U.S. Politics: Having a Good Time

[aceluby]

16 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I mostly agree with what you are saying here.  The Dictionary defines racism as being something general, like "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.   This includes beliefs that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."   This is also more or less how I define racism. 

Others (almost always of a liberal bend) seek to add an additional element to racism, which is that in a society such as ours where institutional racism is such a problem, institutional racism and racism are inexplicably linked.  Thus white people cannot be the victims of racism because any racial prejudice they may experience does not have institutional support of society at large behind it.  I assume this is what Dr. Pepper means when she says:

Because the idea that no white person in America has ever experienced racism/prejudice seems ridiculous.  But perhaps she meant "white people as a whole" rather than each individual white person.  I'll let her speak for herself on that. 

EDIT:  Spelling.

The key to the definition of racism though, is the belief that one's own race is superior.  It's a difference that makes racism very difficult to find in non-white groups, and is different than general bigotry and stereotypes.  What you'll see then is people believe that equality + anger of the lack of equality = superiority.  You see this kind of reasoning all the time on the right when groups are looking for equality, but get labeled as wanting 'special' rules, then declaring themselves the victims.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

35 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I mostly agree with what you are saying here.  The Dictionary defines racism as being something general, like "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.   This includes beliefs that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."   This is also more or less how I define racism. 

Others (almost always of a liberal bend) seek to add an additional element to racism, which is that in a society such as ours where institutional racism is such a problem, institutional racism and racism are inexplicably linked.  Thus white people cannot be the victims of racism because any racial prejudice they may experience does not have institutional support of society at large behind it.  I assume this is what Dr. Pepper means when she says:

Because the idea that no white person in America has ever experienced racism/prejudice seems ridiculous.  But perhaps she meant "white people as a whole" rather than each individual white person.  I'll let her speak for herself on that. 

EDIT:  Spelling.

And that gets to the broader point I’ve made before, that it’s fundamentally important that you separate the two constructs. Same goes with white privilege and racism. Because I can explain white privilege and institutional racism to a white person who is unfamiliar with the concepts and get them to understand and agree that they’re real and a problem that needs to be corrected, but if the starting point is me spitting in their face that they’re automatically a racist, then I know that it’s going to be next to impossible to convert them, and in fact it’s quite likely that I’ll drive them further away.  

[Zorral]

Um, the statement with which somebody has problems with, explicitly states "THESE white guys," which in terms of quantification, within the context of the discussion of a mass murderer, does NOT say all white guys, but rather, these particularly white guys who commit mass murder.  But, yanno, just keep blowharding about what isn't even contained in the statement, because, yanno, as we see demonstrated frequently right that's what some white guys do!  Nor do they go back to actually, yanno, read what they did not read, and maybe even, o heck, apologize for being wrong and accusatory? It's like gun laws, no matter how many people are killed in public by guys with guns, we never admit there is a problem and try to fix it.  Good lordessa, we might become, well, Australia, where they have gun control and people aren't killed massively at outdoor concerts with guns.  Though, then there is France . . . .  but those were muslims not white guys, so that's different!

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/eagles-of-death-metal-paris-explosion-20151113

As well, we see some white guy throwing paper towels as a marked marker of disrespect and  contempt for all people who aren't like them.  Hmmm, will romperman throw tourniquets in  Las Vegas?

[Week]

4 minutes ago, aceluby said:

The key to the definition of racism though, is the belief that one's own race is superior.  It's a difference that makes racism very difficult to find in non-white groups, and is different than general bigotry and stereotypes.  What you'll see then is people believe that equality + anger of the lack of equality = superiority.  You see this kind of reasoning all the time on the right when groups are looking for equality, but get labeled as wanting 'special' rules, then declaring themselves the victims.

Agree with this -- saying that "whites do not experience racism" is not saying that "whites do no experience bigotry, stereotyping, etc.". The disagreement here is, I think, a need for nomenclature -- a definition of terms. I don't think we are all using 'racism' with the same meaning.

 

As racism is currently discussed, power dynamic is implicit as well as bigotry. Minorities do not have power over white people in the US -- therefore, white people are not victims of racism defined as such.

[Seli]

28 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said:

 

Therefore, by proxy White people are all racist, right? Because if your definition of racism selects for the statistical advantage of whites as a part of its premise, then there's no way a white person can escape that label. Conceptually speaking, this is garbage because there's no way you can assign attitudes, beliefs, and dominance to skin color alone, but it does make for good semantics.

