< 1 2 3 4 5 >  Last ›
 
   
 

Racism Spectrum

 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21915
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
05 February 2019 11:49
 
Jb8989 - 05 February 2019 09:09 AM
LadyJane - 05 February 2019 05:35 AM

The tribalism factor is hardwired but so is co-operation.  When we were bands of nomads roaming around we were suspicious of the tribe with different apparel.  And now we are here.  Still tribal with different plumage.

It’s not exclusively American.  And it’s not a zero sum game.

It’s not as though during the French Revolution everyone would storm the castle and rise to the level of royals.  It doesn’t work that way.  You pilfer the jewels and then allocate them among the peasants to even things out.

Yeah but there was never enough. It was always the people who knew the most about and sat the closest to the money that had the most of it. Modern millionaires are just the Romans who worked on top of the coin. I guess the internet made it so that you no longer have to baby sit your cash to have it. That’s a little new.

Edit add: The thought occurred to me that maybe comprehensive capatalism bridged the gap between passive outsider suspicion and active outsider discrimination. IMO it’s fine to be leery initially if it’s part of your process of getting to know another. It’s just not cool to be conclusiory about one’s early leeriness.

The only way we are going to counteract our innate tribalism is when individuals, moved by their own reason and conscience, decide to counteract those impulses with objective action, and become attuned to their own biases and privileges.  It can’t be legislated away or swept away by violence.  It pretty much has to be from the ground up.  We can talk about it, but until the individual lets the idea sink into his/her head and decides to do something about it, nothing will happen.  We’ve had civil rights legislation, constitutional amendments, Supreme Court rulings, a civil war, and years of struggle.  The tribalism still exists.

 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
05 February 2019 13:01
 
EN - 05 February 2019 11:49 AM
Jb8989 - 05 February 2019 09:09 AM
LadyJane - 05 February 2019 05:35 AM

The tribalism factor is hardwired but so is co-operation.  When we were bands of nomads roaming around we were suspicious of the tribe with different apparel.  And now we are here.  Still tribal with different plumage.

It’s not exclusively American.  And it’s not a zero sum game.

It’s not as though during the French Revolution everyone would storm the castle and rise to the level of royals.  It doesn’t work that way.  You pilfer the jewels and then allocate them among the peasants to even things out.

Yeah but there was never enough. It was always the people who knew the most about and sat the closest to the money that had the most of it. Modern millionaires are just the Romans who worked on top of the coin. I guess the internet made it so that you no longer have to baby sit your cash to have it. That’s a little new.

Edit add: The thought occurred to me that maybe comprehensive capatalism bridged the gap between passive outsider suspicion and active outsider discrimination. IMO it’s fine to be leery initially if it’s part of your process of getting to know another. It’s just not cool to be conclusiory about one’s early leeriness.

The only way we are going to counteract our innate tribalism is when individuals, moved by their own reason and conscience, decide to counteract those impulses with objective action, and become attuned to their own biases and privileges.  It can’t be legislated away or swept away by violence.  It pretty much has to be from the ground up.  We can talk about it, but until the individual lets the idea sink into his/her head and decides to do something about it, nothing will happen.  We’ve had civil rights legislation, constitutional amendments, Supreme Court rulings, a civil war, and years of struggle.  The tribalism still exists.

I don’t know, I used to be a stronger advocate for wise social legislation, but I’ve grown skeptical. Nevertheless, I think the things you listed made things better. I think they contribute to paradigm shifts and good and bad collective consciences. If media amplifies biases and doesn’t improve, that might suck.

 
 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  7135
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
05 February 2019 17:02
 
icehorse - 04 February 2019 09:58 AM

It’s a question of framing, and your framing seems divisive. We don’t need more divisiveness.

I wonder if people feeling the downsides of white privilege feel it is divisive.  Those for whom life IS harder…


Or listening-to/reading conversations speculating that they may be genetically less intelligent…

 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
06 February 2019 16:29
 
Jb8989 - 03 February 2019 08:16 AM

We all know that it’s a hot topic with very little nuanced discussion. I’m wondering if this makes sense, or where it can improve. Please add, subtract or alter the framing as you think accurate.

I think that the spectrum would begin with utter ignorance and look like this:

Ignorance -> subconscious ambivalence about racism -> conscious unawareness of one’s own unvetted attitudes that accidentally contribute to racism -> aware of but uncaring about one’s own racist tendencies -> overt racism.

