Racism is contextual

[ponderingturtle]

Nothing in the previous post of yours I replied to, said anything about "racism not hurting anyone". You merely stated that there is no inherent advantage to being black, white, latino, etc. That part is correct.

Of course racism hurts people. Duh. I am not arguing against that.

But the hurt can not damage them as there would be an inherent disadvantage then to being black, and hence a competitive advantage to being white compared to being black and you totally reject that.

How do you resolve that contradiction?

 

[ponderingturtle]

No that's the "proof" you are making up because you incapable of arguing against anything that isn't a pile of straw that you aren't even forming into a man.

Nobody has said that. Nobody has said anything like that. I wonder if the voices in your head even said anything like that.

You have made it clear that the person who is afraid of black men is not racist, as a racist has a clear and conscious association of racial supremacy of a race. merely being afraid of a black man is then not racist, so how can killing the black man be racist from that fear? When does that become the racist as you defined it?

It doesn't matter if you're using the term "racism" in some new approved "Woke" way when 95% of the population is still using it to mean "Intentional and harmful conscious bias based on skin tone."

That's how words work. If you call someone a "racist" you're calling them the most commonly accepted definition of the word, not your own.

Clearly that killing of a black man for being black is not a racist act. It does not fit with the definition of racism you provided.

 

[ponderingturtle]

???

No, it doesn't.

Plenty of people are clear that racism is a thoughtful conscious action, so panicking because you fine blacks scary is not fundamentally racist and so killing them as a response to that does not have to be racist.

If that bothers you then you need broader definitions of racism and racist than many people here are using.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Bingo!!!



If they do, being open-minded about the possibility and being willing to consider it is absolutely vital in being able to out-grow them.

And why we need to be so accepting of people who kill black men for being black, thank god the police are so rarely held accountable for their actions in that regards or you would be punishing them for what society did to them. Totally wrong no matter who they killed.

 

[JoeMorgue]

You have made it clear that the person who is afraid of black men is not racist, as a racist has a clear and conscious association of racial supremacy of a race. merely being afraid of a black man is then not racist, so how can killing the black man be racist from that fear? When does that become the racist as you defined it?

Are you trying to take Jabba's "I'm just going to make up what people are saying" award?

 

[ponderingturtle]

I've seen the racial bias test results, and there are even cases where people have a negative bias against member of their own race. This is discussed in a Sam Harris podcast featuring my favorite podcaster, Glenn Loury of the Glenn Show. “There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.” -- Jesse Jackson

Uncle Ruckus wouldn't have been a useful character if the black man racist against blacks was not a real thing.

 

[ponderingturtle]

People are not born understanding trigonometry either, and you can’t just point to a diagram and a formula and say, |See? If you don’t understand that you’re a bad person. Bad. Shame!”

There is a reason why “woke” is called “woke”. The reason is before you’re woke you legitimately don’t get it. Becoming woke is an educational process that requires the cooperation of the person being educated. You don’t get that cooperation with hostility.

Fine you are right, until everyone becomes a better person on their own we can not talk about racial biases and their effects on society. We will go back to denying that it exists.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Are you trying to take Jabba's "I'm just going to make up what people are saying" award?

Where does that logic go wrong? You can't hold someone who merely killed a black man for being black as a racist because they found them threatening. That is not the kind of conscious superiority you are demanding for it to be racist. So try to empathize and understand this guy who saw a big threatening black man and had a moment of fear and panic, why are you trying to ruin is life by branding him a racist, when he has never held a ideological superior view of whites vs blacks?

 

[JoeMorgue]

Where does that logic go wrong? You can't hold someone who merely killed a black man for being black as a racist because they found them threatening. That is not the kind of conscious superiority you are demanding for it to be racist. So try to empathize and understand this guy who saw a big threatening black man and had a moment of fear and panic, why are you trying to ruin is life by branding him a racist, when he has never held a ideological superior view of whites vs blacks?

*Confused* Are you literally just hearing voices in your head giving you arguments that are easier to argue against?

There are plenty of people in this thread capable of having adult discussions about the nuance of language and how exactly we conceptualize concepts of bias and race in relation to intent and have actual mature disagreements about it.

Nobody is trying to excuse racism or call everybody a racist. We're just having adult disagreements about exact definitions because outside of you everyone understands that finding a common ground is necessary in a discussion that everyone agree matters.

Your childish "OOHHHH SO RACISM IS JUST FINE ACCORDING TO YOU!" theatrics are neither helping nor welcome.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

But the hurt can not damage them as there would be an inherent disadvantage then to being black, and hence a competitive advantage to being white compared to being black and you totally reject that.

How do you resolve that contradiction?

Oh, so you're saying blacks should be killed!

Racist!!

 

[Octavo]

Oh, so you're saying blacks should be killed!

Racist!!

So you're saying blacks are off-limits, but it's fine to kill Muslims?

 

[ponderingturtle]

*Confused* Are you literally just hearing voices in your head giving you arguments that are easier to argue against?

There are plenty of people in this thread capable of having adult discussions about the nuance of language and how exactly we conceptualize concepts of bias and race in relation to intent and have actual mature disagreements about it.

Nobody is trying to excuse racism or call everybody a racist. We're just having adult disagreements about exact definitions because outside of you everyone understands that finding a common ground is necessary in a discussion that everyone agree matters.

Your childish "OOHHHH SO RACISM IS JUST FINE ACCORDING TO YOU!" theatrics are neither helping nor welcome.

And you are not addressing the whole issue that by your standards, there is no reason to call racism into question just because someone killed a black man for being black. Take the shooting of Philando Castile, it is highly unlikely that officer said "I want to kill a black man today" but rather felt threatened and panicked by a black man with a concealed carry permit.

Now it is possible that he would have reacted the same to a white man with a concealed carry permit but that does not exactly seem likely.

So how do you talk about that shooting? I mean we certainly don't want to brand Jeronimo Yanez as racist just because he panicked and killed a black guy, the court did find after all that a black man with a legal gun is a totally acceptable reason to panic and kill them.

So how do you talk about it? Was the shooting racist? It certainly seems that Philando was doing everything right and the cop still felt terrified of him for some reason. But that is clearly not the reasoned rational bigotry that you demand to say there was anything racial about it.

 

[JoeMorgue]

And you are not addressing the whole issue that by your standards, there is no reason to call racism into question just because someone killed a black man for being black. Take the shooting of Philando Castile, it is highly unlikely that officer said "I want to kill a black man today" but rather felt threatened and panicked by a black man with a concealed carry permit.

Now it is possible that he would have reacted the same to a white man with a concealed carry permit but that does not exactly seem likely.

So how do you talk about that shooting? I mean we certainly don't want to brand Jeronimo Yanez as racist just because he panicked and killed a black guy, the court did find after all that a black man with a legal gun is a totally acceptable reason to panic and kill them.

So how do you talk about it? Was the shooting racist? It certainly seems that Philando was doing everything right and the cop still felt terrified of him for some reason. But that is clearly not the reasoned rational bigotry that you demand to say there was anything racial about it.

Alright you have fun talking to whoever it is you've created in your head to talk to.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Alright you have fun talking to whoever it is you've created in your head to talk to.

I have been very clear, can you adress how that kind of situation fits with your views on what is racism and how to talk about it? Or do you just want to keep this abstract and not talk about real victims of this by your definitions not racist act? You have constantly and clearly avoided the whole issue of finding blacks more threatening than whites as a racial stereotype.

 

[Mumbles]

Alright you have fun talking to whoever it is you've created in your head to talk to.

Seems to me that s/he's just pointing out the reasonable conclusion to what you've been saying.

I've mostly kept out of this, since it's...somewhat interesting to watch a mostly white group (yes, an assumption) try to figure out who is and isn't a racist. Mostly because, in my experience, the folks caping for the "panicked cop" can and often will slide very quickly into "Well, Philando Castile (or whoever) was a thug" when given the slightest opportunity.

