One of the stupid things liberals believe: Racism

In Physics, if there are two different equations that explain the same phenomenon, then you should get the same answer when you solve them.

If you get two different answers then there is said to be an anomaly and there is something wrong with your hypothesis.

Similarly, if you believe what Martin Luther King Jr believed, that people should be judged based on the content of their character not the color of their skin and you also believe in Affirmative Action, that some people should be given preferential treatment based on the color of their skin and others should be denied that same preferential treatment based on the color of their skin then you have an anomaly because those two things are different yet they explain the same phenomenon. Therefore, there's something wrong with your beliefs.

You can't simultaneously believe people should not be judged based on the color of their skin and also believe people should be judged based on the color of their skin.

 

I agree. I was happy to go along with MLKs vision but when the left decided that it was OK to be racist against whites then I thought, OK, have it both ways. I wont accept the double standard.

Trump is a result of this double standard. people are fed up of it

 

I generally don’t agree with “affirmative action” but I can recognise the motives behind it and easily distinguish it from racism in general. The purpose, however misguided, is to directly counteract racism in a process so as to manufacture the same kind of outcomes you’d get if there was no racial distinctions at all.

There are lots of principles that certain things should or should not ever happen but that for practical purposes in the vagaries of the real world have to be compromised. The difficult question is where to strike the balance between sticking to your principles and the practical consequences of doing so.

 

There is affirmative action which is about sacrificing the careers of poor white people to advance the careers of not so well qualified black people in order to atone for wrongs done by very rich white people who are now dead.

There is also the abject anti white race hatred that is so preva;lant in the US right now in leftist circles.

 

`
`
OP uses very flawed logic made worse by an obvious bias.

 

Are you claiming to NOT have bias?

If the logic is flawed you will have to explain why it is flawed. You can;t rely on the standard radical screams of

'educate yourself'
or
'Google is your friend'

His statement
"
You can't simultaneously believe people should not be judged based on the color of their skin and also believe people should be judged based on the color of their skin." is completely logical.

 

There are all sorts of different policies and procedures given that name.

There’s racism in the US in all sorts of directions. Social divisions generate frustration and resentment on both sides. If anything, highlighting only one or the other is part of the problem.

 

I agree. The OP totally fails to take into account that 'racism' isn't just about what programs the government may institute when it comes to things like employment. Such hogwash he is trying to push. And 'affirmative action' programs aren't just about trying to even the playing field for people of color, for cryin' out loud. And you can't really equate things like Physics with thing trying when to explain things of a social matter. Bunk.

 

I can beleive that but any policy where someone is given preference because of their race where it is otherwise irrelevant is just racism. Whilst people think that its OK then Ill practoce a pro white policy

Indeed. Its both or nothing for me. its either teh same for everyone or I'm backing my own people.

- - - Updated - - -

So your 'expose' is just a rant. No information, no logical counter argument to what is certainly a logical statement

 

Two wrongs don’t make a right. Anyway, forms of “affirmative action” are imposed by individuals and organisations of various races and creeds and opposed by just as many. Your simplistic “pro-white” policy would support many of the people you disagree with and attack many who agree. You also feed the vicious circle where you all refuse to change until after the “other side” do first. Of course, there’s also no way of knowing that you’re not simply racist and using this as cover.

All-in-all, there’s no good reason for you not to stand against any discrimination and join the civilised world.

 

Here's an 'expose' dude...

Racism has been a part of human history since time immemorial. It stems out of a tendency to create racial stereotypes on the basis of race, colour, nationality, religion and other factors. Often racial discrimination is practiced without even being conscious of it being nurtured and propagated. This happens because our society and its forebearers have successfully managed to plant the seeds of discrimination into our consciousness long before we were able to assert our choices. The feudal system in the middle ages can be recounted as a significant practice of racism. Slavery and serfdom have been identified as the blackest spots on the face of human civilization. In fact some of the most outrageous incidents of genocide took place as a severe repercussion to racism. Be it the Holocaust in Germany or McCarthyism in the United States of America.

The status of a second-class citizen offered to people of a darker tone in America, England and elsewhere gave rise to transatlantic slaves. The Anti-Apartheid movement spearheaded by Nelson Mandela highlighted the plights suffered by the ‘blacks’ in South Africa over a long period of time. The very demarcating terms ‘whites’ and ‘blacks’ play along the lines of binaries, which in turn create a sense of superiority and inferiority among people. The heart of the matter is despite intense and severe struggles by the likes of the late Nelson Mandela among others, discrimination on the basis of ones’ racial identity rules the roost even to this very day. Listed below are 10 reasons why racism still exists.

