Opinion of white people having fun in North Korea
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:56:28 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Off-topic Board (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, The Mikado, YE)
  Opinion of white people having fun in North Korea
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Poll
Question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgCPlzQ2Q1s
#1
FP
 
#2
HP
 
#3
All Juche All The Time
 
#4
He who feds you controls you
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 33

Author Topic: Opinion of white people having fun in North Korea  (Read 1662 times)
White Trash
Southern Gothic
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,910


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: September 27, 2016, 07:51:39 PM »

You really can't call someone edgy if you're going to argue that racism against white people is a thing.

I didn't say it's a "thing," my edgy, adolescent comrade, I implied that it is indeed possible for one individual to be racist against Whites.

I'd LOVE to hear why you think it is impossible, using the definition of the term.  I'm fairly confident it will end with you simply saying you don't CARE if someone expresses racism toward Whites, which is entirely different, if equally deplorable. 
I had a dickier comment typed up in response to this, but it ended up being a single sentence spanning six lines, which was disgusting, so I'm going to actually try responding to something seriously. Let's see how this goes.

First of all, what do you mean by "Using the definition of the term?" If you're just talking about the literal, one-line, dictionary definition of the term, (which is how I interpreted your post) that's not particularly helpful, as dictionaries aren't this authority on words that people seem to act like they are. They only reflect how the words are typically used by the general public, and can't reflect any political, sociological, or any other sort of debates of the term. For instance, according to the dictionary, marriage was only between a man and a woman until it wasn't, and before that, it was only for reproduction, until it wasn't. As a general rule of thumb, keep the dictionary out of political discussions.

Beyond that, not everyone agrees on what racism actually is, but I pretty much accept the sociological theory that racism is a reflection of the subordination of a certain group of people based on their skin color (or whatever other arbitrary feature is accepted as making them a different "race" in that culture. That is to say, if you aren't in a subordinate position due to your race, the idea of racism against you doesn't really make sense. While individual prejudice against whites can certainly exist, this is not happening within the broader context of whites existing in a disadvantaged position due to their race. Racism comes not from individuals, but is instead a reflection of society as a whole. For instance, if I declared that I hated everyone with red hair and decided that I'm going to go out of my way to discriminate against them, that's not racism, because people with red hair are not an inherently disadvantaged group, and me alone being a dick doesn't change that. Similarly, prejudice against whites is not racism because whites are not subjugated because of their race, and this individual prejudice doesn't change this.

All you've done is prove Tom's point that you'd try to argue semantics and definitions.
Logged
Green Line
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,577
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: September 27, 2016, 08:37:16 PM »

You really can't call someone edgy if you're going to argue that racism against white people is a thing.

I didn't say it's a "thing," my edgy, adolescent comrade, I implied that it is indeed possible for one individual to be racist against Whites.

I'd LOVE to hear why you think it is impossible, using the definition of the term.  I'm fairly confident it will end with you simply saying you don't CARE if someone expresses racism toward Whites, which is entirely different, if equally deplorable. 
I had a dickier comment typed up in response to this, but it ended up being a single sentence spanning six lines, which was disgusting, so I'm going to actually try responding to something seriously. Let's see how this goes.

First of all, what do you mean by "Using the definition of the term?" If you're just talking about the literal, one-line, dictionary definition of the term, (which is how I interpreted your post) that's not particularly helpful, as dictionaries aren't this authority on words that people seem to act like they are. They only reflect how the words are typically used by the general public, and can't reflect any political, sociological, or any other sort of debates of the term. For instance, according to the dictionary, marriage was only between a man and a woman until it wasn't, and before that, it was only for reproduction, until it wasn't. As a general rule of thumb, keep the dictionary out of political discussions.

Beyond that, not everyone agrees on what racism actually is, but I pretty much accept the sociological theory that racism is a reflection of the subordination of a certain group of people based on their skin color (or whatever other arbitrary feature is accepted as making them a different "race" in that culture. That is to say, if you aren't in a subordinate position due to your race, the idea of racism against you doesn't really make sense. While individual prejudice against whites can certainly exist, this is not happening within the broader context of whites existing in a disadvantaged position due to their race. Racism comes not from individuals, but is instead a reflection of society as a whole. For instance, if I declared that I hated everyone with red hair and decided that I'm going to go out of my way to discriminate against them, that's not racism, because people with red hair are not an inherently disadvantaged group, and me alone being a dick doesn't change that. Similarly, prejudice against whites is not racism because whites are not subjugated because of their race, and this individual prejudice doesn't change this.

That's just your made up definition.
Logged
SWE
SomebodyWhoExists
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,234
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: September 27, 2016, 08:55:54 PM »

You really can't call someone edgy if you're going to argue that racism against white people is a thing.

