Is this offensive/racist? A course of study

How can we expose more people to critical thinking?
User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 67649
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom
Has thanked: 3427 times
Been thanked: 2173 times

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

Post by Doctor X » Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:54 am

Pyrrho wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 1:01 pm
You are free to feel any way you like about anything.


--J. "Be Seeing You!" D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out."--Don
DocX: FTW.--sparks
"Doctor X wins again."--Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry."--His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone."--clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far."--Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig."--Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power."--asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." --gnome

WS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X5!!!!!

User avatar
Captain
Posts: 265
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:47 pm
Title: Captain
Location: On the verandah in the cool breeze.
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 37 times

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

Post by Captain » Mon Sep 03, 2018 2:45 pm

Ol' Number 6 got rabbit in his blood! Never did get his mind right. Some men you just can't reach.
You run one time, you got yourself a set of chains. You run twice you got yourself two sets. You ain't gonna need no third set, 'cause you gonna get your mind right.

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 22190
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Has thanked: 375 times
Been thanked: 402 times

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

Post by gnome » Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:08 pm

xouper wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 10:53 pm
Meritocracy is racist, says professor.

http://ed-osprey.gsu.edu/ojs/index.php/ ... ew/324/222

Not it's not, says the dictionary. In fact it is the opposite of racist.
I don't think that's her claim--not opposing actual meritocracy, but pseudo-meritocracy that ignores an unlevel playing field and declares the outcome to be a result of merit when that is clearly not the only material factor.
"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: 8880
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: HockeyTown USA
Has thanked: 232 times
Been thanked: 141 times

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

Post by xouper » Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:53 pm

gnome wrote:
Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:08 pm
xouper wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 10:53 pm
Meritocracy is racist, says professor.

http://ed-osprey.gsu.edu/ojs/index.php/ ... ew/324/222

Not it's not, says the dictionary. In fact it is the opposite of racist.
I don't think that's her claim--not opposing actual meritocracy, but pseudo-meritocracy that ignores an unlevel playing field and declares the outcome to be a result of merit when that is clearly not the only material factor.
As I understand it, the author does not make the distinction between pseudo and actual.

She considers all meritocracy to be inherently racist, without qualification.

She claims all meritocracy ignores the levelness of the playing field. Yeah, well so what, that's the whole point.

You don't give an NFL starting quarterback job to a lesser skilled person out of compassion for his unfortunate circumstances. If you want the best of the best, then all other factors are irrelevant. That's the exact opposite of racist.

Perhaps her complaint is that meritocracy is sometimes applied in situations where maybe it is not useful or appropriate. But still, that does not make meritocracy itself racist.

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 22190
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Has thanked: 375 times
Been thanked: 402 times

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

Post by gnome » Mon Sep 03, 2018 8:40 pm

xouper wrote:
Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:53 pm
gnome wrote:
Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:08 pm
xouper wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 10:53 pm
Meritocracy is racist, says professor.

http://ed-osprey.gsu.edu/ojs/index.php/ ... ew/324/222

Not it's not, says the dictionary. In fact it is the opposite of racist.
I don't think that's her claim--not opposing actual meritocracy, but pseudo-meritocracy that ignores an unlevel playing field and declares the outcome to be a result of merit when that is clearly not the only material factor.
As I understand it, the author does not make the distinction between pseudo and actual.

She considers all meritocracy to be inherently racist, without qualification.

She claims all meritocracy ignores the levelness of the playing field. Yeah, well so what, that's the whole point.

You don't give an NFL starting quarterback job to a lesser skilled person out of compassion for his unfortunate circumstances. If you want the best of the best, then all other factors are irrelevant. That's the exact opposite of racist.

Perhaps her complaint is that meritocracy is sometimes applied in situations where maybe it is not useful or appropriate. But still, that does not make meritocracy itself racist.
Maybe I'm not properly versed on her entire argument--but you're still speaking to a different point than I am. If one person is not a better player than another, then I agree that shouldn't factor in if the objective is to identify the best player, even if the disparity in ability is due to unfair circumstances. In that case you address the circumstances--you don't stop looking for the better player.

