IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 30th July 2021, 10:45 AM   #1641
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,742
"Bad Idea" and "Overreaction to Bad Idea" don't cancel each other out or create an argumentative paradox regardless of what the internet wants us to think.

McCarthyism didn't make Communism a good idea.
__________________
"When enough people make false promises, words stop meaning anything. Then there are no more answers, only better and better lies." - Jon Snow

"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 10:52 AM   #1642
SuburbanTurkey
Penultimate Amazing
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 11,040
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
"Bad Idea" and "Overreaction to Bad Idea" don't cancel each other out or create an argumentative paradox regardless of what the internet wants us to think.

McCarthyism didn't make Communism a good idea.
Sure, but McCarthyism did lead to seeing communism in places it didn't exist.

It is transparently clear that the conservatives whipping up this mob of deranged, frothy-mouthed reactionaries are doing so for purely cynical reasons in order to attack ideas that are not critical race theory. They admit as much themselves, as has been pointed out numerous times already in this thread.

The people screaming that Democrats are sucking down child souls under a pizza place don't get half credit because soul-cooking would be bad if it existed. Likewise, the validity of an anti-communist worldview does not really matter when the things being attacked are not marxism, critical race theory, or any other boogieman of the day.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 30th July 2021 at 10:53 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 11:07 AM   #1643
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,742
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Sure, but McCarthyism did lead to seeing communism in places it didn't exist.

It is transparently clear that the conservatives whipping up this mob of deranged, frothy-mouthed reactionaries are doing so for purely cynical reasons in order to attack ideas that are not critical race theory. They admit as much themselves, as has been pointed out numerous times already in this thread.

The people screaming that Democrats are sucking down child souls under a pizza place don't get half credit because soul-cooking would be bad if it existed. Likewise, the validity of an anti-communist worldview does not really matter when the things being attacked are not marxism, critical race theory, or any other boogieman of the day.
Yea well the difference isn't the Left isn't trying really, really, really hard into talking itself into thinking child soul sucking is a good idea and maybe it deserves another chance because it's least it's not as bad as Capitalism.
__________________
"When enough people make false promises, words stop meaning anything. Then there are no more answers, only better and better lies." - Jon Snow

"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 11:09 AM   #1644
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 7,685
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
The cries of CRT are just a hyperbolic panic-mongering tactic to gin up support to oppose ordinary anti-racism policies and the teaching of historically correct versions of US history that doesn't whitewash the sins of the nation.
I'm pretty sure the anti-"CRT" folks would oppose "ordinary anti-racism policies," whatever banner they happen to be flying under. Come to think of it, it's worth asking whether the ordinary policies are working or not.

Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
I didn't see "special" in the post you quoted. What made you think the responsibility was not shared?
Women and non-binary identifying persons were not mentioned, only men. I'll leave it to Suddenly to clarify one way or another.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 11:11 AM   #1645
SuburbanTurkey
Penultimate Amazing
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 11,040
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Yea well the difference isn't the Left isn't trying really, really, really hard into talking itself into thinking child soul sucking is a good idea and maybe it deserves another chance because it's least it's not as bad as Capitalism.
The brand of leftism that is remotely popular in this country is nothing more radical than the types of social democracy commonly seen among our Western allies, where it has a long track record of good service.

The American Overton window could expand a lot leftwards still be nowhere close to any kind of authoritarian Marxism.

ETA: The reactionaries are reacting to a leftward push in this country, but it's not marxism or anywhere close to that, and there's no reason to pretend that their lies have any validity.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 30th July 2021 at 11:23 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 11:37 AM   #1646
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 16,422
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I can make a lot of movie references, though!
Those are also good!
__________________
The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 12:54 PM   #1647
ahhell
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,722
McCarthyism is a really good analogy.

McCarthy didn't make Stalinism a good idea and the moral panic that started seeing commies behind every tree didn't mean there weren't actual commie spies in pretty high positions in the government.

What the phrase, there's nothing wrong with "Pic your idea" that can't be fixed by dividing by 10. That's true of CRT, its also true of the Anti-CRT panic.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 12:58 PM   #1648
ahhell
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,722
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
The brand of leftism that is remotely popular in this country is nothing more radical than the types of social democracy commonly seen among our Western allies, where it has a long track record of good service.

The American Overton window could expand a lot leftwards still be nowhere close to any kind of authoritarian Marxism.

