As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
So when CAN you call someone a racist?
Schrodinger
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
This one has been bugging me for a while. The latest case example seems to come from Ron Paul.
It seems that post OJ-trial, people have been quick to accuse others of playing "the race card" whenever they try to bring up the fact that, yes, racism really does still occur in this country. Basically, all you need to do to avoid being called a racist is to insist that you aren't one. The phrase, "I'm not a racist, but _______" is supposed to magically excuse any comment that follows, no matter how racist it may be. Ron Paul, Don Imus, Michael Richards, etc., will all claim that they aren't racist, regardless of what they actually say.
In the Ron Paul example, you have a history of him saying blatantly racist things, like insisting that only 5% of black people have "sensible" politics (re: extreme libertarian politics), and that the other 95% are criminals. And then you have a libertarian supporters who are wiling to excuse this, because it seems "out of character" for him, and because they don't usually see him come off as very racist in normal circumstance. Which simply begs the question: How does an racist person come accross in normal circumstances, especially considering that most racism isn't overt, and overt racism is highly unpopular? Even the KKK can come accross as being non-racist if you interview them at the right time of day. It seems like basically what people are saying is, "Yes, he might have said something racist back then. But I've never seen him personally lynch black people or light any crosses on fire, so he doesn't strike me as a racist person."
I also dealt with another libertarian physics major recently who claimed that there was actually no such thing as discrimination against black people in America these days, and that any gaps and social standing was the result of the fact that white people simply had more evolved brain capacity. Not surprisingly, this person took great offense when I accused him of being racist. After all, it's not like he hated black people for being black. That would be racist! He just thought that black people were genetically inferior and therefore less likely to be qualified for work. What's so racist about that?
My thoughts are that racism is still a problem in this country, to the extent that it can be measured with emprical data. But people are too quick to find excuses to deny it. I can post a study showing that white people who served in prison for selling cocaine had a better chance of finding a job than black people with similar resumes but no criminal record, and the response I get is, "Gee, maybe the employer went to the same school as the white kid, or disliked the school the black kid went to." I post studies from linguistic experts showing that "black" sounding voices are told that there are no apartments available and "white" sounding voices get responses from the same landlord immeadiately, even when identical grammar is used, and the response I get is that it must be some oversight. Basically, anything to skid around the most obvious answer of, "Well, maybe it really is because the guy is black." Moreover, when you try to point out that such discrimination happens, the conservative response always seems to be, "Well gee, you're the REAL racist, for insisting that black people need an extra hand in order to compete." Which I never understood at all.
Does this bother anyone else? It seems that (mostly white) conservatives have tried to take the control of the term racism, in order to further an agenda that hurts minorities, rather than helping them. For instance, Ron Paul tries to the left by saying that "Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist." In other words, by allowing black people to have their own sense of culture, you are being a racist. The non-racists should uphold the status quo culture, which just so happens to predominantly benefit WASPs. How convenient.
It seems that post OJ-trial, people have been quick to accuse others of playing "the race card" whenever they try to bring up the fact that, yes, racism really does still occur in this country. Basically, all you need to do to avoid being called a racist is to insist that you aren't one. The phrase, "I'm not a racist, but _______" is supposed to magically excuse any comment that follows, no matter how racist it may be. Ron Paul, Don Imus, Michael Richards, etc., will all claim that they aren't racist, regardless of what they actually say.
In the Ron Paul example, you have a history of him saying blatantly racist things, like insisting that only 5% of black people have "sensible" politics (re: extreme libertarian politics), and that the other 95% are criminals. And then you have a libertarian supporters who are wiling to excuse this, because it seems "out of character" for him, and because they don't usually see him come off as very racist in normal circumstance. Which simply begs the question: How does an racist person come accross in normal circumstances, especially considering that most racism isn't overt, and overt racism is highly unpopular? Even the KKK can come accross as being non-racist if you interview them at the right time of day. It seems like basically what people are saying is, "Yes, he might have said something racist back then. But I've never seen him personally lynch black people or light any crosses on fire, so he doesn't strike me as a racist person."