What that means is that all white people gain advantage from the racism in society. Because they can't help it since society has been structured for their advantage for so long.

[maarsen]

16 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Um, the statement with which somebody has problems with, explicitly states "THESE white guys," which in terms of quantification, within the context of the discussion of a mass murderer, does NOT say all white guys, but rather, these particularly white guys who commit mass murder.  But, yanno, just keep blowharding about what isn't even contained in the statement, because, yanno, as we see demonstrated frequently right that's what some white guys do! 

As well, we see some white guy throwing paper towels as a marked marker of disrespect and  contempt for all people who aren't like them.  Hmmm, will romperman throw tourniquets in  Las Vegas?

I have a vague memory of the Patty Hearst kidnapping and part of the ransom demand was to give food to the poor in San Francisco. The food was not just quietly passed out but hurled at those waiting to collect. Trump keeps dredging up unsavory memories for me.

[Mother Cocanuts]

1 hour ago, Sword of Doom said:

Actually yes, all white people are racist and we have greatly benefited from white supremacy and still benefit from it since society is still very much based around white supremacy and white people still perpetuate it.

Casual / subtle racism is just as dangerous as overt / extreme racism, and lots of white people perpetuate casual / subtle forms of racism. 
 

This actually explains it fairly well.

Doesn't his video contradict your statements? If we are to go by his concept of racism, then dominance has nothing to do with it. Even he admits to sustaining racial biases. And if racism is a spectrum rather than an absolute, couldn't any one person be a racist, and conversely any one person can be a target of that racism, even white people?  Aren't you being a "sith lord" by claiming an absolute that white people are all racist?

[Mother Cocanuts]

9 minutes ago, Seli said:

What that means is that all white people gain advantage from the racism in society. Because they can't help it since society has been structured for their advantage for so long.

Really? Which advantage do homeless white people have?

[Maithanet]

22 minutes ago, aceluby said:

The key to the definition of racism though, is the belief that one's own race is superior.  It's a difference that makes racism very difficult to find in non-white groups, and is different than general bigotry and stereotypes.  What you'll see then is people believe that equality + anger of the lack of equality = superiority.  You see this kind of reasoning all the time on the right when groups are looking for equality, but get labeled as wanting 'special' rules, then declaring themselves the victims.

Yeah, I thought about that, and that part is actually the section I have trouble with in the dictionary definition.  Because I feel like if bigotry/prejudice needs to be expressed in the context of thinking that one race is superior, then you are going to be missing an awful lot of things.  I would even go so far as to say that a huge portion (the majority?) of racism that occurs in this country is done at a subconsious/gut level, and is done by people who would claim they are not racist and they do not believe any race to be superior/inferior.  For example, I heard plenty of racial slurs every day in high school, and almost always people saying those things were looking for "this is a good insult", not "I am demeaning this person on racial grounds because black/white/latino people are inferior". 

[Bonnot OG]

It's funny how some white people think that black people have their own bias and that the white people that wrote dictionary definitions didn't, or that they themselves don't have a certain bias when it comes to what racism is when they go by a dictionary definition.

This thread just proves that white people are why racism in will not be solved. They're too fragile to discuss race. "OMG, you said all white people are racist and that white people can't be victims of racism! The dictionary says it's this!"

[Week]

5 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said:

Really? Which advantage do homeless white people have?

The path out from being homeless is, by a large, different for white people than people of color. Or, consider, when someone says "welfare queen" what image do you think typically comes to mind for most people?

Clearly there are situations where people are poor, sick, disabled, etc. -- their treatment and regard in American society is certainly different.

[Bonnot OG]

17 minutes ago, Seli said:

What that means is that all white people gain advantage from the racism in society. Because they can't help it since society has been structured for their advantage for so long.

Won't someone think of the white people being stuck with a label instead of the people of color stuck in a situation created by white people thanks to centuries of slavery and oppression even after slavery ended?! 

I said it before, white people have benefited from white supremacy and still benefit from it.

And if someone's biggest worry is being labeled from that privilege, they are very much the epitome of privilege and have not experienced racial oppression aka racism.
 