ETA: The reactionaries are reacting to a leftward push in this country, but it's not marxism or anywhere close to that, and there's no reason to pretend that their lies have any validity.
I think Ibram X Kendi puts lie to this. He's taken quite seriously and is highly respected and also wants to create an anti-racist board that would be self-appointed and have veto power over every law in the country.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 01:37 PM   #1649
theprestige
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 53,565
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Why would men who didn't personally create those structures have a special responsibility to deconstruct them? This sounds something like collective guilt based on circumstances beyond individual control.
I think anyone who inadvertently finds themselves benefiting from an unjust system has a moral responsibility to take part in the dismantling or reform of that system. It's not about collective guilt. It's about personal choice. Do you choose to keep exploiting an abusive system to your benefit and the detriment of others? Or do you choose to take part in fixing it?

You seem to be arguing that since you didn't create the system, and didn't ask to be born into it, there's nothing wrong with you taking advantage of it, and there's nothing wrong with your tacit agreement to perpetuate it.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 02:32 PM   #1650
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 16,422
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I think anyone who inadvertently finds themselves benefiting from an unjust system has a moral responsibility to take part in the dismantling or reform of that system. It's not about collective guilt. It's about personal choice. Do you choose to keep exploiting an abusive system to your benefit and the detriment of others? Or do you choose to take part in fixing it?

You seem to be arguing that since you didn't create the system, and didn't ask to be born into it, there's nothing wrong with you taking advantage of it, and there's nothing wrong with your tacit agreement to perpetuate it.
That all sounds very good and noble. I support the sentiment.

Now for the pragmatic part: How exactly should an everyday citizen take part in dismantling that unjust system? What exactly are all of you male humans going to actually do in order to dismantle the unjust patriarchal systems that exist around the world and stop exploiting female humans?
__________________
The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 03:57 PM   #1651
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,234
If I'm not mistaken, on both matters of racial and sexual inequality in society, there are a wide range of proposals of varying merit and track record.

It's tricky to get one past the objections of people that claim the problem doesn't exist and that they shouldn't have to do anything about it even if it does.
__________________

gnome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 04:59 PM   #1652
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 16,422
Originally Posted by gnome View Post
If I'm not mistaken, on both matters of racial and sexual inequality in society, there are a wide range of proposals of varying merit and track record.

It's tricky to get one past the objections of people that claim the problem doesn't exist and that they shouldn't have to do anything about it even if it does.
I kind of agree? I mean, people shouldn't be pretending that a problem doesn't exist (although I'm not at all surprised, the volume of 'there's no conflict it's all in your head' is large).

But what also gets lost is the actual realistic discussion of what can reasonably be done, who should be expected to do it, and whether or not it can be reasonably expected to be effective. There's often, to my mind, a lack of willingness to consider longer term potential outcomes.

A bit off topic, but UBI is one that falls into that category for me. It's a noble idea, and at first glance it makes sense. But there's a definite lack of consideration for the long-term viability of it. It might be sustainable for a couple of years, maybe for a decade if we're lucky... but for the life of my I can't figure out how it will can be maintained over the long term.

Racial issues in the US also falls into this. Yes, there's clearly a residual problem, there's definitely a lingering discrepancy. I just don't think that the anti-racism approach of constantly putting "whiteness" under a microscope, and attributing disparities to "white supremacy" - especially with respect to young children - is going to actually solve that problem. I think it's much more likely to create new and worse problems, to create further schisms along racial lines. It might get a short-term lift from raising awareness... but I don't think it's a sustainable approach. I think long run it will do far more harm than good.
__________________
The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2021, 09:37 PM   #1653
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,234
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
A bit off topic, but UBI is one that falls into that category for me. It's a noble idea, and at first glance it makes sense. But there's a definite lack of consideration for the long-term viability of it. It might be sustainable for a couple of years, maybe for a decade if we're lucky... but for the life of my I can't figure out how it will can be maintained over the long term.
The whole idea depends on it being cheaper to give some unconditionally than to invest so much in careful means-testing. Saving on bureaucratic costs, but also in more effective results that could serve to reduce indirect costs that come from crime and poor healthcare. The math isn't at all obvious, and so I think it bears watching. It doesn't seem like it's obviously going to net one way or the other--but if it's even close, the society with less crime and better living conditions seems worth it.

Quote:
Racial issues in the US also falls into this. Yes, there's clearly a residual problem, there's definitely a lingering discrepancy. I just don't think that the anti-racism approach of constantly putting "whiteness" under a microscope, and attributing disparities to "white supremacy" - especially with respect to young children - is going to actually solve that problem. I think it's much more likely to create new and worse problems, to create further schisms along racial lines. It might get a short-term lift from raising awareness... but I don't think it's a sustainable approach. I think long run it will do far more harm than good.
Left and Right alike tend to conflate what you might call individual racism, a personal failing, with institutional racism, a problem that needs addressing but isn't personal. The conversation would really benefit from being careful to differentiate them.
__________________

gnome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2021, 04:10 AM   #1654
CaptainHowdy
Graduate Poster
 
CaptainHowdy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,756
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I think anyone who inadvertently finds themselves benefiting from an unjust system has a moral responsibility to take part in the dismantling or reform of that system. It's not about collective guilt. It's about personal choice. Do you choose to keep exploiting an abusive system to your benefit and the detriment of others? Or do you choose to take part in fixing it?

You seem to be arguing that since you didn't create the system, and didn't ask to be born into it, there's nothing wrong with you taking advantage of it, and there's nothing wrong with your tacit agreement to perpetuate it.
What have you personally done to dismantle or reform the system? What comforts, privileges, advantages, conveniences, etc. have you given up so that others may suffer less? Or do you think of yourself as someone who does not benefit from an unjust system and therefore does not need to make any sacrifices?
CaptainHowdy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2021, 08:16 AM   #1655
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 7,685
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
You seem to be arguing that since you didn't create the system, and didn't ask to be born into it, there's nothing wrong with you taking advantage of it, and there's nothing wrong with your tacit agreement to perpetuate it.
No. I'm arguing that those with the power to change an unjust system ought to do so, whether they are men, women, or non-binary identifying persons. Many men are totally disenfranchised, many women have plenty of power and influence. It makes rather little sense to argue that 21st c. men have a special responsibility to dismantle something they didn't put in place, just b/c they share sexual morphology with those who did.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 31st July 2021 at 08:17 AM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2021, 08:30 AM   #1656
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 4,810
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Many men are totally disenfranchised, many women have plenty of power and influence.
I think the idea isn't supposed to be that all women have it better than all men. I think the idea is supposed to be that for a given individual, all things being equal, things will be easier for them if they are a man. Similarly, for a given individual, all things being equal, things will be easier for them if they are white as opposed to black.

I think most of that is hogwash and what really matters is what class you're born into.
__________________
I don't like that man. I must get to know him better. --Abraham Lincoln
sir drinks-a-lot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2021, 09:29 AM   #1657
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 14,604
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
I think the idea isn't supposed to be that all women have it better than all men. I think the idea is supposed to be that for a given individual, all things being equal, things will be easier for them if they are a man. Similarly, for a given individual, all things being equal, things will be easier for them if they are white as opposed to black.

I think most of that is hogwash and what really matters is what class you're born into.
There are umpteen different kinds of privilege: High IQ privilege, height privilege, two-parent household privilege, mental health privilege etc. John McWhorter asks who has more of an advantage, a photogenic young Black woman from Brooklyn or an obese, pimply-faced White Christian man from rural West Virginia? When a person out here wants to mock a hypothetical someone for low intelligence, they often affect a Southern accent.

I don't think it's at all difficult to argue that Blacks have to deal with a lot more **** than Whites. A class-based affirmative action will still look a lot like racial affirmative action.
__________________
Cain: Don't be a homo.
Diablo: What's that supposed to mean?
Cain: It's a heteronormative remark meant to be taken at face-value.
Diablo: You're a lousy bigot. Apologise and withdraw that remark.
Cain: Nah.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2021, 11:38 AM   #1658
Paul2
Philosopher
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,920
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
What have you personally done to dismantle or reform the system? What comforts, privileges, advantages, conveniences, etc. have you given up so that others may suffer less? Or do you think of yourself as someone who does not benefit from an unjust system and therefore does not need to make any sacrifices?
I'm unclear as to how I, as a white man, might give up the advantages I have in getting a job. I have a hard time imagining not applying for the best job I could, and trying my best to get it, but my chances of getting that job are presumably better than others' chance because of my privileges.

Now, there are plenty of things I can do after I've gotten the best job that I wanted. I could, say, join my union that fights for better jobs for those not privileged as much as I. I can join and contribute to a political party that has similar goals. I can operate in my workplace with a recognition of disadvantages that others might have.

But those are all ancillary to getting the job itself, which seems to be the cruz of the problem. What might CRT have to say about this situation?
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2021, 02:57 PM   #1659
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 7,685
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
What exactly are all of you male humans going to actually do in order to dismantle the unjust patriarchal systems that exist around the world and stop exploiting female humans?
Which systems need to be dismantled here in North America? I can possibly help out with that, but not if it requires me to take a job in HR or (heavens forfend) management.

I suppose we could ask the same question about white supremacist systems. Aside from defunding the police, which systems need to be dismantled? Delgado is fond of claiming “Everything must change at once,” but it's difficult to find a checklist.
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
What have you personally done to dismantle or reform the system?
Always a good question to ponder. Precious little which actually helped, I'm afraid. Tried to treat cis women and trans women like everyone else, except when they wanted directions to the restroom. Voted for the sort of folks who support Title IX. Marched with a knitted pink hat, etc.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 31st July 2021 at 04:19 PM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2021, 06:33 PM   #1660
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,667
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
What have you personally done to dismantle or reform the system? What comforts, privileges, advantages, conveniences, etc. have you given up so that others may suffer less? Or do you think of yourself as someone who does not benefit from an unjust system and therefore does not need to make any sacrifices?
Even if the answer were, "Absolutely nothing and in fact I have personally cynically leveraged all these systems for my personal advantage while striving to maintain them," that would not change the validity of the statement.

You are also leaning towards the, 'you just want cishet white men to suffer' line of thinking. Helping other suffer less does not mean you suffer more, unless one defines more equity and equality as 'giving up' and 'suffering'. There are a few ideologies that would indeed do that.

Guess what they are.

Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
No. I'm arguing that those with the power to change an unjust system ought to do so, whether they are men, women, or non-binary identifying persons. Many men are totally disenfranchised, many women have plenty of power and influence. It makes rather little sense to argue that 21st c. men have a special responsibility to dismantle something they didn't put in place, just b/c they share sexual morphology with those who did.
Everyone has privileges. Everyone has a duty to try to bend the arc of the universe towards justice. Not everyone, as groups, have the same ability to do so. More power means more responsibility of course.

Leaving aside the other mechanisms and history leaving straight white men with more political, social, and economic power in the US (which all means they have more ability to change things), they are also the group most opposed to changing things to fix these inequalities. We are the group with the most incentive to oppose changes and support the inequality. This means if you are one and you still argue for and try to change things, it is more difficult to dismiss it. Statements against self interest carry more weight. Also, racist, sexist, white men are more likely to take the words and actions of other white men as having value. It's kind of their entire thing.

This in no way means only straight white men uphold these systems or only we have a duty to change them. It doesn't even mean any given individual has more ability to change things overriding all other considerations. But it sure as hell explains the focus on especially us.

Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post
I'm unclear as to how I, as a white man, might give up the advantages I have in getting a job. I have a hard time imagining not applying for the best job I could, and trying my best to get it, but my chances of getting that job are presumably better than others' chance because of my privileges.

Now, there are plenty of things I can do after I've gotten the best job that I wanted. I could, say, join my union that fights for better jobs for those not privileged as much as I. I can join and contribute to a political party that has similar goals. I can operate in my workplace with a recognition of disadvantages that others might have.

But those are all ancillary to getting the job itself, which seems to be the cruz of the problem. What might CRT have to say about this situation?
A lot of intersectional arguments that invoke critical theory (I don't recall if any were specifically Critical Race Theory) recognize that many people don't have a meaningful choice in if to benefit from privilege. Being aware of them allows you to have empathy for the people who don't and recognize the other ways to correct for it. 'I just had to work hard so these welfare queens are lazy' for example is not something someone aware of their privilege would likely say. They wouldn't vote for someone running on it. They wouldn't want restrictions and would want refinements and respect for people who need them. They can at least offer moral support to those fighting against their oppression. This can help other people with more ability to meaningfully change things the permission structure, even the incentive structure, to do so.

And of course allowing the teaching of the facts of these things is quite literally the least one could do, even if some kids end up temporarily feeling bad about it.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2021, 07:41 PM   #1661
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 7,685
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Leaving aside the other mechanisms and history leaving straight white men with more political, social, and economic power in the US (which all means they have more ability to change things), they are also the group most opposed to changing things to fix these inequalities.
The median white male in the U.S. has a high school diploma but not a bachelor's degree and makes around $1,115 a week. Do you suppose an individual fitting this description is likely to enjoy outsized political, social, or economic power as a result of his demographics at birth?

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
More power means more responsibility of course.
Of course, but I'd say this moral analysis applies at the individual (or perhaps household) level rather than the group level.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 31st July 2021 at 08:01 PM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2021, 08:32 PM   #1662
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,667
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
The median white male in the U.S. has a high school diploma but not a bachelor's degree and makes around $1,115 a week. Do you suppose an individual fitting this description is likely to enjoy outsized political, social, or economic power as a result of his demographics at birth?
Yes.

Quote:
Of course, but I'd say this moral analysis applies at the individual (or perhaps household) level rather than the group level.
I already outlined many reasons why what you say is wrong, in the post you quoted, that you ignored.

Ignoring it doesn't make it wrong. You haven't addressed the argument.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2021, 11:20 PM   #1663
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 31,096
I’m currently listening to part two of the Opening Arguments two episodes on Critical Race Theory.

They argue that it began in law and derived from Critical Legal theory and while the lawyer on the podcast, Andrew, says he does not subscribe to it, the theory has been useful and has some important points. Moreover CRT is really only something taught at law school or in universities and is NOT used in K-12.

