Proxy? Is there some secret code that I am unaware of? How do you "know" such things?
People were told I was from Africa. They were surprised that I was white. I am able to claim officially that I am part of the "white tribe" of Africa.
Spanish speaking from Argentina?
"Us and them"? Who does not have such categories? Example - "Us" Democrats and "them" deplorables. The distinction is whether one acts on such human stereotyping (a genetic survival trait), and discriminates unfairly, or uses negative pejoratives. (Is deplorable not a pejorative?)
If some-one acts in a biased manner, is it unacceptable to explain their bias by saying that the persons belongs to a group that is mostly negatively inclined? If true, how would one say it without saying it?
And are you saying that once a racist, always a racist? That no-one (and no society) learns and no-one (and no society) changes and improves? And you can recognize "them" from the color of their skin and background? In other words, you "stereotype" them.
The denial is that Hillary did not start the rumor. I accept that from what I read.
But it seems that one or more Hillary campaign staffers did start and circulate it. And one got fired when it seemed necessary to disavow it. Nice to have minions to do the dirty work.
Trump did take it up and own it though.
My apologies for having being excessively succinct in my previous message. Your post has indeed many points that should be addressed.
Let me start speaking of scepticism, something that is not very common in fora. What I am about to say may seem astray but I assure you its reason will be soon evident.
"8 out of 10 cats prefer Whiskes". What does it mean? Basically, nothing at all. Does it mean 10 cats were offered a big plate of tuna on the left and a big plate of Whikes on the right and 8 of them rejected the tuna and jumped towards Whiskes? In that case, Whiskes seems to be exquisite, at least for cats. Or does it mean 10 cats were offered to choose among one plate of shredded cabbage and a plate of Whiskes and even so 2 of them chose cabbage over pellets that now start to look pretty nasty?
The success of those remarks depends on some work the public has to add. The ad is successful as an ad (not as a piece of logic) because most of the public imagine the cats were offered Whiskes and other famous cat food and they chose Whiskes over its competitor. The public has to add information that wasn't there. That is called "an induced inference": I throw at you something blurry and as all human beings have a tendency to try to make find meaning in everything, you concluded what wasn't really said. I'm sure they studied "6 of 10 cats..." to "10 of 10 cats..." and measured the wished inference maximized with 8. Yet the phrase is still saying nothing at all.
Obama is "an alien" is exactly the same thing, as well as Obama is "a Muslim". You don't need to prove that. You only need to keep that alive, and let that each person add their own salt and pepper and stew it into whatever they like to believe. Lots of people thinking "Obama is a f****** n-worder", and biting their tongues to avoid expressing it openly, will jump to the opportunity to believe he is a Muslim born in Kenya and breast fed in Indonesia. That is a proxy. And that's how the world works.
You have enunciated a few of somewhat valid points from a rational perspective. Yet, all of them pale when we address how political messages work. In that "research" above which found 400 out of 1200 US citizens believing Obama is a Muslim, I'm not prone to declare those 400 to be stupid, but all those 1200 to belong to a cultural system that does such things. Then I am taken as an Anti-
Amercian. An induced inference that poster chose to believe more than a year ago and he reinforces it every time he can. No wonder, he could have been any of those 1200.
.
