What's Wrong With Racism?

[Unveiled Artist]

Epigenetics.

The science of epigenetics has shown that behavioral traits can be inherited, such as via the activity of histones, from parent to child. In Buddhist terms, I would call this "kamma". It is one major force which compels people to demonstrate certain habits and behaviors (whether positive or negative) similar to the behaviors of their parents, siblings, extended family, etc.

Kamma and epigenetics are not fatalistic, however. Application of the higher, conscious will can override one's lower, instinctual impulses however. Or, it can be described as the process of using a "higher law" to countermand the effects of a "lower law", in magickal terms.

You lost me.

Id think its human nature to descriminate based on natural reactions, psychological, and phisological means of being around people with like attractions.

Racism is a negative connotation of descriminating (decerning) ones opinion of others based on skin color. Its a form of prejudice. Unlike natual descrimination, being a racing (action) is a choice.

If my senses say Im uncomforta being around people with blond air, I would naturally avoid them.

Hairism (made up word) would be avoiding long haired people because it mirrors who they are. Its a form of prejudice not natual decernment.

For example, I am uncomfortable around certain white people I stereotyped natuakky in one group.

That does Not give me the right to be racist against them because they are human. Thats my prejudice. To turn that into a means of not communicating with them because they are white in this group is wrong.

Unless I am in danger or my body literally reatrains me from being arouns them...or maybe I have psychological pse or something out of my control, I have no reason to deny communicating with someone based on skin color and the group they hang out with.

Its a choice. Either people feel its moral to treat people as everyone else or not. I just find it unhealthy as a whole.

 

[metis]

You're arguing with the dictionary, not me.

Most people incorrectly use the word "racism" or "racist" in terms of the commonly seen effects/consequences of "racism", not in the correct way (regarding the process of discrimination itself).

"Racism" itself can be healthy or unhealthy. The effects & consequences of racism can also be healthy or unhealthy.

Keep telling yourself that, and I'll wait for a list of when you see anyone other than you use either term in a positive way. BTW, in anthropology, we don't even use the word "race" unless it's specifically defined, and we never use it in regards to people unless it refers to the negative.

And I really don't think you're being honest to yourself because if I call you a "racist", I have very strong doubts you would consider that to be a compliment in any way. Also, the OP refers to "racism" as being discriminatory, so this is what we are really talking about on this thread.

BTW, here's Wiki's take:
Racism is a product of the complex interaction in a given society of a race-based worldview with prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination... -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

whatever

 

[buddhist]

Racism is a negative connotation of descriminating (decerning) ones opinion of others based on skin color. Its a form of prejudice. Unlike natual descrimination, being a racing (action) is a choice.

Racism is not always negative.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Humans are tribal by nature. We tend to look at those from other tribes with distrust. This is observed all primates.

When I say I'm racist, it doesn't mean I hate black people or that I wish them harm. If I was looking to hire someone, I wouldn't discriminate against black candidates, and if I saw a black person who needed help, I'd help.

But if I see a group of young black guys dressed up like gangstas and I'm alone and it's 10:30 at night, you bet I'll avoid them.

I know what it's like to face racism; I'm half Japanese/half White and I've been called names by people from both races. It does hurt terribly to be hated for race, but I've encountered so much obnoxious arrogance from black people that I've become predispositioned against them.

I think people oftentimes get preconditioned into racism. Something terrible happens, threats to a way of life, even the discomfort by simply being different to where people avoid you, treat you in ways where you don't feel a part of.

History says a lot about it.

I think one of the best historical examples I've come across is Geronimo and his intense festering hatred toward Mexicans. You almost don't blame him for being racist to the core.

I don't support racism, I'm against it, but I have to say there are some instances where separatism might actually be the best way to turn down the fire just enough to where it dosent consume communities and lives by providing a sanctuary and outlet for those that just can't escape their prejudices for whatever reasons.

Personally I'm a salt and pepper guy and appreciate what multicultural and ethnic enviroments have to offer. I live in a mixed neighborhood, and workplace as well. I don't personally see color or cultures. Just names and interesting ways of doing things but I'm realistic enough to know not everyone is like that.

