Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

How can we expose more people to critical thinking?
User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 70376
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3058 times
Been thanked: 1137 times

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:22 pm

Yes, I am suggesting that particular number is very like a minstrel show.
I know nothing of his oeuvre in general.

Ever read Dewey "Pig meat" Markham's autobiography?

African American vaudevillians used to "black up" for certain acts same as white performers. To be all the same shade and to go with the wig and white gloves etc that were all part of that look.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 21948
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Has thanked: 354 times
Been thanked: 373 times

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by gnome » Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:52 am

Abdul Alhazred wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 8:37 am
gnome wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:28 am
Believe it or not, a large number of people debating politics are actually trying to promote their opinion by honest means.
Not if they use the expression "institutional racism".
I am explaining how an honest person can get into this kind of argument.
An honest person who argues with a post modernist is a sucker.

What you call "honest argument" is against their religion.
I use the term, am I being insincere?

By insisting that my argument would be made only by someone with ill intentions, you are poisoning the well instead of responding.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 21948
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Has thanked: 354 times
Been thanked: 373 times

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by gnome » Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:55 am

ed wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:03 am
gnome wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:37 am


The other meaning, and the one most likely to be referred to by the left these days, can be called "institutional" racism. This refers to systems of oppression in our society that have racial impact--it pertains to how power is used, rather than the nature of people's opinions, so it can be deliberate or implicit. Because it is intended to mean an abuse of power, that is why lots of people on the left bristle at the term "reverse racism"--because someone with little power isn't able to oppress a demographic even if they are personally prejudiced.

OK, I understand.

The problem is is that this is a racist stance from the gitgo. That power is somehow magically wielded in such a way as to only impact race or that race is differentially effected is a silly contention and one that is simply a lie invented to advance an agenda.

A far more compelling argument would take into account the economic factors that are, today, far far far more relevant than race, or gender for that matter.

The left's objective is to simply punish white men. They can wrap words around it and redefine things but that, at it's core, is what they want. They want white men to suffer for the sins of their fathers.
Bolding mine. "Only" impacting race is not part of the argument. There are simultaneous impacts affecting many demographics--it is a specific case of a larger phenomenon of institutional power harming marginalized groups--which is the whole point of these groups allying instead of each waging their own battle.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 70376
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3058 times
Been thanked: 1137 times

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Thu Sep 06, 2018 9:00 am

gnome wrote:
Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:52 am
I use the term, am I being insincere?
You are being insanely naive.

It is a term invented for the purpose of confusing the issue and making reasoned discussion impossible.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 21948
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Has thanked: 354 times
Been thanked: 373 times

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by gnome » Thu Sep 06, 2018 11:42 am

When was the term invented, by your reckoning? And I described a perfectly useful definition, so nice try.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 70376
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3058 times
Been thanked: 1137 times

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Thu Sep 06, 2018 2:52 pm

gnome wrote:
Thu Sep 06, 2018 11:42 am
When was the term invented, by your reckoning? And I described a perfectly useful definition, so nice try.
A definition which may be useful if everyone agrees to it.

Good luck with that.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale

User avatar
sparks
Posts: 13910
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!
Has thanked: 1850 times
Been thanked: 581 times

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by sparks » Thu Sep 06, 2018 6:08 pm

Give up gnome. You've already lost the argument.
You can lead them to knowledge, but you can't make them think.

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 21948
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Has thanked: 354 times
Been thanked: 373 times

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by gnome » Sat Sep 08, 2018 6:41 am

Lost at a fallacy-flinging contest, perhaps.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2

User avatar
xouper
Posts: 8621
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: HockeyTown USA
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 119 times

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by xouper » Sat Sep 08, 2018 7:41 am

gnome wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:37 am
. . . There is a semantic problem here but it's explainable.

The term "racism" is being used to refer to two different things. Perhaps the more commonly used meaning is what I'll call "personal" racism. This is what most people think of when the term comes up--as it's done by individual choice. Someone decides to discriminate, someone thinks an ethnic minority is genetically inferior, someone thinks their race should be legally privileged, or that someone else's shouldn't be trusted most of the time. This can absolutely go against or for any race at all.

The other meaning, and the one most likely to be referred to by the left these days, can be called "institutional" racism. This refers to systems of oppression in our society that have racial impact--it pertains to how power is used, rather than the nature of people's opinions, so it can be deliberate or implicit. Because it is intended to mean an abuse of power, that is why lots of people on the left bristle at the term "reverse racism"--because someone with little power isn't able to oppress a demographic even if they are personally prejudiced.

There's lots to argue about in the boundaries and significance of either term. But before you can get anywhere you do need to make sure you're talking about the same thing, and I see this over and over again. The common practice on the left lately is for default meaning to be "institutional" when they mention it. I've often argued that's a mistake, as most people are thinking of the personal meaning when they hear the term, so when they hear that "blacks can't be racist against whites," they think someone's denying their observation of a black person that was prejudiced--it contributes to the idea of the reality-denying leftist. What is really meant is that blacks don't have the political power in our society to successfully oppress whites as a group. Maybe that's so and maybe it isn't, but if people don't realize that's what you mean, you're not getting anywhere with a slogan like that.

Rather than try to carve out a specialized version and make it the default meaning, how hard is it to add the term "institutional" when talking about it? I think it would get more real conversations going and less defensive hostility.
Here's my understanding:

If a social institution results in disparate outcomes of certain demographics (whether explicitly or implicitly, intentional or unintentional, exclusively or only partly) on the basis of race, then that is "institutional racism". But when a social institution results in disparate outcomes (whether explicitly or implicitly, etc) on the basis of other factors and not the result of race, then that is not racism, by definition.

More specifically, the mere fact that a certain demographic group finds itself at a systemic disadvantage does not automatically imply that the social system that put them there (or keeps them there) is racist. It is only racist if race is (or was) part of the motivation for that outcome.

It is not reasonable to stretch the definition of institutional racism to include social institutions where race is not why the outcome is what it is.

Many of the examples of so-called "institutional racism" are not based on race and thus are not racist, even if the outcome affects one race more than another.

Meritocracy is one example of non-race based discrimination, and thus it is not racist, by definition, because it specifically does not use race as a criteria for choosing (neither explicitly or implicitly). And this is true even though sometimes it may seem that some races (or ethnic groups) experience a less favorable outcome.

Example: Are the NFL or NHL to be considered racist because the percentage of black players does not represent the population at large? Of course not. Their use of meritocracy in those leagues is not racist.

And this concept is not just my personal opinion. See for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism wrote:Institutional racism was defined by Sir William Macpherson in the 1999 Lawrence report (UK) as: "The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people."[4][5]
In other words, if race is not part of the motivation or decision-making process (explicitly or implicitly), then it is not racism, whether by an individual or an "institution".

On this basis, I reject the label "institutional racism" being applied merely because the outcome seems to affect certain races or ethnic groups more than others. If that outcome is not because of race (whether in whole or in part), then it is not racist. Power is not relevant.

This is why I say meritocracy is not racist and why I reject the claim by professor Laurie Rubel (of Brooklyn College City University of New York) that meritocracy is racist.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 70376
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3058 times
Been thanked: 1137 times

Re: Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Sat Sep 08, 2018 11:51 am

gnome wrote:
Sat Sep 08, 2018 6:41 am
Lost at a fallacy-flinging contest, perhaps.
You cannot ignore the history of post modernism.

The whole point was always to prevent meaningful discussion.

"Institutional racism"? That's the trope you use to accuse people who want to cut taxes of genocide.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale