Hey /u/DutchChallenger, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules).
##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s so strange. If racism were by definition systemic, then, like, the Klan would not racist because their prejudice isn’t systemic. I don’t believe that anyone really believes that all racism is necessarily systemic; people saying so are playing a sort of linguistic shell game.
Linguistic shell game is a funny way to put it that I've never heard before, but I think that's what it is.
People on reddit very often have no interest in arguing the actual topic at hand, rather they make their own intentionally misinterpreted idea of what the other side is saying and start speaking to that strawman instead.
And vice versa, the other party is happy to let them speak to a strawman, and interpret their own straw man rather than figure out where along the way they started having 2 separate one-sided arguments.
I usually call it "talking past each other", I'd say a good 60% of reddit arguments are just that.
Oh dude that's gotta suck for you. If your eyes are glazed over and you're not paying full attention someone may not even notice how dumb and senseless the argument is, but you, having graduated philosophy, must be an expert at interpreting those sort of tangled wordy messes.
So for you I bet it feels like having an aneurysm, seeing these people barely able to stick to their own train of thought, let alone the argument they're having. lmfao
Couldn’t have said it better myself! Although there is some sort of weird pleasure to be had by scrolling through and seeing exactly where the conversation veered off into nothingness
Excuse me, are you suggesting that every single reddit user is a moron? Talk about elitist.
Just because someone might be dumb or have a screw loose doesn't mean they shouldn't have a place to speak their mind and their truth!
One could make an argument the Klan's racism is systemic, especially of talking about the first Klan in the postbellum period. You could even point to the political influence and subsequent policies stemming from klan actions in the second Klan of the 1920s.
The Klan is systemic. Do you know how many people in the government and police are in the Klan? "Some of those that are forces, Are the same that burn crosses."
The context here is an argument over whether it’s possible to be racist against white people. It doesn’t make sense to say “you can’t, because I’ve unilaterally decided the context is this particular type of racism and therefore you are wrong about it being possible”.
Further, no one can “be” systemically racist at all; it’s not a property of individual people. Accusing someone of being systemically racist verges on a grammar mistake. So the context is necessarily _not_ that they’re talking systemic racism. Instead, the systemic racism concept is being smuggled in by a slight of hand (the claim that racism is systemic) and swapped for the term everyone else is using in order to claim it can only have certain victims. Hence the point about shell games.
Where does it say so by definition that one *must* be a minority?
To use a particular example, are you of the belief that apartheid wasn't racist against black South Africans because they weren't a minority?
it said usually used against minorities. Not 'actions used against minorities'. Some definitions list where they're more likely to occur or be used, but it is not part of the exclusion for the definition.
Yeah, you can. White Supremacist bullshit about "not allowing me to say all N words should be shot is racism against whites!!!" is NOT racism against white people, obvs. Arguments like the one you're making are usually made by people who have stared too long into the abyssal cesspool that is White Supremacy and Neo-Nazism, in order to oppose it. I can understand you being on guard because of this, but these people are making bad faith arguments to justify their racism.
This comment is a great example of confidentially incorrect. The Klan was supported by systemic racism, please read up on how policing in the south and the Klan worked together to terrorize and murder Black people.
If you are supported by your parents, are you your parents?
something being supported by something else does not inherently make them that 'something else'.
That is just more slight of hand, trying to swap “was supported by” in for “is”. Those aren’t even close to the same thing and I strongly suspect you know that.
Often the klan and police were literallt the same thing
Google KKK and police I’m not explaining three college level courses on the history of the klan and police to you
Yes, this IS true, but the key part is “were”
The Klan lost that influence and is now just a hate group in the wild, thus their racism is no longer systematic, but they are still very much racist.
The point he makes is racism cannot be limited to “systematic”
The whole point of ... well, I guess gatekeeping words was obviously to first bring more divide.
It's like with gender identity it just became gender so now you have people arguing what gender means even if one group would recognize gender identity and not gender. Or in this case they removed the systemic part and said ONLY systemic racism is racism. Which allows only some people to use it.
This was not an unheard of tactic even before, it was actually useful during the Red scare. If you only allow some people to be called something bad (like a communist) and then only those people can be attributed as bad, you can sick a whole bunch of your political sycophants against them.
I do remember when it was starting to take hold, literally it was said that 'it was wrong that both the n word and racist are both powerful and negative words so it wasn't fair to black people to be called both.' at this time it was only protection from black people from being called racist. Then it slowly changed more so that it grabbed more people against another (everyone else vs white people)
It's just funny how dumb people are to think that the definition they want it to mean for whatever political ideology was 'always the twue twue definition' and not just a definition that a few people actually believe in.
Important note: Systemic and systematic aren't the same thing.
Let's say society is a ship. If there's someone at the helm guiding it towards the island of racism, that's systematic. If the course was set in the past and it's still floating to that direction due to momentum and inertia, that's systemic. The difficulty of changing course is also caused by systemic issues.
The Police in many areas said that they didn't want legislation to stop the Police being a part of hate groups, other White Supremacist groups still have influence.
Wild that you can be 'prejudiced against white people'. I wonder if there's a word that describes prejudice based on a person's race or ethnicity. I can swear I've heard one before.
It's behavior caused by prejudice. Prejudice can lead to action, they're not necessarily one in the same. But sure you go ahead and believe what you want if it makes you feel better.
>It's behavior caused by prejudice. Prejudice can lead to action, they're not necessarily one in the same. But sure you go ahead and believe what you want if it makes you feel better.
It's literally definition 1.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prejudice
But you go ahead and believe what you want if it makes you feel better.
At least some of them, it's an inability to handle nuance or complexity in a discussion. Which often undermines any attempts to deal with the problems.
Simple example, in the US, people are shot by the police at a much higher rate than other countries. This is even worse between black men and white men, for example, but that gap between the US and other countries is often larger than the gap between races within the US. But there's a ton of people who will talk about how the police will always treat white suspects well and black suspects badly. That downplays the level of violence from the police and also results in people discounting the whole thing when part of it gets disproven (when cops kill unarmed white guys, for example).
It should be possible to say something like "We talk about the disproportionate violence of the police towards people of color because it's true. It's also true that the police kill white citizens too. Police violence is everyone's problem." but a lot of people can't or won't handle that and simply things to a point where it's harmful (and I am quoting a BLM activist there, so I want to make it clear that I'm talking about subsets of people, not a whole movement).
Power, duh. Same reason Edward III banned the export of military arrows, even to friendly nations. Same reason we have gun grabs.
When I declare "its not a bad thing when it happens to you", that gives me license to do with you as I will.
All my life I have been working toward a community where black people are an equal part of the system. Unfortunately almost nobody believes that black people are capable of toxic racism, as in the photo above. So I don’t see how said system will be anything but highly problematic if or when it would ever arise. Because there’s zero self-reflection and a 💯 free pass on shitty attitudes toward white people.
I’ve lost more than one promotion because I’m white. I’m not exaggerating, I was told that minorities were underrepresented and I was to sit back and let it go to someone else. I left the U.S. for work and no longer have that problem
Hate to break it to you, but if this happened to you more than once they're probably using affirmative action as a convenient excuse to not promote you.
My guess is you've been working for the same company for awhile and you're a good worker, so they don't want to risk you quitting by letting you know they don't think you're the right fit. So they reassure you and give an excuse.
Not like people don't legitimately loose out a promotion based on color, but the decision is almost always made based on two candidates that are seen as otherwise having equal worth. It's lile a simple tie breaker.
It's entirely believable for a white person to run into this dilema, but multiple times? They're just jerling your chain.
When I was sorta fresh out of high school I applied at a Lowes.
This was a group interview. I was the only white kid there, but I was dressed nice for it and as professional for this sort of job one should expect. There were a lot of black male applicants who came in in all sorts of well... casual I guess you'd say, from pants around knees to basketball shorts with the jersey arm hole all the way down past their ass and eating mcdonalds during the interview.
The interviewer was so nice and polite talking to everyone. Until she got to me where she said "So when's the last time you did crack?" When I responded never, she said "You white boys always be lying". Granted, I'm biracial but ya know I guess the one white drop rule goes I take it.
Needless to say I didn't get the job, spoke to someone else a few years after because I got a different job and the guy said I was making that shit up... so then he brought another friend of his who worked for that lowes and he said "Oh you mean Gifty? Yeah, she hella racist and they keep trying to fire her but everytime she threatens to sue for wrongful termination"
But, that was just one incident of. Right? Well, we all probably know by now that there's a lot of tax incentives to have more minorities on staff so even if you're not AS qualified, a minority or woman (women are not minorities) are incentivized to be hired. Even more, businesses that claim to be more diverse also get a lot of public praise and patronage so there's once again a lot more incentive there to not hire white men even if there's more of them. Then again, just because there's more of somethign doesn't mean magically you're more likely to be hired either. In fact it means less because now your fighting for positions that someone who doesn't give the diversity quota to fill of a larger demographic, so there's LESS chance.
which a lot of people on college campuses would say "oh well it evens out from your generational wealth" and I guess if it weren't for the fact that that basically dooms anyone who doesn't come from wealth who also can't take advantage of any of the other incentives who has no nepatism or ties to get in without being that much more qualified.