 

[buddhist]

Keep telling yourself that, and I'll wait for a list of when you see anyone other than you use either term in a positive way. BTW, in anthropology, we don't even use the word "race" unless it's specifically defined, and we never use it in regards to people unless it refers to the negative.

Also, the OP refers to "racism" as being discriminatory, so this is what we are really talking about on this thread.

BTW, here's Wiki's take:
Racism is a product of the complex interaction in a given society of a race-based worldview with prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination... -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

whatever

Racism is discriminatory - do you believe I am debating that? Discrimination can be a good thing, or a bad thing.

Having a worldview, with prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination consistent with one's personal experiences is a good thing. Having a worldview, with prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination inconsistent with one's personal experiences is a bad thing.

And I really don't think you're being honest to yourself because if I call you a "racist", I have very strong doubts you would consider that to be a compliment in any way.

If you call me a "racist", I wouldn't take that as a compliment because I have an understanding of how you employ it, according to your negative perspective of that word.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Racism is not always negative.

By technical definition its not. By context and societal norms in thr states, it is.

For example, in my area not just intermediate and part of the states Im from, when we mention a topic about someone, first thing they ask "was he white or black?"

An african american was surprised I went to a white church (Catholic) and felt I (cant think of the word), left the black church: our history and core of the community.

I dont see it much with carcasians just minorities really.

Racial decernment is natual. We tend to gravitate towards people like us.

Racial prejudice is not natual. We choose to avoid people not like us.

Racist in many context is a result of racial prejudice not racial decernment which is natual to all human beings.

Racist is not a good word for what the OP is describing.

 

[buddhist]

By technical definition its not. By context and societal norms in thr states, it is.

I use the word "racism" according to its dictionary/technical definition.

Racial decernment is natual. We tend to gravitate towards people like us. Racial prejudice is not natual. We choose to avoid people not like us.

What do you believe the word "prejudice" means? Also, why do people avoid others unlike themselves, and why is that unnatural?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I use the word "racism" according to its dictionary/technical definition.

What do you believe the word "prejudice" means? Also, why do people avoid others unlike themselves, and why is that unnatural?

To understand people, you cant use the dictionary. What I mean by racisim may be completely differnet in context of what others mean by it and so forth. In this case, you have to move from using the dictionary to find words like "what is a cat" and "what is a frog" to the definitions used by the person you speak with: what does Christian mean to you. How do you define racisim (Intents**).

In my history, racisim is refered to the negative and aggressive prejudice between white and black races. From slavery to not getting a job, racisim (judging a person based on race) still exist in the states. So, when I read the OP, it sounds like he speaks of racial decernment (or however the technical name is called) not racisim. It doesnt sound like he has a negative prejudice againts black people. It sounds like he natually prefers to avoid black people.

That sounds off to me and I cant say its completely wrong because it isnt based on how I (and many minorities) define racisim.

Like prejudice is also natual for humans. We judge humans based on who is like us and who is not. The point is not to judge and act on it as that can cause the other person to feel harmed or hurt.

If the OP person avoids be because I am African American, I would be insulted. Not because he invoided me in general, but because if he is white and did so it triggers negative feelings based on my skin color. Its more personal not specifically the color of ones skin.

 

[buddhist]

Like prejudice is also natual for humans. We judge humans based on who is like us and who is not. The point is not to judge and act on it as that can cause the other person to feel harmed or hurt.

I agree.

1. Experiences with members of a perceived group (leads to) 2. conditioning (leads to) 3. instinctive judgments on members of the group upon future encounters (leads to) 4. response.

I consider this whole process (steps 1-4) as "racism", according to the dictionary definition of the world, and not in itself wrong in any respect.

Generally speaking, response (step 4) IMO is not wrong when it includes love, like, acceptance, or avoidance. It becomes "wrong" when the response either a. turns violent, or b. the response is based on ideology contrary to the natural experiences gained from steps 1-3 (e.g. xenophobia or xenophilia).

