Racism is on a spectrum

Post Reply New Topic

I agree with Beneficii, I'm skeptical too, since there is a strong motivation to deny any innate prejudice due to a desire not to appear to be a "bad" person.



That's just it, racism doesn't require it's agents to have a conscious belief that black people are inferior. This extends to such things as resumes submitted by black names that don't get called back at the same rate as white names.


Mostly by denying racism even exists, while at the same time undermining the legitimacy of a black candidate by questioning his citizenship, religion, and loyalties. By responding to his election by nominating a blatant racist who sides with white supremacists. By removing civil rights protections in voting that date back to the 1960s.

Here's an entire sociological study on the subject of color-blind racism. I won't hold my breath waiting for you to finish reading it.
https://anth1001.files.wordpress.com/20 ... __2006.pdf

And yet you still appear to be oblivious to the author's explicit references to North American culture, and the reasoning behind such.



Your example of a "non-white attitude" is inclusive of white people, thereby disqualifying it. Care to have another go?



You appear to be under the misapprehension that the definitions of words can be changed according to personal beliefs. Dictionaries exist for a reason. If you wish to know the definition of racism, and its history, I highly recommend starting with the OED.



Your personal disbeliefs of the veracity of another person's testimony are irrelevant without supporting evidence. I stand by the notion of innocent until proven guilty, especially where thought crimes are concerned.



Unconscious racism is an oxymoron, no matter how many sociologists agree to redefine the word "racism". A subconscious in-group preference for people who look like mom and pop is not a belief of superiority/inferiority based on race, it's a ubiquitous, naturally-occurring automatic defence mechanism. The only way to eliminate such a response would be to make the entire human race homogeneous.

It's no different to suggesting that people who have a subconscious preference for partners of the opposite sex are "unconsciously homophobic", that straight women are "unconsciously misogynistic" or that transgender people are "unconsciously sexist".

This is why equality law specifically refers to "prejudice" rather than "automatic subconscious responses".



Only if you assume that the employers weren't making conscious decisions, that racism can be unconscious, that names are unconsciously associated with races, that the study was double-blind, etc. Or we can apply Occam's Razor and make the single, reasonable assumption that some employers are consciously prejudiced.



A sociological study using, as its data, a survey of 627 white American college kids from the 1997. And a non-representative study of 323 whites and and 67 blacks from Detroit, of which 66 white and 17 black interviews were used.

"Although the data from this study are very suggestive and, I believe, essentially right, the study has some limitations. First, it is based on a convenient,rather than a representative, sample, limiting the capacity for generalizing the findings to the white population at large."

"Another limitation of the study is that interviews were conducted only with white respondents. Thus, this data set does not allow us to examine whether or not their views are different from blacks’. Finally, due to budget constraints, the sample was small, albeit large when compared to most interview-based work."

I'll pass, thanks.

For some reason I ended up on this forum after a while
I didn't follow the whole discussion, just wanted to say discrimination or racism here in my country Holland is a big issue nowadays. it is not an exclusive white issue, not between white and black, but whites and muslims. They gather in large groups, bothering whites, for example at the entrance of a supermarket, and threaten to kill em, see video

http://www.ad.nl/amsterdam/doodsbedreig ... ~a3c655a9/

The man on the video says "cheeseheads (nickname for ethnic dutch, since the dutch eat a lot of cheese) kill you all"
the prime minister and many responded to this,
but problem unresolved

I'm extrapolating a psychological phenomenon to other humans.


No, because it doesn't disqualify it. I hold both groups to the same standard, i.e., educating themselves on the subject of race. I don't believe white people care as much about the subject. In general.


That's why there are new words and phrases coined to talk about it. The whole point of this thread seems to be that racism can exist in forms other than the classical one. Scientific tests reveal that innate biases can be present even in people that don't hold the belief that other races are inferior.


This is another example of misplaced defensiveness. No one is accusing an individual of a crime. We are addressing a problem in society, that racism exists in many forms, that it can operate below the level of conscious hatred.


Therefore any attempts to address the problem of racial inequality are somehow "unnatural"? How convenient (for you).



All correct.