I am, and I suspect the author is, referring to something different--if you have two players in a game, and the rules of the game put one at a handicap, the outcome of the competition does not necessarily identify the best player.
"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: 8880
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: HockeyTown USA
Has thanked: 232 times
Been thanked: 141 times

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

Post by xouper » Mon Sep 03, 2018 8:58 pm

gnome wrote:
Mon Sep 03, 2018 8:40 pm
Maybe I'm not properly versed on her entire argument--but you're still speaking to a different point than I am. If one person is not a better player than another, then I agree that shouldn't factor in if the objective is to identify the best player, even if the disparity in ability is due to unfair circumstances. In that case you address the circumstances--you don't stop looking for the better player.

I am, and I suspect the author is, referring to something different--if you have two players in a game, and the rules of the game put one at a handicap, the outcome of the competition does not necessarily identify the best player.
If that is the point, then the complaint is not about meritocracy itself, but rather that in certain circumstances it may not be applied appropriately. In neither case, though is it racist.

Secondly, your complaint is how merit is defined. That too does not make it racist. Meritocracy simply means finding the best in accordance to how "best" is defined. As long as race is not part of the definition of merit, then it cannot be racist.

One could make the same argument that meritocracy is sexist, for example because there are no female NHL players. Sorry, but that argument does not make meritocracy sexist.

User avatar
xouper
Posts: 8880
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 4:52 am
Location: HockeyTown USA
Has thanked: 232 times
Been thanked: 141 times

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

Post by xouper » Mon Sep 03, 2018 9:04 pm

I'd like to pose a meta-question related to the opening post.

If race is not a thing, as some people claim, then how can anything be racist?

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 71412
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3322 times
Been thanked: 1227 times

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

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Mon Sep 03, 2018 9:18 pm

It's post modernism.

Words may have meaning-like epiphenomena, but not meanings.
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
ed
Posts: 33303
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 451 times
Been thanked: 777 times

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

Post by ed » Mon Sep 03, 2018 10:06 pm

xouper wrote:
Mon Sep 03, 2018 8:58 pm
gnome wrote:
Mon Sep 03, 2018 8:40 pm
Maybe I'm not properly versed on her entire argument--but you're still speaking to a different point than I am. If one person is not a better player than another, then I agree that shouldn't factor in if the objective is to identify the best player, even if the disparity in ability is due to unfair circumstances. In that case you address the circumstances--you don't stop looking for the better player.

I am, and I suspect the author is, referring to something different--if you have two players in a game, and the rules of the game put one at a handicap, the outcome of the competition does not necessarily identify the best player.
If that is the point, then the complaint is not about meritocracy itself, but rather that in certain circumstances it may not be applied appropriately. In neither case, though is it racist.

Secondly, your complaint is how merit is defined. That too does not make it racist. Meritocracy simply means finding the best in accordance to how "best" is defined. As long as race is not part of the definition of merit, then it cannot be racist.

One could make the same argument that meritocracy is sexist, for example because there are no female NHL players. Sorry, but that argument does not make meritocracy sexist.
I think the point has merit though it is masturbatory bullshit.

She is saying that, because of past and present circumstances that relate directly to race, any measure of "merit" is hopelessly influenced by those racially based factors and is therefor racist. Fair enough. But then again, so is virtually any measure of anything. Life, as the saying goes, happens. And ans Jack Kennedy said, "life isnt fair".

The implication of the argument is that, like golf, certain people should be given a handicap. So while your doctor really isn;t that good, he gets points for having come from a background where abuse may or may not have occurred. This should give you comfort has he attempts to tie off that bleeder by feel.

The correct response to this silly woman is "so?". This is one where one has to suck it up.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
Pyrrho
Posts: 25953
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Has thanked: 2722 times
Been thanked: 2785 times

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

Post by Pyrrho » Mon Sep 03, 2018 11:43 pm

The paper runs to 40 pages including references. I haven't time to read it this evening but I do plan to read it so I can opine upon it with some level of competency.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 22190
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Has thanked: 375 times
Been thanked: 402 times

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

Post by gnome » Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:37 am

I get into this debate all the time, even among friends on the left.

Image

Forget the post modernist trolling from Abdul. 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.
"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: 71412
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3322 times
Been thanked: 1227 times

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

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Tue Sep 04, 2018 9:12 am

Very clever, gnome.

Also way above the head of those screaming racism.