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I agree.

1. Experiences with members of a perceived group (leads to) 2. conditioning (leads to) 3. instinctive judgments on members of the group upon future encounters (leads to) 4. response.

I consider this whole process (steps 1-4) as "racism", according to the dictionary definition of the world, and not in itself wrong in any respect.

Generally speaking, response (step 4) IMO is not wrong when it includes love, like, acceptance, or avoidance. It becomes "wrong" when the response either a. turns violent, or b. the response is based on ideology contrary to the natural experiences gained from steps 1-3 (e.g. xenophobia or xenophilia).

Id say the OP is talking about the prejudice you describe. To many minorities our responses arent positive. That doesnt mean the definition changed its just that certain words cant be based on dictionary.

 

[MountainPine]

Thoughts? Opinions?

I'm racist. It's not something I choose to be. When I see a black person in public, I do my best to avoid them. Of course it's not fair, but why should I care? My dislike of black people hurts nobody.

I openly respect you for not being ashamed to announce that you're a racist, especially on a forum where you might be penalized for violating the rules of conduct.

People normally associate racism with violence and hatred, however these are separate concepts. Racism, in principle, is the idea that there are different races in nature and that racial culture must be preserved. Can violence be caused by racism? Certainly, but so can religion, politics, and other factions between individuals and groups. The Catholic Church, for example, has a long history of causing wars and death. Does this mean that Christianity, in principle, is evil? Certainly not.

Those who say that race is just a social construct are wrong. Race is a very natural thing. For one thing, the physical differences between the races are so blatantly apparent that to so race isn't real is to deny the obvious.

Secondly, each race has it's own unique culture in which is a big part in one's racial identity. In today's society, especially in America, we have multiculturalism. Black people are encouraged to take pride in their race via Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Black History Month. Chinese Americans can have China Towns in several areas. Jews can have their own banks and communities, etc. Pretty much everyone is accepted and encouraged to display their pride.... except White people. If a White person says “I'm proud to be White” he/she is considered a racist. White people are told they shouldn't be proud of being White, and that only White people can be racist. This is why so many “White supremacists” are hostile and defensive. The truth is that White culture is dead in America and is dying in Europe. Just look at the mass African and Arab immigration in Europe. The native Europeans are being marginalized and their cultures are being replaced by that of the immigrants', particularly Islam. Believe it or not the Sharia law has been forced upon European women in some countries, like Sweden.

Finally, different races have different average IQ's. If one is skeptical of this, then a simple Google search for “racial IQ scores” will produce sufficient proof. Many argue that these stats have been fixed by a “racist elite” (because the average African American IQ is 85), but if this was true then why do these stats indicate that eastern Asians have the highest scores instead of Whites? And why have the standards been lowered for African American college students to graduate and get a career, while White students have to work harder to compete? Speaking of college, African Americans get a grant just for being Black (United Negro College Fund). How is that not racist? “Equal opportunities” is nothing but a euphemism for “we hate Whites”. The standards should be the same for everyone. The job market should be open to everyone equally. Quality of employees should be more important to employers than diversity in the work field. But that's not how it is, therefore, how can we all be one? lol.

Why are the areas with the highest African American population have the highest crime rates? Detroit's population is 84% Black, and is the most violent city in the US. According to the Homicide Trends in the US from 1980-2008, 47% of all homicides were committed by Blacks, and that's a lot considering that African Americans only make up 13% of the US population. Why are Black on White crimes not covered in the media? Etc....

For those of you who don't like racism, then be angry at the actual problem. Be angry at violence instead. And if you want to espouse that we are all one (which is total bull****), then tell that to the Black people who are persecuting anyone who disagrees with them, like labeling anyone "racist" for altering the "Black Lives Matter" slogan to "All Lives Matter".

 

[metis]

I openly respect you for not being ashamed to announce that you're a racist, especially on a forum where you might be penalized for violating the rules of conduct.