The spectrum you proposed seems to rationalize putting the diverse targets of the “racism” slur under one umbrella. There is a spectrum between any two otherwise-unrelated phenomena, but that does not make it useful. If you want to have a clear picture of the psychological phenomena, I suggest just abandoning the word altogether. Racial ignorance is racial ignorance, and racial hatred is racial hatred.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3468
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
06 February 2019 17:20
 
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 04:29 PM
Jb8989 - 03 February 2019 08:16 AM

We all know that it’s a hot topic with very little nuanced discussion. I’m wondering if this makes sense, or where it can improve. Please add, subtract or alter the framing as you think accurate.

I think that the spectrum would begin with utter ignorance and look like this:

Ignorance -> subconscious ambivalence about racism -> conscious unawareness of one’s own unvetted attitudes that accidentally contribute to racism -> aware of but uncaring about one’s own racist tendencies -> overt racism.

The spectrum you proposed seems to rationalize putting the diverse targets of the “racism” slur under one umbrella. There is a spectrum between any two otherwise-unrelated phenomena, but that does not make it useful. If you want to have a clear picture of the psychological phenomena, I suggest just abandoning the word altogether. Racial ignorance is racial ignorance, and racial hatred is racial hatred.

And a racist is a racist.  (See my post #1 on this thread.)

The word should not be over- or misused, but when it does apply, it cannot be softened just because those it applies to don’t like it.

 

 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
06 February 2019 17:27
 
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 05:20 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 04:29 PM
Jb8989 - 03 February 2019 08:16 AM

We all know that it’s a hot topic with very little nuanced discussion. I’m wondering if this makes sense, or where it can improve. Please add, subtract or alter the framing as you think accurate.

I think that the spectrum would begin with utter ignorance and look like this:

Ignorance -> subconscious ambivalence about racism -> conscious unawareness of one’s own unvetted attitudes that accidentally contribute to racism -> aware of but uncaring about one’s own racist tendencies -> overt racism.

The spectrum you proposed seems to rationalize putting the diverse targets of the “racism” slur under one umbrella. There is a spectrum between any two otherwise-unrelated phenomena, but that does not make it useful. If you want to have a clear picture of the psychological phenomena, I suggest just abandoning the word altogether. Racial ignorance is racial ignorance, and racial hatred is racial hatred.

And a racist is a racist.  (See my post #1 on this thread.)

The word should not be over- or misused, but when it does apply, it cannot be softened just because those it applies to don’t like it.

It is a harsh slur, but that isn’t the problem I am talking about. The problem is that it is one word that denotes an unrelated diversity of psychological phenomena. It misleads more than it informs, and it has no use other than as a slur.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3468
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
06 February 2019 17:45
 
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 05:27 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 05:20 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 04:29 PM
Jb8989 - 03 February 2019 08:16 AM

We all know that it’s a hot topic with very little nuanced discussion. I’m wondering if this makes sense, or where it can improve. Please add, subtract or alter the framing as you think accurate.

I think that the spectrum would begin with utter ignorance and look like this:

Ignorance -> subconscious ambivalence about racism -> conscious unawareness of one’s own unvetted attitudes that accidentally contribute to racism -> aware of but uncaring about one’s own racist tendencies -> overt racism.

The spectrum you proposed seems to rationalize putting the diverse targets of the “racism” slur under one umbrella. There is a spectrum between any two otherwise-unrelated phenomena, but that does not make it useful. If you want to have a clear picture of the psychological phenomena, I suggest just abandoning the word altogether. Racial ignorance is racial ignorance, and racial hatred is racial hatred.

And a racist is a racist.  (See my post #1 on this thread.)

The word should not be over- or misused, but when it does apply, it cannot be softened just because those it applies to don’t like it.

It is a harsh slur, but that isn’t the problem I am talking about. The problem is that it is one word that denotes an unrelated diversity of psychological phenomena. It misleads more than it informs, and it has no use other than as a slur.

Overt racism is harsh and those who practise it should be taken to task.

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
06 February 2019 17:48
 
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 04:29 PM
Jb8989 - 03 February 2019 08:16 AM

We all know that it’s a hot topic with very little nuanced discussion. I’m wondering if this makes sense, or where it can improve. Please add, subtract or alter the framing as you think accurate.

I think that the spectrum would begin with utter ignorance and look like this:

Ignorance -> subconscious ambivalence about racism -> conscious unawareness of one’s own unvetted attitudes that accidentally contribute to racism -> aware of but uncaring about one’s own racist tendencies -> overt racism.

