ISF Logo   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 12th September 2017, 02:57 AM   #481
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
Wonderful way to miss my point entirely. I'll concede that you're not the slightest bit interested in my point, so that's not quite criticism.

Your point, if someone else made it in a different way, I'd likely find interesting.
I got your point, you reject the idea that not being subject to racism is an advantage, that living life on the easy setting is something that happens and matters.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 12th September 2017, 02:58 AM   #482
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Well, I think I've made my opinion on the Jim Crow-era statues, especially those that were placed in front of courthouses and other government buildings, very clear in other threads.
It does make the systemic racism of the judicial system very clear.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 12th September 2017, 06:31 AM   #483
Lorentz
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 972
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
I got your point, you reject the idea that not being subject to racism is an advantage, that living life on the easy setting is something that happens and matters.
Oh, did you ever not get my point.
Lorentz 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 12th September 2017, 06:32 AM   #484
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
Additionally, when I encounter terms like 'intersectional', 'cultural appropriation', 'patriarchy', 'kyriarchy', or 'privilege', I immediately, based on past experience, draw the conclusion that the person using them isn't worth spending a minute of my time on.
Why?
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch 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 12th September 2017, 06:39 AM   #485
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
Oh, did you ever not get my point.
You are clear that discussing such things is never acceptable to you. I have heard your point and that is the message you are sending loud and clear.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 12th September 2017, 07:23 AM   #486
Lorentz
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 972
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
You are clear that discussing such things is never acceptable to you. I have heard your point and that is the message you are sending loud and clear.
Perhaps I should practice writing more clearly. And I actually thought that was one of my strengths...
Lorentz 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 12th September 2017, 07:35 AM   #487
Lorentz
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 972
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Why?
Because behind those terms lurk worldviews that promote tribalist, pseudo-scientific, self-righteous, virtue-signalling post-modern nonsense. Apologies if I understate. These terms are shibboleths used to identify a side in an ongoing culture war. Nothing to learn from them.

Quite possibly there are people who use these words thoughtfully with full awareness of the underlying nuances of reality, but I've found they're less easy to locate than needles in proverbial haystacks.

In a similar manner, I suspect that if someone uses words like 'the white race', 'educating the savages', or 'doing God's will' you'd think you weren't much interested in their opinions or the reasoning behind them. I'd certainly come to that conclusion.

Bottom line: I think some of the social justice movements on the left are currently as harmful as their right wing counterparts. More so, if you include pushing people to the right as harm. I would.

p.s. I'm not a centrist by any means. I'm furious that what was once 'my side' seems to be becoming such a toxic mess.

Last edited by Lorentz; 12th September 2017 at 07:36 AM.
Lorentz 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 12th September 2017, 07:40 AM   #488
Mumbles
Illuminator
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,705
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Why?
I'm particularly amused by "cultural appropriation". In and of itself, it's actually a neutral term.

As a positive example, I've found a lot to love about Japanese rap music. It's my opinion that music is meant to be shared. And similarly, while Elvis Presley's early works were mostly his takes on other's original works, he was respectful of the original songwriters, and he would (as I recall) usually let them chart first before releasing his own take.

As a negative example, I can see why native Americans are infuriated by the appropriation of the term "spirit animal", since they had their own children forcibly removed and sent to boarding schools in order to wipe out their culture - and this was common well into the 1950s. Yeah, I'd be pissed off, too.
Mumbles 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 12th September 2017, 07:42 AM   #489
Mumbles
Illuminator
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,705
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
It does make the systemic racism of the judicial system very clear.
The problem is, such statues aren't simply noting the facts, they're also a statement of purpose. They note an intent of unequal judgements.

And that's why they have to go.
Mumbles 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 12th September 2017, 09:07 AM   #490
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
Quite possibly there are people who use these words thoughtfully with full awareness of the underlying nuances of reality, but I've found they're less easy to locate than needles in proverbial haystacks.
Did you read this or dismiss it out of hand?
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch 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 12th September 2017, 09:10 AM   #491
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Did you read this or dismiss it out of hand?
Dismissed it out of hand.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 12th September 2017, 09:11 AM   #492
paulhutch
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Blackstone River Valley, MA
Posts: 1,979
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
https://thecornerstoneforteachers.co...-talking-race/

This article reminded me the discussion we were having in the early pages of the thread before it degraded into whataboutism. Thought I'd share.
Thanks for posting the link.
paulhutch 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 12th September 2017, 11:09 AM   #493
Lorentz
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 972
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Did you read this or dismiss it out of hand?
First Time I stopped reading early because it didn't interest me and is of no concern to me, being neither a teacher nor American..

