no such statements can be true of such groups. It would not be racist to say that Jewish people are wealthier, on average, than the average US person. Last I checked, they are. It would be wrong to say this is so because they are Jewish....or some moral defect like greed....or to assume any such thing about any Jewish person. The fact of the group may exist as an average but to abstract from the fact some other causal assumptions is a grave mistake. There are far too many possibilities for the fact to ever be certain of the cause. No judgement of the individual based upon such reasoning can be justified.

I understand why this can be difficult to avoid....merely looking for facts about racial groups tends to cause people to associate the two as connected inherently.

Still...it's a pretty simple concept. It's easily proven false. It's fundamentally no different from any other unjustified association of unrelated characteristics. I used to assume that people with southern accents were less intelligent...same with many blonde girls. We can all be guilty of these assumptions but they rarely rise to the level of shame fulness unless we let them rule our behavior.

That's my view. It's a type of wrongly formed association of unrelated superficial characteristics. As such, it's hard to take any professed racial expert seriously. There's nothing really to be an expert on other than perhaps it's history....or the pattern seeking biological basis for it in our brains.

That's not the concern of our time though. The concern is the potential damage it causes to our society and lives. On this I've given considerable thought. I would say that...

1. In everyday interpersonal interactions it can be harmful and degrading. Particularly so if the racial beliefs become widespread or generally accepted as true...or if the target holds dear some aspects of their racial identity (which itself carries it's own problems). Therefore there is no racism towards any group that is acceptable or justified.

2. In practice, if not in policy or law, it limits opportunities and potentials. It damages entire communities. It tends to be a result of #1 being allowed to proliferate. It's difficult to deal with if it's undetected as a deliberate expression of racism.

3. In policy or law, it's most harmful. It limits the opportunities and potentials of entire racial groups. It damages the health and wellness of entire generations.

Understanding these things I believe we can understand how to properly interact with each other. Attempting to disregard these characteristics with the grace and understanding that we will inevitably fail, as all people do, from time to time. When such beliefs are found, an understanding of their origin, and an understanding of why they are wrong is the ideal for moving forward.

There has been a rather vast a different set of ideas put forth lately that I disagree with. The reasons why they have been put forth I can only speculate on but I admit, its speculation...and welcome anyone who disagrees and feels they can rationally explain why my views are wrong.

It seems to have started with the idea that a better definition of racism was necessary, though nobody ever explained why. It was a prejudice + privilege sort of vague definition that no one ever really used apart from attempting to justify the racial beliefs of some towards others. Nobody really used this new definition either, and continued using the old, and I am certain of this.

If anyone were to pass a racist statement written on a wall, for example, and identify it as such....without knowledge of who wrote it. Without that knowledge, no analysis of power or privilege occurs. This was never a useful or good definition for any reason other than the one I stated above.

Still, it proliferated, and in doing so it effectively signaled a "green light" for anyone racist to express their beliefs against white people (including white people) and eventually other races (as long as it's not expressed by white people). This hasn't been helpful for race relations...but it can be.

The new definition has been abandoned for obvious reasons. Non-white people who have been openly racist towards whites they have some power over would be rightly deemed racist and the definition falls apart. New definitions have been proposed since but no one understands them. They're too vague to make racism identifiable.

At best, the idea of systemic racism seems to be an attempt to reconcile the previous definition while maintaining its original purpose of justifying racial hatred towards anyone of "privilege". It does this by being vague, and demanding a rigidly dogmatic viewpoint of equating a status of victimhood with moral righteousness....and therefore justifies hatred, disdain, envy, and even violence.

I had some small hope that the violent attacks on asians recently, by multiple racists, would enable some reflection and reconsideration of race that led to a reconciliation...maybe one closer to my views. Instead, the narrative bends again for blatantly political reasons...to blame white people. There is no amount of reconciliation or reflection to correct this view....because it's inherently racist.

The attempts to do so now are concerning. Indoctrination of this racist viewpoint in school is vile and reprehensible. Passing laws and policies that treat whites as less than other races, because they don't work as hard, or don't claim victimhood is inexcusable. It's causing a reactionary increase in white nationalist supremacy that continues to fuel the false political narrative. It's threatening to erase the difficult decades of progress we've made.

The cause of this seems directly related to the left's embracing identity politics as demographics shift....and unfortunately, many of their most vocal and politically motivated are racist.

The future of this course is ugly, violent, and unfortunately in the best case, I think we'd simply have to come full circle back to the view of racism I described above. I think there's a possibility of reconciliation now....but it's not easy. We cannot hope to eliminate racism entirely, and we certainly cannot hope to create a just and equitable society by indoctrinating children and discriminating against whites in law.

