3 ms·

> instead of bothering to make judgments based on the individual, a racist just decides that all individuals of group x are the same for some particular charact

by lutusp 13y ago

> instead of bothering to make judgments based on the individual, a racist just decides that all individuals of group x are the same for some particular characteristic. I define a racist as someone comfortable making blanket denunciations of arbitrary groups, without it ever crossing his mind that, according to well-established logical rules, his group will eventually become the target.

danieltillett 13y ago
Racism is not always arbitrary nor negative. A good example would be the casual racism implicit is statements like "Jews are smart" or "Chinese are hardworking". Both statements are highly racist and reflect lazy thinking - while I have met many smart jewish people and lots of hard working people who were born in China, I have also met a number dumber than a box of hammers and lazier than a tree full of sloths.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > Racism is not always arbitrary nor negative. On the contrary. A deep understanding of these issues leads one to the conclusion that stereotyping, whether positive or negative, is harmful because it reduces the described group to a set of cliches, thereby preventing the group from having equal standing with other groups. If a group is stereotyped with a positive trait (Jews are smart, Asians are good at math), that stereotype will work against them in open competition with other groups (don't give Abraham extra help in class, he doesn't need it, he's Jewish). Same with negative stereotypes. Tl;dr: stereotyping, regardless of what kind it is, stands in the way of equality and fair dealing.
  - danieltillett 13y ago
    >stereotyping, regardless of what kind it is, stands in the way of equality and fair dealing. I agree, but I don't think I ever said that racism was "good", just that it is not always negative or arbitrary. One thing it always is is lazy. Individuals should always be treated as an individual and not as a member of some "convenient" grouping that enables a person to avoid having to think.
    - lutusp 13y ago
      > I agree, but I don't think I ever said that racism was "good", just that it is not always negative or arbitrary. That doesn't change the meaning. My rejoinder says that racism, regardless of whether it elevates or degrades the subject group, always has negative effects.
      - dllthomas 13y ago
        I read the grand-parent as a note that "denunciation" is overly narrow because it can also be praise that is overly weighted, overly generalized, or misapplied entirely - a claim you seem to agree with. It's "not negative" in the way that "positive feedback" is "not negative" - which says nothing about the consequences.

by lutusp 13y ago

danieltillett 13y ago

Racism is not always arbitrary nor negative. A good example would be the casual racism implicit is statements like "Jews are smart" or "Chinese are hardworking". Both statements are highly racist and reflect lazy thinking - while I have met many smart jewish people and lots of hard working people who were born in China, I have also met a number dumber than a box of hammers and lazier than a tree full of sloths.

lutusp 13y ago
> Racism is not always arbitrary nor negative. On the contrary. A deep understanding of these issues leads one to the conclusion that stereotyping, whether positive or negative, is harmful because it reduces the described group to a set of cliches, thereby preventing the group from having equal standing with other groups. If a group is stereotyped with a positive trait (Jews are smart, Asians are good at math), that stereotype will work against them in open competition with other groups (don't give Abraham extra help in class, he doesn't need it, he's Jewish). Same with negative stereotypes. Tl;dr: stereotyping, regardless of what kind it is, stands in the way of equality and fair dealing.
- danieltillett 13y ago
  >stereotyping, regardless of what kind it is, stands in the way of equality and fair dealing. I agree, but I don't think I ever said that racism was "good", just that it is not always negative or arbitrary. One thing it always is is lazy. Individuals should always be treated as an individual and not as a member of some "convenient" grouping that enables a person to avoid having to think.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > I agree, but I don't think I ever said that racism was "good", just that it is not always negative or arbitrary. That doesn't change the meaning. My rejoinder says that racism, regardless of whether it elevates or degrades the subject group, always has negative effects.
    - dllthomas 13y ago
      I read the grand-parent as a note that "denunciation" is overly narrow because it can also be praise that is overly weighted, overly generalized, or misapplied entirely - a claim you seem to agree with. It's "not negative" in the way that "positive feedback" is "not negative" - which says nothing about the consequences.