4 ms·

No, everyone knows racism is obviously bad. What we're back to is having to prove that what the opponent is proposing actually constitutes racism. One argument

No, everyone knows racism is obviously bad. What we're back to is having to prove that what the opponent is proposing actually constitutes racism. One argument I hear is that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with the West's values, that immigrants from those countries don't integrate well, and that the dangerous ideas within Islam aren't limited to radical fundamentalists. Under this view, a temporary ban is not necessarily a bad idea, nor is it necessarily racist except in the literal sense. I disagree with this — I think the perfectly reasonable people from those countries need to be shown compassion, not to be lumped in with their oppressors — but the discussion should be about that, not who can scream "racist" louder.

varjag 10y ago
> No, everyone knows racism is obviously bad. No, everyone knows racism is ostracised. Plenty people cherish it. And now that there is less stigma with racist president in charge, they come out of closets.
metafunctor 10y ago
I agree. Labelling all people from entire countries as not eligible to enter your country is, by definition, racist. I don't see how that is not clear. I thought it was clear. I thought people defending these executive orders think it's all fine and good to basically blacklist entire countries and every person on earth who is a citizen of those countries.
- hueving 10y ago
  >I don't see how that is not clear Because you're not even using the right word? Discriminating by country is not racist, it's xenophobic. Otherwise everyone who says American tourists are annoying or has a stereotype about Americans is racist by your definition.
  - metafunctor 10y ago
    Ah, of course. Thanks, and sorry. In my native language we don't have a separate word for xenophobia. I seem to forget that all too easily. If you replace "racism" with "discrimination" (or where applicable, "xenophobia") my comments here may make more sense.
  - anon1385 10y ago
    Trump’s chief spokesman Sean Spicer just explicitly stated that it's not about countries[1]: >certain areas of the world produce people who seek to do us harm. What's your definition of race? It's a hard thing to define since it doesn't objectively exist, but I think 'people from certain areas of the world' is pretty indistinguishable from what most people mean by race. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2017/jan/29/donald-trump-us-travel-ban-refugees-airports?page=with:block-588f3b4be4b0f1550c0da61f#block-588f3b4be4b0f1550c0da61f https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2017/jan/29/donald-...
    - throwaway8727 10y ago
      Regions are not not necessarily race either. It could easily be about culture and the associated value systems. For example during WW2 - even before the US joined it - america did reject refugees from europe because they might have been nazis. Nazis were just as caucasian as most americans, but they had a culture that was clearly seen not just as incompatible but as hostile. To the "alt-right", fundamentalist christians, nationalists or simply less-informed conservatives someone from the middle east may appear to have a similarly fundamentally incompatible value-system as a nazi would have to an american in the 1930s or a commie during the cold war. Race and Nationality are a proxy for religion and culture which is a proxy for value systems. And value systems are what people disagree with and vote against.
    - makomk 10y ago
      Is it really? For example, the region held by ISIL is indisputably an area of the world which produces people who seek to do us harm, for values of "us" that include America and Europe. Does that make discriminating against people who try and enter the country from there is racism?
- FloatingGhost 10y ago
  > Labelling all people from entire countries as not eligible to enter your country is, by definition, racist. Nope, this assumes that the country is racially homogeneous
- talmand 10y ago
  >> Labelling all people from entire countries as not eligible to enter your country is, by definition, racist. Um, no it is not.

varjag 10y ago

> No, everyone knows racism is obviously bad. No, everyone knows racism is ostracised. Plenty people cherish it. And now that there is less stigma with racist president in charge, they come out of closets.

metafunctor 10y ago

I agree. Labelling all people from entire countries as not eligible to enter your country is, by definition, racist. I don't see how that is not clear. I thought it was clear. I thought people defending these executive orders think it's all fine and good to basically blacklist entire countries and every person on earth who is a citizen of those countries.

hueving 10y ago
>I don't see how that is not clear Because you're not even using the right word? Discriminating by country is not racist, it's xenophobic. Otherwise everyone who says American tourists are annoying or has a stereotype about Americans is racist by your definition.
- metafunctor 10y ago
  Ah, of course. Thanks, and sorry. In my native language we don't have a separate word for xenophobia. I seem to forget that all too easily. If you replace "racism" with "discrimination" (or where applicable, "xenophobia") my comments here may make more sense.
- anon1385 10y ago
  Trump’s chief spokesman Sean Spicer just explicitly stated that it's not about countries[1]: >certain areas of the world produce people who seek to do us harm. What's your definition of race? It's a hard thing to define since it doesn't objectively exist, but I think 'people from certain areas of the world' is pretty indistinguishable from what most people mean by race. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2017/jan/29/donald-trump-us-travel-ban-refugees-airports?page=with:block-588f3b4be4b0f1550c0da61f#block-588f3b4be4b0f1550c0da61f https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2017/jan/29/donald-...
  - throwaway8727 10y ago
    Regions are not not necessarily race either. It could easily be about culture and the associated value systems. For example during WW2 - even before the US joined it - america did reject refugees from europe because they might have been nazis. Nazis were just as caucasian as most americans, but they had a culture that was clearly seen not just as incompatible but as hostile. To the "alt-right", fundamentalist christians, nationalists or simply less-informed conservatives someone from the middle east may appear to have a similarly fundamentally incompatible value-system as a nazi would have to an american in the 1930s or a commie during the cold war. Race and Nationality are a proxy for religion and culture which is a proxy for value systems. And value systems are what people disagree with and vote against.
  - makomk 10y ago
    Is it really? For example, the region held by ISIL is indisputably an area of the world which produces people who seek to do us harm, for values of "us" that include America and Europe. Does that make discriminating against people who try and enter the country from there is racism?
FloatingGhost 10y ago
> Labelling all people from entire countries as not eligible to enter your country is, by definition, racist. Nope, this assumes that the country is racially homogeneous
talmand 10y ago
>> Labelling all people from entire countries as not eligible to enter your country is, by definition, racist. Um, no it is not.