4 ms·
I would like you to personally explain why you believe that article to be convincing that colorblindness isn't a positive way to treat people. What do you actua
by sieabah 5y ago
I would like you to personally explain why you believe that article to be convincing that colorblindness isn't a positive way to treat people. What do you actually propose with how to treat people that is an overall improvement over colorblindness?
Let's say you start to treat people based on the supposed presumption that all blacks are oppressed and poor. All. Not some, all. I'm not talking about a rough life in a rough neighborhood, I'm talking systemtic oppression at all levels everywhere that everyone does to blacks. As that's the premise of that article, you must repair the relations of the past in order to move forward? Instead why not take the individual and judge them by who they are, not the color you see through your eyes and assume them to be. You end up properly enacting how people should be treated in general, regardless of race. Unless of course you propose and truly believe a race is somehow indicative of a persons' entire identity and personal history. It's delusional and dishonest if you think seeing color is the ultimate message.
You can wish to not be judged for color and wish for reparations to repair relations _at the time_. Certainly the way you're championing this article as somehow irrefutable account of MLKs true intent behind his speech is also disingenuous to nuance.
The article isn't even conclusive as it would require you to follow the sources of:
- Standford (Univeristy)
- Brookings (Public Policy Nonprofit)
- WashingtonPost (Media)
- the74million (Media)
- The Atlantic (Media)
- Ibram X. Kendi ("How to be anti-racist" book author)
- SPLC (Law firm)
- ASCD (Educators community?)
- TNTP (Educators community?)
Not to mention all the standford links are behind a login panel which cannot be verified. This is horribly sourced to be considered _concrete_ in itself.
I feel the article takes MLK's speech as if he said it yesterday instead of taking into account improvements that occurred between then and now. Trying to say that the blacks have had a total degradation of rights and life since then is an insult to the blacks who actually suffered during that time.
I'll continue to treat everyone the same regardless of race because I feel that trying to apologize or cater to someone for the color of their skin without having spoken a word to them would be pretty presumptuous to assume they come from that background or even from a country where they were oppressed in the first place. I'm not sure what your goal is?
- enkid 5y agoHoly strawmans Batman. Stop putting words into people's mouths. I don't think we should treat all black people like they are oppressed and poor. I think we should recognize our society has historically oppressed and impoverished the majority of black people. Colorblindness does not allow that. Beyond that, I owe you no explanation.
- sieabah 5y ago> I think we should recognize our society has historically oppressed and impoverished the majority of black people. Okay, now that we've acknowledged it happened historically how do we make sure it doesn't continue? Treat those same people differently based on the color of their skin? > Colorblindness does not allow that. What are you talking about? It absolutely does, you can understand that treating people based on race is incorrect. You are blind to the color of their skin for today. If you treat them any differently because of their skin color you're inherently believing they are different because of their skin color. > Beyond that, I owe you no explanation. Then don't post on a _discussion_ board? You're kidding, right? I guess I won't expect anything else, but I'm not sure why you're here in the first place then?