Just now I actually read the first page and - ponderingturtle got one thing right - I dismissed it as an irrational tribalist polemic. Nothing to learn there.
Lorentz 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 12th September 2017, 11:15 AM   #494
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
Just now I actually read the first page and - ponderingturtle got one thing right - I dismissed it as an irrational tribalist polemic. Nothing to learn there.
This is why we can't have discussions about race.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch 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 12th September 2017, 11:50 AM   #495
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
This is why we can't have discussions about race.
How would talking about race help when someone reject fundamental issues of racism as meaningless buzzwords?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 12th September 2017, 11:56 AM   #496
Lorentz
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 972
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
This is why we can't have discussions about race.
Well, you can have discussions about race, but indeed, I'm not going to join you. Race is a long discredited, useless, social construct backed by no scientific evidence. Anyone who talks about 'race' in the 21st century is in my book, well, automatically racist.

Now if you wanted to talk about systematic discrimination against members of out-groups, about communities or whole subcultures caught in vicious cycles of poverty and lack of access to good education, about how to design our societies so that the vulnerable are protected and have near equal opportunities, and the rich and powerful don't get to abuse their power... I might join that conversation.

Make it about 'race' and then implicitly or explicitly ignore impoverished or otherwise disadvantaged second or third generation Latinos, Pakistanis, Chinese, Afghans, Iraqis, poor rural whites and the rest and I'm very definitely out.

A conversation about 'race'? Nothing to learn there.
Lorentz 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 12th September 2017, 12:12 PM   #497
Lorentz
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 972
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
How would talking about race help when someone reject fundamental issues of racism as meaningless buzzwords?
Potato, tomato. You say 'fundamental issues', you're right that I say this article is full of 'meaningless buzzwords' (by which I mean tribalist, exclusionary postmodern rhetoric fundamentally disconnected from any objective reality).
Lorentz 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 12th September 2017, 12:36 PM   #498
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
Now if you wanted to talk about systematic discrimination against members of out-groups, about communities or whole subcultures caught in vicious cycles of poverty and lack of access to good education, about how to design our societies so that the vulnerable are protected and have near equal opportunities, and the rich and powerful don't get to abuse their power... I might join that conversation.
Well, duh. What do you think this thread has been about if not the systematic discrimination against minorities based on a socially constructed idea that we call "race"?

Words have multiple meanings, the proper one you have to infer from the context in which it is being discussed. No where in that article that I linked to did she mention genetics or biological taxonomy.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch 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 12th September 2017, 12:58 PM   #499
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
Potato, tomato. You say 'fundamental issues', you're right that I say this article is full of 'meaningless buzzwords' (by which I mean tribalist, exclusionary postmodern rhetoric fundamentally disconnected from any objective reality).
The problem is, these social issues are not disconnected from objective reality. You're objecting to the word race's etymology, rather than it's current meaning as used here, and dismissing the entire conversation through a misinterpretation on your own part.

As I said before, this is why can't have discussions about race.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch 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 12th September 2017, 01:13 PM   #500
Lorentz
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 972
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Well, duh. What do you think this thread has been about if not the systematic discrimination against minorities based on a socially constructed idea that we call "race"?
Maybe it's based on that social construct, more likely it's the usual in-group versus out-group nonsense, I don't care. People use whatever excuse is handy to exclude and dehumanise others; race is but, religion another, putative background, accent, clothing, there are so many. So why talk about the excuse (race) rather than the behaviour?

Quote:
Words have multiple meanings, the proper one you have to infer from the context in which it is being discussed. No where in that article that I linked to did she mention genetics or biological taxonomy.
Line 1: "why I am talking only to white people?"
That refers to their putative race, not background, religion, clothing or choice in footwear. Racist.
Further same line: "Isnít that racist?"
I concur. It is.


Fifth paragraph
"And I canít presume to speak on behalf of people of color. I donít know their full experience. But I also donít think itís fair to ask a person of color to be the spokesperson for his or her race,"
Why would this particular social construct need a spokesperson in the first place? Why only THAT subgroup? Why should it matter what 'race' this spokesperson would be? A better criterion would be 'someone from the same subculture', but there is no one subculture associated with any 'race'. Altogether a nonsensical paragraph

Sixth paragraph:
"People of color have no choice but to think about and understand race on a daily basis. "
Is it really 'race' they think about? Or discrimination and the higher chance of getting arrested or shot? Are Persons of Color* universally more discriminated against than sikhs in turbans, or muslims performing their noon prayer, or poorly dressed Latinos looking for day jobs? I think not.