They say that the whole hullabaloo about CRT is a misrepresentation by someone called Christopher Rufo who first started out making some argument about it on Fox, was seen by Trump, and then got CRT mainstreamed as a bogieman and deliberately confused with much simpler and obvious arguments that it is wrong to be racist, and led to arguments that CRT should be banned from higher learning.

Of course the irony here is that many people calling for banning CRT often consider themselves first amendment advocates who demand that universities teach the controversy on various right wing theories…

Does this sum things up?
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 04:49 AM   #1664
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
 
Graham2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,418
From a 1940s book on Classical Music, one of the key idea's of what is mistakenly called 'CRT', namely Inherent Racial Characteristics.



Quote:
"In those days a good deal was light-heartedly talked about races and racial characteristics, for it was before the time when racial myths had shown all the ugly consequences of wide-spread adoption; and it was believed that England was inhabited by 'Saxons' and Ireland by 'Celts' and that those labels designated differences as remarkable as those between dissimilar breeds of dogs. Celts, living in the smaller and less populous island, were supposed to be wistfully imaginative men; Saxons to be pedestrian, gross, materialistic."

Bernard Shore, Sixteen Symphonies, 1949, pg. 341
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!"
'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail

Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...
Graham2001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 10:15 AM   #1665
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 7,685
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
I already outlined many reasons why what you say is wrong, in the post you quoted, that you ignored.
No you simply asserted that people should be evaluated "as groups" regarding their ability to affect positive change. You did not say why it makes sense to think of people as groups instead of considering their individual values, voting records, etc.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 10:21 AM   #1666
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 7,685
Interesting tweet from a former TAM speaker:

https://twitter.com/peterboghossian/...02608465252353

Some of these definitions need work, all of them need footnotes.

Here is the image itself:
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 10:41 AM   #1667
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,667
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
No you simply asserted that people should be evaluated "as groups" regarding their ability to affect positive change. You did not say why it makes sense to think of people as groups instead of considering their individual values, voting records, etc.
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Everyone has privileges. Everyone has a duty to try to bend the arc of the universe towards justice. Not everyone, as groups, have the same ability to do so. More power means more responsibility of course.

Leaving aside the other mechanisms and history leaving straight white men with more political, social, and economic power in the US (which all means they have more ability to change things), they are also the group most opposed to changing things to fix these inequalities. We are the group with the most incentive to oppose changes and support the inequality. This means if you are one and you still argue for and try to change things, it is more difficult to dismiss it. Statements against self interest carry more weight. Also, racist, sexist, white men are more likely to take the words and actions of other white men as having value. It's kind of their entire thing.

This in no way means only straight white men uphold these systems or only we have a duty to change them. It doesn't even mean any given individual has more ability to change things overriding all other considerations. But it sure as hell explains the focus on especially us.
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
No you simply asserted that people should be evaluated "as groups" regarding their ability to affect positive change. You did not say why it makes sense to think of people as groups instead of considering their individual values, voting records, etc.
Your dishonesty isn't clever. I explicitly said why grouping is valid AND that it isn't the only useful way to think of things.

You've also done the remarkably silly thing again of pretending you're being skeptical with 'Just Asking QuestionsTM' while not holding yourself to the same standard.

Why do you think it is valid to only ever valid to look at things as individuals, a method of thinking that would make seeing systemic bias much more difficult. This is the 'don't see race and racism doesn't meaningfully exist' line of argument. You haven't supported it if your standard applies to you.

Why shouldn't the same standard apply to your 'assertions'?
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 11:39 AM   #1668
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 4,810
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I’m currently listening to part two of the Opening Arguments two episodes on Critical Race Theory.

They argue that it began in law and derived from Critical Legal theory and while the lawyer on the podcast, Andrew, says he does not subscribe to it, the theory has been useful and has some important points. Moreover CRT is really only something taught at law school or in universities and is NOT used in K-12.
I'd say this is mostly correct.

Quote:
They say that the whole hullabaloo about CRT is a misrepresentation by someone called Christopher Rufo who first started out making some argument about it on Fox, was seen by Trump, and then got CRT mainstreamed as a bogieman and deliberately confused with much simpler and obvious arguments that it is wrong to be racist, and led to arguments that CRT should be banned from higher learning.
Mostly correct, although biased, especially the part that it's deliberately confused with arguments that it's wrong to be racist. That's one of the the heavily politicized takes. Instead, it is conflated kinda sorta with what I think it better called antiracism - Robin DiAngelo, Ibram kennedy, whiteness studies, etc.

