3 ms·

Your entire argument rests upon unsupported notions of political and social homogeneity of racial groups. Seeing my race as important to my identity doesn’t mea

Your entire argument rests upon unsupported notions of political and social homogeneity of racial groups. Seeing my race as important to my identity doesn’t mean I have the same beliefs as my neighbor, friend, coworker, or family member of the same race. It would be racist - actually racist, not the politically correct “racist” - to suggest all members of the same race have the same beliefs. And even worse is this paragraph implying some kind of future risk to white people if they were not in political control: > Will they be treated with gratitude for sharing their country, and so can afford to act colorblind, forsaking racial solidarity? Is gratitude what they're being shown now? Seriously, I would ask you both define gratitude concretely and justify why it matters. Otherwise you’re just vending fear.

nhchris 4y ago
> It would be racist to suggest all members of the same race have the same beliefs. I'm not suggesting that. Only that they, on average, exhibit in-group preference, to a degree that correlates with how important they say their racial identity is.
- helen___keller 4y ago
  Can you justify that statement? I’m not even sure how you would quantify that. What counts as “in-group preference”? What do you mean “on average (…) to a degree that correlates with(…)”? For a sufficiently weak “in-group preference” and “correlates with”, this is a very easy claim to make. Sure, Indian Americans are more likely to support increased GC quota from India. They’re also more likely to have personal experience with how frustrating and difficult the GC system is for immigrants from India. Is that displaying in-group preference, or is that simply being more knowledgeable about a broken/unfair aspect of our immigration system that most people are unaware of? And just how much more likely are Indian Americans to support increased GC quotas from India compared to say white people, normalized against confounding factors like having background knowledge on our arcane and complicated immigration system? How do you relate this against how likely Indian Americans are to say that their race is part of their identity (which as you say is the degree of correlation on in group preference)? And is this behavior (in-group preference) consistent across a wide degree of issues across all races? Many people have already pointed out in the comments some counter examples with Latinos for example. Is this just an outlier?
Clubber 4y ago
>It would be racist - actually racist, not the politically correct “racist” - to suggest all members of the same race have the same beliefs. That's not what being racist means. Here's a definition. characterized by or showing prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized. His statement showed neither prejudice, discrimination or antagonism.
- helen___keller 4y ago
  To suggest all members of race X hold opinion Y by virtue of their ethnicity is a form of prejudice. OP has not stated this directly but come very close, implying that members of race X, for whom their race is part of their identity, will support opinion Y if such is preferential to members of their race. At its core this is still prejudiced. Op has thrown a zillion cultural confounders and nuances to the wind and presented an argument based totally on race.
  - Clubber 4y ago
    >OP has not stated this directly but come very close, implying that members of race X, for whom their race is part of their identity, will support opinion Y if such is preferential to members of their race. You've just described demographic research. Prejudice is defined as such: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience. >At its core this is still prejudiced. Op has thrown a zillion cultural confounders and nuances to the wind and presented an argument based totally on race. Reductive perhaps, but not prejudice.
onetimeusename 4y ago
> unsupported notions of political and social homogeneity of racial groups > It would be racist - actually racist, not the politically correct “racist” - to suggest all members of the same race have the same beliefs. Of course there is political and social homogeneity of racial groups. I can prove it by showing you voting statistics. By and large, your race/ethnicity and to some extent gender predicts which party you vote for. Also, people tend to live in neighborhoods that are not mixed. The funny thing is that politics relies on this heavily. That's why Biden says things like "he'll put y'all back in chains" and it's why there is a call for diversity in powerful positions like the supreme court and federal judges, because people assume judges of their own race will be more understanding to them (or maybe there is a more sinister reason like punishing opponents more harshly). This is a huge part of identity politics actually all over the world. I think both sides use it to be fair. You should ask Japanese people if they object to the idea of political and social homogeneity of their ethnic group. >And even worse is this paragraph implying some kind of future risk to white people if they were not in political control: Is there a political risk to anyone of being a minority? Do you think that if whites were a minority that it's impossible that other groups might seek to punish them? It's not unprecedented that happens. It happened to Indians in Uganda.

nhchris 4y ago

> It would be racist to suggest all members of the same race have the same beliefs. I'm not suggesting that. Only that they, on average, exhibit in-group preference, to a degree that correlates with how important they say their racial identity is.

helen___keller 4y ago
Can you justify that statement? I’m not even sure how you would quantify that. What counts as “in-group preference”? What do you mean “on average (…) to a degree that correlates with(…)”? For a sufficiently weak “in-group preference” and “correlates with”, this is a very easy claim to make. Sure, Indian Americans are more likely to support increased GC quota from India. They’re also more likely to have personal experience with how frustrating and difficult the GC system is for immigrants from India. Is that displaying in-group preference, or is that simply being more knowledgeable about a broken/unfair aspect of our immigration system that most people are unaware of? And just how much more likely are Indian Americans to support increased GC quotas from India compared to say white people, normalized against confounding factors like having background knowledge on our arcane and complicated immigration system? How do you relate this against how likely Indian Americans are to say that their race is part of their identity (which as you say is the degree of correlation on in group preference)? And is this behavior (in-group preference) consistent across a wide degree of issues across all races? Many people have already pointed out in the comments some counter examples with Latinos for example. Is this just an outlier?

Clubber 4y ago

>It would be racist - actually racist, not the politically correct “racist” - to suggest all members of the same race have the same beliefs. That's not what being racist means. Here's a definition. characterized by or showing prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized. His statement showed neither prejudice, discrimination or antagonism.

helen___keller 4y ago
To suggest all members of race X hold opinion Y by virtue of their ethnicity is a form of prejudice. OP has not stated this directly but come very close, implying that members of race X, for whom their race is part of their identity, will support opinion Y if such is preferential to members of their race. At its core this is still prejudiced. Op has thrown a zillion cultural confounders and nuances to the wind and presented an argument based totally on race.
- Clubber 4y ago
  >OP has not stated this directly but come very close, implying that members of race X, for whom their race is part of their identity, will support opinion Y if such is preferential to members of their race. You've just described demographic research. Prejudice is defined as such: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience. >At its core this is still prejudiced. Op has thrown a zillion cultural confounders and nuances to the wind and presented an argument based totally on race. Reductive perhaps, but not prejudice.

onetimeusename 4y ago

> unsupported notions of political and social homogeneity of racial groups > It would be racist - actually racist, not the politically correct “racist” - to suggest all members of the same race have the same beliefs. Of course there is political and social homogeneity of racial groups. I can prove it by showing you voting statistics. By and large, your race/ethnicity and to some extent gender predicts which party you vote for. Also, people tend to live in neighborhoods that are not mixed. The funny thing is that politics relies on this heavily. That's why Biden says things like "he'll put y'all back in chains" and it's why there is a call for diversity in powerful positions like the supreme court and federal judges, because people assume judges of their own race will be more understanding to them (or maybe there is a more sinister reason like punishing opponents more harshly). This is a huge part of identity politics actually all over the world. I think both sides use it to be fair. You should ask Japanese people if they object to the idea of political and social homogeneity of their ethnic group. >And even worse is this paragraph implying some kind of future risk to white people if they were not in political control: Is there a political risk to anyone of being a minority? Do you think that if whites were a minority that it's impossible that other groups might seek to punish them? It's not unprecedented that happens. It happened to Indians in Uganda.