Is the left more racist, than the right?

Happy_Killbot

@YeshuaBought When you say you stand with the right on the issue of racial unity you mean????

What you follow it up with, about removing racial barriers and declaring race a purely social construct is something a lot of people agree with except far right fundamentalist extremists (like rickey) and some semantic debate among historians.

Your post really confuses me, the only people on the left who attack people for being white are the super far left extremists that no one listens to.

Just because one person who has left views says something doesn't mean everyone on the left thinks that.

I think this is yet another case of FOX news doing that thing they do to people who watch it. They are deliberately manipulating you.
https://www.businessinsider.com/study-watching-fox-news-makes-you-less-informed-than-watching-no-news-at-all-2012-5

piloteer

American democrats are mostly white. American republicans are mostly white. White people are inherently racist. So obviously American democrats are just as racist as American republicans.     

Ampersand

Do you watch that video and think it shows that the left is more racist then the right?

The presenter gives no actual examples of this left racism that supposedly occurs[1] and mainly involves a white man who claims to not know about any racial prejudice (except against white people) in the USA from the 1970's onwards whilst talking over a black woman's experiences of racism. All this despite not actually knowing the definition of racism!

[1]While they were talking there is briefly shown on screen a listicle called "37 things White people need to stop ruining in 2018". No mention is actually made of the article in the interview ans especially not of the comments, section of this article, the most recent 5 comments including: "god damn i really hate níggérs" and "Go back to the ghetto toxic nįgger!". But no, there is no racism against black people at any point in the last 40-50 years and only the left and doing such vicious things as posting racist listicles.

smoothie

piloteer said:

American democrats are mostly white. American republicans are mostly white. White people are inherently racist. So obviously American democrats are just as racist as American republicans.     

@piloteer How are white people inherently racist? More importantly, how is one race inherently anything? That is a large generalization

smoothie

I feel like painting one political side as more racist is frankly strange when members of both sides can be racist.

YeshuaBought

piloteer said:

American democrats are mostly white. American republicans are mostly white. White people are inherently racist. So obviously American democrats are just as racist as American republicans.     

No, I actually, am not. I am white, and I don't care, what skin color, you have. All i am asking you to do, is not blame or judge me for the actions of other white people, and I really do have that right. I am just pointing out how racist the left is. I don't think anyone should be singled out for the color of their skin. As a racial unity supporter, and #AllLivesMatter supporter who regards all humans as possessing equal rights given by the Lord their God, i have the right to not be judged, for the color, of my skin. It is racist to judge by skin color. That is all I am saying. That is all most conservatives are saying. You know me, you know I passionately disagree with the right on so many issues. i just don't agree with the left on this.  I agree with Dr. King Jr., on this: We should be judged by the content of our character, and not the color, of our skin. Such, is a human right, such is, equality.

Ampersand

YeshuaBought said:

piloteer said:

American democrats are mostly white. American republicans are mostly white. White people are inherently racist. So obviously American democrats are just as racist as American republicans.     

No, I actually, am not. I am white, and I don't care, what skin color, you have. All i am asking you to do, is not blame or judge me for the actions of other white people, and I really do have that right. I am just pointing out how racist the left is. I don't think anyone should be singled out for the color of their skin. As a racial unity supporter, and #AllLivesMatter supporter who regards all humans as possessing equal rights given by the Lord their God, i have the right to not be judged, for the color, of my skin. It is racist to judge by skin color. That is all I am saying. That is all most conservatives are saying. You know me, you know I passionately disagree with the right on so many issues. i just don't agree with the left on this.  I agree with Dr. King Jr., on this: We should be judged by the content of our character, and not the color, of our skin. Such, is a human right, such is, equality.

What do you think it says about someone's character if they're more upset about hypothetically being called a name on the internet because of their skin colour rather than people actually in real life being shot dead in the streets because of their skin colour?

Happy_Killbot

@YeshuaBought What is the racism from the left?

I haven't seen a single example yet. The Left is not saying you should judge people based on their skin color, no one is saying that, why do you think they are?

YeshuaBought

Ampersand said:

YeshuaBought said:

piloteer said:

American democrats are mostly white. American republicans are mostly white. White people are inherently racist. So obviously American democrats are just as racist as American republicans.     

No, I actually, am not. I am white, and I don't care, what skin color, you have. All i am asking you to do, is not blame or judge me for the actions of other white people, and I really do have that right. I am just pointing out how racist the left is. I don't think anyone should be singled out for the color of their skin. As a racial unity supporter, and #AllLivesMatter supporter who regards all humans as possessing equal rights given by the Lord their God, i have the right to not be judged, for the color, of my skin. It is racist to judge by skin color. That is all I am saying. That is all most conservatives are saying. You know me, you know I passionately disagree with the right on so many issues. i just don't agree with the left on this.  I agree with Dr. King Jr., on this: We should be judged by the content of our character, and not the color, of our skin. Such, is a human right, such is, equality.

What do you think it says about someone's character if they're more upset about hypothetically being called a name on the internet because of their skin colour rather than people actually in real life being shot dead in the streets because of their skin colour?

Appeal to emotion fallacy, and strawman fallacy. First, I don't want anyone to be shot, unless they endanger the life or bodily safety, of someone else. Second, you are being very dishonest. The media is fake, on both the left, and the right. I have seen no evidence that is factual, that black people, are being shot, for being black, but PLEASE do feel free to prove me wrong. Third, you are guilty of the appeal to emotion fallacy. By creating images of dead black people, you are triggering a false emotional reaction, in the people reading this. I don't want anyone to suffer, ever, not even my worst enemy, so chill. If someone suffers, i will have their back, even if they hurt me, because the Lord my God said to. Fourth, I have the right to not be judged by my skin color, because I believe we are all one human race. I have done nothing wrong, and serious disrespect your and other leftist's dishonesty, and appeals to emotion. You have not made a valid argument, so please try again!

piloteer

smoothie said:

piloteer said:

American democrats are mostly white. American republicans are mostly white. White people are inherently racist. So obviously American democrats are just as racist as American republicans.     

@piloteer How are white people inherently racist? More importantly, how is one race inherently anything? That is a large generalization

I cannot deny that what I said was a generalization because not all white people are racist, but I stand by the statement as being generally accurate.   

Happy_Killbot

@piloteer Well, what if I said that all people were racist, and even gave a reason from the perspective of evolutionary psychology?

YeshuaBought

piloteer said:

smoothie said:

piloteer said:

American democrats are mostly white. American republicans are mostly white. White people are inherently racist. So obviously American democrats are just as racist as American republicans.     

@piloteer How are white people inherently racist? More importantly, how is one race inherently anything? That is a large generalization

I cannot deny that what I said was a generalization because not all white people are racist, but I stand by the statement as being generally accurate.   

It is racist and hypocrital, to judge by skin color. It is also racist to say that white people are racist, in the general sense, because once again, you are judging by skin color. Don't liberals always quote Jesus, when He said: Judge not, lest ye be judged? I respect and share some of your opinions, but I disagree on on this, and respect the right of every human person to not be judged by skin color, but by the content, of his or her character. This is an absolute, human right. 

piloteer

Happy_Killbot said:

@piloteer Well, what if I said that all people were racist, and even gave a reason from the perspective of evolutionary psychology?

I'd say you can't make that point without appealing to a racist social construction that was once considered a valid scientific truth. And if you were to make the point that all people are racist, it would totally validate my argument that white people are inherently racist. Feel free to try and make that argument, but I will ask that you describe "race" for all of us to see.  

Ampersand

YeshuaBought said:

Ampersand said:

YeshuaBought said:

piloteer said:

American democrats are mostly white. American republicans are mostly white. White people are inherently racist. So obviously American democrats are just as racist as American republicans.     

No, I actually, am not. I am white, and I don't care, what skin color, you have. All i am asking you to do, is not blame or judge me for the actions of other white people, and I really do have that right. I am just pointing out how racist the left is. I don't think anyone should be singled out for the color of their skin. As a racial unity supporter, and #AllLivesMatter supporter who regards all humans as possessing equal rights given by the Lord their God, i have the right to not be judged, for the color, of my skin. It is racist to judge by skin color. That is all I am saying. That is all most conservatives are saying. You know me, you know I passionately disagree with the right on so many issues. i just don't agree with the left on this.  I agree with Dr. King Jr., on this: We should be judged by the content of our character, and not the color, of our skin. Such, is a human right, such is, equality.

What do you think it says about someone's character if they're more upset about hypothetically being called a name on the internet because of their skin colour rather than people actually in real life being shot dead in the streets because of their skin colour?

Appeal to emotion fallacy, and strawman fallacy. First, I don't want anyone to be shot, unless they endanger the life or bodily safety, of someone else. Second, you are being very dishonest. The media is fake, on both the left, and the right. I have seen no evidence that is factual, that black people, are being shot, for being black, but PLEASE do feel free to prove me wrong. Third, you are guilty of the appeal to emotion fallacy. By creating images of dead black people, you are triggering a false emotional reaction, in the people reading this. I don't want anyone to suffer, ever, not even my worst enemy, so chill. If someone suffers, i will have their back, even if they hurt me, because the Lord my God said to. Fourth, I have the right to not be judged by my skin color, because I believe we are all one human race. I have done nothing wrong, and serious disrespect your and other leftist's dishonesty, and appeals to emotion. You have not made a valid argument, so please try again!

It's not an appeal to emotion fallacy because what is morally right is based on emotive moral concerns. It can only be an appeal to emotion fallacy if it's a topic where emotion is irrelevant e.g. "You love me right? So you know I wouldn't rob a bank!".

It's also not a strawman fallacy because nothing in there misrepresented your argument.

Also I don't know how you can have lived through the last decades (or decades) depending on your age and not noticed the black peopel getting shot, but if you want evidence then take for instance http://www.csun.edu/~dma/Scott,%20Ma,%20Sadler,%20Correll,%202018.pdf which finds "police are more likely to shoot a Black suspect than a White suspect, even in the absence of racial differences in criminal activity". Please note this is with a p value of < .001 which means this is incredibly statistically significant or https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0027968417303206 which finds "structural racism is an important predictor of the Black-White disparity in rates of police shootings of unarmed victims across states."

These are peer reviewed scientific studies by independent researchers. There is no better source. Black people are being shot dead for being black. Fact.

Your claim that "I don't want anyone to be shot, unless they endanger the life or bodily safety, of someone else." While this may be true, isn't it also true you prefer to talk about the racial discrimination of someoen hypothetically saying something mean about white people than about black people literally being shot dead in the street?

And isn't it true that although you have tried to deny awareness of the issue, int he past you've actually tried to shout over and silence the issue by countering with the "all lives idea" response, a countervailing voice that silences the people trying to draw attention to this?

And isn't it true that although you say you report racial equality and "If someone suffers, i will have their back", every time someone like me brings up racial discrimination and your focus on white privelege instead of actually helping and joining in the movement to end racial discrimination you instead try and shout it down and call people racist?

Happy_Killbot

@piloteer The argument has nothing to do with race, because race doesn't exist. In fact, it only has to do with "in group" and "out group", and therefore applies to all manner of tribalism "hates" including the ones we lack vocabulary for, which I will invent new terms and briefly define.

There is an evolutionary precedence that all people who live in social structures will develop a natural distrust for outsiders. This is because those withing the group will be known and the individual will be familiar with them and will therefore project traits they see in those they are familiar with on to those they do not know, and create an unconscious link between two things that are not related. For Humans, who had a tribal ancestry, this type of thinking runs very deep to the point that it is more or less the defining characteristic of humans.

Sexism for example, relates to one gender preferring people of the same gender, and seeing the other as inferior.

Our political affiliation, witch I now dub "Ideaoism" is another common point of contention. Someone is an "ideaoist" when they believe that any other political party's or philosophies are inferior to their own. This is very common today.

Who can forget sports rivalries? Have you ever know a fan who was so enamored by their own team, and hated anyone from a rival team, without giving them a chance?

Nationalism is yet another example of the in group/out group dichotomy that we are so unable to see past. When your view is "my country is the best, our allies will be tolerated, and everyone else is our enemy" that is the same line of reasoning.

"Ageism" is when you hate a group based on age, typically in the form of a rivalry between old and young people over changing times.



My definition of race? I don't believe that race exists, based on the genetic similarity of all humans.

On top of this, the concept of making differences based on skin color has always seemed silly to me. Why not based on something else, like liver size or eyesight? There are so many more useful things, but for some reason skin color prevailed.

YeshuaBought

Ampersand said:

YeshuaBought said:

Ampersand said:

YeshuaBought said:

piloteer said:

American democrats are mostly white. American republicans are mostly white. White people are inherently racist. So obviously American democrats are just as racist as American republicans.     

No, I actually, am not. I am white, and I don't care, what skin color, you have. All i am asking you to do, is not blame or judge me for the actions of other white people, and I really do have that right. I am just pointing out how racist the left is. I don't think anyone should be singled out for the color of their skin. As a racial unity supporter, and #AllLivesMatter supporter who regards all humans as possessing equal rights given by the Lord their God, i have the right to not be judged, for the color, of my skin. It is racist to judge by skin color. That is all I am saying. That is all most conservatives are saying. You know me, you know I passionately disagree with the right on so many issues. i just don't agree with the left on this.  I agree with Dr. King Jr., on this: We should be judged by the content of our character, and not the color, of our skin. Such, is a human right, such is, equality.

What do you think it says about someone's character if they're more upset about hypothetically being called a name on the internet because of their skin colour rather than people actually in real life being shot dead in the streets because of their skin colour?

Appeal to emotion fallacy, and strawman fallacy. First, I don't want anyone to be shot, unless they endanger the life or bodily safety, of someone else. Second, you are being very dishonest. The media is fake, on both the left, and the right. I have seen no evidence that is factual, that black people, are being shot, for being black, but PLEASE do feel free to prove me wrong. Third, you are guilty of the appeal to emotion fallacy. By creating images of dead black people, you are triggering a false emotional reaction, in the people reading this. I don't want anyone to suffer, ever, not even my worst enemy, so chill. If someone suffers, i will have their back, even if they hurt me, because the Lord my God said to. Fourth, I have the right to not be judged by my skin color, because I believe we are all one human race. I have done nothing wrong, and serious disrespect your and other leftist's dishonesty, and appeals to emotion. You have not made a valid argument, so please try again!

It's not an appeal to emotion fallacy because what is morally right is based on emotive moral concerns. It can only be an appeal to emotion fallacy if it's a topic where emotion is irrelevant e.g. "You love me right? So you know I wouldn't rob a bank!".

It's also not a strawman fallacy because nothing in there misrepresented your argument.

Also I don't know how you can have lived through the last decades (or decades) depending on your age and not noticed the black peopel getting shot, but if you want evidence then take for instance http://www.csun.edu/~dma/Scott,%20Ma,%20Sadler,%20Correll,%202018.pdf which finds "police are more likely to shoot a Black suspect than a White suspect, even in the absence of racial differences in criminal activity". Please note this is with a p value of < .001 which means this is incredibly statistically significant or https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0027968417303206 which finds "structural racism is an important predictor of the Black-White disparity in rates of police shootings of unarmed victims across states."

These are peer reviewed scientific studies by independent researchers. There is no better source. Black people are being shot dead for being black. Fact.

Your claim that "I don't want anyone to be shot, unless they endanger the life or bodily safety, of someone else." While this may be true, isn't it also true you prefer to talk about the racial discrimination of someoen hypothetically saying something mean about white people than about black people literally being shot dead in the street?

And isn't it true that although you have tried to deny awareness of the issue, int he past you've actually tried to shout over and silence the issue by countering with the "all lives idea" response, a countervailing voice that silences the people trying to draw attention to this?

And isn't it true that although you say you report racial equality and "If someone suffers, i will have their back", every time someone like me brings up racial discrimination and your focus on white privelege instead of actually helping and joining in the movement to end racial discrimination you instead try and shout it down and call people racist?

You are such a . You have no proof that I am privileged or racist. In fact, I am calling you a racist, because you are only saying that because of my skin color. That is racist. i have done nothing wrong, and have the right to not be judged, for the color of my skin, as black people have that same right. You don't have the right to force me to join a movement, if that is not what I believe.

Ampersand

YeshuaBought said:

Ampersand said:

YeshuaBought said:

Ampersand said:

YeshuaBought said:

piloteer said:

American democrats are mostly white. American republicans are mostly white. White people are inherently racist. So obviously American democrats are just as racist as American republicans.     

No, I actually, am not. I am white, and I don't care, what skin color, you have. All i am asking you to do, is not blame or judge me for the actions of other white people, and I really do have that right. I am just pointing out how racist the left is. I don't think anyone should be singled out for the color of their skin. As a racial unity supporter, and #AllLivesMatter supporter who regards all humans as possessing equal rights given by the Lord their God, i have the right to not be judged, for the color, of my skin. It is racist to judge by skin color. That is all I am saying. That is all most conservatives are saying. You know me, you know I passionately disagree with the right on so many issues. i just don't agree with the left on this.  I agree with Dr. King Jr., on this: We should be judged by the content of our character, and not the color, of our skin. Such, is a human right, such is, equality.

What do you think it says about someone's character if they're more upset about hypothetically being called a name on the internet because of their skin colour rather than people actually in real life being shot dead in the streets because of their skin colour?