People normally associate racism with violence and hatred, however these are separate concepts. Racism, in principle, is the idea that there are different races in nature and that racial culture must be preserved. Can violence be caused by racism? Certainly, but so can religion, politics, and other factions between individuals and groups. The Catholic Church, for example, has a long history of causing wars and death. Does this mean that Christianity, in principle, is evil? Certainly not.

Those who say that race is just a social construct are wrong. Race is a very natural thing. For one thing, the physical differences between the races are so blatantly apparent that to so race isn't real is to deny the obvious.

Secondly, each race has it's own unique culture in which is a big part in one's racial identity. In today's society, especially in America, we have multiculturalism. Black people are encouraged to take pride in their race via Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Black History Month. Chinese Americans can have China Towns in several areas. Jews can have their own banks and communities, etc. Pretty much everyone is accepted and encouraged to display their pride.... except White people. If a White person says “I'm proud to be White” he/she is considered a racist. White people are told they shouldn't be proud of being White, and that only White people can be racist. This is why so many “White supremacists” are hostile and defensive. The truth is that White culture is dead in America and is dying in Europe. Just look at the mass African and Arab immigration in Europe. The native Europeans are being marginalized and their cultures are being replaced by that of the immigrants', particularly Islam. Believe it or not the Sharia law has been forced upon European women in some countries, like Sweden.

Finally, different races have different average IQ's. If one is skeptical of this, then a simple Google search for “racial IQ scores” will produce sufficient proof. Many argue that these stats have been fixed by a “racist elite” (because the average African American IQ is 85), but if this was true then why do these stats indicate that eastern Asians have the highest scores instead of Whites? And why have the standards been lowered for African American college students to graduate and get a career, while White students have to work harder to compete? Speaking of college, African Americans get a grant just for being Black (United Negro College Fund). How is that not racist? “Equal opportunities” is nothing but a euphemism for “we hate Whites”. The standards should be the same for everyone. The job market should be open to everyone equally. Quality of employees should be more important to employers than diversity in the work field. But that's not how it is, therefore, how can we all be one? lol.

Why are the areas with the highest African American population have the highest crime rates? Detroit's population is 84% Black, and is the most violent city in the US. According to the Homicide Trends in the US from 1980-2008, 47% of all homicides were committed by Blacks, and that's a lot considering that African Americans only make up 13% of the US population. Why are Black on White crimes not covered in the media? Etc....

For those of you who don't like racism, then be angry at the actual problem. Be angry at violence instead. And if you want to espouse that we are all one (which is total bull****), then tell that to the Black people who are persecuting anyone who disagrees with them, like labeling anyone "racist" for altering the "Black Lives Matter" slogan to "All Lives Matter".

There are many problems with the above, such as:

One is that, even though I.Q. is only supposed to measure innate learning ability, we well know that it also reflects various aspects of socialization as well, especially early education.

Secondly, studies done on crime indicate a far closer relationship with social-economic class than with race.

Thirdly, the above simply ignores the effect of racism on those whom are the targets of racism, whether it be blacks, Hispanics, Amerindinans, etc.

Fourthly, anyone who denies that there is a problem with our criminal-justice system in regards to blacks and Hispanics is oblivious to reality, and it was a reaction to that, whereas the "Black Lives Matter" movement was started, not that somehow the lives of others don't count as much. An example is that blacks are far more likely to be incarcerated and for longer periods of time versus whites who commit the same crime. They have more difficulty getting good representation in court, and judges tend to give longer sentences.

Discrimination has its consequences, and your statements above simply do not reflect that.

 

[MountainPine]

Thirdly, the above simply ignores the effect of racism on those whom are the targets of racism, whether it be blacks, Hispanics, Amerindinans, etc

Targets of racism? You mean targets of violence and/or discrimination? Again racism itself is not synonymous with violence, etc. There is nothing inherently wrong with the idea of racism. There is, however, with violence and discrimination.

Discrimination has its consequences, and your statements above simply do not reflect that.

That's because I was addressing racism, not discrimination. That Black criminals are given longer sentences may be so, but that is irrelevant to the African American crime rate.

One is that, even though I.Q. is only supposed to measure innate learning ability, we well know that it also reflects various aspects of socialization as well, especially early education.

OK, so can you explain why tribal Africans and other indigenous peoples are still living primitively? The natives in Africa and central and South America are half-naked whom paint and tattoo themselves and live very primitively, some of them practice cannibalism. Why don't they advance themselves like the rest of the world? You might say “well it's because they don't have the means to do so because most of Africa's resources have been destroyed or stolen.” It may be true that Africa's resources are being diminished, but this doesn't affect the African natives' ability to advance as evidenced by the fact that the indigenous peoples who live in the rain forests of Central and South America are living just as primitively as the Africans and yet their habitat is rich with resources. Another thing to take into account is that Saudi Arabia has less resources than Africa but the Arabs who live there are more civilized. So their reason for not developing as a race is not environmental, it is intellectual. They don't advance because they're not smart enough to figure it out.

 

[Kirran]

Targets of racism? You mean targets of violence and/or discrimination? Again racism itself is not synonymous with violence, etc. There is nothing inherently wrong with the idea of racism. There is, however, with violence and discrimination.



That's because I was addressing racism, not discrimination. That Black criminals are given longer sentences may be so, but that is irrelevant to the African American crime rate.



OK, so can you explain why tribal Africans and other indigenous peoples are still living primitively? The natives in Africa and central and South America are half-naked whom paint and tattoo themselves and live very primitively, some of them practice cannibalism. Why don't they advance themselves like the rest of the world? You might say “well it's because they don't have the means to do so because most of Africa's resources have been destroyed or stolen.” It may be true that Africa's resources are being diminished, but this doesn't affect the African natives' ability to advance as evidenced by the fact that the indigenous peoples who live in the rain forests of Central and South America are living just as primitively as the Africans and yet their habitat is rich with resources. Another thing to take into account is that Saudi Arabia has less resources than Africa but the Arabs who live there are more civilized. So their reason for not developing as a race is not environmental, it is intellectual. They don't advance because they're not smart enough to figure it out.

Here is a picture of all those Africans living in the jungle -

That's Lagos, Nigeria.

Honestly, Africa is nothing like how you think it is. Neither is South America. I'm of partial Chilean extraction myself, and in countries like Peru and Bolivia native ancestry by far predominates. And those countries have cities, engineers, industries, stock exchanges...

 

[Sees]

Here is a picture of all those Africans living in the jungle -

That's Lagos, Nigeria.

Honestly, Africa is nothing like how you think it is. Neither is South America. I'm of partial Chilean extraction myself, and in countries like Peru and Bolivia native ancestry by far predominates. And those countries have cities, engineers, industries, stock exchanges...

Really don't want to be part of this thread but I don't think he was considering Western stuff as valid. If their clothing, language, architecture, business models, etc. all reflect the West - it's not much for saying "look at what they did."

 

[Kirran]

Really don't want to be part of this thread but I don't think he was considering Western stuff as valid. If their clothing, language, architecture, business models, etc. all reflect the West - it's not much for saying "look at what they did."

Fair enough - I'll duck out too - but he did say that the natives of Africa were living half-naked and painting and tattooing themselves. The existence of Lagos rather refutes this, regardless of the heavy Western influence on its architecture etc.

 

[MountainPine]

The existence of Lagos rather refutes this, regardless of the heavy Western influence on its architecture etc.

No it doesn't. First of all, Lagos was named by the Portuguese, and also the modernization of Lagos was built by Creoles from Brazil whom had knowledge of Portuguese architecture. Secondly, any Westernized city in Africa was influenced by Europeans. European settlers showed the native inhabitants the ways of civilization, etc. which is the only reason why they know the things they do.

 

[metis]

Targets of racism? You mean targets of violence and/or discrimination? Again racism itself is not synonymous with violence, etc. There is nothing inherently wrong with the idea of racism. There is, however, with violence and discrimination.



That's because I was addressing racism, not discrimination. That Black criminals are given longer sentences may be so, but that is irrelevant to the African American crime rate.