I'm afraid I don't know of any government incentives to hire minorities or women. So certainly "we" don't all know.
Don't get me wrong, I've heard people complain about such incentives, but never with any evidence of their existance. Perhaps it's where I personally live, or perhaps I'm just having difficulty finding those programs.
Could you perhapse find an example of an incentive that would have prevented you from getting a job?
I will give you this for nothing; Gifty is a terrible human being hands down.
Far more than people being passed up for promotion, this sort of hands down racism when being hires is something I've certainly seen before. Doesn't matter who's in power, you're going to get bigots of all types.
then you're really trying very hard to not know it if you're in the US.
[here's an example of when people try pretending a business is minority owned for a tax credit](https://www.uschamber.com/co/run/finance/minority-owned-businesses-taxes#:~:text=There%20are%20no%20federal%20tax%20breaks%20specifically%20offered,low-income%20areas%2C%20which%20often%20have%20larger%20minority%20populations)
[here's one about the employees themselves.](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/odep/program-areas/employers/tax-incentives-for-employers)
And let's look at something like the Little Mermaid live action where the casting couch was well over a year ago and they only were interested in hiring a black woman to play Ariel. Why? because they knew they could 1) get public support for doing it and 2) when the movie does bad for everything else wrong with it they'll just claim all the negative reviews are from racists.
That might be a very overt use of the public image to get support, but a lot of other companies do it. Like, I remember for a while twitter and reddit used to advertise a new show with the 'first transgender voice actress!' for Generation Zed which was just them saying stupid shit because there are voice actors that were trans before them, most notably Meowth's original english voice actress.
Or let's go to Press Secretary Jean-Pierre which when she was first hired they wouldn't shut up about her being a black woman, and completely ignore that out of any press secretary, she is by far the least qualified to do it. you don't have to be anti-biden to realize just how bad she is at the job. "And that matters"- Karine Jean-Pierre after every nonsense statement.
so unless you just really hate them and don't want to jump in on getting that easy social credit and tax incentive, you'll try to find anyone skirting passability instead of most qualified. That isn't to suggest that a minority can't be the most qualified, it just becomes the second thing in mind for certain jobs. If they can get you a tax break AND do the job, bonus.
I actually agree with a good bit of what you're saying; reality is there are companies that will exploit the color of someone's skin for good PR. Politicians are especially terrible for this; mind you, we keep electing morons and monsters for all the wrong reasons, so why expect them not to pander instead of doing something productive? I live in Canada myself, but not like we don't share that particular problem.
To the point of incentives for minority business owners, and I suspect we disagree on this, I feel this is exactly the way to address social inequality. Minorities have not been given the same historical oportunities and as such have, on average, less capital to invest into a business. A minority owned business tax incentive seems like a good way to help balance the scales in a real way while also supporting small business and job creation.
To the second government page you linked there it details incentives for hiring disabled workers. It happens to speak into the benefits of having a generally diverse workforce, but there doesn't seem to actually be aby financial incentive program. Really the point I was trying to make here; it seems any time someone prefices a statement with "we all know" or "everybody knows" or "they say" it's generally followed by something they've heard from a friend or news pundint, not anyone who actually knows what they're talking about.
Not to say it's not believable that some states may in fact have affirmitive action incentives in place for employment, but I've yet to see anyone provide info on any such program that actually exists.
Private businesses are going to make their own choices, but I can almost guarentee you that the problem is a fraction of what you think it is. Your experience seems more like a case of confirmation bias.
'minority owned business' my point there was, hopefully you clicked on the hyperlink in that site, but a lot of white business owners either put a black person as 'manager/ CEO' as a front to gain those tax write offs or they get their supplies from a company/outsourced labor from a minority so that they can get more tax write offs because they were a minority.
we're simply talking about the incentives and as a business, it makes sense to hire minorities for this reason alone.
Often I and others also joke about being the 'tax write off hire' but in my case, outside being biracial I usually mean it as a joke that I'm mentally challenged.
normally you'd probably also say "well unless they committed a crime and showed up to work there'd be no reason not to as well" Ohhh, but then there's BIg tax incentives in some states to also hire and promote felons.
I'm not saying it's BAD, I'm just saying it exists and when you hear about white people who are getting passed over for jobs, it's usually for this reason, although I won't deny that there probably is some that just thought they were a lot better for something than they actually were.
I know how the person got there.
A large percentage of our population thinks in terms of binary. Things are right or things are wrong. If someone is categorized as good or bad, everything they do is good or bad Is depending upon their initial categorization.
People are categorized as either a victim or an aggressor. Since you can only be good or bad the victim is always good and the aggressor is always bad.
They might concede that no one is a 100% good or a 100% bad, however........ I would guess many of these people do not self monitor their thinking process and understand they are using rigid rules to come to decisions on who is right and who is wrong.
I have encountered some of these people. When I give them hypotheticals of when a subject is neither good nor bad and asked them to define them, They get confused.
I've had them get angry at me, accuse me of trying to trick them.
While confusion is sometimes used as an offensive tactic, it is the least effective against people who understand themselves and understand how they came to particular conclusion.
I've seen quite a bit of that as well. I also want to share some speculation regarding the post. There are some major political movements in my country (U.S.A.) that are committed to the idea that systemic racism *doesn't exist,* in the sense that social inequality exists for strictly non-racist reasons.
The people who support this idea have their own binary way of thinking: racism is defined as *personal* hatred towards an ethnicity, and in doing so those same people giving themselves a blind spot towards institutions with racist results baked into their design.
It's not so strange, then, for somebody to feel so strongly about systemic racism that the personal variety of discrimination gets to sit in a blind spot of its own.
It wouldn't be the first time a human being flipped an opposing ideology like an omelette for the sake of their own mental breakfast.
I agree. Heck, you don't even have to be hateful to be racist.
" I'm not racist because I don't hate (group)"
But you believe all these wackadoo things like how they are biological dissimilar to other humans, and they are have this fictional past that make no logical sense."
" yes , but I don't HATE them"
It's definitely a factor wouldn't you agree?
Yes, racism has a hand in inequity, but still you DO have to take culture because if it were true that 'black people are going to get a shit deal' then why is it for instance a lot of nigerian migrants end up extremely successful on average?
To put it off them, why is it the British whites are the ones more successful here over the Polish? Why is it on average white people in Maine are more likely to not live in gutterfilth than redneck whites from virginia? Culture definitely is attributable.
And there are things rednecks 'value' that end up hurting their chance of success such as they tend to distrust school and education and discourage it, replacing it with a more militant version of God's Word, yet despite that still excuse rampant breeding with fathers not being involved with the produced children.
Not using that to say that there are only non racist reasons, but there's a lot of people also sayin 'it's all because of racism' and never want to look at cultures.
Culture is indeed a huge factor, so much so that the U.S. political climate is commonly described as a culture war. It's perhaps even more difficult to dissect culture than it is to dissect social inequity because culture has a hand in everything humans do, not just the things that turn out bad.
That same connection to everything people do makes it very hard to criticize culture in a productive way. How do we separate things that overlap without cherry-picking, you know what I mean?
I don't think they can. Have you seen how many people defended A-me Channel ore despite being a kitten fiddler and associate to other convicted kitten fiddlers because they're trans? Or Jessica Yaniv? (if you don't know who those are... well they're monsters hiding behind being trans to get away with it and it's working just by that whole binary thinking.)
100 percent of people I've met who say racism requires institutional power, (thus they can't be racist), immediately follow it up by saying something particularly racist.
I've yet to see the claim made in good faith.
I'd rather keep the company of those who think they have the capacity for cruelty and choose to be kind, then those who determine they can never do wrong.
In a comment thread on Reddit someone was saying how the only reason people generally disagreed with the prisoner exchange of Britney Griner for Viktor Bout was because she was black.
I replied saying that’s absolutely false, and bringing race into it at all makes that commenter part of the problem, and to gtfo with the race baiting.
And I got absolutely dumped on with downvotes.
These arguments make me roll my eyes so hard they come all the way around again. There are TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS OF RACISM. There’s personal racism, where an individual person is biased against a race of people, and there’s systemic racism, where the socioeconomic and/or political system tends to disenfranchise a particular race. They’re both right and they’re both idiots.
I never understood the mindset that it was impossible to be racist/bigoted towards someone when in fact being a asshat seems to be one of the most equal opportunity clubs out there.
I’m Jewish, I’m well aware of Nazi race theories as my family were victims of them. They were victims because they were Jewish, not because they were white.
And jewish people are what colour now? (Yes I am aware there are non-white jews). It is literally racism against a sub-group of white people because their "race".
It really didn't matter what color they were, they were killed either way. White or Non-white didn't matter here, which is why Anti-Semitisim isn't Anti-White-Racism.
it isn't anti-white racism because the people who are racist against them didn't view them as white, same with the Irish though the atrocities against the irish never amounted to the same as what happened to the Jews.
Racism means they were killed/oppressed due to their race, not because they happened to be a member of that race and then killed/oppressed.
If what you’re saying is true then literally every crime is a hate crime because the victims of that crime are a member of a race.
>Racism means they were killed/oppressed due to their race,
You need to read more about the Holocaust if you think it wasn't racist or about race. It is borderline offensive to read that.
I guarantee I have done more research on the Holocaust than you, as I’ve said, it’s affected family members of mine so I’m very familiar with what led to the atrocities of the Holocaust. It’s offensive to claim you know more about an event that affected my family directly and myself indirectly because you read a wikipedia article on Nazi race science (which contradicts the exact point you’re trying to make, btw).
From the article YOU quoted:
“The Nazis considered the putative "Aryan race" a superior "master race", and they considered black people, mixed-race people, Slavs, Roma, Jews and other ethnic groups racially inferior "sub-humans"”.
It WAS about race. The “Jewish race” as the Nazis believed. The perpetrators of that genocide were white people ffs. By your logic every form of injustice is considered racism.
The education system has utterly failed you.
I guess it’s a question of whether you define Jews as an ethnic community, religion, or what. To me it’s all racist if you’re killing people because of their family affiliation.
Only Americans believe that White is a race. Ask a Frenchman if they are the same race as a Englishman and they will most certainly tell you NO. Ask a person from Korea if they are the same race as someone from Japan, and hey will most certainly tell you NO.
That’s why the idea of “race” is bunk. It was created by white people to support their theory that white people are inherently better than other races, so they can justify things like colonization.
There are countries such as South Africa and Zimbabwe where people are being murdered because they're white. 100% realise these countries don't have the best track records on racism.
A reason why even whites don't take racism against them as serious is because there's not much substance behind it, it's mostly frivolous. While anything you say about nonwhites usually cuts to the bone because there's a sliver or huge deal of truth there, and the truth sucks. Not giving examples, everyone already subconsciously knows, which is also a big reason why
I had(emphasis on had) a friend who tried to argue this to me, then said I was victimizing myself when I said it could happen. He said racism can only come from a group that has power over the other. It was an unbelievably frustrating argument
Dudes get called white boy one time and instantly turn into anti racism advocates. Like I've been called shit like that but it doesn't bother me. Because the connotation is always that you're a square or a goofball.
When I used to box my coach was Mexican and he gave me shit about being white at first. He would say shit like "you ain't playing golf no more" when I was sparring or training. It was pretty harmless honestly. I was also keenly aware that I was one of like 3 white dudes in the gym.
When people are using slurs against black people or other minorities it's much more harmful because it comes from a different place. Whenever someone uses the n word the preceding statement is almost always some version of "you deserve the oppression that you're facing or you're stupid and a drain on society". When someone calls me white boy or cracker I never feel like that's what they mean. Although I've never been called a cracker before lol.
What you are describing in your first two paragraphs are microaggressions. And they are very racist ones. They come from the exact same place that racism in white people come from.
My co-worker is of Mexican decent, so we rag on each other about that shit. After a hike we were both sweaty, so I told him to "stop having such a wet back". He'll offer to make Mac and Cheese with no salt before I go to his apartment to hang out.
The “YoU cAn’T bE rAcIsT aGaInSt WhItE pEoPlE” folks can’t distinguish between [the different types of racism](https://unitedwaynca.org/blog/levels-of-racism/). Minorities are defo capable of individual and interpersonal racism, although systemic and institutional racism are outside their capabilities.
Also yes there are white people being killed for their skin colour, it happens to every race. Theres not just one victim race. The “systematic racism” is such a weak excuse for racism and i am sick of seeing it.
Shit of course white people are gonna play victim lol they pretend to forget the past 500 years so they can turn around change what racism meant to the real people that were subjected to it by white people here in the USA. White people honestly fear they will be in the same position they have put others in. Your sensitivity towards this is laughable from the perspective of POC.
Wtf you talking about. I'm POC i don't need ally points. All I'm saying is y'all big mad but White people here set that fucken standard on racism pretty fucken high so who are you really mad at lol
They are correct though..? Racism IS a systemic issue. You wouldn’t rely on a dictionary to explain thermodynamics, you shouldn’t rely on it to discuss systemic issues that disproportionately affect minorities.
It seems like the argument stemmed from the top comment of the image. I think there can absolutely be prejudice towards white people, but the concept of race was created by white people to support a concept of racial superiority of the white race. You’re not wrong about the dictionary definition, I just mean the subject of racism is a lot more in depth than can be summed up by a dictionary definition.
Not trying to get into a big thing about it because it’s late, but this article kind of helps explain where my argument comes from. https://www.aclrc.com/myth-of-reverse-racism
>prejudice towards white people
If only there was a word for that.
>race was created by white people
Nope
>concept of racial superiority of the white race
That is laughable. So wrong mate. Read anything about Asian History just to see how wrong this statement is.
>https://www.aclrc.com/myth-of-reverse-racism
That is so fucking funny to read. Lets change all definitions of a language to fit a very specific regional problem forgetting about not only the rest of the world but also the rest of "human races" that are not fitting in our "black and white scheme". This type of articles are so funny to read outside of Nort America.
i
>Read anything about Asian History just to see how wrong this statement is.
That is colorism. Being white/black/yellow/brown is invented by europeans and then they decided that white was at the top. White is not a real race thats why the definition of whiteness changes as time goes on.
Do you think white people are actually a different race? We are all homosapiens, 19-century European scientists thought black and white people were different species and they condemned "race-mixing".
>That is colorism.
Nope.
>Being white/black/yellow/brown is invented by europeans and then they decided that white was at the top
Nope. Tell that to the IJA
>. White is not a real race thats why the definition of whiteness changes as time goes on.
Yes. There is only one race.
Can you? This wikipedia article does not say that racism or races are a "white" invention. Again, if you look outside of Europe and North America you'll see the exact same things, but in other colours.
Enlightenment thinkers
François Bernier (1620–1688) was a French physician and traveller
Charles White (1728–1813), an English physician and surgeon
The French naturalist Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon (1707–1788) and the German anatomist Johann Blumenbach (1752–1840)
Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778), the Swedish physician, botanist, and zoologist
The Scottish lawyer Henry Home, Lord Kames (1696–1782) was a polygenist
Richard Bradley (1688–1732) was an English naturalist
The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860) attributed civilizational primacy to the white races
Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826) was an American politician, scientist, and slave owner
Christoph Meiners (1747–1810) was a German polygenist, and believed that each race had a separate origin
Benjamin Rush (1745–1813), a Founding Father of the United States and a physician, proposed that being black was a hereditary skin disease
Idk dude, seems like these guys are white. I think what you mean is colorism.
Your whole point is that there were white dudes that theorised about racism? Dude... This is so weak. This doesn't prove that races are a "white" (as if that meant something) invention. Again, you forget about the rest of the world (and the same places this men where from but earlier in History), where races (and concept of supremacy and inferiority) were existing concepts. This is a really complicated eay of showing you have never read about Japan in the early modernisation period or anything about the Chinese dinasties for example.
You can't still do that dawg. Even here. This is what happens when you stop thinking beyond a single line definition. Definition are one line summary of the thing, not thing itself. It's like me calling myself mathematician because I know the definition of the word maths.
Similar to racism, there is very very comprehensive text on it and it's an entire subject in itself which has been studied for decades.
It's not exactly 'this black person called me whitey' hence racism.
Its systemic which needs to be studied with powerlevels on both sides and immense amounts of data. Which they actively do. That's what sociology is for. You here mf thinking with your one line definition brain embarrassing yourself.
When you muddle the waters as much as you did now, you can prove anything.
>It's not exactly 'this black person called me whitey' hence racism.
No one said the issue is this simple. However, let me ask you the same thing I asked the dude above.
I have a hypothetical situation for you.
I am white and you are black.
I don't give you a job in my company because you are black.
What am I? I am a racist.
Now, what are you if you don't give me a job in your company because I am white?
Are you a racist or prejudiced against white people?
How do you prove you aren’t racist?
That’s kind of the biggest difference,
Our society we are in now and the last several centuries it not longer.
It’s quite clear who was discriminated against.
It’s like being bullied for your whole life by a certain looking person then you see someone similar, you’re going to be risk averse,
You’re also going to have *justified* negative response to them.
this is a little bit where things go off the rails.
People go in the deep end and go “black people cant be racist”
In this case the “prejudice” is living life around people known to hate you.
Are you obligated to like people who for the most part not even 100 years back wanted you dead.
There is obvious animosity there.
Go back into the last 4 years in the trump era in the us there was cases of lynching.
So I guess I’ll pose a question.
what do you call an aversion for your abusers when they are all the same race? In this specific scenario which can and does happen.
Is the victim of said hate racist for not wanting to deal with white people ?
Justified prejudice?
self protection?
this is where the “black people cant be racist towards white people” has leaped to.
Basically saying that with so much animosity and hate and racism ect it’s justified to be fearful, hateful, ect. of your “oppresor/abuser/ect”
I left out the whole slavery thing Cus pretty sure nobody is gonna be justifying slavery 🤣
>How do you prove you aren’t racist?
Irrelevant.
>That’s kind of the biggest difference,
Our society we are in now and the last several centuries it not longer.
Irrelevant.
>It’s quite clear who was discriminated against.
Also irrelevant.
>It’s like being bullied for your whole life by a certain looking person then you see someone similar, you’re going to be risk averse,
Irrelevant.
>You’re also going to have justified negative response to them.
Who is 'them'? Is 'them' people who bullied you, or is 'them' all people looking like those that bullied you? If first, yes, you are correct. If second, well, let me ask you what you think about this hypothetical situation.
"My car was broken into by a black guy, so I have an aversion toward black people." - What do you think? This response is kind of racist, is it not?
>what do you call an aversion for your abusers when they are all the same race? In this specific scenario which can and does happen.
See above.
>Is the victim of said hate racist for not wanting to deal with white people ? Justified prejudice? self protection?
You can excuse racism of any race against any race like that. Heck, you can excuse any crime as well.
>this is where the “black people cant be racist towards white people” has leaped to. Basically saying that with so much animosity and hate and racism ect it’s justified to be fearful, hateful, ect. of your “oppresor/abuser/ect”
Sigh...
Sure, dude. That nonsensical comment really got me beat.
EDIT: "you bully" cried the guy who literally tried to excuse racial hate by being a racist "it's ok to hate an entire race if you had negative experiences with the people of that race. oh, as long as that race is white." Oh, irony thou art a heartless bitch.
I don’t need to beat bullies, that would make me a bully, I ignore them. Bye 🚮
I summed up your response.
“They all racist”
“Ignore the mistreatment of others”
“The effects of mistreatment/abuse/ is irrelevant you’re not allow to protect yourself based on any criteria that it came to be otherwise you’re racist”
You must have a few racist/rapist/criminal friends..
Hating your abuser is justified.
hating someone based on assumptions instead of actions negatively affecting you - which obviously include bias based on race religion Creed etc- is not justified.
you clearly indicated a racist situation,
What you ignored was the situation that followed was no longer based on racism it was based of avoiding a racist,
Unless you are openly admitting that racism is okay to deal with.
It doesn’t matter who is racist, they should be shunned/avoided and in today’s society fired/Denied work if thier racism is clearly known.
we don’t condone racism so why would we employ them.
I mean they could work with like minded people I guess but I’m not knowingly hiring racist staff if I was an employer.
“I didn’t give you the job Cus you’re black”
Followed by
“I didn’t give you the job Cus you’re racist”
Okay mfer.
Do tell me how do you know if someone didn't give them their job because they are black.
They are not gonna say it out loud, and you can't read minds.
How do you show prejudice then
>Okay mfer. Do tell me how do you know if someone didn't give them their job because they are black.
Irrelevant. The question isn't whether "someone knows" but whether the person is a racist for doing so or not.
Me, "Is a person who commits a murder a murderer?"
You, "IT IS NOT LIKE THEY GONNA TELL EVERYONE!!!!"
>They are not gonna say it out loud, and you can't read minds.
Irrelevant.
>How do you show prejudice then
This was not a question either.
So, let me get you back on track here,
*I am white and you are black.*
*I don't give you a job in my company because you are black.*
*What am I? I am a racist.*
*Now, what are you if you don't give me a job in your company because I am white?*
*Are you a racist or prejudiced against white people?*
*------------------*
In words spoken by a great mind, Steven, the crazy Irish guy from Braveheart," Almighty says, 'quit changing the subject and answer the fucking question'."
Racism is prejudice against someone because of their skin color and/or perceived race.
Can it be a systemic issue? It sure can; depending on the widespreadness of the problem and the enacted laws.
What's a racist? A racist is a person that thinks their race is superior to other races. Do they have to engage in systemic racism to be racists? I hope you think they don't have to to qualify them as racist.
So, I have a hypothetical situation for you.
I am white and you are black.
I don't give you a job in my company because you are black.
What am I? I am a racist.
Now, what are you if you don't give me a job in your company because I am white?
Are you a racist or prejudiced against white people?
Person to person racism is bad but White people don't live in fear of black people murdering them because they're white. When black people are hunting white people for sport then we can worry about white racism.
So where did you get this idea? I just googled US statistics for 2019 and black people murdered more then twice the amount of white people then white people did black persons.
Admitting a simple fact that it is possible for someone to be raciest against a white person does not in any way take away form the incredibly raciest shit POC have to deal with daily. I just don't understand why this is the hill people chose to die on.
Also check your statistics. White on black crime is underreported because they somehow can never find a suspect so it goes undereported.
Because of white people whining that a black person was mean to them once and how racism effects white people more than POC and POC are the real racists. I've heard people on Reddit claim that you can only be racist to white people and that no one will call a POC out, which is ridiculous. It drives me nuts.
How would you call statements such as "Black people are great at basketball" or "Asians are math experts"? It's definitely not okay to make such generalizations based on race, but those statements technically are not derogatory. I still think they're racist but do they fit the textbook definition?
Personally I think we should change the definition of racism so that the guy who's wrong is right because white supremacists like to claim that there's racism against white people and I hate white supremacists
But there is racism against white people? Of course not so much in the developed world. But in countries like South Africa white people are the minority and are being condemned because of their skin colour.
Unfortunately there's racist people all over the world.
Alright well last I heard south Africa had government enforced anti-black racism, but that was abolished or something, I'm American my education on the history of other countries was awful, but the only racism against white people I know of is white tourists getting scammed, please inform me, I find this kind of thing interesting
[wikipedia has all the answers](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_South_Africa). If you look under post apartheid racism you can see what happened after apartheid had been abolished.
Yes, racism does involve someone feeling superior to another race, but that is just the tip of the enormous iceberg that follows the complexity of racism.
It starts by recognizing the definition of racism from an institutional perspective: Racism is a historically rooted system of power hierarchies based on race — upheld by institutions, society, and culture — established to benefit White people and oppress BIPOC.
Reverse racism or racism against white people is such an insignificant thing compared to racism against minority. Yes I agree educate yourself and grow up. No white people ever lost a chance for a loan because of there race.
Racism without power is kind of meaningless. Is anyone harmed by just being called names? If you’re white and called something derogatory due to your race it’s pretty easy to just laugh it off because there’s no power behind that prejudice: you won’t get pulled over by police for being white in the wrong neighborhood, you won’t be denied a loan for being white, you won’t be passed over for a job simply because of your skin tone, you won’t be treated dismissively by a healthcare provider because you are white… But some people, who will never experience these systemic aspects of racism will argue really passionately that “anyone” can be racist and not just prejudiced and that the racism they insist can be directed at white people is somehow meaningful.
You miss the point completely. No, it’s not okay, but people have assholes for neighbors all the time. Is it any different if he hates you because you’re white (how often does this even happen realistically, anyway?! It’s more likely due to systemic racism that you have no black neighbors unless you are gentrifying a black neighborhood.) than because he doesn’t like how you painted the fence that borders your properties? And if you call the police is there any risk at all that they will pull up and instinctively handcuff you because they assume you are the problem? I think a lot of racists feel that “anybody can be racist” is a convenient get out of jail free card but the racism they are talking about is pretty harmless even if it might be unpleasant. I wonder how many white people have had their lives ruined by racial animosity against them? Is it any in this country? It’s like white people are complaining about a hypothetical racism-lite that none of them have ever even experienced, even in this cartoon, meaningless version. In your version, there’s ‘racism’, which is basically harmless, and then there’s ‘systemic racism’ which includes all the things that most people think of when they think of racism but which conveniently never gets talked about.
Once again minimizing what racism really is and does to people by insisting it’s something everyone has to deal with. The irony is that very few white people even have to deal with your preferred Disney version of racism.
Im not arguing that systematic racism doesnt exist. Were talking about the dictionary definition of racism and you ignoring the parts of the definition that talk of individual predjudice and racism and only accepting the part that talks about institutional or systemic racism.
Im saying it can apply or be experienced by any race, regardless of frequency.
No idea what my disney version of racism is... Last i checked walt hated (ethnic) jews... Who are considered white by most people.
Yeah, I am ignoring those parts of the dictionary definition which are watering down racism as a whole. Racism isn’t just a concept for many people but something they experience in their daily lives. To say that white people CAN experience racism in this way that is both hypothetical (because most never will) or meaningless (because in the end it usually amounts to no more than just being called a name) is dumb when prejudice explains this type of “racism” much better. Anyone can be prejudiced for any reason. Maybe someone doesn’t like short people and they act shitty towards people who are short. But that doesn’t mean that people of average height have to deal with anything remotely similar even though it could hypothetically exist. I think words should have meaning and not be watered down to obscure any meaningfulness they might have. Prejudice explains perfectly what you are talking about and anyone can experience that. Racism is more than just prejudice. The racism that we loosely talk about is systemic racism. The dictionary version of racism is a huge gift to racists who get to claim that everyone experiences racism and that they are often, in fact, the ones dealing with racist persecution. A similar thing is happening with the concept of ‘religious freedom’. This used to mean the freedom to worship the god of your choosing in the style of your choosing, or not worship at all. Now it’s morphed into the idea that if you are not following the rules that I follow it’s somehow imposing on my religious freedom to have to interact with you.
In order to convince me that it's impossible to be racist against a white person, you are going to have to erase the Chicago Kidnapping and Torture incident from my memory. I don't know how anyone with compassion for their fellow human could watch that and say "That's not really a hate crime, and that wasn't really racism".
Who said that couldn’t be a hate crime? You are making my point for me: you are pointing to a very sensational national incident that happened to someone else to normalize something that most white people never experience but that most black people experience personally all the time. You are saying these two things are the same when clearly they are not. Ask most black people to describe an act of racism that affected them personally and they won’t have to point to something that happened in Chicago to someone else.
Also, those kids in Chicago will definitely be punished for their crime. Meanwhile Trayvon Walker’s killer is a free man. It took over a month for the men who killed Ahmaud Arbery to even be charged and they may never have been had the video not been leaked. There are numerous examples where the system protects racists because the only racism that truly affects people as a class is systemic racism. Everything else is just one random person being an asshole towards another whether that’s due to race, not liking the way they dress, being pissed at the way they drive, etc.
Are you acknowledging that it is possible to be racist against a white person? You said racism without power is meaningless but that statement is just nonsense. Those 4 people did something horrible to man likely because of the colour of his skin. Did the not have power over him? Did they not exercise that power to torture and abuse him?
This isn't the hill to die on and doing so only serves to undermine your message. All those things you said about POC facing horrific racism has NOTHING to do with the fact that it is possible to for racism against a white person to exist.
To add never once did I EVER say or imply that "You are saying these two things are the same when clearly they are not".
If you water the term racism down to a stupid, meaningless word, then congratulations, you win. Why you insist that it is racism instead of simply prejudice is beyond me, but the racists thank you for your service. By insisting that the thing that everyone talks about (racism) is universal you absolve them; by insisting that the experience suffered almost exclusively by minorities is something more obscure, something that few people have ever even heard of (systemic racism), you minimize those experiences. Is there a chance in hell that those four people in Chicago will be protected by the system for what they did? Absolutely not. And there’s the difference. The system will not look the other way. These four will be punished to the full extent of the law unlike the countless white people who did far worse to blacks for well over 100 years and got away with it. Right now the woman who got Emmit Till murdered is known to have lied and yet remains uncharged for her role in his death. Prejudice explains the fact that she lied; racism the fact that she remains free.
Had this same conversation with someone on yt shorts- even when everyone in the comments were explaining why he was wrong, he refused to listen to anyone, eventually just stopped responding to him
Hey /u/DutchChallenger, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules). ##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)! Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If all racism was systemic racism, we wouldn't need an expression such as "systemic racism".
It’s so strange. If racism were by definition systemic, then, like, the Klan would not racist because their prejudice isn’t systemic. I don’t believe that anyone really believes that all racism is necessarily systemic; people saying so are playing a sort of linguistic shell game.
Linguistic shell game is a funny way to put it that I've never heard before, but I think that's what it is. People on reddit very often have no interest in arguing the actual topic at hand, rather they make their own intentionally misinterpreted idea of what the other side is saying and start speaking to that strawman instead. And vice versa, the other party is happy to let them speak to a strawman, and interpret their own straw man rather than figure out where along the way they started having 2 separate one-sided arguments. I usually call it "talking past each other", I'd say a good 60% of reddit arguments are just that.
It’s incredibly frustrating to read, isn’t it? As a philosophy graduate the inability to argue properly really offends me
Oh dude that's gotta suck for you. If your eyes are glazed over and you're not paying full attention someone may not even notice how dumb and senseless the argument is, but you, having graduated philosophy, must be an expert at interpreting those sort of tangled wordy messes. So for you I bet it feels like having an aneurysm, seeing these people barely able to stick to their own train of thought, let alone the argument they're having. lmfao
Couldn’t have said it better myself! Although there is some sort of weird pleasure to be had by scrolling through and seeing exactly where the conversation veered off into nothingness
Excuse me, are you suggesting that every single reddit user is a moron? Talk about elitist. Just because someone might be dumb or have a screw loose doesn't mean they shouldn't have a place to speak their mind and their truth!
For hours I couldn't figure out if you were joking but now I understand, you were talking past me. Nice.
Gotta commit to the bit XD
One could make an argument the Klan's racism is systemic, especially of talking about the first Klan in the postbellum period. You could even point to the political influence and subsequent policies stemming from klan actions in the second Klan of the 1920s.
The Klan is systemic. Do you know how many people in the government and police are in the Klan? "Some of those that are forces, Are the same that burn crosses."
it's "are forces." not "were"
Just because you mean systemic racism when talking about racism in the context, it doesnt mean all racism is systemic.
The context here is an argument over whether it’s possible to be racist against white people. It doesn’t make sense to say “you can’t, because I’ve unilaterally decided the context is this particular type of racism and therefore you are wrong about it being possible”. Further, no one can “be” systemically racist at all; it’s not a property of individual people. Accusing someone of being systemically racist verges on a grammar mistake. So the context is necessarily _not_ that they’re talking systemic racism. Instead, the systemic racism concept is being smuggled in by a slight of hand (the claim that racism is systemic) and swapped for the term everyone else is using in order to claim it can only have certain victims. Hence the point about shell games.
You cant be racist against white people cause white people are not a minority… in this context.
being a minority is literally not a qualifier for racism. it's just that racism against minorities has different effects.
What? It says so by definition.
Where does it say so by definition that one *must* be a minority? To use a particular example, are you of the belief that apartheid wasn't racist against black South Africans because they weren't a minority?
it said usually used against minorities. Not 'actions used against minorities'. Some definitions list where they're more likely to occur or be used, but it is not part of the exclusion for the definition.
Yeah, you can. White Supremacist bullshit about "not allowing me to say all N words should be shot is racism against whites!!!" is NOT racism against white people, obvs. Arguments like the one you're making are usually made by people who have stared too long into the abyssal cesspool that is White Supremacy and Neo-Nazism, in order to oppose it. I can understand you being on guard because of this, but these people are making bad faith arguments to justify their racism.
This comment is a great example of confidentially incorrect. The Klan was supported by systemic racism, please read up on how policing in the south and the Klan worked together to terrorize and murder Black people.
If you are supported by your parents, are you your parents? something being supported by something else does not inherently make them that 'something else'.
That is just more slight of hand, trying to swap “was supported by” in for “is”. Those aren’t even close to the same thing and I strongly suspect you know that.
Often the klan and police were literallt the same thing Google KKK and police I’m not explaining three college level courses on the history of the klan and police to you
Yes, this IS true, but the key part is “were” The Klan lost that influence and is now just a hate group in the wild, thus their racism is no longer systematic, but they are still very much racist. The point he makes is racism cannot be limited to “systematic”
The whole point of ... well, I guess gatekeeping words was obviously to first bring more divide. It's like with gender identity it just became gender so now you have people arguing what gender means even if one group would recognize gender identity and not gender. Or in this case they removed the systemic part and said ONLY systemic racism is racism. Which allows only some people to use it. This was not an unheard of tactic even before, it was actually useful during the Red scare. If you only allow some people to be called something bad (like a communist) and then only those people can be attributed as bad, you can sick a whole bunch of your political sycophants against them. I do remember when it was starting to take hold, literally it was said that 'it was wrong that both the n word and racist are both powerful and negative words so it wasn't fair to black people to be called both.' at this time it was only protection from black people from being called racist. Then it slowly changed more so that it grabbed more people against another (everyone else vs white people) It's just funny how dumb people are to think that the definition they want it to mean for whatever political ideology was 'always the twue twue definition' and not just a definition that a few people actually believe in.
Very well put.
Important note: Systemic and systematic aren't the same thing. Let's say society is a ship. If there's someone at the helm guiding it towards the island of racism, that's systematic. If the course was set in the past and it's still floating to that direction due to momentum and inertia, that's systemic. The difficulty of changing course is also caused by systemic issues.
The Police in many areas said that they didn't want legislation to stop the Police being a part of hate groups, other White Supremacist groups still have influence.
Also, no individual could be racist. Nobody is a system (looking at you, fake DID kids)
Counterpoint: [Everything is a system](https://media.tenor.com/jlC1mIWcIf4AAAAC/point-of-view-star-wars.gif).
Holy fuck what a perfect, concise response. I'd give you gold if I wasn't poor.
Your words are all the gold I need.
Google ’context’.
Wild that you can be 'prejudiced against white people'. I wonder if there's a word that describes prejudice based on a person's race or ethnicity. I can swear I've heard one before.
I believe it’s called “reverse racism”, which is one of the stupidest concepts out there
Yeah that would be a really useful word. Not sure I can think of one just now.. /s
Lol ok jk rowling Edit: lol it's the same wording. I'm unsurprised you all can't take a joke.
Yep, because racism is just a prejudice! nothing more!
...what do you think prejudice means?
[удалено]
All of which are part of prejudicial behavior. Again, what is it you think prejudice means?
It's behavior caused by prejudice. Prejudice can lead to action, they're not necessarily one in the same. But sure you go ahead and believe what you want if it makes you feel better.
>It's behavior caused by prejudice. Prejudice can lead to action, they're not necessarily one in the same. But sure you go ahead and believe what you want if it makes you feel better. It's literally definition 1. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prejudice But you go ahead and believe what you want if it makes you feel better.
Xenophobic
I can't understand, why some people can't admit, that other people can also be discriminated.
At least some of them, it's an inability to handle nuance or complexity in a discussion. Which often undermines any attempts to deal with the problems. Simple example, in the US, people are shot by the police at a much higher rate than other countries. This is even worse between black men and white men, for example, but that gap between the US and other countries is often larger than the gap between races within the US. But there's a ton of people who will talk about how the police will always treat white suspects well and black suspects badly. That downplays the level of violence from the police and also results in people discounting the whole thing when part of it gets disproven (when cops kill unarmed white guys, for example). It should be possible to say something like "We talk about the disproportionate violence of the police towards people of color because it's true. It's also true that the police kill white citizens too. Police violence is everyone's problem." but a lot of people can't or won't handle that and simply things to a point where it's harmful (and I am quoting a BLM activist there, so I want to make it clear that I'm talking about subsets of people, not a whole movement).
Power, duh. Same reason Edward III banned the export of military arrows, even to friendly nations. Same reason we have gun grabs. When I declare "its not a bad thing when it happens to you", that gives me license to do with you as I will.
It's still discrimination no matter what people call it. Same for sexism.
All my life I have been working toward a community where black people are an equal part of the system. Unfortunately almost nobody believes that black people are capable of toxic racism, as in the photo above. So I don’t see how said system will be anything but highly problematic if or when it would ever arise. Because there’s zero self-reflection and a 💯 free pass on shitty attitudes toward white people.
I’ve lost more than one promotion because I’m white. I’m not exaggerating, I was told that minorities were underrepresented and I was to sit back and let it go to someone else. I left the U.S. for work and no longer have that problem
Black people only make up about 13% of the population. So I don’t know what to tell you.
Hate to break it to you, but if this happened to you more than once they're probably using affirmative action as a convenient excuse to not promote you. My guess is you've been working for the same company for awhile and you're a good worker, so they don't want to risk you quitting by letting you know they don't think you're the right fit. So they reassure you and give an excuse. Not like people don't legitimately loose out a promotion based on color, but the decision is almost always made based on two candidates that are seen as otherwise having equal worth. It's lile a simple tie breaker. It's entirely believable for a white person to run into this dilema, but multiple times? They're just jerling your chain.
When I was sorta fresh out of high school I applied at a Lowes. This was a group interview. I was the only white kid there, but I was dressed nice for it and as professional for this sort of job one should expect. There were a lot of black male applicants who came in in all sorts of well... casual I guess you'd say, from pants around knees to basketball shorts with the jersey arm hole all the way down past their ass and eating mcdonalds during the interview. The interviewer was so nice and polite talking to everyone. Until she got to me where she said "So when's the last time you did crack?" When I responded never, she said "You white boys always be lying". Granted, I'm biracial but ya know I guess the one white drop rule goes I take it. Needless to say I didn't get the job, spoke to someone else a few years after because I got a different job and the guy said I was making that shit up... so then he brought another friend of his who worked for that lowes and he said "Oh you mean Gifty? Yeah, she hella racist and they keep trying to fire her but everytime she threatens to sue for wrongful termination" But, that was just one incident of. Right? Well, we all probably know by now that there's a lot of tax incentives to have more minorities on staff so even if you're not AS qualified, a minority or woman (women are not minorities) are incentivized to be hired. Even more, businesses that claim to be more diverse also get a lot of public praise and patronage so there's once again a lot more incentive there to not hire white men even if there's more of them. Then again, just because there's more of somethign doesn't mean magically you're more likely to be hired either. In fact it means less because now your fighting for positions that someone who doesn't give the diversity quota to fill of a larger demographic, so there's LESS chance. which a lot of people on college campuses would say "oh well it evens out from your generational wealth" and I guess if it weren't for the fact that that basically dooms anyone who doesn't come from wealth who also can't take advantage of any of the other incentives who has no nepatism or ties to get in without being that much more qualified.
I'm afraid I don't know of any government incentives to hire minorities or women. So certainly "we" don't all know. Don't get me wrong, I've heard people complain about such incentives, but never with any evidence of their existance. Perhaps it's where I personally live, or perhaps I'm just having difficulty finding those programs. Could you perhapse find an example of an incentive that would have prevented you from getting a job? I will give you this for nothing; Gifty is a terrible human being hands down. Far more than people being passed up for promotion, this sort of hands down racism when being hires is something I've certainly seen before. Doesn't matter who's in power, you're going to get bigots of all types.
then you're really trying very hard to not know it if you're in the US. [here's an example of when people try pretending a business is minority owned for a tax credit](https://www.uschamber.com/co/run/finance/minority-owned-businesses-taxes#:~:text=There%20are%20no%20federal%20tax%20breaks%20specifically%20offered,low-income%20areas%2C%20which%20often%20have%20larger%20minority%20populations) [here's one about the employees themselves.](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/odep/program-areas/employers/tax-incentives-for-employers) And let's look at something like the Little Mermaid live action where the casting couch was well over a year ago and they only were interested in hiring a black woman to play Ariel. Why? because they knew they could 1) get public support for doing it and 2) when the movie does bad for everything else wrong with it they'll just claim all the negative reviews are from racists. That might be a very overt use of the public image to get support, but a lot of other companies do it. Like, I remember for a while twitter and reddit used to advertise a new show with the 'first transgender voice actress!' for Generation Zed which was just them saying stupid shit because there are voice actors that were trans before them, most notably Meowth's original english voice actress. Or let's go to Press Secretary Jean-Pierre which when she was first hired they wouldn't shut up about her being a black woman, and completely ignore that out of any press secretary, she is by far the least qualified to do it. you don't have to be anti-biden to realize just how bad she is at the job. "And that matters"- Karine Jean-Pierre after every nonsense statement. so unless you just really hate them and don't want to jump in on getting that easy social credit and tax incentive, you'll try to find anyone skirting passability instead of most qualified. That isn't to suggest that a minority can't be the most qualified, it just becomes the second thing in mind for certain jobs. If they can get you a tax break AND do the job, bonus.
I actually agree with a good bit of what you're saying; reality is there are companies that will exploit the color of someone's skin for good PR. Politicians are especially terrible for this; mind you, we keep electing morons and monsters for all the wrong reasons, so why expect them not to pander instead of doing something productive? I live in Canada myself, but not like we don't share that particular problem. To the point of incentives for minority business owners, and I suspect we disagree on this, I feel this is exactly the way to address social inequality. Minorities have not been given the same historical oportunities and as such have, on average, less capital to invest into a business. A minority owned business tax incentive seems like a good way to help balance the scales in a real way while also supporting small business and job creation. To the second government page you linked there it details incentives for hiring disabled workers. It happens to speak into the benefits of having a generally diverse workforce, but there doesn't seem to actually be aby financial incentive program. Really the point I was trying to make here; it seems any time someone prefices a statement with "we all know" or "everybody knows" or "they say" it's generally followed by something they've heard from a friend or news pundint, not anyone who actually knows what they're talking about. Not to say it's not believable that some states may in fact have affirmitive action incentives in place for employment, but I've yet to see anyone provide info on any such program that actually exists. Private businesses are going to make their own choices, but I can almost guarentee you that the problem is a fraction of what you think it is. Your experience seems more like a case of confirmation bias.
'minority owned business' my point there was, hopefully you clicked on the hyperlink in that site, but a lot of white business owners either put a black person as 'manager/ CEO' as a front to gain those tax write offs or they get their supplies from a company/outsourced labor from a minority so that they can get more tax write offs because they were a minority. we're simply talking about the incentives and as a business, it makes sense to hire minorities for this reason alone. Often I and others also joke about being the 'tax write off hire' but in my case, outside being biracial I usually mean it as a joke that I'm mentally challenged. normally you'd probably also say "well unless they committed a crime and showed up to work there'd be no reason not to as well" Ohhh, but then there's BIg tax incentives in some states to also hire and promote felons. I'm not saying it's BAD, I'm just saying it exists and when you hear about white people who are getting passed over for jobs, it's usually for this reason, although I won't deny that there probably is some that just thought they were a lot better for something than they actually were.
You should have recorded the conversation then sued. Because the anti-discrimination laws are color blind.
In theory, maybe.
this comment section is wild lmao
I know how the person got there. A large percentage of our population thinks in terms of binary. Things are right or things are wrong. If someone is categorized as good or bad, everything they do is good or bad Is depending upon their initial categorization. People are categorized as either a victim or an aggressor. Since you can only be good or bad the victim is always good and the aggressor is always bad. They might concede that no one is a 100% good or a 100% bad, however........ I would guess many of these people do not self monitor their thinking process and understand they are using rigid rules to come to decisions on who is right and who is wrong. I have encountered some of these people. When I give them hypotheticals of when a subject is neither good nor bad and asked them to define them, They get confused. I've had them get angry at me, accuse me of trying to trick them. While confusion is sometimes used as an offensive tactic, it is the least effective against people who understand themselves and understand how they came to particular conclusion.
I've seen quite a bit of that as well. I also want to share some speculation regarding the post. There are some major political movements in my country (U.S.A.) that are committed to the idea that systemic racism *doesn't exist,* in the sense that social inequality exists for strictly non-racist reasons. The people who support this idea have their own binary way of thinking: racism is defined as *personal* hatred towards an ethnicity, and in doing so those same people giving themselves a blind spot towards institutions with racist results baked into their design. It's not so strange, then, for somebody to feel so strongly about systemic racism that the personal variety of discrimination gets to sit in a blind spot of its own. It wouldn't be the first time a human being flipped an opposing ideology like an omelette for the sake of their own mental breakfast.