As for ed's original question, the voice in that clip is the audio equivalent of blackface, complete with the white gloves.
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
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 71412
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3322 times
Been thanked: 1227 times

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

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Tue Sep 04, 2018 1:49 pm

Now that I read gnome's screed more carefully, I come to the conclusion that he is correct and furthermore substantially in agreement with what I said more concisely and he calls trolling.

Modulo error:
gnome makes the mistake of judging others by himself. That is assuming others are intellectually honest and aren't totalitarian screwballs.

gnome assumes "real conversations" are what is desired by folks who use the term "institutional racism".

It is a deliberate tactic provoke to "defensive hostility" for the purpose of preemptively shutting down "real conversations".

A way of cross talking oldthinkers who think "racism" means a belief that one's race is superior. And it is implied that their opponents are "deep down" racist in this sense anyway.

A way of crushing ones enemies and hearing their lamentations, etc.
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
Boss Paul
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 5:30 am
Title: Boss
Location: Florida Corrections
Been thanked: 14 times

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

Post by Boss Paul » Tue Sep 04, 2018 2:14 pm

gnome wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:37 am
I get into this debate all the time, even among friends on the left.

Image
Misquoting the Captain gets a night in the box!
Get the wax outta your ears!

You call the Captain "Captain!"

And you call the rest of us "Boss," you hear?!

User avatar
gnome
Posts: 22190
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Has thanked: 375 times
Been thanked: 402 times

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

Post by gnome » Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:27 am

double post
Last edited by gnome on Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
"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: 22190
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Has thanked: 375 times
Been thanked: 402 times

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

Post by gnome » Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:28 am

Abdul Alhazred wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 1:49 pm
Now that I read gnome's screed more carefully, I come to the conclusion that he is correct and furthermore substantially in agreement with what I said more concisely and he calls trolling.

Modulo error:
gnome makes the mistake of judging others by himself. That is assuming others are intellectually honest and aren't totalitarian screwballs.

gnome assumes "real conversations" are what is desired by folks who use the term "institutional racism".

It is a deliberate tactic provoke to "defensive hostility" for the purpose of preemptively shutting down "real conversations".

A way of cross talking oldthinkers who think "racism" means a belief that one's race is superior. And it is implied that their opponents are "deep down" racist in this sense anyway.

A way of crushing ones enemies and hearing their lamentations, etc.
Believe it or not, a large number of people debating politics are actually trying to promote their opinion by honest means.
There are indeed people making arguments not in good faith. Isn't getting into these finer points how such fakery is recognized, by contrast?

I am explaining how an honest person can get into this kind of argument.
"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
Captain
Posts: 265
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:47 pm
Title: Captain
Location: On the verandah in the cool breeze.
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 37 times

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

Post by Captain » Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:30 am

Boss Paul wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 2:14 pm
gnome wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:37 am
I get into this debate all the time, even among friends on the left.

Image
Misquoting the Captain gets a night in the box!
You run one time, you got yourself a set of chains. You run twice you got yourself two sets. You ain't gonna need no third set, 'cause you gonna get your mind right.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 71412
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3322 times
Been thanked: 1227 times

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

Post by Abdul Alhazred » 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.
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
ed
Posts: 33303
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 451 times
Been thanked: 777 times

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

Post by ed » 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.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
ed
Posts: 33303
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 451 times
Been thanked: 777 times

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

Post by ed » Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:16 am

Abdul Alhazred wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 9:12 am


As for ed's original question, the voice in that clip is the audio equivalent of blackface, complete with the white gloves.
Hardly.

re Michael Pfleger:
They are attuned to the words of a priest wearing a long, green, African-style vestment, who sounds for all the world like a black Baptist minister.
https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/t ... oid=874774

Are you suggesting he is a minstrel show? Check your privilege white boy. You are simply hung up on an authentic regional american dialect. I question your love of freedom. You need to travel this great land of ours, you need to see what Shemp has seen as he wandered to and fro, selling siding and gargling the occasional ball. You are simply too grounded in your cloistered elite white existence to understand the complexity of our society. You have no appreciation for diversity. There, I said it. If a person does not sound like you, or have a form of pronunciation that you are familiar with (and approve of) it is to be feared and judged. That, my tubby, gay friend, is the core of racism. I, naturally, have transcended that and I am to be listened to.
:freedom:
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!