Appeal to emotion fallacy, and strawman fallacy. First, I don't want anyone to be shot, unless they endanger the life or bodily safety, of someone else. Second, you are being very dishonest. The media is fake, on both the left, and the right. I have seen no evidence that is factual, that black people, are being shot, for being black, but PLEASE do feel free to prove me wrong. Third, you are guilty of the appeal to emotion fallacy. By creating images of dead black people, you are triggering a false emotional reaction, in the people reading this. I don't want anyone to suffer, ever, not even my worst enemy, so chill. If someone suffers, i will have their back, even if they hurt me, because the Lord my God said to. Fourth, I have the right to not be judged by my skin color, because I believe we are all one human race. I have done nothing wrong, and serious disrespect your and other leftist's dishonesty, and appeals to emotion. You have not made a valid argument, so please try again!

It's not an appeal to emotion fallacy because what is morally right is based on emotive moral concerns. It can only be an appeal to emotion fallacy if it's a topic where emotion is irrelevant e.g. "You love me right? So you know I wouldn't rob a bank!".

It's also not a strawman fallacy because nothing in there misrepresented your argument.

Also I don't know how you can have lived through the last decades (or decades) depending on your age and not noticed the black peopel getting shot, but if you want evidence then take for instance http://www.csun.edu/~dma/Scott,%20Ma,%20Sadler,%20Correll,%202018.pdf which finds "police are more likely to shoot a Black suspect than a White suspect, even in the absence of racial differences in criminal activity". Please note this is with a p value of < .001 which means this is incredibly statistically significant or https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0027968417303206 which finds "structural racism is an important predictor of the Black-White disparity in rates of police shootings of unarmed victims across states."

These are peer reviewed scientific studies by independent researchers. There is no better source. Black people are being shot dead for being black. Fact.

Your claim that "I don't want anyone to be shot, unless they endanger the life or bodily safety, of someone else." While this may be true, isn't it also true you prefer to talk about the racial discrimination of someoen hypothetically saying something mean about white people than about black people literally being shot dead in the street?

And isn't it true that although you have tried to deny awareness of the issue, int he past you've actually tried to shout over and silence the issue by countering with the "all lives idea" response, a countervailing voice that silences the people trying to draw attention to this?

And isn't it true that although you say you report racial equality and "If someone suffers, i will have their back", every time someone like me brings up racial discrimination and your focus on white privelege instead of actually helping and joining in the movement to end racial discrimination you instead try and shout it down and call people racist?

You are such a . You have no proof that I am privileged or racist. In fact, I am calling you a racist, because you are only saying that because of my skin color. That is racist. i have done nothing wrong, and have the right to not be judged, for the color of my skin, as black people have that same right. You don't have the right to force me to join a movement, if that is not what I believe.

I didn't call you racist, you've called ME racist.

You asked for proof black people are being shot and I provide you peer reviewed scientific studies that's happening, exactly as you requested. And what do you do? You complain about how people are being unfair and racist to you. Why do you think anyone would take your claims of caring about racial injustice seriously if every time you're provided with a chance to actually join in and give a about black people's suffering you completely ignore it and complain about your woes and the imaginary racism you face. 

I did say you focus on white privilege, but:

a) White privilege is about how society treats you and is not even close to calling someone racist. We are both white and so will both benefit from white privilege.  

b) In the other thread where we're having this discussion (https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/59982/#Comment_59982) I posted multiple pieces of evidence showing how both you and I benefit from white privilege.

You're offering no actual defence and are not seeming to understand half of what you're arguing against. You're just randomly shouting that I'm racist for some unknown reason, apparently because I tried to  "force [you] to join a movement". SHOCK AND HORROR - in a debate forum I debated my point of view. How horrible and unexpected of me.

MayCaesar

In my experience, racism has more to do with individual experiences and upbringing, than with the general ideological leaning. People who have grown up in multicultural societies, or who have been taught by their parents to respect and value everyone regardless of any superficial traits they might have, do not tend to exhibit racist beliefs - while those who have grown up in secluded monocultural communities, and who had highly judgemental parents, often discriminate against others based on them being different from them in any way.

I grew up in a very monolithic society in Belarus.
My first encounter with a person of non-White and non-Asian race occurred when I was 4 years old; I remember it vividly. I asked my mother loudly, "Moooom, why is that man black?" I simply did not even know that black people existed and was very surprised. My mother did not like the question one bit, and when we came home, she read me a very serious lecture about respecting everyone regardless of anything.
Later, at the age of 6, I made a similarly thoughtless comment about my grandmother's friend who was a limp: "Wow, grandma, that woman is really old and can barely walk! That is weird!" Another harsh lecture.
Pretty quickly I learned that all of this is meaningless. What matters is the person's heart and brain; everything else is just a bonus.

Now, my views are very unconventional; I am a voluntarist and an anarcho-capitalist. Among anarcho-capitalists, there are plenty of racists and non-racists. Same is true for socialists, nationalists, Islamists, liberals, conservatives, libertarians, centrists... You name it. I have never observed any direct correlation between following a given ideology and being or not being a racist.

It seems to have more to do with identity politics, that very thing that my mother and grandmother so harshly discouraged me from following. When you unite a group of people into one meaningful category based on some superficial trait - then you start necessarily judging people for those traits, and that is when various -isms arise.

Identity politics is not just about race; it goes deeper. In the extreme case, consider a blind person; would you think less of someone for being blind? I would not. I would not mind having a blind girlfriend or close friend, for example. Someone being blind is simply one aspect of them. They are not able to see, but they are able to hear better and to have fewer distractions. Regardless of whether they can or cannot see, they can say smart and kind things, they can be fun to be around, they can be very successful professionally. Who cares about eyesight, when there is so much more to life?

It is those identity politics followers that make lives of, say, blind people so hard. They want to build special schools for them, to put them on the disability lists, to do everything to make them feel unworthy and deserving special care, and involuntarily be segregated. I say - let a blind person study in the same class as everyone else. The teacher can adapt their teaching style to students with unusual needs. A blind person has a hard time writing on the blackboard? No problem, she can say what she wants written, and the teacher will write it. A blind person has difficulty keeping up with the book material? There are books that can be read by blind people, and they can get extremely good at that. A blind person cannot easily find a way into a classroom? People around can guide her.