Understandably, the focus of racial discussion has been entirely on white people and the socio-cultural beliefs that racism has influenced and it's results. We have, after all, been the primary source of it and it's harm historically. That's a fact. However, I can safely say that I've never seen the widespread cultural acceptance of and attempts to justify racism against whites like I have any other group in my life. In the majority of my years, racist attitudes and beliefs have been discouraged and shamed. It's sad to see so many racists unashamedly profess their hatred.

The reasons I believe the current course will fail are many but to put it simply, you cannot claim victimhood while standing on someone's neck. You cannot sit a seat of power that was given to you by discrimination and claim righteousness. We risk teaching a generation of white people that they must atone for crimes they aren't guilty of through rules and laws that deny them the same humanity they have.

It risks a backlash of bitter, beaten down whites with a legitimate grievance of injustice and ultimately I don't expect them to be gentle or understanding. Ultimately, I'd expect them to see justification for their own hatred and demands of power and wealth and privilege to follow.

This is avoidable I think, if we are able to do something difficult. If we can speak openly and honestly, regardless of race, would be a start. I do this and get chastised for it so I understand why it's difficult. I think if we call out all racism and stop pretending its harmless because of its scope, power dynamics, or target.

If we start there, I think we can begin a careful, gentle, and understanding examination of racism in non-white communities. It will be difficult, but I see no other way to progress. We can't endlessly redefine racism to avoid it, we cannot hope to eliminate the damage of racism without it. A lot of good and progress has been made in the white community by it...and I understand that it can seem shameful....so we avoid it. It need not be. As an aspect and fault common to all humanity there's only shame in hiding or justifying it.

I welcome any thoughts, criticisms, and disagreements so long as they are constructed with a consideration of my viewpoint...and not a personal attack.

I understand that sometimes people read my posts, make assumptions, and take offense. I don't apologize for it. I think you deserve the truth of my views out of respect, and don't see any value in platitudes. We may disagree, but I wish no one any harm. Your assumptions are your own.

Thanks for reading.
Maybe the time has come where white people do not get to “define racism”?
Maybe it’s come time for us to shut up and listen without defending?
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Maybe the time has come where white people do not get to “define racism”?

There's validity in new definitions I think....if they lead to a better understanding or if they have some more utility, the change makes sense.

Definitions also change naturally but that's evident and requires no social enforcement.

I haven't seen any new definitions that anyone uses apart from the excuse of their own racist beliefs.

Maybe it’s come time for us to shut up and listen without defending?

Why would I need to shut up?

Am I less than anyone else in some way? Does my opinion hold less value because of my skin color?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: MehGuy
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
We cannot read minds but other people are not total mysteries. I readily recognise hostility as easily as fellow-feeling. I expect you do too.

Oh I certainly can sense people's feelings and hostility and sympathy and whatnot.

The difference is that I'm fully aware I can't do this perfectly, and neither can anyone else, so we all get it wrong often.

That's why we judge people by their behavior, not whatever we imagine others think or feel. There is not, and should not be, any thought crime.

I find your constant nit-picking unhelpful and frustrating. It is difficult to make progress

What progress are you talking about?
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I consider TCM to be a very harmful belief system.

Then why let it go?

Sure, yes. Doesn't really matter if they think the universe is 14 billion years old or less that 10,000 years.

Right.

There are two harms.
1. The harm of doing nothing
2. the harm of doing something

There's all kinds of harms. There's harms you're aware of, harms you aren't. There are harms that are avoidable, harms that aren't.

If you do nothing, then you get a continuance of the problem.

If there is a problem unaddressed....yes, it continues.

A particular minority doing poorly at school, poorly on employment, poorly in criminal stats.

Uh huh.

Others thinking that race is dumb or lazy or criminal.

I'm sure that some people think that. I don't know how many though. I don't know if thinking that even translates into their behavior in every case.

Do you think that's true? Do you think those racist thoughts become racist behaviors if unaddressed?

That's a big society problem.

It could be. It would be better if we actually examined the problem. If a group of students are doing poorly in school....and I find out the main reason is they don't attend school....calling the teachers racist won't fix a thing. It might make it worse.

If you do something, then maybe you help get a minority out of that hole and into an even keel, where youngsters growup believing that they can make some kind of productive life and add to society, rather than believing that society is against them and giving up trying to fit in.

But yes I agree that some measures can be counter productive.
For example, in Malaysia, they lowered the standards for native Malay people to become doctors.
This resulted in the common people thinking that Malay doctors were less well educated so they tried to avoid those doctors.

Yeah, anytime you hold one group to a different set of standards than another...there's going to be suspicion and resentment.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0