Quote:
Of course the irony here is that many people calling for banning CRT often consider themselves first amendment advocates who demand that universities teach the controversy on various right wing theories…
Also IMO a highly politicized view. I don't think it's the case that many people fall into such a group.
__________________
I don't like that man. I must get to know him better. --Abraham Lincoln
sir drinks-a-lot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 01:13 PM   #1669
CaptainHowdy
Graduate Poster
 
CaptainHowdy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,756
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Which systems need to be dismantled here in North America? I can possibly help out with that, but not if it requires me to take a job in HR or (heavens forfend) management.

I suppose we could ask the same question about white supremacist systems. Aside from defunding the police, which systems need to be dismantled? Delgado is fond of claiming “Everything must change at once,” but it's difficult to find a checklist.Always a good question to ponder. Precious little which actually helped, I'm afraid. Tried to treat cis women and trans women like everyone else, except when they wanted directions to the restroom. Voted for the sort of folks who support Title IX. Marched with a knitted pink hat, etc.
It sounds like you're doing anything you can as an individual. But the problem is systemic. What can you do to fix a system that you didn't create, in which you do not willingly participate or perpetuate, but which benefits you immensely while oppressing the rest of us?
CaptainHowdy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 01:40 PM   #1670
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 7,685
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
I explicitly said why grouping is valid AND that it isn't the only useful way to think of things.
I'm going to assume that you are referring here to your claim that white men "are the group with the most incentive to oppose changes and support the inequality." This claim is demonstrably false (white men are not the race/sex based grouping with the highest median income or educational attainment in the U.S.) but let's put that to the side. Your conclusion still doesn't follow. People should not assume that speaking out for equal opportunity is somehow a "statement against self interest" unless the individual making the statement would personally benefit from perpetuating systemic inequalities. You appear to be assigning characteristics of a broad group of people to individuals (only selves can have "self interest" after all) which is fundamentally the same mistake racists and sexists make when they prejudge people based on race and sex.

It is not only illogical to assume any given white man would benefit from keeping the existing system in place, but it speaks to a lack of imagination as well. Plenty of European Americans have BIPOC kids and want nothing more than to see them succeed. There are fathers raising daughters who want nothing more than to see them succeed. Not everyone construes their "self-interest" so narrowly as to include only themselves or those of their own ethnicity and sex.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Why do you think it is...only ever valid to look at things as individuals, a method of thinking that would make seeing systemic bias much more difficult.
I would not say it's only ever valid to look at things that way, but I would say that we should be fairly cautious about assigning personal characteristics and moral responsibilities to individuals based on a group-level assessment, especially when the groups in question are being drawn using concepts as arbitrary, malleable, and pernicious as race.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
This is the 'don't see race and racism doesn't meaningfully exist' line of argument.
No. This is the argument that individuals are not core samples from a homogenous mix; the interests of any one person are not the interests of their demographic mixture, however finely sliced.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 02:45 PM   #1671
CaptainHowdy
Graduate Poster
 
CaptainHowdy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,756
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Even if the answer were, "Absolutely nothing and in fact I have personally cynically leveraged all these systems for my personal advantage while striving to maintain them," that would not change the validity of the statement.

You are also leaning towards the, 'you just want cishet white men to suffer' line of thinking. Helping other suffer less does not mean you suffer more, unless one defines more equity and equality as 'giving up' and 'suffering'. There are a few ideologies that would indeed do that.

Guess what they are.



Everyone has privileges. Everyone has a duty to try to bend the arc of the universe towards justice. Not everyone, as groups, have the same ability to do so. More power means more responsibility of course.

Leaving aside the other mechanisms and history leaving straight white men with more political, social, and economic power in the US (which all means they have more ability to change things), they are also the group most opposed to changing things to fix these inequalities. We are the group with the most incentive to oppose changes and support the inequality. This means if you are one and you still argue for and try to change things, it is more difficult to dismiss it. Statements against self interest carry more weight. Also, racist, sexist, white men are more likely to take the words and actions of other white men as having value. It's kind of their entire thing.

This in no way means only straight white men uphold these systems or only we have a duty to change them. It doesn't even mean any given individual has more ability to change things overriding all other considerations. But it sure as hell explains the focus on especially us.



A lot of intersectional arguments that invoke critical theory (I don't recall if any were specifically Critical Race Theory) recognize that many people don't have a meaningful choice in if to benefit from privilege. Being aware of them allows you to have empathy for the people who don't and recognize the other ways to correct for it. 'I just had to work hard so these welfare queens are lazy' for example is not something someone aware of their privilege would likely say. They wouldn't vote for someone running on it. They wouldn't want restrictions and would want refinements and respect for people who need them. They can at least offer moral support to those fighting against their oppression. This can help other people with more ability to meaningfully change things the permission structure, even the incentive structure, to do so.