Treat every person in a way that makes them feel welcome and appreciated, regardless of who they are - and that is how you build a happy, equal and prosperous society. You do not build it with the opposite approach: dividing people into groups and then applying universal special rules to those groups. This is how you build an apartheid.

Dee

@YeshuaBought

***** Attatching value to any color whatsoever, is wholeheartedly irrational, and illogical

Right 

****. I have no problem with black people, at all.

Excellent 

**** In fact, I have more respect for black people than white liberals,

You’re a racist 

 ****because I see no racial difference,

You just said the opposite 

****like I said, and see the black community, as equal, to the white community. 

No you don’t 

Dee

@YeshuaBought

 *****As a racial unity supporter, and #AllLivesMatter supporter who regards all humans as possessing equal rights given by the Lord their God,

Rights were not given by the lord god , your god approved of slavery 

*****i have the right to not be judged, for the color, of my skin. It is racist to judge by skin color. 

Yet you said you “have more respect for black people than white liberals “ ......you’re a racist 

piloteer

Happy_Killbot said:

@piloteer The argument has nothing to do with race, because race doesn't exist. In fact, it only has to do with "in group" and "out group", and therefore applies to all manner of tribalism "hates" including the ones we lack vocabulary for, which I will invent new terms and briefly define.

There is an evolutionary precedence that all people who live in social structures will develop a natural distrust for outsiders. This is because those withing the group will be known and the individual will be familiar with them and will therefore project traits they see in those they are familiar with on to those they do not know, and create an unconscious link between two things that are not related. For Humans, who had a tribal ancestry, this type of thinking runs very deep to the point that it is more or less the defining characteristic of humans.

Sexism for example, relates to one gender preferring people of the same gender, and seeing the other as inferior.

Our political affiliation, witch I now dub "Ideaoism" is another common point of contention. Someone is an "ideaoist" when they believe that any other political party's or philosophies are inferior to their own. This is very common today.

Who can forget sports rivalries? Have you ever know a fan who was so enamored by their own team, and hated anyone from a rival team, without giving them a chance?

Nationalism is yet another example of the in group/out group dichotomy that we are so unable to see past. When your view is "my country is the best, our allies will be tolerated, and everyone else is our enemy" that is the same line of reasoning.

"Ageism" is when you hate a group based on age, typically in the form of a rivalry between old and young people over changing times.



My definition of race? I don't believe that race exists, based on the genetic similarity of all humans.

On top of this, the concept of making differences based on skin color has always seemed silly to me. Why not based on something else, like liver size or eyesight? There are so many more useful things, but for some reason skin color prevailed.

Your argument is only a hypothetical scenario of how tribalism came to be, but it does not demonstrate how or why everybody is racist because even in a tribal situation those outside of the tribe could be viewed as members of the same race, but since they are still not within the tribe they are viewed as suspicious. How, or what is it about tribalism that causes everyone to be racist?

Your argument does not account for nations with several different ethnic groups who live within its borders. If nationalism is a factor, what is it that causes certain factions of that nation (usually minority groups) to be outcast by the rest of the country?     

YeshuaBought

Dee said:

@YeshuaBought

***** Attatching value to any color whatsoever, is wholeheartedly irrational, and illogical

Right 

****. I have no problem with black people, at all.

Excellent 

**** In fact, I have more respect for black people than white liberals,

You’re a racist 

 ****because I see no racial difference,

You just said the opposite 

****like I said, and see the black community, as equal, to the white community. 

No you don’t 

If you don't stop lying about me, there will be legal trouble. Libel is not a human right.

YeshuaBought

Dee said:

@YeshuaBought

 *****As a racial unity supporter, and #AllLivesMatter supporter who regards all humans as possessing equal rights given by the Lord their God,

Rights were not given by the lord god , your god approved of slavery 

*****i have the right to not be judged, for the color, of my skin. It is racist to judge by skin color. 

Yet you said you “have more respect for black people than white liberals “ ......you’re a racist 

you don't have the right to call me a racist, because that is a lie. You owe me an apology.

AmericanFurryBoy

@piloteer, would it not be racist to assume that white people are inherently racist?

YeshuaBought

AmericanFurryBoy said:

@piloteer, would it not be racist to assume that white people are inherently racist?

Right? that is the point I am trying to make.

Happy_Killbot

@piloteer I agree that it is hypothesis and doesn't mean everyone is racist, but it does illustrate the point that the underlying cause of racism, which is tribalism, is an inherent part of human psychology. The fact that you can see people of a different skin color as part of your tribe, or "in group members" is exactly what we see in the real world. People who grow up around people from a different ethnicity or who are physically different from them are seen as benign and allies. This is actually very good evidence for tribalism as the source of racism.

Tribalism can also account for distrust of minority groups within a nation. All it requires is for people to make a distinction between "us" and "others" just happening on a national scale. This is a little misleading though, because tribalism is a force held in individual psychology and only behaves on national levels when the madness of crowds is dominant.

John_C_87

The dictionary describes racism as just a form of prejudice.

: racial prejudice or discrimination

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

Ampersand

AmericanFurryBoy said:

@piloteer, would it not be racist to assume that white people are inherently racist?

Yeah. The problem is people are saying that's what's happening when actually a) They're not being called racist or b) they're being called racist for saying or doing racist stuff. The defence suddenly comes out that "Oh, I'm not really racist. They're just saying that because I'm white". It's often indicative of a victimhood complex and a desire to enable racism, because actual honest self analysis is too big an ask.

Dee

@YeshuaBought

Back you your stalking again ....Here is what you said ......

“ I have  more respect for black people than white liberals “ ......

You’re a racist 

Dee

@YeshuaBought


 ....Here is what you said ......

“ I more respect for black people than white liberals “ ......

