5 ms·

Impact is the important part of racism, not intent. You can have the best intentions and still be racist.

• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
  • grasshopperpurp 9y ago
    Say you're a nice, white mother in the 1950s, and the subject of desegregation comes up. You have no problem with black people, but you don't think the disruption would be good for your daughter's educational experience, so you favor maintaining segregation. You can say, 'I'm not racist. I'm just thinking of my daughter,' but guess what? The Poc negatively impacted by your stance don't give two shits, and they shouldn't. It's racist. Of course, we don't have to go back in time at all to see this sort of thinking, but, for the sake of the example, I thought it worked better.
    • deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
      • rhcom2 9y ago
        Can't you continue that line of thinking to include, "I have no problem with black people but slavery is my family's means of economic security, I'm not being racist, just selfish"? Just because the people in these examples claim they aren't motivated by racism doesn't mean they aren't (at least partly) motivated by racism, maybe even unconsciously. If I care about the suffering of my own race, but not those people over there because they're a different race - that's discrimination. That's my point about intent, the mother may feel she is just "indifferent" but the impact is certainly racist.
        • deleted 9y ago
          [deleted]
          • rhcom2 9y ago
            I didn't create the mother example but it's the same with the slaver holder. Even with a non-racist intent, supporting and participating in a racist system is still racist - no matter the justification or motivations. I think you are defining racism so narrowly it only defines people who state "I'm superior to this race" where their actions alone can never be racist unless they say that. I already replied to the tornado comment but weather can't hold beliefs, it's a non sequitur that doesn't support your argument.
            • deleted 9y ago
              [deleted]
              • rhcom2 9y ago
                Racism is a set of beliefs. Tornados, door knobs, planets, these things can't have beliefs - only people can - which is why the argument makes no sense. I really hope you read this CNN article in full but here is a quote that I believe directly applies to your argument: > "When some whites talk about racism, they think it's only personal -- what one person says or does to another. But many minorities and people who study race say racism can be impersonal, calculating, devoid of malice..." http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/26/us/ferguson-racism-or-racial-bias/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/26/us/ferguson-racism-or-racial-b...
              • ghostbrainalpha 9y ago
                You have to think about the effects of what you are saying. Let's say you have the "non-racist" slave owner. No matter what they personally believe about the equality of individual humans, they create a world where the people who come after will believe fundamentally different things about races. You can't say, slavery IS wrong, but we are going to do it anyway because we are selfish. The act is racist, because the people who come after you will justify your decisions and cement a racial worldview that you contributed to.
  • rhcom2 9y ago
    Tornados can't have beliefs nor do they target specific neighborhoods because of the people that live there obviously. Separate but equal schooling had good intentions, doesn't make the impact less racist.
• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]