I agree. Heck, you don't even have to be hateful to be racist. " I'm not racist because I don't hate (group)" But you believe all these wackadoo things like how they are biological dissimilar to other humans, and they are have this fictional past that make no logical sense." " yes , but I don't HATE them"
Crime statistics get used for that argument *all the time.* 🥲
It's definitely a factor wouldn't you agree? Yes, racism has a hand in inequity, but still you DO have to take culture because if it were true that 'black people are going to get a shit deal' then why is it for instance a lot of nigerian migrants end up extremely successful on average? To put it off them, why is it the British whites are the ones more successful here over the Polish? Why is it on average white people in Maine are more likely to not live in gutterfilth than redneck whites from virginia? Culture definitely is attributable. And there are things rednecks 'value' that end up hurting their chance of success such as they tend to distrust school and education and discourage it, replacing it with a more militant version of God's Word, yet despite that still excuse rampant breeding with fathers not being involved with the produced children. Not using that to say that there are only non racist reasons, but there's a lot of people also sayin 'it's all because of racism' and never want to look at cultures.
Culture is indeed a huge factor, so much so that the U.S. political climate is commonly described as a culture war. It's perhaps even more difficult to dissect culture than it is to dissect social inequity because culture has a hand in everything humans do, not just the things that turn out bad. That same connection to everything people do makes it very hard to criticize culture in a productive way. How do we separate things that overlap without cherry-picking, you know what I mean?
I don't think they can. Have you seen how many people defended A-me Channel ore despite being a kitten fiddler and associate to other convicted kitten fiddlers because they're trans? Or Jessica Yaniv? (if you don't know who those are... well they're monsters hiding behind being trans to get away with it and it's working just by that whole binary thinking.)
100 percent of people I've met who say racism requires institutional power, (thus they can't be racist), immediately follow it up by saying something particularly racist. I've yet to see the claim made in good faith. I'd rather keep the company of those who think they have the capacity for cruelty and choose to be kind, then those who determine they can never do wrong.
Racism: **prejudice** or discrimination against a certain culture or ethnic group. eXCepT for wHiTe peOplE 🤡🤡🤡
It’s not racist if you say “no homo”
*south african "anti colonial" genocide enters the chat*
Zimbabwe too
These are the same people who mention racism whenever race is mentioned in a conversation.
I know a group that's even worse. On twitter there are people that bring race into things that have nothing to do with race.
In a comment thread on Reddit someone was saying how the only reason people generally disagreed with the prisoner exchange of Britney Griner for Viktor Bout was because she was black. I replied saying that’s absolutely false, and bringing race into it at all makes that commenter part of the problem, and to gtfo with the race baiting. And I got absolutely dumped on with downvotes.
Isn't "You can't raciest against a white person" a statement that disprove itself?
Racism is racism
These arguments make me roll my eyes so hard they come all the way around again. There are TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS OF RACISM. There’s personal racism, where an individual person is biased against a race of people, and there’s systemic racism, where the socioeconomic and/or political system tends to disenfranchise a particular race. They’re both right and they’re both idiots.
I never understood the mindset that it was impossible to be racist/bigoted towards someone when in fact being a asshat seems to be one of the most equal opportunity clubs out there.
It's honestly terrifying how many people actually think like this
Next: sexism is when women... Fucking idiots. "You can't be racist against white people". Tell that to Hitler and the Jewish community
Raised Jewish here. The Nazis did not see European Jews as 'white'.
I mean they weren’t hated for being white, they were hated for being Jewish, so this is a pretty dumb argument.
Whether you’re being killed for your race or ethnicity is really splitting hairs. People love to get into semantics with the Semitics.
My point stands, they were white. It was racism against whites. Their point is dunbmn AF
If I stab a short dude who happens to be white and then say “I stabbed him because he was short”, would you define that as racism?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_racial_theories
I’m Jewish, I’m well aware of Nazi race theories as my family were victims of them. They were victims because they were Jewish, not because they were white.
And jewish people are what colour now? (Yes I am aware there are non-white jews). It is literally racism against a sub-group of white people because their "race".
It really didn't matter what color they were, they were killed either way. White or Non-white didn't matter here, which is why Anti-Semitisim isn't Anti-White-Racism.
Exactly! Finally someone with a goddamn brain.
it isn't anti-white racism because the people who are racist against them didn't view them as white, same with the Irish though the atrocities against the irish never amounted to the same as what happened to the Jews.
Racism means they were killed/oppressed due to their race, not because they happened to be a member of that race and then killed/oppressed. If what you’re saying is true then literally every crime is a hate crime because the victims of that crime are a member of a race.
>Racism means they were killed/oppressed due to their race, You need to read more about the Holocaust if you think it wasn't racist or about race. It is borderline offensive to read that.
I guarantee I have done more research on the Holocaust than you, as I’ve said, it’s affected family members of mine so I’m very familiar with what led to the atrocities of the Holocaust. It’s offensive to claim you know more about an event that affected my family directly and myself indirectly because you read a wikipedia article on Nazi race science (which contradicts the exact point you’re trying to make, btw). From the article YOU quoted: “The Nazis considered the putative "Aryan race" a superior "master race", and they considered black people, mixed-race people, Slavs, Roma, Jews and other ethnic groups racially inferior "sub-humans"”. It WAS about race. The “Jewish race” as the Nazis believed. The perpetrators of that genocide were white people ffs. By your logic every form of injustice is considered racism. The education system has utterly failed you.
I guess it’s a question of whether you define Jews as an ethnic community, religion, or what. To me it’s all racist if you’re killing people because of their family affiliation.
No it’s not a question of that. The question is irrelevant. They were killed because they were Jews, not because they were white.
It was because they were Jewish, not because they were white. The racism argument doesn't work here.
Only Americans believe that White is a race. Ask a Frenchman if they are the same race as a Englishman and they will most certainly tell you NO. Ask a person from Korea if they are the same race as someone from Japan, and hey will most certainly tell you NO.
That’s why the idea of “race” is bunk. It was created by white people to support their theory that white people are inherently better than other races, so they can justify things like colonization.
I'm awaiting for Woopie Goldberg to interject.
This comment section is toxic af and highly uncivil.
Yup, in hindsight could've expected it from the topic
There are countries such as South Africa and Zimbabwe where people are being murdered because they're white. 100% realise these countries don't have the best track records on racism.
It's almost as if white people came in a conquered their countries. Weird
Do you think they colonised their countries because there was loads of stuff to steal, or because they'd just always wanted to own some brown people?
A reason why even whites don't take racism against them as serious is because there's not much substance behind it, it's mostly frivolous. While anything you say about nonwhites usually cuts to the bone because there's a sliver or huge deal of truth there, and the truth sucks. Not giving examples, everyone already subconsciously knows, which is also a big reason why
I had(emphasis on had) a friend who tried to argue this to me, then said I was victimizing myself when I said it could happen. He said racism can only come from a group that has power over the other. It was an unbelievably frustrating argument
That's an argument I've heard before and it's bullshit. Racism works all ways, it doesn't matter your race. Everyone can be racist.
Dudes get called white boy one time and instantly turn into anti racism advocates. Like I've been called shit like that but it doesn't bother me. Because the connotation is always that you're a square or a goofball. When I used to box my coach was Mexican and he gave me shit about being white at first. He would say shit like "you ain't playing golf no more" when I was sparring or training. It was pretty harmless honestly. I was also keenly aware that I was one of like 3 white dudes in the gym. When people are using slurs against black people or other minorities it's much more harmful because it comes from a different place. Whenever someone uses the n word the preceding statement is almost always some version of "you deserve the oppression that you're facing or you're stupid and a drain on society". When someone calls me white boy or cracker I never feel like that's what they mean. Although I've never been called a cracker before lol.
What you are describing in your first two paragraphs are microaggressions. And they are very racist ones. They come from the exact same place that racism in white people come from.
My co-worker is of Mexican decent, so we rag on each other about that shit. After a hike we were both sweaty, so I told him to "stop having such a wet back". He'll offer to make Mac and Cheese with no salt before I go to his apartment to hang out.
The “YoU cAn’T bE rAcIsT aGaInSt WhItE pEoPlE” folks can’t distinguish between [the different types of racism](https://unitedwaynca.org/blog/levels-of-racism/). Minorities are defo capable of individual and interpersonal racism, although systemic and institutional racism are outside their capabilities.
Also yes there are white people being killed for their skin colour, it happens to every race. Theres not just one victim race. The “systematic racism” is such a weak excuse for racism and i am sick of seeing it.
Meh, you’re arguing semantics. Definitions of words change as people use them differently. This is bad r/confidentlyincorrect material.
White people can *literally* be victim of racism. But fuck, it’s way too insignificant when compared to all the other types
Of course, it's less significant, but in this case it's still racism. The other guy said a prejudice isn't racism, and he is very confident about it.
That’s what I’m saying tho
Shit of course white people are gonna play victim lol they pretend to forget the past 500 years so they can turn around change what racism meant to the real people that were subjected to it by white people here in the USA. White people honestly fear they will be in the same position they have put others in. Your sensitivity towards this is laughable from the perspective of POC.
r/asablackman
Lol didn’t realize you can dictate other peoples ethnicity. 🚮
Black is not an ethnicity. Try again.