You’re a racist 

Dee

@YeshuaBought

Back you your stalking again ....Here is what you said ......

“ I have more respect for black people than white liberals “ ......

You’re a racist 

MichaelElpers

@Happy_Killbot. The racism i see from the left is the constant support of programs that exclude/ include people solely based on skin color.  Affirmative action, reparations, diversity hirings. They care more about diversity of skin color than thought.

There are also many ive talked to that dont even believe minorities can be racist.

Happy_Killbot

@MichaelElpers There is kind of a complicated argument here, but it is basically the same in all instances.

If you are familiar with Bayes's Theorem its very easy to understand, if not I'll try to make this as intuitive as possible.

Let's say we have a population with people of various skin colors, who live in a society that believes that all people are equal, and skin color doesn't matter, but rather qualifications and charterer matter.

suppose we take a demographic survey of this society and find 70% are skin color 1, 25% skin color 2, and 5% skin color 3. Now we graph all people based on wealth, college education, and average income.

If our belief that skin color doesn't matter is justified, then we would expect to see the number of people in each demographic be proportional to each metric we graphed. (this is where an understanding of Bayesian analysis is useful, but it should be obvious why they would be like that) We would expect 70% of college graduates to be skin color 1, 25% skin color 2, and 5% skin color 3.

Instead, we find that of college graduates: 80% are skin color 1, 5% are skin color 2, and 15% are skin color 3.

From this information, we can suppose one of the following:

• colleges are biased toward toward people depending on skin color
• societal pressures, such as past discrimination has made it harder or easier for people of a certain skin color to get into college or graduate
• cultural pressures, such as work ethic trend with skin color, and make it more or less likely for people to graduate.
• our assumption that skin color doesn't matter is false

It is possible that more than one of these is true, or that some other unknown factor is causing the skew in the data. However, in all except the last case, the society can presumably fix the problem by giving an advantage to people based on skin color. After some time, the difference should be minimized or dissolved completely, at which point the advantage becomes unnecessary.

This is the rational behind policies such as affirmative action, reprimand, and diversity hiring. They are a band-aid to heal past wounds caused by social and culture differences, and they are not meant to be a permanent solution. If the disparity in the data was not present, then I would agree that such actions would disadvantage people based on skin color and would be racist.

MichaelElpers

@Happy_Killbot. Your premise is  not hard to understand, but I dont believe that cultural differences or societal pressures are enough of a qualification to make a different set of rules for different skin colors.

Everyone should be treated as an individual, i dont believe we should be bothered by racial or cultural disparities unless we are somehow causing a direct disadvantage.

Anyway the end criteria should never be based on skin color, it more be a resultant of factors that cause objective disadvantages and skin color is not one of them.

If you want to create a law that helps economically disadvantaged people, and that law happens to help more minority communities thats fine.  That type of program would self balance what individuals recieve help assuming people with more disadvantage factors would give an individual higher probability of being selected.

YeshuaBought

Ampersand said:

AmericanFurryBoy said:

@piloteer, would it not be racist to assume that white people are inherently racist?

Yeah. The problem is people are saying that's what's happening when actually a) They're not being called racist or b) they're being called racist for saying or doing racist stuff. The defence suddenly comes out that "Oh, I'm not really racist. They're just saying that because I'm white". It's often indicative of a victimhood complex and a desire to enable racism, because actual honest self analysis is too big an ask.

What a croc of leftist ****! I am so tired of being blamed for society's ills, because of my skin color. That really is racist. i have the right to not be blamed for society's ills, or be judged for my skin color, just like every other color and creed. Honestly, no one takes you social justice warrios seriously, anymore.

YeshuaBought

MichaelElpers said:

@Happy_Killbot. Your premise is  not hard to understand, but I dont believe that cultural differences or societal pressures are enough of a qualification to make a different set of rules for different skin colors.

Everyone should be treated as an individual, i dont believe we should be bothered by racial or cultural disparities unless we are somehow causing a direct disadvantage.

Anyway the end criteria should never be based on skin color, it more be a resultant of factors that cause objective disadvantages and skin color is not one of them.

If you want to create a law that helps economically disadvantaged people, and that law happens to help more minority communities thats fine.  That type of program would self balance what individuals recieve help assuming people with more disadvantage factors would give an individual higher probability of being selected.

I agree with you. I personally believe the left is fueling racist ideology.

Happy_Killbot

@MichaelElpers The idea behind a lot of these programs is to help disadvantaged families, but the restrictions will ultimately come down to bureaucracy, and generalizations will have to be made.

How would a bureaucracy be developed that will always determine who is and is not disadvantaged?

YeshuaBought

Dee said:

@YeshuaBought

Back you your stalking again ....Here is what you said ......

“ I have more respect for black people than white liberals “ ......

You’re a racist 

My debate, my rules. if you don't like it, you are free to leave. i have the absolute right to respond to your lies, and if you don't stop lying about me, i will speak to a lawyer. Dishonest speech is not a human right, and you will be held accountable, for your lies. The abuse stops now.

Dee

@YeshuaBought


But I’m not lying here you go your words you racist not mine ....

*****“ I have more respect for black people than white liberals “ ......

You’re still a racist , so why are you lying?

YeshuaBought

Dee said:

@YeshuaBought


But I’m not lying here you go your words you racist not mine ....

*****“ I have more respect for black people than white liberals “ ......

You’re still a racist , so why are you lying?

You don't have the right to say what is not true, and you are the one stalking me, on my debates. if you don't knock it off, i will take you to court, and sue you for harassment, and libel.

MichaelElpers

@Happy_Killbot. How about they perform studies on which disadvantages are the worst and base their metrics off of that.

Its much better than making the generalizations based on race..almost the definition of racism.

Then you have programs like affirmative action that make graduation rate numbers even worse for minorities because they are put in schools with students who they are not equivalent too academically. 

Happy_Killbot

@MichaelElpers I agree that there needs to be some way of determining and assisting people who for no fault of their own, are disadvantaged and will have a harder time in society, but I'm not really sure how exactly you would pull this off, since everyone's individual situation is going to be unique.

Maybe geographically would be better? If you were raised in a low income area, or spent most of your life in economically repressed places you might get assistance.

I don't think  affirmative action has decreased graduation rates among minorities overall, but I would change my mind if I saw statistics. I think the problem is deeper and more pervasive than we might want to admit. Especially if there is something that leads to minorities getting lower grades to begin with before they even apply to college, (This is where I would point to cultural differences) but it wouldn't speak very strongly to the idea that all people are equal independent of skin color.

There is of course, an obvious scenario that would lead to the result we see with affirmative action leading to higher chances of dropping out of college, and that is that affirmative action helps the wrong people out sometimes. Suppose we have 4 people, 1, and 2 have race 1, 3 and 4 have race 2, 1 and 3 have high IQ, 2 and 4 have low IQ. They all apply for the same college. 1 and 3 get accepted immediately, and 2 gets accepted due to affirmative action. However, 2 is now at a disadvantage because he has a lower IQ as an individual.

MayCaesar

@Happy_Killbot ;

"Skin color does not matter" is a very vague statement that can have many connotations. Usually, when people say this phrase, they do not mean that skin color makes absolutely no difference on anything (as that is just objectively false), but that skin color does not determine one's ability to succeed in life. Now, obviously people of certain skin colors, for historical reasons, for example, may start statistically in the worse initial conditions - however, as long as they have access to the same opportunities as everyone else, and as long as there are no systematic effects applicable to them that do not allow them to apply for the same jobs or universities as everyone else can, we can say (in a very specific context) that skin color, indeed, does not matter.

Regardless, history shows that the societies that succeed are those societies that choose to implement the desired change, rather than try to make up for the past injustices. This means that if we want to make it so skin color really does not matter, then we need to act like it does not matter, meaning no reparations, no affirmative action, etc., and full equality of opportunity and treatment of every person equally regardless of their skin color as a society.

This is the only way forward. You are not going to get anywhere by constantly making calculations to see which groups are disadvantaged, and then trying to use governmental means to correct those disadvantages. This is a sure way to always have racial tensions and to never solve the problem of racial discrimination.

Happy_Killbot

@MayCaesar If it could be as simple as giving everyone the same opportunity, then that should solve the problem. But of course, reality is messy and nothing is so simple. A lot of times which opportunities are available to you are going to depend on things like where and how you were raised, and what values were instilled in you from culture and life experience.

A lot of these policies focus on leveling out the difference in opportunity so that over time, everything should end up more or less even so that the most talented can rise to the top. This of course, should go both ways. Many at the top live above a "glass ceiling" that makes it so that no matter how much of a F*** up they are, they can never go down because of endless opportunity, and people at the bottom must suffer a similar fate. There is social stratification in our society that needs to be eliminated, so that we can all have more equal opportunity.

These programs are not intended to be permanent, they are only supposed to exist long enough that differences reach statistically insignificant levels and prejudice can effectively be said to not exist.

YeshuaBought

Ampersand said:

Do you watch that video and think it shows that the left is more racist then the right?

The presenter gives no actual examples of this left racism that supposedly occurs[1] and mainly involves a white man who claims to not know about any racial prejudice (except against white people) in the USA from the 1970's onwards whilst talking over a black woman's experiences of racism. All this despite not actually knowing the definition of racism!

[1]While they were talking there is briefly shown on screen a listicle called "37 things White people need to stop ruining in 2018". No mention is actually made of the article in the interview ans especially not of the comments, section of this article, the most recent 5 comments including: "god damn i really hate níggérs" and "Go back to the ghetto toxic nįgger!". But no, there is no racism against black people at any point in the last 40-50 years and only the left and doing such vicious things as posting racist listicles.

That doesn't prove anything. It is the left that is always playing the race race. 

MayCaesar

@Happy_Killbot

Opportunity refers to what you can or cannot do. It does not refer to your initial conditions.

Your argument comes down to, "Initial conditions are different, hence we need to give some people more opportunity than others in order to compensate for that". This is not how you remedy such issues, however: you have to equalise opportunity, so over time initial conditions are also equalised. Otherwise, the problem will be perpetuated, as allegedly disadvantaged groups get exemptions from regular competition and are incentivised to compete less and less.

Not to mention that giving people special advantages based not on their individual situation, but on their race, gender, etc. does not even address the problem. A black person who grew up in a very good environment gets an easier entrance into, say, the higher education system, than a white person who grew up in a very poor environment - the entrance is already much easier for the former, but now you widen the gap even more by implementing policies favoring black people. What problem does it solve? None; it only makes the education system less meritocratic, in turn discouraging real competition, in turn making it even less meritocratic, in turn leading to more discriminatory policies - and it spirals out of control.

These proposals are based on a very malicious ideology, according to which disadvantaged people should gain privileges in order to offset their disadvantage. This is wrong on many levels. Imagine if you are a parent, your child gets a poor grade for an exam, and you give a reward to that child to compensate for the poor performance. Is this an example of good parenting? Are you creating the right incentives for your child in the future?
Well, this is what your proposal does: it discourages people it is aimed to support from bettering themselves, perpetuating the problem - and even worsening it. Again, you need only to look at what happened to the indigenous populations of Canada and Australia after a series of equalisation reforms, to see where creation of perverse incentives leads.

Once again, the only way to bring about the desired societal outcome is to act in a way as you would if it had already been achieved. Acting the opposite way leads to the opposite result. Advocating for racist policies to address racist issues is racist and only leads to more racism, which should be obvious.

Happy_Killbot

@MayCaesar Here is an example of what I mean by different opportunities being afforded to people in different social strata: D.J.Trump was born to a wealthy business man. His father, who had many successful businesses taught him the ways of business growing up. When he was older, he gave him a large loan. Because he was well connected, he was able to get whatever he wanted. 