I also dealt with another libertarian physics major recently who claimed that there was actually no such thing as discrimination against black people in America these days, and that any gaps and social standing was the result of the fact that white people simply had more evolved brain capacity. Not surprisingly, this person took great offense when I accused him of being racist. After all, it's not like he hated black people for being black. That would be racist! He just thought that black people were genetically inferior and therefore less likely to be qualified for work. What's so racist about that?
My thoughts are that racism is still a problem in this country, to the extent that it can be measured with emprical data. But people are too quick to find excuses to deny it. I can post a study showing that white people who served in prison for selling cocaine had a better chance of finding a job than black people with similar resumes but no criminal record, and the response I get is, "Gee, maybe the employer went to the same school as the white kid, or disliked the school the black kid went to." I post studies from linguistic experts showing that "black" sounding voices are told that there are no apartments available and "white" sounding voices get responses from the same landlord immeadiately, even when identical grammar is used, and the response I get is that it must be some oversight. Basically, anything to skid around the most obvious answer of, "Well, maybe it really is because the guy is black." Moreover, when you try to point out that such discrimination happens, the conservative response always seems to be, "Well gee, you're the REAL racist, for insisting that black people need an extra hand in order to compete." Which I never understood at all.
Does this bother anyone else? It seems that (mostly white) conservatives have tried to take the control of the term racism, in order to further an agenda that hurts minorities, rather than helping them. For instance, Ron Paul tries to the left by saying that "Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist." In other words, by allowing black people to have their own sense of culture, you are being a racist. The non-racists should uphold the status quo culture, which just so happens to predominantly benefit WASPs. How convenient.
Schrodinger on
0
Posts
Apparently not so petrified:
Not really, and especially not in "conservative" circles. There calling somebody a racist is often looked at as being worse that actually being a racist. Even breaking out the R-word is sure to get you branded as a PC Liberal Commie Idiot, or some such.
Libertarians are the new hippies, only with a lot more money, think tanks, and non-elected political influence.
I do not. ;-)
Pretty much. And not just in conservative circles either, since no one wants to be labeled "politically correct." (For the record, when was the last time you even SAW someone push political correctness?).
Like I said, it seems to be post-OJ burnout. As a result of the OJ trial, people tend to exagerrate the types of actions that will get you accused of being a racist, and are therefore quick to dismiss the label in all but the most extreme cases.
BOOGABOOGABOOGA!
"Libertarians are anarchists who want police protections from their slaves" and
"Libertarians are conservatives who want to smoke pot."
So you can tell him that yes, by definition he is a racist.
Also, I would further point out that he is making a gross generalization regarding intelligance and that even if it were true that blacks are less intelligent than whites (which it isn't) there still exist very stupid white people and very smart black people and the generalization provides absolutely no useful information whatsoever for dealing with individual people. That is to say that even if the average IQ of blacks was lower than whites (don't anybody bother citing "The Bell Curve" here, that POS has been thoughouly debunked for flawed methodology years ago) the person sitting across from you still might have an IQ of 200, or 130, or whatever, as even in the wildest estimates the varience within a population HUGELY trumps the varience between populations.
its pretty difficult to do, i can never gather enough mana to tap it
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Yeah, that's what I tried.
Unfortunately, for most people, the implications of superiority is more implied than overt. e.g., if you acknowledge that there's a measurable discrepency between white people and black people in this country, which is backed up by studies, and you deny that it's the result of discrimination, which many people do, then you have to wonder what causes the discrepency. And if it's not the environment, then it must be something inherent within the person, and therefore within the group.