The spectrum you proposed seems to rationalize putting the diverse targets of the “racism” slur under one umbrella. There is a spectrum between any two otherwise-unrelated phenomena, but that does not make it useful. If you want to have a clear picture of the psychological phenomena, I suggest just abandoning the word altogether. Racial ignorance is racial ignorance, and racial hatred is racial hatred.

Not just slurs, but any act that could reasonably considered racist is accompanied by an actor with a mental state. There’s a lot of grey area between ignorance and therefore unknowingly doing something seemingly racist, and hating someone for racist reasons and intended to offend or cause harm.

 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
06 February 2019 17:51
 
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 05:45 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 05:27 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 05:20 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 04:29 PM
Jb8989 - 03 February 2019 08:16 AM

We all know that it’s a hot topic with very little nuanced discussion. I’m wondering if this makes sense, or where it can improve. Please add, subtract or alter the framing as you think accurate.

I think that the spectrum would begin with utter ignorance and look like this:

Ignorance -> subconscious ambivalence about racism -> conscious unawareness of one’s own unvetted attitudes that accidentally contribute to racism -> aware of but uncaring about one’s own racist tendencies -> overt racism.

The spectrum you proposed seems to rationalize putting the diverse targets of the “racism” slur under one umbrella. There is a spectrum between any two otherwise-unrelated phenomena, but that does not make it useful. If you want to have a clear picture of the psychological phenomena, I suggest just abandoning the word altogether. Racial ignorance is racial ignorance, and racial hatred is racial hatred.

And a racist is a racist.  (See my post #1 on this thread.)

The word should not be over- or misused, but when it does apply, it cannot be softened just because those it applies to don’t like it.

It is a harsh slur, but that isn’t the problem I am talking about. The problem is that it is one word that denotes an unrelated diversity of psychological phenomena. It misleads more than it informs, and it has no use other than as a slur.

Overt racism is harsh and those who practise it should be taken to task.

Yes, and the word would not be so bad if it denoted only what is overt. But it also denotes what is merely unintended or what has motivations unrelated to race. “Ignorance” is put on that racism spectrum—why exactly? Is there any psychological relationship between overt racial hatred and racial ignorance? No, though such a relationship exists within the belief system of critical race theory (a racial conspiracy theory in which the racism of whites is responsible for absolutely all racial inequalities of every sort).

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3468
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
06 February 2019 18:05
 
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 05:51 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 05:45 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 05:27 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 05:20 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 04:29 PM
Jb8989 - 03 February 2019 08:16 AM

We all know that it’s a hot topic with very little nuanced discussion. I’m wondering if this makes sense, or where it can improve. Please add, subtract or alter the framing as you think accurate.

I think that the spectrum would begin with utter ignorance and look like this:

Ignorance -> subconscious ambivalence about racism -> conscious unawareness of one’s own unvetted attitudes that accidentally contribute to racism -> aware of but uncaring about one’s own racist tendencies -> overt racism.

The spectrum you proposed seems to rationalize putting the diverse targets of the “racism” slur under one umbrella. There is a spectrum between any two otherwise-unrelated phenomena, but that does not make it useful. If you want to have a clear picture of the psychological phenomena, I suggest just abandoning the word altogether. Racial ignorance is racial ignorance, and racial hatred is racial hatred.

And a racist is a racist.  (See my post #1 on this thread.)

The word should not be over- or misused, but when it does apply, it cannot be softened just because those it applies to don’t like it.

It is a harsh slur, but that isn’t the problem I am talking about. The problem is that it is one word that denotes an unrelated diversity of psychological phenomena. It misleads more than it informs, and it has no use other than as a slur.

Overt racism is harsh and those who practise it should be taken to task.

Yes, and the word would not be so bad if it denoted only what is overt. But it also denotes what is merely unintended or what has motivations unrelated to race. “Ignorance” is put on that racism spectrum—why exactly? Is there any psychological relationship between overt racial hatred and racial ignorance? No, though such a relationship exists within the belief system of critical race theory (a racial conspiracy theory in which the racism of whites is responsible for absolutely all racial inequalities of every sort).

As I said previously, the word ‘racist’ should not be misused.  As Jb says, people may unknowingly do or say something seemingly racist due to insensitivity or ignorance.  However, those who go to great lengths to distort and misinterpret facts to convince themselves that they are of a superior race are not of this category.

