4 ms·

Anti racism has all the qualities of racism. They want you to treat people of colour differently, to pity them, to assume they are weak and that they need to be

Anti racism has all the qualities of racism. They want you to treat people of colour differently, to pity them, to assume they are weak and that they need to be saved by some massive act of guilt. They aim to never let anyone forget what race they or their associates are. They put race above individual traits. Then they go around reporting or flagging everything they disagrees, like the ops article

akvadrako 6y ago
That's why the call it anti-racism. Like how anti-matter shares all the features of matter.
camgunz 6y ago
> They want you to treat people of colour differently BIPOC people _are_ different. They have different experiences in America. It's not racist to acknowledge and respect this. > to pity them, to assume they are weak This is going way too far. No serious anti-racism activist says this. > and that they need to be saved by some massive act of guilt If you look at asthma rates in the Black community vs. the average, it's not guilt that motivates people to address it, it's rationality and decency. Although guilt wouldn't be wrong either! > They aim to never let anyone forget what race they or their associates are. ...in the same way I don't forget my sex, gender, name, nationality, etc. These are core parts of one's identity. > They put race above individual traits. Insofar as race exists, it's absolutely an individual trait? If you're saying we should look past race into a person's merits, no anti-racist activist is saying we shouldn't. In fact, that's kind of the point. Unless you're making a weird reverse racism argument, which is hogwash.
- brailsafe 6y ago
  Racism is racism, as far as I can see, it can apply no matter who it comes from or who it's applied to. If it's harmful, it doesn't get to only be harmful for qualified recipients. What's this reverse racism you speak of?
  - camgunz 6y ago
    > Reverse racism or reverse discrimination is the concept that affirmative action and similar color-conscious programs for redressing racial inequality are a form of anti-white racism. The concept is often associated with conservative social movements and the belief that social and economic gains by black people in the United States and elsewhere cause disadvantages for white people. > Belief in reverse racism is widespread in the United States; however, there is little to no empirical evidence that white Americans suffer systemic discrimination. Racial and ethnic minorities generally lack the power to damage the interests of whites, who remain the dominant group in the U.S. Claims of reverse racism tend to ignore such disparities in the exercise of power and authority, which scholars argue constitute an essential component of racism. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism
    - brailsafe 6y ago
      I'm honestly surprised there is a Wikipedia article on this, but I suppose if you can dream it, you can put it up there. My point stands, because regardless of how accurate your quoted text is (seems to me like it's just a term invented by zealots to shutdown an argument without participation), it's irrelevant in this thread. It's invalid to say this other thing (reverse racism) is false, therefore racism can't manifest in other ways than you're saying.
      - camgunz 6y ago
        Sorry let me dig in a little more here. It's pretty common to naively think that racism in the US is treating anyone of any race differently based on their race. Conservatives trot this out all the time whenever anyone treats white Americans differently. However, they're wrong, and they've never been right. Racism in the US is a pervasive caste system that places white Americans at the top, Black Americans at the bottom, and others somewhere in-between. This is why "reverse racism" is nonsensical and why white Americans don't experience racism. I understand why people want to hew to the simple definition, but sadly it doesn't really help anyone. Well, it helps people who don't want to fix racism but, that seems like a mark against it. And, for what it's worth, the Wikipedia article is super well-cited [1]. There's a lot of good info in there; it's definitely not some liberal hack job. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism#References https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism#References
- anoncake 6y ago
  > BIPOC people _are_ different. They have different experiences in America. It's not racist to acknowledge and respect this. Yes, it is. Treat people based on their experiences, not on what you expect people with their skin colour to have experienced. > If you look at asthma rates in the Black community vs. the average, it's not guilt that motivates people to address it, it's rationality and decency. If high asthma rates motivate you to do something, it should be to help asthmatics. Not to treat people differently based on their skin colour, which is racist. > ...in the same way I don't forget my sex, gender, name, nationality, etc. These are core parts of one's identity. There is no reason why people's skin colour needs to be part of their identity any more than their eye colour. > Insofar as race exists, it's absolutely an individual trait? Not a relevant one, unless you are a dermatologist or a sun cream salesperson.
  - camgunz 6y ago
    There's nothing racist about acknowledging and respecting the fact that BIPOC people have different experiences and are marginalized. You seem to be making an argument that that's prejudiced, but in America it's inescapable. If you're born Black in the US, you had a way higher chance of dying and your mother had a way higher chance of dying than if you were born white. And besides, race is more than skin/eye color. It's culture and experience. For example, there are higher rates of asthma in Black Americans because we tend to put polluting things by their neighborhoods and schools. But, broadly I think you're just being disingenuous. You can't seriously think this stuff is just about the color of someone's skin.
    - anoncake 6y ago
      It is just the colour of someone's skin. Or aren't dark-skinned people who grew up outside the USA black? > If you're born Black in the US, you had a way higher chance of dying and your mother had a way higher chance of dying than if you were born white. Poor people have a higher chance of being criminal. Black people have a higher chance of being poor. Therefore (I assume) black people have a higher chance of being criminal. Treating black people like criminals because crime is correlated with being black is textbook racism. Treating them differently because of any correlated trait is also racism. > For example, there are higher rates of asthma in Black Americans because we tend to put polluting things by their neighborhoods and schools. Why? - If it's because they're poor, the root cause is not racism but poverty (or how the poor are treated). - If it's because of their skin colour, the root cause is that treating people differently based on their skin colour is considered acceptable. Treating people differently based on their skin colour will not exactly help.
- syspec 6y ago
  > These are core parts of one's identity. The problem with this line of thinking is that not everyone WANTS to be identified by their race. This as was told to me by someone: A white person doesn't have the mental weight of representing their race at all times over them this way. As an example a white guy named jake at work, who is lazy represents jake being lazy. A black person named jake at work who is lazy. Represents black people being lazy, and that is a huge burden to carry at all times.
  - camgunz 6y ago
    Yeah definitely. This is good example of privilege.

akvadrako 6y ago

That's why the call it anti-racism. Like how anti-matter shares all the features of matter.

camgunz 6y ago

> They want you to treat people of colour differently BIPOC people _are_ different. They have different experiences in America. It's not racist to acknowledge and respect this. > to pity them, to assume they are weak This is going way too far. No serious anti-racism activist says this. > and that they need to be saved by some massive act of guilt If you look at asthma rates in the Black community vs. the average, it's not guilt that motivates people to address it, it's rationality and decency. Although guilt wouldn't be wrong either! > They aim to never let anyone forget what race they or their associates are. ...in the same way I don't forget my sex, gender, name, nationality, etc. These are core parts of one's identity. > They put race above individual traits. Insofar as race exists, it's absolutely an individual trait? If you're saying we should look past race into a person's merits, no anti-racist activist is saying we shouldn't. In fact, that's kind of the point. Unless you're making a weird reverse racism argument, which is hogwash.

brailsafe 6y ago
Racism is racism, as far as I can see, it can apply no matter who it comes from or who it's applied to. If it's harmful, it doesn't get to only be harmful for qualified recipients. What's this reverse racism you speak of?
- camgunz 6y ago
  > Reverse racism or reverse discrimination is the concept that affirmative action and similar color-conscious programs for redressing racial inequality are a form of anti-white racism. The concept is often associated with conservative social movements and the belief that social and economic gains by black people in the United States and elsewhere cause disadvantages for white people. > Belief in reverse racism is widespread in the United States; however, there is little to no empirical evidence that white Americans suffer systemic discrimination. Racial and ethnic minorities generally lack the power to damage the interests of whites, who remain the dominant group in the U.S. Claims of reverse racism tend to ignore such disparities in the exercise of power and authority, which scholars argue constitute an essential component of racism. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism
  - brailsafe 6y ago
    I'm honestly surprised there is a Wikipedia article on this, but I suppose if you can dream it, you can put it up there. My point stands, because regardless of how accurate your quoted text is (seems to me like it's just a term invented by zealots to shutdown an argument without participation), it's irrelevant in this thread. It's invalid to say this other thing (reverse racism) is false, therefore racism can't manifest in other ways than you're saying.
    - camgunz 6y ago
      Sorry let me dig in a little more here. It's pretty common to naively think that racism in the US is treating anyone of any race differently based on their race. Conservatives trot this out all the time whenever anyone treats white Americans differently. However, they're wrong, and they've never been right. Racism in the US is a pervasive caste system that places white Americans at the top, Black Americans at the bottom, and others somewhere in-between. This is why "reverse racism" is nonsensical and why white Americans don't experience racism. I understand why people want to hew to the simple definition, but sadly it doesn't really help anyone. Well, it helps people who don't want to fix racism but, that seems like a mark against it. And, for what it's worth, the Wikipedia article is super well-cited [1]. There's a lot of good info in there; it's definitely not some liberal hack job. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism#References https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism#References
anoncake 6y ago
> BIPOC people _are_ different. They have different experiences in America. It's not racist to acknowledge and respect this. Yes, it is. Treat people based on their experiences, not on what you expect people with their skin colour to have experienced. > If you look at asthma rates in the Black community vs. the average, it's not guilt that motivates people to address it, it's rationality and decency. If high asthma rates motivate you to do something, it should be to help asthmatics. Not to treat people differently based on their skin colour, which is racist. > ...in the same way I don't forget my sex, gender, name, nationality, etc. These are core parts of one's identity. There is no reason why people's skin colour needs to be part of their identity any more than their eye colour. > Insofar as race exists, it's absolutely an individual trait? Not a relevant one, unless you are a dermatologist or a sun cream salesperson.
- camgunz 6y ago
  There's nothing racist about acknowledging and respecting the fact that BIPOC people have different experiences and are marginalized. You seem to be making an argument that that's prejudiced, but in America it's inescapable. If you're born Black in the US, you had a way higher chance of dying and your mother had a way higher chance of dying than if you were born white. And besides, race is more than skin/eye color. It's culture and experience. For example, there are higher rates of asthma in Black Americans because we tend to put polluting things by their neighborhoods and schools. But, broadly I think you're just being disingenuous. You can't seriously think this stuff is just about the color of someone's skin.
  - anoncake 6y ago
    It is just the colour of someone's skin. Or aren't dark-skinned people who grew up outside the USA black? > If you're born Black in the US, you had a way higher chance of dying and your mother had a way higher chance of dying than if you were born white. Poor people have a higher chance of being criminal. Black people have a higher chance of being poor. Therefore (I assume) black people have a higher chance of being criminal. Treating black people like criminals because crime is correlated with being black is textbook racism. Treating them differently because of any correlated trait is also racism. > For example, there are higher rates of asthma in Black Americans because we tend to put polluting things by their neighborhoods and schools. Why? - If it's because they're poor, the root cause is not racism but poverty (or how the poor are treated). - If it's because of their skin colour, the root cause is that treating people differently based on their skin colour is considered acceptable. Treating people differently based on their skin colour will not exactly help.
syspec 6y ago
> These are core parts of one's identity. The problem with this line of thinking is that not everyone WANTS to be identified by their race. This as was told to me by someone: A white person doesn't have the mental weight of representing their race at all times over them this way. As an example a white guy named jake at work, who is lazy represents jake being lazy. A black person named jake at work who is lazy. Represents black people being lazy, and that is a huge burden to carry at all times.
- camgunz 6y ago
  Yeah definitely. This is good example of privilege.