On Racism (Split Topic)

But the Blacks have suffered political oppression at the hands of the white man, social degradation at the hands of the white man, and economic exploitation at the hands of the white man. Now this doesn't mean I'm anti white, but I'm anti oppression, anti exploitation and anti degradation.

Generalisations have limited scope, the broader the more limited probably. It's not all black people, and its not all white people, so it depends what your trying to say if using language like 'black man' and 'white man'... not to mention, what about the women!!!
:silly:

A good way to discuss racism at a broad level prone to generalization is to stop using actual categories of race, such as for me for something to be racist it must include prejudice based on race so that if you saw a green little man and you called him a green little man it would not be racist, unless by doing so it incurred some prejudice. And if discussing actual incidents of racism then there is no need to generalize, and its probably counter-productive to the argument and progress of discussions to do so IMO.

Silas Mercury wrote: But the Blacks have suffered political oppression at the hands of the white man, social degradation at the hands of the white man, and economic exploitation at the hands of the white man. Now this doesn't mean I'm anti white, but I'm anti oppression, anti exploitation and anti degradation.

The terms "the blacks" and "the white man" are inherently racist, similarly conceptually treating all people of a race as equally culpable and equally victimised is inherently racist.

You are grouping people together and making generalisations about them based on the colour of their skin. At no point have ALL white people and ALL black people gone through or participated in the things you describe. As such you're tarring everyone with the same brush in precisely the same way people who say "white power" or "blacks go home" do, whilst imagining you're doing the opposite.

Getting really tired of having to point this out to you.

tzb wrote: Getting really tired of having to point this out to you.

This is what I was referring to in post #255013 “until the tribal mentality can be overcome, individuals learn to accept what was is not what is and personal accountability is not as vial a concept; we will forever be bogged down with social stigmas and petty prejudices that have caused the individual to view the world through racist eyes.”

Even if you can say something to create that “click” moment where someone really understands what you’re saying, it still takes a long time to un-program what has been programmed over a lifetime.
[hr]
And that is IF they want to change or want to see things from a different perspective than the one they currently have.

I disagree - I would hope everyone who comes here could hear an entire community of people saying "dude... that's kind of racist" and understand that, even if they continue to see things their way, they should probably adjust their language to avoid further offence in that community.

See also: all the rules we publish about conduct in our Temple.

Stu - I guess i started this so would you mind locking it ?? Just so that me or anyone else doesn't say anything that weill get us banned.

Silas Mercury wrote: Stu - I guess i started this so would you mind locking it ?? Just so that me or anyone else doesn't say anything that weill get us banned.

I don't really see how that is a solution

Phortis' is the OP, I don't see a need to lock this. The discussion is good, a disagreement doesn't equal an out of control thread. I just ask (not as a mod, just as a member of this Temple) that you and everyone else understand that making remarks about everyone in a race is the literal definition of racism, and something I personally abhor.

Brick wrote: I don't really see how that is a solution

Agreed, it seems inadvisable to rely on locking threads to keep tempers in check. Among a lot of other things, that’s what our code is for (Emotion, yet peace). I personally welcome these kind of challenges (and I can think of at least one that challenged me in that way during the past weeks). Staying calm in threads that agitate me is a conscious effort but also excellent training.

After all, there are no taksies backsies in the real world.

Also, as I see it (jay personal interpretation) most here are only disagreeing on the breadth of the brush, not about its paint. Differentiation might be the key to getting your point across without all the ‘not all’ responses.

In the context of this thread, I strongly agree with Codama. Instead of looking for who’s at fault or where it started I too would prefer not to participate in it and not to let it feed of my attention (kudos for this phrasing Codama, nicely put).

tzb wrote: I disagree - I would hope everyone who comes here could hear an entire community of people saying "dude... that's kind of racist" and understand that, even if they continue to see things their way, they should probably adjust their language to avoid further offence in that community.

See also: all the rules we publish about conduct in our Temple.

I am not disagreeing with that at all. Just pointing out that even if we can see an error in our thinking that it can take a long time to learn not to think that way. That does not excuse anything nor am I suggesting that it means people should say anything they want without consequence.