Eighth paragraph:
"having those tough conversations that are so, so important, and empower you to be a more culturally responsive teacher."
Not quoted for mentioning race, but can you really really read that without throwing up, or at least feeling nauseated? So supercilious, so arrogant, condescending and one-dimensional. I have trouble reading past this, but I'll do so this once.

Tenth paragraph:
"Racism is about contributing to or looking the other way in the face of acts or systems that marginalize people of color. "
So, systems that marginalise Latinos, Afghans, or any other disempowered groups, no problem. I'm sensing some racism here.

(stopping the numbering - it's not helping)
"The truth is that you can subconsciously hold ideologies of white supremacy even if you have black friends. "
White supremacy? I realise there are a few of those backwards groups in the U.S., but seriously, you can hold these 'ideologies', not merely views, but whole ideologies, subconsciously? Someone's trying too hard to virtue-signal.

"You can love black culture, music, and slang while benefitting from systems that are designed to elevate you above black people in social status. "
Now we're getting to the truly absurd. Benefiting from a system can make you racist? No, weird author, you're lost in cloud cuckoo-land there. Everyone benefits from some systems, suffers from others. The author is trying to say these systems are about race and were designed to be. That's made up from whole cloth; as spurious as 'rape culture' in the West.

"Itís just not possible, because as weíve established, racism cannot exist without a history of systemic oppression and marginalization."

Ah yes, the old sociological definition of racism. Burn that and the horse it rode in on, please. Anyone who really believes that has some serious cognitive dissonance to deal with.

The casual phrase "as we've established" adds some superfluous irony. I wonder who "we" are and how the author thinks the "established" came about.

Most of the rest of the article seems to be about word policing, explaining current fashions on which words you are allowed to use to whom in what context. I'm headdesking at the frivolous, vapid, unthinking stupidity of it all.

THIS is an article you want to have a conversation about? Oh my C'Thulhu!

* I hate that phrase "Person Of Color" - at some cocktail party of wealthy middle class snobs, some activists probably decided it would be better to find a new word to avoid the stigma of 'black'. I'd be shocked if the new term originated with the people it designates. Please prove me wrong by the way - end rant
Lorentz 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 12th September 2017, 01:19 PM   #501
CaptainHowdy
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 562
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
As an aside, I actually started this thread in the hopes that CaptainHowdy would defend his assertion that there were differences between "white supremacists" and "white nationalists", and possibly his assertion that white nationalists were pretty much equivalent to Zionists. Alas, he chose not to. Oh,well. Sometimes, you start something with one intention, and you can't really control where it goes.
This thread must've been started on a day I wasn't on the computer. By the time I noticed it, it had already started spinning off course and was several pages. I'm playing catch up now and will participate if necessary.

But I consider the premise of the discussion settled. White Nationalism and White supremacism are two different concepts, Fascism is a political ideology. Nazi is slang their political opponents used to insult members of the National Socialist German Workers Party. The Ku Klux Klan is a social fraternity. These words are not interchangeable.

I will use them interchangeably bearing in mind that Zionism is a specific type of Nationalism. Jews who believe Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state (as many do) are Nationalists. Most Jews are White people. So most Jews can be referred to as whatever word you use to describe White people who are Nationalists.

Anyway, carry on.
CaptainHowdy 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 12th September 2017, 01:30 PM   #502
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
Maybe it's based on that social construct, more likely it's the usual in-group versus out-group nonsense, I don't care. People use whatever excuse is handy to exclude and dehumanise others;
No "maybe" about it.

Also, do you realize you are doing precisely what you are complaining about? These (out-group/inhuman) people with their ideas are not worth your (in-group/worthwhile) time because they are using words that you find contemptible.


Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
Line 1: "why I am talking only to white people?"
That refers to their putative race, not background, religion, clothing or choice in footwear. Racist.
Further same line: "Isnít that racist?"
I concur. It is.
Cherry-picking a rhetorical device out of context without acknowledging or addressing that there is more to what she's saying.