The irony that underlines human and world history is that history gives us an insight both into our glorious and shameful pasts. History acts as a guidance, which determines our future course of action. Hence, if history itself is misinterpreted and if we are not taught to learn a lesson from our predecessors’ mistakes, history shall repeat itself in its most retrogressive forms. The injustice done to the blacks and the torture inflicted upon them have been recorded over centuries. The terrible Holocaust images in the concentration camps in Germany send a chill down our nerves even today. Opportunists and hate mongers use this distraught vision of history to instruct succeeding generations to maintain the status quo.

We have read about Nelson Mandela and his Anti-Apartheid movement. We know that he has spent 27 years of his life in jail for the cause and recently his death captured a sizeable share of space in the world media. Will it be absolutely unjust to say that Mandela for majority of the people has been just a chapter in the textbooks? Things have changed for the better and The United Nations has taken steps to curb racism around the world. The hard reality though is that at ground levels racial prejudices still exist, even though genocide/widespread torture on racial grounds have been controlled by efforts of many such organizations.

The fixation with fairness creams gives us enough reason to believe that we are a herd of white-obsessed individuals. The moment you switch on to your television sets, you will manage to catch a glimpse of the latest fairness product, with a white-washed face making tall claims of ‘revolutionising’ your life. This problem is not just restricted to South-Asian countries as advertisements all over the world harp on being fair in order to be called a ‘natural beauty’. An international human rights lawyer, Arsalan Iftikhar was quoted saying recently that racism is alive and well in America. He tweeted against the defacing of a GAP advertisement featuring Sikh model Waris Ahluwalia in a New York subway station. The company drew flak for the racial stereotyping they professed and had to apologise.

Many people would argue that a classless/undifferentiated society leads to disorder and anarchy. It is true that such a proposition has its share of disadvantages but it is an undeniable fact that the hierarchy in our society is what propels a person towards practicing racial discrimination. A highly stratified society creates division between a ‘black/brown’ and a ‘white’, a Hindu, Muslim, Christian and Sikh, between a Caucasian and a Latino. Members of a particular group club together and detest any communication/mingling with members of another group. This effort can be read as a defence mechanism against ‘outsiders/invaders’. This in turn leads to unprecedented animosity among people and creates tension.

A black cat crosses your path and you grow superstitious. We have been told that it is a sign of ill-omen. In Christianity, men and women wear a black robe while attending the funeral ceremony of a deceased person. As a result of such practices, black is identified with death, decay and the devil. The image of the fallen Satan is incomplete without the colour black. Hell has been presented as a deadly place submerged in darkness. Such preconceived notions, propagated through various mediums create a wrong impression in the minds of people, prompting them to adopt unjust ways of segregation.

The politics of divide and rule has been predominant in our social and cultural discourse for a long time. In an attempt to consolidate ones’ support among a certain section of people, politicians and our law-makers indulge in the politics of appeasement. Barack Obama broke many cultural and political barriers by becoming the first coloured President of the world’s most powerful country The United States of America. If one remembers correctly then his political opponent from the Republican Party, John McCain in the 2008 general elections in America, in a hushed manner asked people to vote for him just because his skin colour was white. Actor Clint Eastwood gave an interview in which he explained why, in the 2008 presidential election, he voted for John McCain: “I voted for McCain because he was white. ‘Cuz that’s why other folks vote for other people – because they look like them. … That’s American politics, pure and simple.”

South-Asian and African countries are referred to as the Third-World countries. Such a pejorative term often leads to such countries being seen in a poorer light than its ‘First-World’ counterparts. The term of a ‘developing country’ perhaps makes things a bit more dignified yet the damage seems to have been done. The literature of these ‘Third-World’ countries is often termed as post-colonial literature, as most of these territories have faced colonial rule in the past. Such differentiating terms and identification of so many aspects of our everyday life, boiling down to being a part of the ‘blacks/browns’ and ‘whites’ grouping, spurs hatred among people.

Any person who is different from us in skin colour/habits/practices gets tagged as The Other. The art of Other-ization is often an attempt to validate ones’ own importance in the world order. Individuals seem to have nurtured pre-conceived ideas about the other. Anything that is unknown/foreign to us is treated as a mark of danger and threat. The racially different person is viewed with apprehension and distrust.

Xenophobia is the fear or intense dislike for a person from another country. Unfortunately more than half of the world is suffering from this irrational disease. When an individual steps into foreign shores, among unfamiliar people, he/she is often made to feel like an outsider. It would not be fair to assess that everyone is hostile towards foreigners in their countries, though there have been significant examples in the recent past. A threat perception on the economic front is often the reason behind racial crimes. The truth though is that no individual can infringe upon another’s right to living. Competition is everywhere and it should not be eliminated on racial grounds.

Somewhere deep down, all of us suffer from an inferiority complex. In order to establish our supremacy, it has trickled down into our senses that we need to show others in a poor light. Racial segregation provides us mortals with this wonderful opportunity. By telling and making a group realize that they are racially inferior to others, one often feels a sadistic pleasure. The need of the hour is to get rid of such prejudices and treat everyone as an equal and competent fellow-being.

 

I agree, but MLK was also a hypocrite. It makes no sense to adopt a colour-blind attitude basing people only on the content of their character, and then campaign against segregation - which means you aren't basing people only on the content of their character, but distinguishing people by skin colour.

 

If MLK was truly colour-blind, segregation would not exist in the first place.

 

Martin Luther King was an Egalitarian. He was pro-equality. His message wasn't "we shouldn't notice differences" it was "we shouldn't give social importance to differences."

So in saying we should judge people by the content of their character not the color of their skin he is saying that we should treat people as individuals and judge them by how they behave not what they look like. Segregation was in opposition to what King believed so he campaigned to have it eradicated. There was no hypocrisy in his message.

 

You are SO pathetic. You just cut and paste from some twattish social justice warrior site, You can;t even make your own arguments

- - - Updated - - -

Not in his message. The hypocrisy is in YOU, who ignore King and want special treatment.

 

The two are not competing equations.

While I'm not arguing in favor or against affirmative action, the idea that these are contradictory ideas is wrong.

MLK's speech was about how the world should be, how people should be affected.

Affirmative action is a response to how the world IS, how people are being affected.

One is an ideal that does not have to be tied in with reality in other than broad ways, the other is a response to an effect in practice.

But before you jump on me to criticize AA, just realize that I'm not posting here to defend it or say that we should have it. I think at best it should be used in specific situations at specific places where bias was proven to be occurring, not as a preemptive measure applied broadly. But regardless of your opinion on the effectiveness of AA, the comparison in the OP is wrong.

 

Your thread title is nonsensical and your premise is faulty.

At its basic level, AA merely provides a guarantee of redress in cases of discrimination. It doesn't provide preferential treatment based on the color of a person's skin; it provides a firewall against refusing to hire a person because of the color of their skin or even their gender.

 

MLK speeches make it seem as if he was a proponent of a colour-blind society. Have you ever heard the following saying? "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." So there should be no colour-awareness in terms of law for this to be achieved. It makes no sense to be an egalitarian and support affirmative action, or discriminate in regards to skin colour when it comes to segregation/integration. An egalitarian should be truly colour-blind and neither support, nor oppose segregation - by either supporting or opposing segregation there is colour-awareness not blindness.

 

I haven't seen any speeches by King where he advocates color blindness in the way you are using it. King was pro-equality therefore an Egalitarian. He never claimed races did not exist nor that racism wasn't an issue that needed to be addressed through social reform. His message was that people shouldn't be treated unfairly by the law because of skin color and that prejudice and discrimination was wrong. I don't know what his views were on the idea of Affirmative Action but he was clearly pro-integration as a means to ending racism. I don't consider myself to be color-blind. I recognize racism as as probably that society needs to deal with. I don't support Affirmative Action although I don't think its intent is to be racist. I do support integration, oppose separatism and believe that hate crime laws that punish people for racial discrimination should be enforced.

 

Bull(*)(*)(*)(*), its about quotas and hiring less qualified people.

- - - Updated - - -

But you only want hate crime laws enforced against white people. No doubt you think the black girl harrassing the white guy in dreadlocks was exhibiting acceptable behavior

 

I get your position, but it doesn't achieve what you want. Racial discrimination or racism will always exist as long as colour-awareness does. Note of course i'm only talking about law e.g. equal opportunities and a fair society. There's no way to eradicate colour-awareness in the colloquial sense of people recognising physical variation, nor would there be any need to do this since there are different ethnic groups. But the only way to end racial discrimination in the sense of equal opportunities etc. is to become colour-blind.

 

I've asked this question many times but never got a satisfactory response. What is a benefit to diversity?

 

How do you explain the 'redress' when Asians are more discriminated by affirmative action than whites?

 

There's a potentially interesting question here about discrimination that gets lost by focusing on "judging". It isn't obvious that affirmative action involves judging people by the color of their skin, because you aren't necessarily coming to any conclusions about what they are like from their skin color.

So you can be against judging by skin color and for affirmative action. You just can't be against racial discrimination and for affirmative action.

 

You have no idea what I want. You obviously get your info from a closed-circuit and automatically dismiss anything that doesn't agree with your close-minded dogma.