 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
06 February 2019 18:17
 
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 06:05 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 05:51 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 05:45 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 05:27 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 05:20 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 04:29 PM
Jb8989 - 03 February 2019 08:16 AM

We all know that it’s a hot topic with very little nuanced discussion. I’m wondering if this makes sense, or where it can improve. Please add, subtract or alter the framing as you think accurate.

I think that the spectrum would begin with utter ignorance and look like this:

Ignorance -> subconscious ambivalence about racism -> conscious unawareness of one’s own unvetted attitudes that accidentally contribute to racism -> aware of but uncaring about one’s own racist tendencies -> overt racism.

The spectrum you proposed seems to rationalize putting the diverse targets of the “racism” slur under one umbrella. There is a spectrum between any two otherwise-unrelated phenomena, but that does not make it useful. If you want to have a clear picture of the psychological phenomena, I suggest just abandoning the word altogether. Racial ignorance is racial ignorance, and racial hatred is racial hatred.

And a racist is a racist.  (See my post #1 on this thread.)

The word should not be over- or misused, but when it does apply, it cannot be softened just because those it applies to don’t like it.

It is a harsh slur, but that isn’t the problem I am talking about. The problem is that it is one word that denotes an unrelated diversity of psychological phenomena. It misleads more than it informs, and it has no use other than as a slur.

Overt racism is harsh and those who practise it should be taken to task.

Yes, and the word would not be so bad if it denoted only what is overt. But it also denotes what is merely unintended or what has motivations unrelated to race. “Ignorance” is put on that racism spectrum—why exactly? Is there any psychological relationship between overt racial hatred and racial ignorance? No, though such a relationship exists within the belief system of critical race theory (a racial conspiracy theory in which the racism of whites is responsible for absolutely all racial inequalities of every sort).

As I said previously, the word ‘racist’ should not be misused.  As Jb says, people may unknowingly do or say something seemingly racist due to insensitivity or ignorance.  However, those who go to great lengths to distort and misinterpret facts to convince themselves that they are of a superior race are not of this category.

If the word were used only to denote the way I think, then the word would not be much of a problem. I don’t try to defend myself against the slur. But, the word, as it is commonly used, denotes a broad diversity of psychological phenomena related only by a popular absurd racial conspiracy theory. When it is used to denote mere insensitivity or ignorance, then that is not an incorrect usage of the word. That is not abusing the word. Such usage is in line with the way the word is used broadly. The word itself, and the underlying racially conspiratorial thinking, is the problem.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3468
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
06 February 2019 18:46
 
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 06:17 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 06:05 PM

As I said previously, the word ‘racist’ should not be misused.  As Jb says, people may unknowingly do or say something seemingly racist due to insensitivity or ignorance.  However, those who go to great lengths to distort and misinterpret facts to convince themselves that they are of a superior race are not of this category.

If the word were used only to denote the way I think, then the word would not be much of a problem. I don’t try to defend myself against the slur. But, the word, as it is commonly used, denotes a broad diversity of psychological phenomena related only by a popular absurd racial conspiracy theory. When it is used to denote mere insensitivity or ignorance, then that is not an incorrect usage of the word. That is not abusing the word. Such usage is in line with the way the word is used broadly. The word itself, and the underlying racially conspiratorial thinking, is the problem.

Yes, it’s all a conspiracy.  Everyone is out to slur and malign those poor dear boys who no longer have their whiteness to fall back on.  Well, they’re just going to have to learn to adjust to a topsy-turvy world.

[ Edited: 06 February 2019 18:49 by Jan_CAN]
 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
06 February 2019 18:50
 
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 06:17 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 06:05 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 05:51 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 05:45 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 05:27 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 05:20 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 04:29 PM
Jb8989 - 03 February 2019 08:16 AM

We all know that it’s a hot topic with very little nuanced discussion. I’m wondering if this makes sense, or where it can improve. Please add, subtract or alter the framing as you think accurate.

I think that the spectrum would begin with utter ignorance and look like this:

Ignorance -> subconscious ambivalence about racism -> conscious unawareness of one’s own unvetted attitudes that accidentally contribute to racism -> aware of but uncaring about one’s own racist tendencies -> overt racism.

The spectrum you proposed seems to rationalize putting the diverse targets of the “racism” slur under one umbrella. There is a spectrum between any two otherwise-unrelated phenomena, but that does not make it useful. If you want to have a clear picture of the psychological phenomena, I suggest just abandoning the word altogether. Racial ignorance is racial ignorance, and racial hatred is racial hatred.

And a racist is a racist.  (See my post #1 on this thread.)

The word should not be over- or misused, but when it does apply, it cannot be softened just because those it applies to don’t like it.

It is a harsh slur, but that isn’t the problem I am talking about. The problem is that it is one word that denotes an unrelated diversity of psychological phenomena. It misleads more than it informs, and it has no use other than as a slur.

Overt racism is harsh and those who practise it should be taken to task.

Yes, and the word would not be so bad if it denoted only what is overt. But it also denotes what is merely unintended or what has motivations unrelated to race. “Ignorance” is put on that racism spectrum—why exactly? Is there any psychological relationship between overt racial hatred and racial ignorance? No, though such a relationship exists within the belief system of critical race theory (a racial conspiracy theory in which the racism of whites is responsible for absolutely all racial inequalities of every sort).

As I said previously, the word ‘racist’ should not be misused.  As Jb says, people may unknowingly do or say something seemingly racist due to insensitivity or ignorance.  However, those who go to great lengths to distort and misinterpret facts to convince themselves that they are of a superior race are not of this category.

If the word were used only to denote the way I think, then the word would not be much of a problem. I don’t try to defend myself against the slur. But, the word, as it is commonly used, denotes a broad diversity of psychological phenomena related only by a popular absurd racial conspiracy theory. When it is used to denote mere insensitivity or ignorance, then that is not an incorrect usage of the word. That is not abusing the word. Such usage is in line with the way the word is used broadly. The word itself, and the underlying racially conspiratorial thinking, is the problem.

It sounds like you don’t think that someone can commit and act that can reasonably be considered racist while also not knowing what they did is racist?

 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
06 February 2019 19:01
 
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 06:46 PM
Abel Dean - 06 February 2019 06:17 PM
Jan_CAN - 06 February 2019 06:05 PM

As I said previously, the word ‘racist’ should not be misused.  As Jb says, people may unknowingly do or say something seemingly racist due to insensitivity or ignorance.  However, those who go to great lengths to distort and misinterpret facts to convince themselves that they are of a superior race are not of this category.

If the word were used only to denote the way I think, then the word would not be much of a problem. I don’t try to defend myself against the slur. But, the word, as it is commonly used, denotes a broad diversity of psychological phenomena related only by a popular absurd racial conspiracy theory. When it is used to denote mere insensitivity or ignorance, then that is not an incorrect usage of the word. That is not abusing the word. Such usage is in line with the way the word is used broadly. The word itself, and the underlying racially conspiratorial thinking, is the problem.

Yes, it’s all a conspiracy.  Everyone is out to slur and malign those poor dear boys who no longer have their whiteness to fall back on.  Well, they’re just going to have to adjust to a topsy-turvy world.

Here is the way the conspiracy theory works: it is the memeplex that all white people, not just me and my racist buddies but you, too, are secretly or unconsciously upholding a racially oppressive system that is causing all disadvantaged minorities to be less likely to graduate school (because of implicitly/secretly racist teachers), more likely to be disciplined at school (because of implicitly/secretly racist teachers), more likely to have health problems (because of implicitly/secretly racist doctors), less likely to have jobs (because of implicitly/secretly racist employers), less likely to get loans (because of implicitly/secretly racist bankers), more likely to go to jail (because of implicitly/secretly racist accusers, police, and jurors), less likely to get good housing (because of implicitly/secretly racist landlords and landladies), and so on. The thinking is that the racism exists in every white mind, because it is a core part of every social system. So, when a white person pays a compliment by saying, “You’re a credit to your race,” it accidentally reveals the whole racist mental structure of that white person, because it implicitly means that the disadvantaged race needs credit, but, according to the theory, white people cheated, stole and oppressed other races out of their credit, and therefore it is fair to call such a compliment “racist.” Using the word, “racist,” that way is not abusing the word, because that is how the word is used everywhere.

 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21915
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
06 February 2019 19:05
 

Even if there is some difference in intelligence (whatever that is) between the races (whatever those are), I’m not sure it makes any difference.  An individual of any race can be more intelligent than most people in any other race, and we are constitutionally committed to equal rights, equal opportunity, etc. Maybe dark haired people are smarter on the whole than light haired people, or vice versa.  So what?  We still treat people equally.

 
 < 1 2 3 4 5 >  Last ›