Imma stop you right there. When Americans talk about race, white, black, whatever, they are more often than not talking about what is more correctly class or caste. You are either deliberately or ignorantly misconstruing the context of the discussion to fit your preconceived notion rather than attempting to discuss what the author is, quite clearly, conveying.

If you "don't care" (and I suspect you actually do), then please stop derailing the thread.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch 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 12th September 2017, 01:39 PM   #503
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,573
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
This is why we can't have discussions about race.
Typical crazy liberal:

Quote:
There is no such thing as reverse racism.

Itís just not possible, because as weíve established, racism cannot exist without a history of systemic oppression and marginalization. Racism is rooted in privilege and power.
Where did "we" establish this? From the sound of it, she thinks that blacks cannot be racist, because there is no history of systemic oppression of whites by blacks. Indeed, she says it more explicitly later:

Quote:
That is why racism does not ďgo both ways.Ē It goes in one direction: from the group who holds the power and privilege toward the groups who do not.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster 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 12th September 2017, 01:42 PM   #504
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,573
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
This is why we can't have discussions about race.
In my experience, whenever somebody says they want to have a discussion or dialogue about race, what they really mean is they want to give a lecture and for me to shut up. It would be more honest to say that they want to have a monologue on race.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster 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 12th September 2017, 01:43 PM   #505
sir drinks-a-lot
Master Poster
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 2,995
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
This is why we can't have discussions about race.
I think you're actually right in referencing that article in regards to why we can't have discussions about race.
__________________
I drink to the general joy o' th' whole table. --William Shakespeare
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 12th September 2017, 01:43 PM   #506
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Where did "we" establish this?
Earlier in the article. That's what that phrase means.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch 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 12th September 2017, 01:46 PM   #507
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
In my experience, whenever somebody says they want to have a discussion or dialogue about race, what they really mean is they want to give a lecture and for me to shut up. It would be more honest to say that they want to have a monologue on race.
No, I want a discussion, but it should be a discussion of complete ideas rather than name calling and an outright rejection of cherry-picked phrases taken out of context.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch 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 12th September 2017, 01:49 PM   #508
sir drinks-a-lot
Master Poster
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 2,995
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
No, I want a discussion, but it should be a discussion of complete ideas rather than name calling and an outright rejection of cherry-picked phrases taken out of context.
It might be better to start another thread and post your own ideas instead of a link. Sure, you can reference a link or two, but I don't think it's fair to request that people read a long article (especially one as loaded as that one) without you even putting that much effort in.
__________________
I drink to the general joy o' th' whole table. --William Shakespeare
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 12th September 2017, 01:54 PM   #509
Lorentz
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 972
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
No "maybe" about it.

Also, do you realize you are doing precisely what you are complaining about? These (out-group/inhuman) people with their ideas are not worth your (in-group/worthwhile) time because they are using words that you find contemptible.
Critical difference 1: I'm criticising people's WORDS, not their involuntary characteristics or background. I dislike stupid words. I dislike stupid words more when they're manipulative. These words in my opinion, most certainly are. Furthermore I'm most certainly not addressing them as a group, but as individuals and I'm not speaking as a part of any group, just myself.

Critical difference 2: You're saying that not giving people my time is discrimination. If so, then there are some 7 billion people on this planet who should take offense at me.

I do actually go beyond that of course. I wish these ideas to be publicly refuted, disgraced and no longer part of mainstream public opinion. I find them harmful in the extreme, from a number of viewpoints, the social effects of such tribalism being just one.

Quote:
Cherry-picking a rhetorical device out of context without acknowledging or addressing that there is more to what she's saying.
There is? I certainly haven't managed to pick up anything worthwhile there.

Quote:
Imma stop you right there. When Americans talk about race, white, black, whatever, they are more often than not talking about what is more correctly class or caste.
I do not believe you. When they say 'black', or 'people of color', they mean people whose ancesters were slaves a few centuries ago. Recent Kenyan immigrants, third generation Latinos or Pakistanis excluded.

Quote:
You are either deliberately or ignorantly misconstruing the context of the discussion to fit your preconceived notion rather than attempting to discuss what the author is, quite clearly, conveying.
The author is quite clearly conveying that she's an 'ally', a 'good person', conforming to 'right thought', 'woke', much more moral than other people of her pigmentation. I find it nauseating. If there's any further point to be gleaned from her writing, I'm clearly missing it.

Quote:
If you "don't care" (and I suspect you actually do), then please stop derailing the thread.
You're right, I care. I wish to see this type of thinking discredited, the movement derailed, that worldview laughed out of town. Preferably before much of it crosses the ocean to where I live.
Lorentz 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 12th September 2017, 01:59 PM   #510
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
The author is quite clearly conveying that she's an 'ally', a 'good person', conforming to 'right thought', 'woke', much more moral than other people of her pigmentation. I find it nauseating.
If she is, then how are you not? Are you not conveying that you understand better than she does? That you know more? That you are better aware of reality?
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch 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 12th September 2017, 02:09 PM   #511
Lorentz
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 972
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
If she is, then how are you not? Are you not conveying that you understand better than she does? That you know more? That you are better aware of reality?
When it comes to 'understand better', 'better aware of reality', absolutely. Name me one person who does not think this about themselves compared to people they disagree with, including you. To disagree is to think you know better. Rather trivial, don't you think?

Actually, I do think the author a bit of a doofus, beyond merely me 'understanding better'.

My criticism of her is of another nature though. She is virtue signalling, posing, pretending, trying to acquire social status. I think that describes most of the content of her article rather well.

I am not.
Lorentz 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 12th September 2017, 02:12 PM   #512
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
My criticism of her is of another nature though. She is virtue signalling, posing, pretending, trying to acquire social status. I think that describes most of the content of her article rather well.

I am not.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern

Last edited by Upchurch; 12th September 2017 at 02:14 PM.
Upchurch 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 12th September 2017, 06:55 PM   #513
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,049
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
But I consider the premise of the discussion settled. White Nationalism and White supremacism are two different concepts, Fascism is a political ideology. Nazi is slang their political opponents used to insult members of the National Socialist German Workers Party. The Ku Klux Klan is a social fraternity. These words are not interchangeable.
Let me explain why I don't think whatever differences between them are significant. They share, as a definitive characteristic, a belief that "whiteness" is somehow significant. Somehow, they all share a belief that being white separates them from people who are not so white. This common, and mistaken, belief unites them all.

From that jumping off point, they go their separate ways, but the differences pale before their similarities. Once you accept the concept of "whiteness" or "the white race" as an important part of an identity that must be preserved and protected from the non-white, whichever direction you take probably has more to do with attitude or just which meeting you showed up to first. If you went to a neo-Nazi bar, you become a neo-Nazi. If your grandfather was KKK, maybe you sought out the KKK. Whatever specific style of "whites only" organization you became part of, or whichever aspect of "white separatist" philosophy you picked up, it's hardly significant compared to the unifying features of all of them.

The Presbyterians and Methodists probably think there's something significant about the differences between them, but from the outside, they pretty much all look alike.

As for the comparison between Zionists and white nationalists, I, for one, think there is at least a certain degree of racism, or at least ethnic prejudice, inherent in Zionism, so the comparison isn't totally and completely misplaced. However, there are so many differences between the two groups, the present circumstances of the people involved, and the history of the movements, that whatever superficial similarities might be present, the differences are far more significant than their similarities. I think that you are really just trying some sort of ploy to say that "if you are ok with Zionists, you ought to be ok with white nationalists." That is wrong, for several reasons, so if that's what you are doing, and you can't see the error in that position, I'll explain.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 12th September 2017 at 06:57 PM.
Meadmaker 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 12th September 2017, 07:12 PM   #514
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,049
I read upchurch's article. It wasn't bad. It had some good points, but I don't think it was great, either. I think there were several elements of it that made it not a very good way to think about race and race relations in America.

Strictly for lack of time, I will focus on only one of those problems. She says that there cannot be "reverse racism" because racism can only be directed from the powerful to the oppressed group. I get her point, and there is some truth to it, but it overlooks a very important truth. America is not uniform, and while whites have historically been the powerful group in America, they are not the powerful group in, for example, modern Detroit. That's true for other cities as well, but I will focus on Detroit because I live in the suburbs and so am more familiar with Detroit than any other major city.

In Detroit, for decades a group of black politicians exploited anti-white feelings to remain in power, where they enriched their friends. They were racist through and through. They played the race card at every opportunity. There, they were the powerful, and so they could be, and were, racist.

On a much smaller scale, you don't have to be the political leader of a city to achieve a local, race-based, superiority. You could be a head of a clique or a gang in a mostly black school. You could be a black principal of that school. In mostly black schools, whites may be ostracized from the "cool" social groups. That is racism just as much as it is when black students suffer the same fate in mostly white schools or social environments.

