4 ms·
This is anti-intellectualism. Yes, you have some premise about subconscious bias and your inferred that conscious awareness of skin color is necessary or more g
by raxxorraxor 4y ago
This is anti-intellectualism. Yes, you have some premise about subconscious bias and your inferred that conscious awareness of skin color is necessary or more generally that skin color is relevant again.
This reminds me of the a John Steward show where someone said they wouldn't see color. The audience booed and pointed their thin fingers with thick accusations. This reminds me of The Wave from Morton Rhue instead of a step towards more enlightenment. Perhaps people are so afraid to not be on the "right side history"-club that their facilities randomly fail. But there are less excuses for academics.
I mean, go ahead, ignore the civil rights movements on your own peril. You know better, you are an academic and surely very smart. You could also just not wear pants tomorrow or accuse people of not wearing them.
- omginternets 4y agoYou may want to read about how this works outside of the US. There are several viable models for multiculturalism.
- raxxorraxor 4y agoI am not from the US. I know there are places where this approach isn't feasible, especially in ethnic conflicts. But the idea that colorblindness is outdated and a liberal US TV audience cheering against people with allegedly backward views merits some criticism. This is group think without any reflection and certainly not the next step to combat racism or any prejudice. Again, contrary to most civil rights movements, including their own.
- omginternets 4y agoI think I may have interpreted your original comment backwards. Upon re-reading, it sounds like you are defending colorblidness, which would put us in agreement. It's hard to tell; I think we're talking past each other at this point. Could you please state your point directly?