I didn't say it's a "thing," my edgy, adolescent comrade, I implied that it is indeed possible for one individual to be racist against Whites.

I'd LOVE to hear why you think it is impossible, using the definition of the term.  I'm fairly confident it will end with you simply saying you don't CARE if someone expresses racism toward Whites, which is entirely different, if equally deplorable. 
I had a dickier comment typed up in response to this, but it ended up being a single sentence spanning six lines, which was disgusting, so I'm going to actually try responding to something seriously. Let's see how this goes.

First of all, what do you mean by "Using the definition of the term?" If you're just talking about the literal, one-line, dictionary definition of the term, (which is how I interpreted your post) that's not particularly helpful, as dictionaries aren't this authority on words that people seem to act like they are. They only reflect how the words are typically used by the general public, and can't reflect any political, sociological, or any other sort of debates of the term. For instance, according to the dictionary, marriage was only between a man and a woman until it wasn't, and before that, it was only for reproduction, until it wasn't. As a general rule of thumb, keep the dictionary out of political discussions.

Beyond that, not everyone agrees on what racism actually is, but I pretty much accept the sociological theory that racism is a reflection of the subordination of a certain group of people based on their skin color (or whatever other arbitrary feature is accepted as making them a different "race" in that culture. That is to say, if you aren't in a subordinate position due to your race, the idea of racism against you doesn't really make sense. While individual prejudice against whites can certainly exist, this is not happening within the broader context of whites existing in a disadvantaged position due to their race. Racism comes not from individuals, but is instead a reflection of society as a whole. For instance, if I declared that I hated everyone with red hair and decided that I'm going to go out of my way to discriminate against them, that's not racism, because people with red hair are not an inherently disadvantaged group, and me alone being a dick doesn't change that. Similarly, prejudice against whites is not racism because whites are not subjugated because of their race, and this individual prejudice doesn't change this.

All you've done is prove Tom's point that you'd try to argue semantics and definitions.
When did Tom make that point? He literally asked me to argue the definition.


Oh ok
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: September 29, 2016, 01:50:29 PM »

     It is a definition, but one with obvious problems. Among these problems is that it deprives us of a term to properly describe racial bigotry against white people. Another problem is that most people do not use this definition of racism, so using it just muddies the waters.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: September 29, 2016, 03:21:38 PM »

I love the way this thread evolved.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,420
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: September 29, 2016, 03:50:53 PM »

ITT: white people thinking that they can be victims of racism too

The whole (modern) concept of "race" is historically inseparable from the ideology of white supremacy. And furthermore, the notion that racism exists against white people is self-refuting because the concept of "whiteness" is likewise historically inseparable from the ideology of white supremacy. And for there to be supremacy, there has to be the opposite of supremacy: subjugation, marginalization, oppression.

Those who are socially (because race is socially mediated) considered "white" and accept that designation but simultaneously deny that white supremacy and racism in American society are inseparable are being intellectually dishonest. And whites who claim to be victims of racism themselves are not only being dishonest, they are also insulting those who experience actual racism and oppression. But I'm sure this post will be either ignored or attacked by those who would rather not have their precious feelings hurt by someone pointing out social and historical reality.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,420
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: September 29, 2016, 03:54:55 PM »


Edgy, as always!

LLR, I don't think you'd actually believe that, but how would the same joke with a different race be received?  Rightfully horribly, as should this.

     It is true; it says something about public perception of race when whites are the only group of people that it is socially acceptable to make fun of based on their skin color.

Let me know when making fun of white people is paired with centuries of violence, intimidation, disenfranchisement, and publicly and socially sanctioned discrimination that has destroyed and continues to destroy (or at the very least, adversely affect) the lives of an entire social group.

This concern trolling about "reverse racism" is utterly tiresome.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: September 29, 2016, 09:36:37 PM »


Edgy, as always!

LLR, I don't think you'd actually believe that, but how would the same joke with a different race be received?  Rightfully horribly, as should this.

     It is true; it says something about public perception of race when whites are the only group of people that it is socially acceptable to make fun of based on their skin color.

Let me know when making fun of white people is paired with centuries of violence, intimidation, disenfranchisement, and publicly and socially sanctioned discrimination that has destroyed and continues to destroy (or at the very least, adversely affect) the lives of an entire social group.

This concern trolling about "reverse racism" is utterly tiresome.

     Some terrible stuff happened in the past, which nobody really denies. The stuff that happens today (which is admittedly more than nothing) isn't nearly as bad as the stuff that happened in the past, which is evident from the fact that only white people are socially acceptable targets of racial humor. Getting on a high horse about "centuries of violence" is irrelevant; the past is the past and the present is the present. Slavery was horrible, but there is no purpose in getting worked up over it now like guilty liberals will tend to do.