And of course allowing the teaching of the facts of these things is quite literally the least one could do, even if some kids end up temporarily feeling bad about it.
Having empathy for people who are oppressed is good. Moral support and respect for those people are also good. So are thoughts and prayers. But what concrete actions can we take to dismantle systemic racism? If somebody doesn't see their privilege how do we even convince them that it even exists?
CaptainHowdy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 03:20 PM   #1672
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 31,096
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Interesting tweet from a former TAM speaker:

https://twitter.com/peterboghossian/...02608465252353

Some of these definitions need work, all of them need footnotes.

Here is the image itself: https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...ee70e10f87.jpg
This was also being approvingly retweeted by Michael Shermer.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 03:39 PM   #1673
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 14,604
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
This was also being approvingly retweeted by Michael Shermer.
Of course he did. I had trouble getting past whatever it was they were trying to say about social justice. Two books I wish more people on the left read, both by Brian Barry:

Culture & Equality: An Egalitarian Critique of Multiculturalism

Why Social Justice Matters
__________________
Cain: Don't be a homo.
Diablo: What's that supposed to mean?
Cain: It's a heteronormative remark meant to be taken at face-value.
Diablo: You're a lousy bigot. Apologise and withdraw that remark.
Cain: Nah.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 04:15 PM   #1674
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,667
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I'm going to assume that you are referring here to your claim that white men "are the group with the most incentive to oppose changes and support the inequality." This claim is demonstrably false (white men are not the race/sex based grouping with the highest median income or educational attainment in the U.S.) but let's put that to the side.
This is why I like it when you are actually forced to make an argument. It's so easy to take apart.

No, we will not put that aside because you are at least twice over wrong. First you reduced "more political, social, and economic power in the US," to simply 'who is first in economic power'. But even then you would be completely wrong, so you reduced "economic power" to 'yearly income'. Now white people wouldn't have to have the most economic power for my argument to remain correct as it was a totality of other factors you ignored in the same way that one doesn't have to place first in every event to be the highest placed in many sports. But here they really are still first in economic power, which yearly income is not a good proxy for. This isn't a nitpick and it shouldn't be surprising given the racial disparities there are often because people of color have been denied the same ability produce or keep generational wealth. White people have the most wealth in the US and especially more than black people.

Quote:
Your conclusion still doesn't follow. People should not assume that speaking out for equal opportunity is somehow a "statement against self interest" unless the individual making the statement would personally benefit from perpetuating systemic inequalities. You appear to be assigning characteristics of a broad group of people to individuals (only selves can have "self interest" after all) which is fundamentally the same mistake racists and sexists make when they prejudge people based on race and sex.
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Also, racist, sexist, white men are more likely to take the words and actions of other white men as having value. It's kind of their entire thing.
But also, no, only you think these general trends and groupings means it must apply to all in that group. This is a tactic to get people to stop talking about racism that isn't as clever or sneaky as the people who employ it think it is. Pretending it's 'really racist' to talk, and especially teach, about racism because to do so you have to acknowledge the way people use the concept of race as if it were an endorsement of it is feeble.

Quote:
It is not only illogical to assume any given white man would benefit from keeping the existing system in place, but it speaks to a lack of imagination as well. Plenty of European Americans have BIPOC kids and want nothing more than to see them succeed. There are fathers raising daughters who want nothing more than to see them succeed. Not everyone construes their "self-interest" so narrowly as to include only themselves or those of their own ethnicity and sex.
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Also, racist, sexist, white men are more likely to take the words and actions of other white men as having value. It's kind of their entire thing...

...It doesn't even mean any given individual has more ability to change things overriding all other considerations.
Yes, that is indeed the way racist white men think, who are the largest and most powerful group opposing fixing any of that. Freaking duh.

But more to the point, you know who has more children of color than white people? People of color. They also are personally impacted by the racism directly. You don't have more of an interests in this than your children or PoC do. Neither as the group you belong to nor as an individual is that true.

This also points to a blind spot probably born of privilege for you specifically in that you're not as used to being held up publicly an 'exemplar' of your racial group the way most other people in other racial groups are. A lot of black men don't get the option to divorce their self-interests from their racial group. People just won't let them. It can come up at any damn time. You can chaff at the much lesser associations like just admitting the reality that white guys are the most opposed and have the least to gain through better racial justice, but every other group has it worse there.

Quote:
I would not say it's only ever valid to look at things that way, but I would say that we should be fairly cautious about assigning personal characteristics and moral responsibilities to individuals based on a group-level assessment, especially when the groups in question are being drawn using concepts as arbitrary, malleable, and pernicious as race.