Similarily, if you want to argue that "Well, it's okay to engage in racial profiling, because black people are more likely to commit crimes than white people!", then you're implying a sort of moral superiority. And as you said, even if this applies to the group, it doesn't really apply to the individual.
http://www.college.wsj.com/successwork/workplacediversity/20030910-wessel.html
From The Wall Street Journal Online
Two young high-school graduates with similar job histories and demeanors apply in person for jobs as waiters, warehousemen or other low-skilled positions advertised in a Milwaukee newspaper. One man is white and admits to having served 18 months in prison for possession of cocaine with intent to sell. The other is black and hasn't any criminal record.
Which man is more likely to get called back?
It is surprisingly close. In a carefully crafted experiment in which college students posing as job applicants visited 350 employers, the white ex-con was called back 17% of the time and the crime-free black applicant 14%. The disadvantage carried by a young black man applying for a job as a dishwasher or a driver is equivalent to forcing a white man to carry an 18-month prison record on his back.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
short of raising several thousand babies (gotta have a good sample size) of various races in isolated seclusion for eighteen years or so.
The real tragedy is the fact that while it's blatantly obvious that racism took place, it's next to impossible to identify the actual victims. e.g., 20% of black applicants would have gotten a response (but didn't) if they were white. Unfortunately, you can't really say which 20% it was. So that none of the victims can even realize that they were victims. If they cried "racism" in this situation, chances are that they would be swiftly dismissed for "playing the race card."
Psychologically, this could also perpetuate a feeling of learned helplessness. e.g., black people feel that there's nothing they can do to increase their social standing due to factors beyond their control, give up, and therefore widen the gap further. Or as I call it, "Stop getting so uppity, and learn your goddamned place!"
"Strangely", the reverse of this trend seems to be met with far more acceptance, from white people who are absolutely certain that they would be getting college admissions and scholarship if it weren't for affirmative action, even though the college acceptence rate would only go up by a measely .5% if AA was removed (From 23.8 to 24.3).
I discovered an amazing power a year or two ago.
I was arguing with that one preacher, and made some comment about jalepenos.
He decided to declare, "That's racist! I'm part Mexican!"
I rebuffed him with, "Oh yeah? I'm Native American, bitch."
And he acted like I had just slapped his mouth shut.
WHAT WERE WE THINKING
Some notes:
1) Please define what is meant by "get away with." I'm sure that in the olden days they might have been taken out back and lynched for their words, but that's not how we play things today.
3) Please define their "bias." Where is the line between having an opinion, and having a "bias."
3) If black people enslaved white people and ran the country for 200 years, I doubt anyone would care about having the white equivalent of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in churches and on the radio. Hell, we already have guys like Bill O Reilly and Rush Limbaugh right now. And it's not like Al Sharpton has started a fourth tier law school that now accounts for 10% of the white house administration, including the Director of Public Affairs for the United States Department of Justice.
I'm white with no criminal record.
Everything's comin' up roses!
But you're atheist.
The least trusted minority in the United States.
So perhaps things are not as rosy as you would think them to be.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I have the smug confidence that I'm almost certainly not as wrong as most other people in the world to carry me through.
Ya'll are fucked.
Ah, but what denomination?
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Christian Bale.
Depends on the situation.
People tend to treat atheists like wizards. Some fear and hate them, others are in dreading awe of them.
I have never encountered a situation where bringing up that I think god is a fairy tale and monotheism is a load of horseshit was a good thing, outside of the internet and with certain friends.
Certainly not in a job setting, unless you were applying for some secular magazine or whatever.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I think the difficulty comes in with uniformed folks who think that the reason one becomes an athiest is because you want to misbehave without fear of divine retribution.
Which is of course the same kind of thinking that leads folks to assert the American native tribes are all casino parisites and that all black men are after white women.
The insulting bit there is of course that they assume these things because that is what they think they would do in the same situation.
It's also too bad that only white people can be assholes. If you call out a non-caucasian on a behavior that would get a whitey pegged as a Grade-A asshole, and suddenly you're a racist.
I don't live in this world you have described.
What? No.