Racism by degree

Post Reply New Topic

Be so good as to juxtapose this with your speciesist post.

THEN read:

We regard the chimp as inferior - as we regard certain other humans.

But in some cases the OTHER humans see us as inferior. Perhaps the chimp [Pan] sees us [Homo] as inferior.

Might there not be chimps working for equal status for humans?

Who [except of course the one with the best weaponry] decides who / swhat is inferior?

There are other implications one might read but that should suffice..

A) I never said you claimed it was racist. But it's been said by others in this thread. For some reason you responded to my earlier post which had -zero- to do with anything you may have ever said.

B) Why are Native Americans different? Taking land and sending them to reservations was bad. Slavery and segregation was bad. I just don't see the difference. Institutions have tried to help both.

C) You can generate examples of imprecision to your heart's content. Policy is imprecise as I already said. You can find exceptions and loopholes to every policy. You might find immigrant Canadian Indians getting services under the US BIA as well. That doesn't negate the value of the BIA.

D) You can think whatever you like about AA. I don't give a s. My point was that it's not racist, it's simply a difference of opinion between two groups. Those who think the government should address racial injustice that it created and those who think that it's inappropriate to try to make up for that at this point.

E) I very much doubt that African immigration has overtaken the former slave / segregation era population or come anywhere close to it.



I gave my reasons. My words were typed above so there is no need to manufacture an opinion for me and coyly suggest I have not stated my true opinion. My comment had nothing to do with diversity for it's own sake. It's about breaking the cycle of poverty and trying to integrate formerly segregated people into the middle class. An attempt to accelerate a process that will likely take a very long time.

I have no dog in the fight. I think there is value to it but it's subject to popular opinion and will likely go away entirely at some point.

Unfortunately, ignoring the words that another says and deconstructuring straw man opinions onto the "opponent" - who is often NOT an opponent, just trying to talk in a civilized manner - is endemic around here.

Evidently that site doesn't allow hot linking. Pretty interesting photograph.

so the question should not be about affirmative action.

Maybe it should be if you're trying to suss out the racists.

Sure it should. Just use that picture and ask the question, "do we need affirmative action so these two twin girls will be treated differently from each other?"

The problem with that is you a self-described non-racist would be grouped with coderac and burzum whom
I don't think would be too offended if you described them as racist , racialist, racial realist or whatever the term is these days.
I am afraid we would end up with a bad partition.
apparently 12% of american describe themselves as racist
when ask the question are you racist?
is 12% the right figure?
is there a better question?

There is a better question, but in practice it is absolutely useless, EVEN if people self-report honerstly.

"Are you uncomfortable around Green Monkeys?"

Which could be simplified:

"Do you consider yourself a human being?"

I don't see how on earth this is a refutation of Burzum's point, if that is what it's meant to be.

As far as I can see it, Burzum's point is that people are comfortable enough with acknowledging the differences between humans and chimpanzees, and realise that humans acknowledging those differences does not imply a desire on the part of humans to dominate, enslave or exterminate chimpanzees. But point out the differences between the different races, and people will jump through intellectual hoops to deny them largely through some learned fear about where acknowledging those differences might lead.

Furthermore, questions of superiority are hardly meaningful unless you specify the criteria to measure superiority by - and so simply acknowledging the differences between one's own group and others (or simply putting the interests of one's own group above the interests of other groups) does not imply a belief that one's own group is "superior", any more than a mother recognising the uniqueness of her own child and loving her own child more than some stranger's child implies a belief in her own child's "superiority" (or a desire to harm others for that matter).

I was by no means trying to refute his point. Should I have been? There is a lot of failure to think straight in "racial" questions, as in most of the other political hot spots. Thinking straight and talking straight will not eliminate the problems. But slogan thinking - from whatever standpoint - will make them worse.

What I was doing - which seems to have been a mistake since I thought I saw humor in Burzum's wording - was play along and extend what I thought was humor.

I don't think coderac's suggestion of getting rid of white people was serious.

No I am pretty sure coderac is a self declared racist, white nationalist or something along those lines.
I don't think I am outing or shaming him by saying so.
This is an Aspie community he has as much right to be here as I do.

When you mention inferiority, are you referring specifically to intelligence? Chimpanzees are certainly not inferior to humans when it comes to strength or short-term memory.

My point had nothing to do with inferiority. I was only ridiculing the belief that races are somehow innately equal and share equal natural endowments. It's as silly as the belief that chimpanzees and humans are innately equal. If someone believes chimpanzees and humans are equal, good for them. But that is not what objective data shows.

Well, there was a degree of humour - I was satirizing 'anti-racists'.

Perhaps I am better at using humour than I am at recognizing it.

Hey, mon, you are not alone. Been there, done that. I have been read as humorous when not, as serious when not, and I have laughed hard at a joke the guy was not making, AND my wife says I never know when she is joking - though at least half the time I do, I just don't respond the way she expects.