Well, here's the paper:
http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873
Conscious prejudice would not explain that higher (fake) qualifications resulted in less of an increase in callbacks for black sounding names than white sounding names, because qualifications wouldn't matter to a conscious racist.


I'm quite sure you can pass for a white person any day, based only on what you've written.

Not caring about race is optimal. It stops becoming an issue when it becomes irrelevant. It should be encouraged.

It's a luxury only the dominant race can afford.

It's what you want everyone to be doing. Because those that aren't, the racists, will stand out more, and be condemned more. Because it would be less normalised. Because people would be going about their business without race factoring into anything, then would be shocked on seeing someone making it factor in. Like in my thread about how people were introduced to the concept of racism.

You're applying social theory dealing with the unique cultural history of America and applying it to other cultures based solely on skin colour.



It disqualifies it from the category "non-white".



And thus the arguments against such, or were you expecting an echo chamber?



I've referred to such already. Such biases are not equivalent to racism.



Nor was there a suggestion of such. The notion of "thought crimes" was raised as an allegory, though I suspect you're already fully aware of that. Oh, and I'll thank you to refrain from further ad hominem. My position is entirely bereft of any need to "defend" anyone or anything but my assertions. Feel free to attack my opinions, as I have done so with your own, but keep your ill-conceived unqualified psychological profiling to yourself.



You're inventing problems, not addressing them. Addressing problems requires more than pointing out theoretical unconscious biases then labelling them as "bad". You've failed to demonstrate a problem, let alone address one.



I don't find your illogical strawman even remotely convenient, nor do I find it amusing. Meanwhile, you've completely failed to argue the point I made.



I'm familiar with it, and several others like it.



Only if you further assume that prejudice is a static value.



Asinine and unproductive, much like the article in the OP.



I wholeheartedly agree. Likewise, I'm in favour of giving bigots a platform to better enable their self-mutilation of public image. You only need look at the BNP's Nick Griffin to see how effective this is.

Most people don't think it factors in now. And yet discrimination in many forms still persists.
I urge you to read this book, Racism without Racists by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva. It's free.
https://anth1001.files.wordpress.com/20 ... __2006.pdf

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor
freedom, and yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops with-
out plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and
lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many
waters. This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one,
or it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power
concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.
—Frederick Douglass,
My Bondage and My Freedom

There’s nothing wrong with a race of people creating a society for their own benefit, but obviously it’s in the interests of non-whites who want to leech from white-created societies to convince whites that there is something wrong with it. That’s what the word racism is really for: racial aggression against whites disguised as racial defence against whites. If ‘white racism’ was so bad for non-whites they’d be trying to get away from whites instead of following them around.

And this is basically why this thread and others like it are such BS. These threads tend to follow a familiar pattern:

- Some media outlet publishes a BS article by someone claiming ‘I’m white and we whites should feel more guilty for how bad we are’ (even though in this case the author is Jewish and therefore not white, but never mind)
- A status-signaller like beneficii sees the article and thinks ‘hey if I post a link to that article on an internet forum I’ll make myself look really clever and people will pat me on the back for having the right opinions
- Said internet poster will imply that race doesn’t really exist although somehow they have no problem identifying white people and lecturing them, hahaha
- A few people will raise mild objections to the opening post, and this will confirm the opening poster’s smug belief that although white people are generally really bad, the opening poster if one of the good whites.

Just watch everyone – in a few days beneficii will be posting a link to another BS hate-on-whitey article with the subtext being ‘look at how clever and moral I am everyone’. These articles are ten a penny if you read the Huffington Post, Salon, the New York Times and so on.

^^

Thank Christ, someone said it how it is.

Thank you! I was worried I would have to prove that racists also exist in England, but you did it for me! But seriously, no one needs your alt-right bullcrap, we are having a serious discussion for adults.

There's a Godfrey Elfwick parody in here somewhere.

Thank you too, the Parent's Basement Cretins were really under-represented in this thread.

Personal attacks when no names were mentioned. I believe they call this a perfect blend of ad hominem and knee jerk reaction.

I stand by my previous comments in the thread, and am surprised you only noticed me when there was the slight possibility you were insinuated as resorting to calling people names and deflection questions rather than actually offering up political debate.