Clearly, the number and significance of areas where whites are the majority and where whites have historically oppressed blacks are much greater than where whites are the oppressed, but it is terribly naÔve to imagine that whites cannot be the targets of racism.
Meadmaker 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 12th September 2017, 08:07 PM   #515
rdwight
Thinker
 
rdwight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 223
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Let me explain why I don't think whatever differences between them are significant. They share, as a definitive characteristic, a belief that "whiteness" is somehow significant. Somehow, they all share a belief that being white separates them from people who are not so white. This common, and mistaken, belief unites them all.
Not to repeat myself too much but I again feel this is an unnecessary grouping that is done purposefully. There is no need for it. It is done so that larger segments can be added into the most despised of groups. You wouldn't call a black separatist a white separatist even though they share much more in terms of beliefs than they don't.


Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Strictly for lack of time, I will focus on only one of those problems. She says that there cannot be "reverse racism" because racism can only be directed from the powerful to the oppressed group. I get her point, and there is some truth to it, but it overlooks a very important truth. [Snip..]
That's another issue I have with the sociology 'racism' definition people seem to be deferring to recently. There are already succinct phrases for what they are trying to confer, but that is not the purpose of redefining 'racism'.

It both increases the abhorrence of racism and tries to label it as a white only occurrence. Not really on board with that.
rdwight 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 12th September 2017, 08:17 PM   #516
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,600
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Why?
Because those are code words used by the bucket of despicbles.
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus 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 13th September 2017, 03:47 AM   #517
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by Noztradamus View Post
Because those are code words used by the bucket of despicbles.
Like talking about making america great when everyone knows that means white. Ergo anyone talking about that is a racist. QED.

Makes it easy to refute any position in a few easy steps.

1.Find someone who does not understand nuance and is a bigot and uses some terms
2.Generalize their usage to everyone
3.Discredit any side.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 13th September 2017, 03:55 AM   #518
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 29,983
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Strictly for lack of time, I will focus on only one of those problems. She says that there cannot be "reverse racism" because racism can only be directed from the powerful to the oppressed group. I get her point, and there is some truth to it, but it overlooks a very important truth. America is not uniform, and while whites have historically been the powerful group in America, they are not the powerful group in, for example, modern Detroit.
That's a fair point. There is no doubt variances throughout society, but the examples you give, in no way, rises to the ingrained systemic racism found in the US. And we're not just talking about white people being historically powerful, we're talking currently. 200+ years of dominance doesn't turn off overnight. It appears that Detroit has gone quite a way to change that, perhaps too far, perhaps not. I note the police force is still more white than the general population, there is currently a white mayor (despite "not being a powerful group in modern Detroit"), and a quick google found no evidence of systemic "reverse racism" in the local justice system.

I think the one of the biggest problems when talking about racism in America is that folks insist on looking at it as both an individual phenomenon and only a binary label, rather than as an ongoing institutional issue that has evolved over time with many shades of gray. This is why I suggest we need more words for "racism" in order to more accurately convey what we mean.

The author of the article I linked to, for instance, was not talking about individual racism nor to a general audience. She was talking about how teachers can talk to students about institutional racism as issues arise in the classroom. And she's right, there is no systemic reverse racism at any significantly large level of society. We never had legal institutionalized white slavery in this country or ..."Jim Dove laws", I guess. We never had a need for a civil rights movement to assure equal rights for white people. The Black Panthers never held any significant proportion of office in state or federal government, unlike the KKK.

She's not talking about small groups of people here and there being mean to one another. She's talking about the society as a whole and the big picture.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch 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 13th September 2017, 07:24 AM   #519
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 10,503
Originally Posted by Lorentz View Post
Maybe it's based on that social construct, more likely it's the usual in-group versus out-group nonsense, I don't care. People use whatever excuse is handy to exclude and dehumanise others; race is but, religion another, putative background, accent, clothing, there are so many. So why talk about the excuse (race) rather than the behaviour?
OK let's consider unequal application of justice based on "race". (There are many examples.) Granted, the concept of race isn't scientific. Still, how does this discussion occur in a way that you don't object to?
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche 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 13th September 2017, 07:26 AM   #520
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
OK let's consider unequal application of justice based on "race". (There are many examples.) Granted, the concept of race isn't scientific. Still, how does this discussion occur in a way that you don't object to?
Isn't this as silly as talking about economics as money isn't real?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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
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 05:23 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.