4 ms·

The presumption here is that "America is not a racist country" is a racist statement on its own. Nobody is claiming it is. The problem arises in what that sta

by Zetice 3y ago

The presumption here is that "America is not a racist country" is a racist statement on its own. Nobody is claiming it is. The problem arises in what that statement does for the racists in America; it legitimizes their behavior, which means it supports people and actions that do suggest one racial group is inferior or superior to another. It's that knock-on effect one ought to think of as fitting the definition of "racist", not the idea itself. Also why do so many people absolutely lose their minds when they find out that tribalism is a human trait, and when applied to racial groups, results in racism? I really don't understand why the idea that everyone has racist impulses causes such despair for some specific set of people. The problem isn't that you're a human being, the problem is refusing to try to do better than your base impulses. "Racist" isn't a brand. It's a neon sign you flip on and off 300x a day, depending on what you do and say.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
You're still ambiguously oscillating between definitions of racism and racists.
- Zetice 3y ago
  Weird of you to say considering I defined it very clearly at the start of this discussion.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > "Racist" isn't a brand. It's a neon sign you flip on and off 300x a day, depending on what you do and say > Weird of you to say considering I defined it very clearly at the start of this discussion You believe "one racial group is inferior to or superior to another racial group in any way" multiple times a day? > problem arises in what that statement does for the racists in America Do you count us (you and I) among those racists? Or are these the non-neon-sign racists? Do you see the problem? It's insidious. And do you see the meta problem? This is an intellectually-satisfying semantic debate. But it's entirely devoid of actual meaning! We haven't actually discussed implicit-association biases nor the role of normalizing biased institutions in giving cover to individuals who soundly believe that some races are superior to others. Meanwhile, I take it we both feel strongly about the nothing we're debating.
    - Zetice 3y ago
      Yes, when everyone has the snap impulse regarding an "other" group along racial lines, they're flipping on their "racist" neon sign. Then, when they realize that's ridiculous and the result of every human's biological affinity for like-appearing fellow humans, they flip their "racist" sign off. You, me, every single healthy human who interacts across racial lines has this impulse. It's normal, you're not an awful person for being human, and nobody is trying to "brand" you anything. Racism is an insidious problem, that is correct, but one that many, many people successfully navigate, and even often ingrain that secondary reaction into an automatic response. When you ask "Do YOU have racist thoughts?" the point is that for many, the natural human instinct towards tribalism is paired with an also-natural human instinct of empathy. Of course this only happens when you recognize the first impulse, but once you admit it's happening, obviously you can get to a place where you're usually able to do better than your baser instincts as part of your natural way of interacting with the world. To deny your tribalistic impulses is to literally deny your existence as a human being. The problem arises when folks seem to want to pretend human impulses don't exist. How is that "nothing"? It's a critical determinant in how you treat the people around you, why would you call that "nothing"?
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        Within one comment, I showed how you used multiple definitions of racism and racists. Nobody is pretending something doesn't exist. But it's going to be difficult to pinpoint what that "something" is if we get caught up in semantics, which is where this issue--broadly--has hit the rocks in national discourse.
        Zetice 3y ago
        No, you didn't show anything related to the dual definition of racism you claim I've given, and yes you are currently in denial that you have tribal impulses along racial lines.
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago

by Zetice 3y ago

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

You're still ambiguously oscillating between definitions of racism and racists.

Zetice 3y ago
Weird of you to say considering I defined it very clearly at the start of this discussion.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > "Racist" isn't a brand. It's a neon sign you flip on and off 300x a day, depending on what you do and say > Weird of you to say considering I defined it very clearly at the start of this discussion You believe "one racial group is inferior to or superior to another racial group in any way" multiple times a day? > problem arises in what that statement does for the racists in America Do you count us (you and I) among those racists? Or are these the non-neon-sign racists? Do you see the problem? It's insidious. And do you see the meta problem? This is an intellectually-satisfying semantic debate. But it's entirely devoid of actual meaning! We haven't actually discussed implicit-association biases nor the role of normalizing biased institutions in giving cover to individuals who soundly believe that some races are superior to others. Meanwhile, I take it we both feel strongly about the nothing we're debating.
  - Zetice 3y ago
    Yes, when everyone has the snap impulse regarding an "other" group along racial lines, they're flipping on their "racist" neon sign. Then, when they realize that's ridiculous and the result of every human's biological affinity for like-appearing fellow humans, they flip their "racist" sign off. You, me, every single healthy human who interacts across racial lines has this impulse. It's normal, you're not an awful person for being human, and nobody is trying to "brand" you anything. Racism is an insidious problem, that is correct, but one that many, many people successfully navigate, and even often ingrain that secondary reaction into an automatic response. When you ask "Do YOU have racist thoughts?" the point is that for many, the natural human instinct towards tribalism is paired with an also-natural human instinct of empathy. Of course this only happens when you recognize the first impulse, but once you admit it's happening, obviously you can get to a place where you're usually able to do better than your baser instincts as part of your natural way of interacting with the world. To deny your tribalistic impulses is to literally deny your existence as a human being. The problem arises when folks seem to want to pretend human impulses don't exist. How is that "nothing"? It's a critical determinant in how you treat the people around you, why would you call that "nothing"?
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      Within one comment, I showed how you used multiple definitions of racism and racists. Nobody is pretending something doesn't exist. But it's going to be difficult to pinpoint what that "something" is if we get caught up in semantics, which is where this issue--broadly--has hit the rocks in national discourse.
      - Zetice 3y ago
        No, you didn't show anything related to the dual definition of racism you claim I've given, and yes you are currently in denial that you have tribal impulses along racial lines.
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago