4 ms·
I have a seriouse question on this, I would like to understand your logic, you say: > While racialism is not criminalized, anyone using racialist "science" to
by kls 6y ago
I have a seriouse question on this, I would like to understand your logic, you say:
> While racialism is not criminalized, anyone using racialist "science" to falsely claim intellectual or behavioral differences between different ethnic groups has committed a serious crime.
Would you apply this standard to Farrakhan and his teaching that the white man was created from a evil witch-doctor and thus are inherently evil and have no souls?
Second you state.
> I just plain disagree that people have the right to express racist views or endorse Nazism.
What if I said, I hate the fact that the Nazis committed genocide, but we have to admit that they where very good at executing a national vision that pulled their nation out of a depression and turned them into an industrial powerhouse in just a few short years?
I would like to get your thought on it, as the above statement is a factually true statement, but it is an endorsement that they where effective economically and politically. Would you say that I don't have the right to state an established fact due to the fact that it may have racial or ethnic implications.
What about other facts based on numerical data like the rate of absentee fathers in the black community or the statistically high prevalence of high SAT scores by Asians. Would facts be limited in your view.
I am not trying to counter, correct or mock your position, I honestly don't understand it, I don't understand the desire to limit speech due to the follow on implications and I would like to know how you mentally walk thru those questions and come to the conclusion that we as a society would be better if we just could not say some things.
- ojnabieoot 6y ago> Would you apply this standard to Farrakhan and his teaching that the white man was created from a evil witch-doctor and thus are inherently evil and have no souls? Yes, as the law would clearly state: any expression of belief of racial behavioral/cognitive differences between ethnic groups is a crime. > What if I said, I hate the fact that the Nazis committed genocide, but we have to admit that they where very good at executing a national vision that pulled their nation out of a depression and turned them into an industrial powerhouse in just a few short years? No that would not be illegal because that is not an endorsement of Nazism or Holocaust denial. I will grant that it's an unnecessarily trollish and downright misleading way of describing the economy in Nazi Germany but it would not be a crime. > What about other facts based on numerical data like the rate of absentee fathers in the black community or the statistically high prevalence of high SAT scores by Asians. Would facts be limited in your view. No because these data can be understood in terms of ethnic groups without resorting to the pseudoscience of racialism.
- kls 6y agoThank you for responding, I am genuinely curious how other people see the world.
- ojnabieoot 6y agoIf you want to read a bit about how I got here - as of about 10 years ago I was nowhere near this radical - I would strongly recommend "Racecraft: The Soul of Inequality in American Life" by Barbara E. Fields and Karen J. Fields, which deeply analyzes the historical and socio-anthropological development of racialist ideology. The blurb from the link[1]: "Most people assume that racism grows from a perception of human difference: the fact of race gives rise to the practice of racism. Sociologist Karen E. Fields and historian Barbara J. Fields argue otherwise: the practice of racism produces the illusion of race, through what they call 'racecraft.' And this phenomenon is intimately entwined with other forms of inequality in American life. So pervasive are the devices of racecraft in American history, economic doctrine, politics, and everyday thinking that the presence of racecraft itself goes unnoticed. "That the promised post-racial age has not dawned, the authors argue, reflects the failure of Americans to develop a legitimate language for thinking about and discussing inequality. That failure should worry everyone who cares about democratic institutions." [1]https://www.versobooks.com/books/1645-racecraft https://www.versobooks.com/books/1645-racecraft Kate Mann's "Down Girl" takes a conceptually similar view and analysis of misogyny and sexism: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/down-girl-9780190604981?cc=us&lang=en& https://global.oup.com/academic/product/down-girl-9780190604...