2 ms·
The criticism is that putting people in buckets based on their DNA and ancestry is what racists do and not something that we should encourage and normalize in 2
by olalonde 3y ago
The criticism is that putting people in buckets based on their DNA and ancestry is what racists do and not something that we should encourage and normalize in 2023. We should minimize the importance of ethnicity and race, not emphasize it. As a staunch individualist and someone who fervently opposes racism, it's disheartening to observe the USA trending in such a direction.
- abenga 3y agoHand wringing about "placing people in buckets" is one the last things we need to worry about when it comes to dealing with racism and it's effect on victims of racism. Like, "now we are colourblind, hooray! racism is finished!" While ignoring how disadvantaged people who suffered discrimination in the past (and still do) continue to feel the effects of institutionalised racism, regardless of any changes in law.
- olalonde 3y agoI know your intentions are noble but the alternative approach promotes the idea that racial groups are very real and matter. It promotes the belief that one "belongs" to a race, that members of a race have a shared interest, etc. It's a mindset that often leads to racism. I grew up in a place where colorblindness was the prevalent philosophy and somehow, racism was much less of a problem than what I've witnessed in the USA. People of different colors mixed up and race or skin color was almost never mentioned. I don't think I even had a concept of what racism was until high school when it was taught in class. I can't help but have a suspicion that people who are so incredulous at the idea of "colorblindness" are simply projecting their own racist beliefs (e.g. "I am not colorblind... how could anyone be?"). Finally, I have no issue with compensating people that were direct victims of institutionalized racism. However, I take issue with the idea of assigning benefits or penalties based on factors beyond an individual's control, such as one's ancestors' or genetic makeup. If the idea is to help less fortunate people, we should develop programs that help less fortunate people, regardless of their genetics or ancestry.
- abenga 3y agoNoticing that someone is a member of a racial (or any other group) is benign. It is just a fact, nothing more. What you do with that information is what matters. As an individual, I can claim that I am colour/gender/whatever-blind but _in the world that exists_, that is just ignoring what certain groups of people are experiencing from other people who are not as agnostic to these characteristics as you claim to be. Also, I doubt that there is any place on earth that is colourblind and somehow race is not a problem. And no, "nobody speaks about it =/= the problem does not exist. Most countries have some issues with race, are largely homogeneous (sometimes despite spending decades brutally exploiting countries with other races a century or two ago), or have a long-running kerfuffle with some local minority.
- viraptor 3y agoNo. Treating them worse based on which bucket you put them in is racist. Taking about various segments of population, what specific issues they experience and why is not that.
- lionkor 3y agoThats not what "racism" is. While its one way to define racism, the most general and eay to understand one is racism: > The belief that each race has distinct and intrinsic attributes. And that is what you're doing. Its not about oppression or discrimination, its about the (wrong) belief that each race has some intrinsic properties. When you start with this, you eventually end up putting people of different races on a pedestal, which does inadvertently discriminate against another race.
- viraptor 3y ago> The belief that each race has distinct and intrinsic attributes. / And that is what you're doing. I'm not sure where you got that from. Did you respond to the right message?