Initial conditions are everything. We can pretend like they are not.

The policies are based on statistics more than anything else, as I explain above:

If you are familiar with Bayes's Theorem its very easy to understand, if not I'll try to make this as intuitive as possible.

Let's say we have a population with people of various skin colors, who live in a society that believes that all people are equal, and skin color doesn't matter, but rather qualifications and charterer matter.

suppose we take a demographic survey of this society and find 70% are skin color 1, 25% skin color 2, and 5% skin color 3. Now we graph all people based on wealth, college education, and average income.

If our belief that skin color doesn't matter is justified, then we would expect to see the number of people in each demographic be proportional to each metric we graphed. (this is where an understanding of Bayesian analysis is useful, but it should be obvious why they would be like that) We would expect 70% of college graduates to be skin color 1, 25% skin color 2, and 5% skin color 3.

Instead, we find that of college graduates: 80% are skin color 1, 5% are skin color 2, and 15% are skin color 3.

From this information, we can suppose one of the following:

colleges are biased toward toward people depending on skin colorsocietal pressures, such as past discrimination has made it harder or easier for people of a certain skin color to get into college or graduatecultural pressures, such as work ethic trend with skin color, and make it more or less likely for people to graduate.our assumption that skin color doesn't matter is falseIt is possible that more than one of these is true, or that some other unknown factor is causing the skew in the data. However, in all except the last case, the society can presumably fix the problem by giving an advantage to people based on skin color. After some time, the difference should be minimized or dissolved completely, at which point the advantage becomes unnecessary.

This is the rational behind policies such as affirmative action, reprimand, and diversity hiring. They are a band-aid to heal past wounds caused by social and culture differences, and they are not meant to be a permanent solution. If the disparity in the data was not present, then I would agree that such actions would disadvantage people based on skin color and would be racist.

MayCaesar

@Happy_Killbot

It is true that initial conditions help, but no, they are not everything. Again, I personally was born in one of the last places on Earth one wants to be born in, in a very poor family. I seemingly had no prospects in life, but very early on I gave up the idea of being a victim and took an action-focused approach instead - and look at me now. A week ago I got a job offer that blew my mind, that normally would require either a mind-blowing resume, or solid long-term connections - yet I just drove to the place myself over 1000 miles one way, formed connections while being there, and got an offer next day. This is what massive action and dedication does: it makes you shine despite where you find yourself in life.
Connections, wealth, etc. - all of this is achievable by anyone, and while it is certainly easier for those who started out with these things already there, anyone can get them, starting with any initial conditions (with very-very rare exceptions, such as being born without legs in a North Korean concentration camp - it has to be about this bad for you to absolutely have no shot at the life success).

Statistics are irrelevant when we talk about policies applied to individuals. There are rich and successful black people, and poor and miserable black people; are we going to give all of them privileges, just because they happen to be in the same arbitrary group? You mentioned before that race does not exist in your view, yet you seem perfectly happy to group people up by race when it comes to policies - how does this make sense? You have the right idea in mind, but you support policies that run contrary to that idea.

If you want to help disadvantaged people by using coercive governmental apparatus (which I think is a terrible idea in principle, but that is beside the point), then the biggest mistake you can make is to paint large groups of people with the same brush. To truly help disadvantaged people, you have to consider each individual case. Morgan Freeman's children obviously are much more advantaged by default, than my drunkard neighbor's children - if you really want to remedy initial condition issues, then the fact that Morgan Freeman's and my neighbor's children happen to have the same skin color should be absolutely irrelevant to you.

Happy_Killbot

@MayCaesar For every you who succeeded, how many did not? It seems like this is just a case of survivor bias, where your success may be possible, but on the whole is a major hindrance. 

When we are trying to make or change policies, we can not look at individuals, we can only look at statistics. If there is a dependency in the data, it is indicative of a deeper prejudice, and if left unchecked it will get out of hand. These types of policies seek to correct those wrongs so that everything can stable out in the long run. They are not racist, rather they are counter-racist.

There are people who treat people of a particular race poorly then we can't just let that go. Racism exists, not because it is real but because people assume it is, and that assumption, irrational as it may be is what makes these policies necessary.

MayCaesar

@Happy_Killbot

There are countless people who have turned around the worst possible circumstances one can think of; I am hardly unique, and my success is fairly minor compared to even what some North Korean refugees have accomplished.
Of course many do not succeed, because people make wrong life choices, assume poor beliefs, and so on. That is precisely my point: your initial conditions do not determine your success, but your choices do. As such, if you truly want to help someone, you will help them make the right choices. Simply giving them good initial conditions is not going to cut it, not to mention that it is impossible to give everyone good initial conditions without countless negative consequences, likely defeating the whole point.

You can look at statistics to assess where the society currently is, but you cannot base policies on them without employing a lot of unjust discrimination. And since discrimination is what you seem to want to defeat in the first place, your approach runs contrary to your goal.
Tell me why Morgan Freeman's children deserve more governmental assistance than my children, despite my children starting out in significantly worse initial conditions. I am not interested in statistics, I want to hear how you will rationalise this particular case. Is my situation somehow less relevant, because I am white? How so?
There is no way to justify this without employing racist arguments. So, again, you will have to try to tackle racism with racism, which makes no sense from pretty much any philosophical standpoint.

Yes, we cannot let that go - which is why the first thing you should abstain from is doing the exact same thing. "Oh, black people are treated poorly on average, so I will treat white people poorer than black people to offset it" - this does not fly. And no, these policies are not necessary, unless you genuinely believe that without affirmative action black people have no chance to make it in life - which, again, is a very discriminatory, and just extreme inhumane, assumption.

It speaks a lot about the modern state of the Western society that such policies are even seriously considered, let alone supported by major political parties. Back when I was moving to the US in 2014, I thought these matters had been left in the past. I thought that people had spoken in 60-s and the matter was resolved once and for all. But no, we are back to arguing about whether people should be treated preferentially based on race. When will this end?