OK, so can you explain why tribal Africans and other indigenous peoples are still living primitively? The natives in Africa and central and South America are half-naked whom paint and tattoo themselves and live very primitively, some of them practice cannibalism. Why don't they advance themselves like the rest of the world? You might say “well it's because they don't have the means to do so because most of Africa's resources have been destroyed or stolen.” It may be true that Africa's resources are being diminished, but this doesn't affect the African natives' ability to advance as evidenced by the fact that the indigenous peoples who live in the rain forests of Central and South America are living just as primitively as the Africans and yet their habitat is rich with resources. Another thing to take into account is that Saudi Arabia has less resources than Africa but the Arabs who live there are more civilized. So their reason for not developing as a race is not environmental, it is intellectual. They don't advance because they're not smart enough to figure it out.

As an anthropologist, ya, I can explain it, but I don't think you're even remotely open to information.

We know that that what forms "us" is an interplay between "nature" (our genetic pre-disposition) and "nurture" (our environment). Humans can and have adapted to almost any kind of environment, and we well know that how a test is designed and who does it and what it reflects will highly influence the results. Therefore, it is literally impossible to design any kind of I.Q. test that can take all these cultural variables into consideration. If you tried to go right now to live in the Kalahari Desert where the Bushmen live, for example, you wouldn't have a chance to survive unless someone took you step by step through what it would take to adjust. To the Bushmen, you would be inferior in intellect.

Contrary to what you say above, the a great many of the indigenous in South America have pretty much the same problem of adjusting to western-style living, and crime rates tend to be quite high with them as well. The ghettos of Sao Paulo, Brazil, for example, are terribly crime ridden.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Because it is illogical, irrational and scientifically disproven. Plus, it leads to treating others badly, including violence.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

OK, so can you explain why tribal Africans and other indigenous peoples are still living primitively? The natives in Africa and central and South America are half-naked whom paint and tattoo themselves and live very primitively, some of them practice cannibalism. Why don't they advance themselves like the rest of the world? You might say “well it's because they don't have the means to do so because most of Africa's resources have been destroyed or stolen.” It may be true that Africa's resources are being diminished, but this doesn't affect the African natives' ability to advance as evidenced by the fact that the indigenous peoples who live in the rain forests of Central and South America are living just as primitively as the Africans and yet their habitat is rich with resources. Another thing to take into account is that Saudi Arabia has less resources than Africa but the Arabs who live there are more civilized. So their reason for not developing as a race is not environmental, it is intellectual. They don't advance because they're not smart enough to figure it out.

Except that Europeans were also living like that until very recently. While Egypt, China, Mesopotamia, Persia, etc. were flourishing and creating advanced empires, the Northern Europeans were a bunch of dirty tribal spearchuckers who were on the same level as all the other tribal cultures of the world, and they remained that way well into the Middle Ages (and beyond, in many cases). The Arabs, Indians and East Asians viewed Europeans as filthy savages, beasts and even demons. The indigenous peoples of the Americas also viewed Europeans as disgusting brutes. (And they were actually correct in their estimation of Europeans of the Middle Ages and the colonists.)

The only time humans create grand civilizations is when a number of cultures mix together due to trade and proximity, empires are created, etc. Also, the Mesoamerican peoples had empires, advanced arts and sciences, etc. They're just not talked about that much. Most of the greatness of Greece and Rome came from the fact that they were surrounded by so many equally great neighbors and they weren't all white people, either.

Also, another thing to keep in mind is that survival is really what matters. For example, indigenous Australian cultures go back about 60,000 years. The same goes for the Khoisan peoples (the San and others). (Those are some of the oldest human genetic lineages in the world.) It's much the same with the Inuit peoples, the Sami, etc. They all have their arts, complex perspectives of Nature and the Cosmos (mythos, etc.), languages, medicine, etc. So if they're so "less intelligent", how have they survived so long, including surviving (more or less) centuries of ethnic genocide by the dumb, diseased, unhygienic, uncivilized, superstitious Christian Europeans? Hmm? Dumb Europeans had most of their population wiped out from the plague because they didn't see basic hygiene as all that important. Oops.

In other words, you're spouting rubbish.