     I don't really care about "reverse racism" over something as pithy as jokes. If someone is demanding I pay reparations to black people then that's something to get exercised over. I am mostly amazed that in an allegedly "white-supremacist" society it is okay to diss white people but not black people. That should be a hint that the United States in 2016 is not actually white-supremacist.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: September 30, 2016, 10:43:23 AM »

     Having slept on this, the fundamental issue is that there is a sociological definition of racism and a lay definition of racism. It shouldn't be necessary to completely obviate the lay definition, but this is politics so of course this sort of stuff is going to happen. It's much like libertarians arguing over who's a real libertarian.

     I see the value of the sociological definition. American racism was propagated early on as a means of driving a wedge between Irish and black underclasses so as to prevent them from uniting as a political entity. It identifies certain sociological institutions that exist for certain purposes, and sociologists can of course define terms as they see fit.

     Speaking as an individualist, I also see real value in the lay definition. One of the core tenets of individualism is that we should be judged based on who we are as people and not based on features beyond our control. Judging me ill because of what I say is your prerogative. Judging me ill because of my skin color denies me the benefit of being judged as a person.

    In that sense, hatred of people of any color denies them that benefit. The racial motivations of the crimes of Micah Johnson and Dylann Roof are both deserving of disapprobation. People who use the lay definition of racism are not trying to claim that there is systemic oppression of whites in the United States. These are people who wish to have a unified term to describe and castigate the wretchedness of a person targeting another person for discrimination or violence on account of the color of their skin. Given the strongly negative connotation that "racism" holds, it is only too useful in this capacity.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,999
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: September 30, 2016, 11:31:05 AM »

ITT: white people thinking that they can be victims of racism too

The whole (modern) concept of "race" is historically inseparable from the ideology of white supremacy. And furthermore, the notion that racism exists against white people is self-refuting because the concept of "whiteness" is likewise historically inseparable from the ideology of white supremacy. And for there to be supremacy, there has to be the opposite of supremacy: subjugation, marginalization, oppression.

Those who are socially (because race is socially mediated) considered "white" and accept that designation but simultaneously deny that white supremacy and racism in American society are inseparable are being intellectually dishonest. And whites who claim to be victims of racism themselves are not only being dishonest, they are also insulting those who experience actual racism and oppression. But I'm sure this post will be either ignored or attacked by those who would rather not have their precious feelings hurt by someone pointing out social and historical reality.

I'm not claiming to be a victim of racism.  I'm claiming that it's rude and classless and NOT something that should be blindly condoned to openly display contempt for all White people.  And it is.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,665
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: September 30, 2016, 12:09:30 PM »

ITT: white people thinking that they can be victims of racism too

The whole (modern) concept of "race" is historically inseparable from the ideology of white supremacy. And furthermore, the notion that racism exists against white people is self-refuting because the concept of "whiteness" is likewise historically inseparable from the ideology of white supremacy. And for there to be supremacy, there has to be the opposite of supremacy: subjugation, marginalization, oppression.

Those who are socially (because race is socially mediated) considered "white" and accept that designation but simultaneously deny that white supremacy and racism in American society are inseparable are being intellectually dishonest. And whites who claim to be victims of racism themselves are not only being dishonest, they are also insulting those who experience actual racism and oppression. But I'm sure this post will be either ignored or attacked by those who would rather not have their precious feelings hurt by someone pointing out social and historical reality.

You're not pointing out reality. You are conflating reality to fit a simplistic narrative which suffers from a severe genetic fallacy.

"Whiteness" is inseparable from white supremacy?  You are telling me people who don't believe in white supremacy don't believe in white people?
Logged
PresidentSamTilden
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 507


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 01, 2016, 07:30:47 PM »

First of all, definitely HP. Don't support that regime, they're straight up horrible.

But I gotta say, I do think that white people can be victims of racism. I don't disagree with anyone saying that white people have privilege or advantages in society. But that doesn't make it acceptable to hate or attack someone based on their race, whether it's white, Asian, un-contacted green people, whatever.

Martin Luther King said he had a dream that white and blacks could live together in harmony. Not that white people could discriminate and disenfranchise blacks. But also, not that blacks could hate and attack white people on the basis of their race, either.

There goes my liberal card, I guess, lol. But I just can't do the whole, "its okay to be racist against whites" thing. It should be about equality. 
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 01, 2016, 09:58:32 PM »

I, a white person, need to feel like I am discriminated against also because otherwise it's not fair
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,990
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 01, 2016, 10:01:49 PM »

These two statements are equivalent in terms of their severity and badness:
1. a black guy called my dad a cracker once
2. black men are systematically discriminated against, a fact that results in higher levels of poverty and incarceration and suffering, all else held constant.

These statements are the same folks. They're just as bad.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.06 seconds with 14 queries.