And then scream when the obvious racism is pointed out to them.

And most of my black and Hispanic friends have noticed the same thing.

A lot of people work hard to not be called a racist, and not to call other white people racist, but not so much into, you know, not being racist.

As far as this goes - I actually believe that the cop that shot Castile genuinely thought he was about to be killed - even though he obviously wasn't. And I think the same about the cop that shot Levar Jones, and quite likely even the lunatic that murdered Jordan Davis. And it's entirely possible that there were dead-serious proponents of Drapetomania, as well as the people who swear that they aren't racist, they're just tired of those lazy blacks and Mexicans who refuse to take jobs, and steal all of "their" jobs.

But all of the above are examples of racism.

 

[phiwum]

Seems to me that s/he's just pointing out the reasonable conclusion to what you've been saying.

I've mostly kept out of this, since it's...somewhat interesting to watch a mostly white group (yes, an assumption) try to figure out who is and isn't a racist. Mostly because, in my experience, the folks caping for the "panicked cop" can and often will slide very quickly into "Well, Philando Castile (or whoever) was a thug" when given the slightest opportunity.

And then scream when the obvious racism is pointed out to them.

If anyone has done that in this thread, I've missed it.

You're totally right that it happens, but I haven't seen it here. (I do make liberal use of the ignore feature, but I don't ignore Joe and I don't think he's said anything like that. )

 

[JoeMorgue]

"I just think conceptualizing unintentional biases as 'racism' is not the best way to go forward in discussions about race relations..."

"...therefore I'm completely okay with cops shooting black people."

Okay somebody has got to fill in the blank for me here.

 

[ponderingturtle]

"I just think conceptualizing unintentional biases as 'racism' is not the best way to go forward in discussions about race relations..."

"...therefore I'm completely okay with cops shooting black people."

Okay somebody has got to fill in the blank for me here.

I have asked many times how do you talk about this while preserving white feelings, and you haven't given any kind of serious answer.

I never said that you were ok with it, just that you wouldn't classify it as racism by your stated definition of racism. If you think these shootings are racist then your stated definition of racism is not fitting your feeling on what is and isn't racist. You have made no sign that you are even remotely trying to reconcile these real situation with your hurt no ones feelings extreme definition of racism.

When you say you can't talk about it in one fashion, presumably you have some idea of a better way to talk about these issues but I have not seen any sign of that.

 

[Crawtator]

And you are not addressing the whole issue that by your standards, there is no reason to call racism into question just because someone killed a black man for being black. Take the shooting of Philando Castile, it is highly unlikely that officer said "I want to kill a black man today" but rather felt threatened and panicked by a black man with a concealed carry permit.

Now it is possible that he would have reacted the same to a white man with a concealed carry permit but that does not exactly seem likely.
So how do you talk about that shooting? I mean we certainly don't want to brand Jeronimo Yanez as racist just because he panicked and killed a black guy, the court did find after all that a black man with a legal gun is a totally acceptable reason to panic and kill them.

So how do you talk about it? Was the shooting racist? It certainly seems that Philando was doing everything right and the cop still felt terrified of him for some reason. But that is clearly not the reasoned rational bigotry that you demand to say there was anything racial about it.

As a member of a skeptics forum, I'm going to ask you for some evidence backing these assertions. Because they seem to be, as an outsider to this discussion just reading along, personally biased and potentially wildly off-base.

 

[Mycroft]

Fine you are right, until everyone becomes a better person on their own we can not talk about racial biases and their effects on society. We will go back to denying that it exists.

And why we need to be so accepting of people who kill black men for being black, thank god the police are so rarely held accountable for their actions in that regards or you would be punishing them for what society did to them. Totally wrong no matter who they killed.

Those are powerful straw-men you've built there, but I don't feel I should respond to ideas that are attributed to me but don't come from anything I've said.

Care to try again?