[Maithanet]

1 minute ago, Sword of Doom said:

This thread just proves that white people are why racism in will not be solved. They're too fragile to discuss race. "OMG, you said all white people are racist and that white people can't be victims of racism! The dictionary says it's this!"

What are you trying to accomplish with this kind of statement?  We are discussing racism right now and have been for the past 30 or so posts. 

[Week]

3 minutes ago, Sword of Doom said:

It's funny how some white people think that black people have their own bias and that the white people that wrote dictionary definitions didn't, or that they themselves don't have a certain bias when it comes to what racism is when they go by a dictionary definition.

This thread just proves that white people are why racism in will not be solved. They're too fragile to discuss race. "OMG, you said all white people are racist and that white people can't be victims of racism! The dictionary says it's this!"

Or, the anti-diversity screed of "take the best candidate" -- as if there is a color, gender, and historically agnostic algorithm that can magically and perfectly pick the "most deserving candidate" based on a resume. Ignoring that the entire game is already rigged.

[aceluby]

9 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said:

Really? Which advantage do homeless white people have?

The same most groups of people get over similar groups of minorities.  Police interactions, general populace interactions, interactions at homeless shelters....

I mean.... seriously.  This is really a dense question to ask.

[polishgenius]

Just now, Maithanet said:

What are you trying to accomplish with this kind of statement?  We are discussing racism right now and have been for the past 30 or so posts. 

Sword of Doom isn't interested in solving any kind of a problem. Just in shouting at people who are trying to talk this shit through. It's true that us fragile white people are the biggest obstacle to solving racism in Western society, for sure, but if anyone makes an attempt at working through it that isn't an immediate 'mea culpa, all my fault' SoD will immediately do whatever possible to send anybody making small steps of thought back into their corner with closed-off worldview intact and, if at all possible, reinforced.

[Kalbear]

6 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

What are you trying to accomplish with this kind of statement?  We are discussing racism right now and have been for the past 30 or so posts. 

You really haven't though. You've been discussing the definition of racism (which is not a nice thing, but isn't the issue) vs. the racism that is built in to the fundament of US society, and many people have been equating the two. 

And I agree, this is a massive problem. There are plenty of people who think racism means hating people because of their race and that alone - and sure, white people are also a problem there, but this is basically like saying #alllivesmatter to someone trying to talk about #blacklivesmatter. It derails the discussion from a discussion about problems with racism that people are experiencing which get them killed into a discussion about how some people dislike white people some times and got their feelings hurt. 

[Kalbear]

2 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

Sword of Doom isn't interested in solving any kind of a problem. Just in shouting at people who are trying to talk this shit through. It's true that us fragile white people are the biggest obstacle to solving racism in Western society, for sure, but if anyone makes an attempt at working through it that isn't an immediate 'mea culpa, all my fault' SoD will immediately do whatever possible to send anybody making small steps of thought back into their corner with closed-off worldview intact and, if at all possible, reinforced.

You're right that he's not interested in solving a problem; he's interested in pissing people off. Sometimes getting pissed off will make you reexamine why; as someone on NPR said recently, if hearing something makes you uncomfortable that is when you should be MOST aware of your tendency to shut it off and start looking at it more. Other times you won't be able to do that.

But with white people it's very easy to make them uncomfortable by pointing out all the benefits they get from just being white, and how the system of racism in the US benefits them. 

That said, HOLY FUCK is this not about US politics right now.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

Ok - completely separately, the IRS just released the list of regulations that they are going to repeal or replace as a result of the executive order from earlier this year. 

Here are some you should be aware of.  They are:

1.  Completely withdrawing regulations that were meant to stop an abuse where people undervalued private company interests for estate tax purposes based on shady valuation practices. 

2.  Postponing effectiveness and probably substantially revising regulations regarding related party debt/equity characterization (in large part in place to combat inversions).  Basically they think tax reform will moot the need.

3.  Postponing effectiveness on the taxability of moving IP offshore.

 

[polishgenius]

5 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

You're right that he's not interested in solving a problem; he's interested in pissing people off. Sometimes getting pissed off will make you reexamine why; as someone on NPR said recently, if hearing something makes you uncomfortable that is when you should be MOST aware of your tendency to shut it off and start looking at it more.

 

This is fair enough. The problem comes when even when people start trying to be a bit reflective and he just drives any discussion back. There are other piss-people-off-merchants here who don't do that.

 

 

eta: but yes, this is probably not the right place for this.