4 ms·

Honest question, what is reverse racism? If I act racist against the dominate race? That's racism again, no? I'm minority myself so I could potentially do that

by msoad 11y ago

Honest question, what is reverse racism? If I act racist against the dominate race? That's racism again, no? I'm minority myself so I could potentially do that and in my own internal moral system it feels wrong.

vernie 11y ago
I'd wager that the authors of this code of conduct subscribe to the "prejudice plus power" definition of racism.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  Of course, there is an argument that, accepting the "prejudice plus power" definition, operating in a context in which preference is given to the concerns of a class that is less powerful in other contexts creates a context in which that group is empowered over the group that is more powerful in other context, converting -- by the "prejudice plus power" definition -- what would be "reverse racism" in other context to simply "racism" in that context (and, of course, vice versa.)
onewaystreet 11y ago
The argument against "reverse racism" is that racism is "prejudice plus power" so while many minorities may be prejudice they don't have power to act on it.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  Power always exists within a particular context. If you have the power in a context to get a code of conduct defined which licenses prejudice in your group's favor, and punishes it when it is against your group, it is a pretty strained claim to argue that its only those prejudiced against you in that context that are acting with a combination of prejudice and power.
chomp 11y ago
This reads as a SJW document, so they probably don't subscribe to that belief. Also, they already have "Offensive comments related to ... gender, ..., race" on there, so it might be a non-issue. Unless a minority rejects a commit or contribution from a non-minority on the basis of gender or race, then I'm not sure how this CoC resolves that (admittedly absurd hypothetical.)
2muchcoffeeman 11y ago
According to wikipedia, that's pretty much it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism
Oompa 11y ago
I've heard it used often in conjunction with benefits given to minorities. For example, a university offering a scholarship for African Americans is sometimes criticized for being reverse racist.
NoCulturalFit 11y ago
Depends on where you stand on identity politics. Usually certain types of people consider it difficult to be discriminatory against other people of "privilege". Now "privilege" used to mean from wealth but I it saw move towards caucasian in the past and I didn't really gave it a second thought since I wasn't caucasian and I just blew it of as antics of raving radical lunatics. Now it's essentially anyone who doesn't agree with the person shouting racist and/or misogynist. It's masquerading under "social justice" so it looks nice. Sorta when the communists sent people to the Gulag by calling them "fascists". Obviously no one wants to stand up for a "fascist", forget innocent until guilty here.

by msoad 11y ago

vernie 11y ago

I'd wager that the authors of this code of conduct subscribe to the "prejudice plus power" definition of racism.

dragonwriter 11y ago
Of course, there is an argument that, accepting the "prejudice plus power" definition, operating in a context in which preference is given to the concerns of a class that is less powerful in other contexts creates a context in which that group is empowered over the group that is more powerful in other context, converting -- by the "prejudice plus power" definition -- what would be "reverse racism" in other context to simply "racism" in that context (and, of course, vice versa.)

onewaystreet 11y ago

The argument against "reverse racism" is that racism is "prejudice plus power" so while many minorities may be prejudice they don't have power to act on it.

dragonwriter 11y ago
Power always exists within a particular context. If you have the power in a context to get a code of conduct defined which licenses prejudice in your group's favor, and punishes it when it is against your group, it is a pretty strained claim to argue that its only those prejudiced against you in that context that are acting with a combination of prejudice and power.

chomp 11y ago

This reads as a SJW document, so they probably don't subscribe to that belief. Also, they already have "Offensive comments related to ... gender, ..., race" on there, so it might be a non-issue. Unless a minority rejects a commit or contribution from a non-minority on the basis of gender or race, then I'm not sure how this CoC resolves that (admittedly absurd hypothetical.)

2muchcoffeeman 11y ago

According to wikipedia, that's pretty much it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism

Oompa 11y ago

I've heard it used often in conjunction with benefits given to minorities. For example, a university offering a scholarship for African Americans is sometimes criticized for being reverse racist.

NoCulturalFit 11y ago

Depends on where you stand on identity politics. Usually certain types of people consider it difficult to be discriminatory against other people of "privilege". Now "privilege" used to mean from wealth but I it saw move towards caucasian in the past and I didn't really gave it a second thought since I wasn't caucasian and I just blew it of as antics of raving radical lunatics. Now it's essentially anyone who doesn't agree with the person shouting racist and/or misogynist. It's masquerading under "social justice" so it looks nice. Sorta when the communists sent people to the Gulag by calling them "fascists". Obviously no one wants to stand up for a "fascist", forget innocent until guilty here.