No. This is the argument that individuals are not core samples from a homogenous mix; the interests of any one person are not the interests of their demographic mixture, however finely sliced.
You, specifically and as a member of a racial group, do have a moral responsibility to help address these things. Pretending you can opt out individually isn't doing what you think it is.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 04:25 PM   #1675
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 7,685
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
What can you do to fix a system that you didn't create, in which you do not willingly participate or perpetuate, but which benefits you immensely while oppressing the rest of us?
I am skeptical as to whether we should really fix the part which benefitted me the most, that is, Armed Forces recruiting Hispanic youth and giving us scholarships. Once such advantages are picked up, they are difficult to put down. I suppose we could do something like taking the (possibly hoax) pledge from upthread to somehow prevent our kids from going to elite schools.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 04:43 PM   #1676
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,667
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
Having empathy for people who are oppressed is good. Moral support and respect for those people are also good. So are thoughts and prayers. But what concrete actions can we take to dismantle systemic racism? If somebody doesn't see their privilege how do we even convince them that it even exists?
Teaching the facts and stats that prove it exists/existed would be one good thing. So opposing the reframing of intelligent opposition to racism as 'Commie CRT invading out schools' is thing to do. Concrete? Asking the right questions of people trying to get these laws passed. Threatening to vote them out. Getting actual information out there. Telling them that you specifically think that racism is a real problem and even if one has to 'own the libs' to not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

To dismantle systemic racism is about the same thing. Right now convincing people it exists is a major hurdle, so doing that is a concrete step but is granular to the person. Generally overall doing what you can do decouple taking apart systemic racism from political identity might help. When someone is ranting about some aspect of systemic racism being addressed, ask them how they would address it. Yeah, some are going to say 'it isn't real' and say 'the commies got to you' just for asking, but people less certain in their opposition to anti-racism might remember that another person they see as on 'their team' was taking the issue seriously.

There are no simple but also specific answers to address all of it.

Systemic racism in policing? Direct accountability has shown to be one of the only ways to reduce it. Figure out a local, viable way to get that. Systemic racism in housing? Some programs have worked but it can also be as simple as finding out if a realtor is a racist ass then not using them and letting people know why.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 05:08 PM   #1677
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 7,685
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
First you reduced "more political, social, and economic power in the US," to simply 'who is first in economic power'.
Let me know if you find a way to quantify the non-economic factors and we'll have a look at them.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Your source fails to treat Asians separately, even though they are the third largest racial group in the US; my source had more up-to-date information and higher resolution by race. If you want to do wealth instead of income, that's just fine, but let's not pretend that "white" and "black" are the only races in America and everyone else is similar enough to bucket together.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
This also points to a blind spot probably born of privilege for you specifically in that you're not as used to being held up publicly an 'exemplar' of your racial group the way most other people in other racial groups are.
Try being the only Puerto Rican in a Texas classroom sometime.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
You, specifically and as a member of a racial group, do have a moral responsibility to help address these things.
As someone of mixed racial ancestry, I'm not about to uphold the idea that moral responsibility falls on racial groups rather than individuals, but I'd be interested in hearing more about "these things" which need to be addressed. I expect that people holding liberal values will want to address them regardless of their 23andMe results.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 1st August 2021 at 05:12 PM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 08:32 PM   #1678
Shadowdweller
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,067
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Interesting tweet from a former TAM speaker:

https://twitter.com/peterboghossian/...02608465252353

Some of these definitions need work, all of them need footnotes.
Disgusting, brazen attempt at fabrication and revisionism. That you seem to imagine that this is "interesting" or relevant does not reflect well on soundness of your reasoning nor the intellectual honesty with which you claim to pursue the subject matter.
Shadowdweller is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2021, 09:22 PM   #1679
Shadowdweller
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,067
Originally Posted by tyr_13
First you reduced "more political, social, and economic power in the US," to simply 'who is first in economic power'.
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Let me know if you find a way to quantify the non-economic factors and we'll have a look at them.
There are any number of indicators or ways to quantify these factors if one devotes even a minuscule bit of thought to the matter. For example, number of Asian-American presidents compared to the number of Caucasian-American presidents. Incidence of Asian-Americans in congress. Percentage of Asian-Americans living in poverty. Crime victimization rates and crime reporting rates. College graduation rates. Hate crime victimization rates. Home ownership rates. Voter turnout demographics...to name a few.
Shadowdweller is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2021, 07:18 AM   #1680
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 31,096
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
I'd say this is mostly correct.



Mostly correct, although biased, especially the part that it's deliberately confused with arguments that it's wrong to be racist. That's one of the the heavily politicized takes. Instead, it is conflated kinda sorta with what I think it better called antiracism - Robin DiAngelo, Ibram kennedy, whiteness studies, etc.



Also IMO a highly politicized view. I don't think it's the case that many people fall into such a group.
Thanks for your comments. I'll look into it a little more.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:29 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.