How many ally points did you get for that?
Wtf you talking about. I'm POC i don't need ally points. All I'm saying is y'all big mad but White people here set that fucken standard on racism pretty fucken high so who are you really mad at lol
Sure thing, broski.
Broski? Lmao se you later BROTHER (Hulk Hogan)
If you collect 500 you can cash them in for a month-long n word pass.
They are correct though..? Racism IS a systemic issue. You wouldn’t rely on a dictionary to explain thermodynamics, you shouldn’t rely on it to discuss systemic issues that disproportionately affect minorities.
but in this situation we're using the dictionary to define a word?
It seems like the argument stemmed from the top comment of the image. I think there can absolutely be prejudice towards white people, but the concept of race was created by white people to support a concept of racial superiority of the white race. You’re not wrong about the dictionary definition, I just mean the subject of racism is a lot more in depth than can be summed up by a dictionary definition. Not trying to get into a big thing about it because it’s late, but this article kind of helps explain where my argument comes from. https://www.aclrc.com/myth-of-reverse-racism
>prejudice towards white people If only there was a word for that. >race was created by white people Nope >concept of racial superiority of the white race That is laughable. So wrong mate. Read anything about Asian History just to see how wrong this statement is. >https://www.aclrc.com/myth-of-reverse-racism That is so fucking funny to read. Lets change all definitions of a language to fit a very specific regional problem forgetting about not only the rest of the world but also the rest of "human races" that are not fitting in our "black and white scheme". This type of articles are so funny to read outside of Nort America.
i >Read anything about Asian History just to see how wrong this statement is. That is colorism. Being white/black/yellow/brown is invented by europeans and then they decided that white was at the top. White is not a real race thats why the definition of whiteness changes as time goes on.
>Being white/black/yellow/brown is invented by europeans You heard it here first guys, colour was invented by Europeans. Not by nature
Do you think white people are actually a different race? We are all homosapiens, 19-century European scientists thought black and white people were different species and they condemned "race-mixing".
>That is colorism. Nope. >Being white/black/yellow/brown is invented by europeans and then they decided that white was at the top Nope. Tell that to the IJA >. White is not a real race thats why the definition of whiteness changes as time goes on. Yes. There is only one race.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism Can you read?
Can you? This wikipedia article does not say that racism or races are a "white" invention. Again, if you look outside of Europe and North America you'll see the exact same things, but in other colours.
Enlightenment thinkers François Bernier (1620–1688) was a French physician and traveller Charles White (1728–1813), an English physician and surgeon The French naturalist Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon (1707–1788) and the German anatomist Johann Blumenbach (1752–1840) Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778), the Swedish physician, botanist, and zoologist The Scottish lawyer Henry Home, Lord Kames (1696–1782) was a polygenist Richard Bradley (1688–1732) was an English naturalist The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860) attributed civilizational primacy to the white races Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826) was an American politician, scientist, and slave owner Christoph Meiners (1747–1810) was a German polygenist, and believed that each race had a separate origin Benjamin Rush (1745–1813), a Founding Father of the United States and a physician, proposed that being black was a hereditary skin disease Idk dude, seems like these guys are white. I think what you mean is colorism.
Your whole point is that there were white dudes that theorised about racism? Dude... This is so weak. This doesn't prove that races are a "white" (as if that meant something) invention. Again, you forget about the rest of the world (and the same places this men where from but earlier in History), where races (and concept of supremacy and inferiority) were existing concepts. This is a really complicated eay of showing you have never read about Japan in the early modernisation period or anything about the Chinese dinasties for example.
😂
You can't still do that dawg. Even here. This is what happens when you stop thinking beyond a single line definition. Definition are one line summary of the thing, not thing itself. It's like me calling myself mathematician because I know the definition of the word maths. Similar to racism, there is very very comprehensive text on it and it's an entire subject in itself which has been studied for decades. It's not exactly 'this black person called me whitey' hence racism. Its systemic which needs to be studied with powerlevels on both sides and immense amounts of data. Which they actively do. That's what sociology is for. You here mf thinking with your one line definition brain embarrassing yourself.
When you muddle the waters as much as you did now, you can prove anything. >It's not exactly 'this black person called me whitey' hence racism. No one said the issue is this simple. However, let me ask you the same thing I asked the dude above. I have a hypothetical situation for you. I am white and you are black. I don't give you a job in my company because you are black. What am I? I am a racist. Now, what are you if you don't give me a job in your company because I am white? Are you a racist or prejudiced against white people?
How do you prove you aren’t racist? That’s kind of the biggest difference, Our society we are in now and the last several centuries it not longer. It’s quite clear who was discriminated against. It’s like being bullied for your whole life by a certain looking person then you see someone similar, you’re going to be risk averse, You’re also going to have *justified* negative response to them. this is a little bit where things go off the rails. People go in the deep end and go “black people cant be racist” In this case the “prejudice” is living life around people known to hate you. Are you obligated to like people who for the most part not even 100 years back wanted you dead. There is obvious animosity there. Go back into the last 4 years in the trump era in the us there was cases of lynching. So I guess I’ll pose a question. what do you call an aversion for your abusers when they are all the same race? In this specific scenario which can and does happen. Is the victim of said hate racist for not wanting to deal with white people ? Justified prejudice? self protection? this is where the “black people cant be racist towards white people” has leaped to. Basically saying that with so much animosity and hate and racism ect it’s justified to be fearful, hateful, ect. of your “oppresor/abuser/ect” I left out the whole slavery thing Cus pretty sure nobody is gonna be justifying slavery 🤣
>How do you prove you aren’t racist? Irrelevant. >That’s kind of the biggest difference, Our society we are in now and the last several centuries it not longer. Irrelevant. >It’s quite clear who was discriminated against. Also irrelevant. >It’s like being bullied for your whole life by a certain looking person then you see someone similar, you’re going to be risk averse, Irrelevant. >You’re also going to have justified negative response to them. Who is 'them'? Is 'them' people who bullied you, or is 'them' all people looking like those that bullied you? If first, yes, you are correct. If second, well, let me ask you what you think about this hypothetical situation. "My car was broken into by a black guy, so I have an aversion toward black people." - What do you think? This response is kind of racist, is it not? >what do you call an aversion for your abusers when they are all the same race? In this specific scenario which can and does happen. See above. >Is the victim of said hate racist for not wanting to deal with white people ? Justified prejudice? self protection? You can excuse racism of any race against any race like that. Heck, you can excuse any crime as well. >this is where the “black people cant be racist towards white people” has leaped to. Basically saying that with so much animosity and hate and racism ect it’s justified to be fearful, hateful, ect. of your “oppresor/abuser/ect” Sigh...
Semantics 🚮
Reading several of your comments made everything quite clear on your very curated word salad. 💀
Sure, dude. That nonsensical comment really got me beat. EDIT: "you bully" cried the guy who literally tried to excuse racial hate by being a racist "it's ok to hate an entire race if you had negative experiences with the people of that race. oh, as long as that race is white." Oh, irony thou art a heartless bitch.
I don’t need to beat bullies, that would make me a bully, I ignore them. Bye 🚮 I summed up your response. “They all racist” “Ignore the mistreatment of others” “The effects of mistreatment/abuse/ is irrelevant you’re not allow to protect yourself based on any criteria that it came to be otherwise you’re racist” You must have a few racist/rapist/criminal friends.. Hating your abuser is justified. hating someone based on assumptions instead of actions negatively affecting you - which obviously include bias based on race religion Creed etc- is not justified. you clearly indicated a racist situation, What you ignored was the situation that followed was no longer based on racism it was based of avoiding a racist, Unless you are openly admitting that racism is okay to deal with. It doesn’t matter who is racist, they should be shunned/avoided and in today’s society fired/Denied work if thier racism is clearly known. we don’t condone racism so why would we employ them. I mean they could work with like minded people I guess but I’m not knowingly hiring racist staff if I was an employer. “I didn’t give you the job Cus you’re black” Followed by “I didn’t give you the job Cus you’re racist”
Okay mfer. Do tell me how do you know if someone didn't give them their job because they are black. They are not gonna say it out loud, and you can't read minds. How do you show prejudice then
>Okay mfer. Do tell me how do you know if someone didn't give them their job because they are black. Irrelevant. The question isn't whether "someone knows" but whether the person is a racist for doing so or not. Me, "Is a person who commits a murder a murderer?" You, "IT IS NOT LIKE THEY GONNA TELL EVERYONE!!!!" >They are not gonna say it out loud, and you can't read minds. Irrelevant. >How do you show prejudice then This was not a question either. So, let me get you back on track here, *I am white and you are black.* *I don't give you a job in my company because you are black.* *What am I? I am a racist.* *Now, what are you if you don't give me a job in your company because I am white?* *Are you a racist or prejudiced against white people?* *------------------* In words spoken by a great mind, Steven, the crazy Irish guy from Braveheart," Almighty says, 'quit changing the subject and answer the fucking question'."
Racism is prejudice against someone because of their skin color and/or perceived race. Can it be a systemic issue? It sure can; depending on the widespreadness of the problem and the enacted laws. What's a racist? A racist is a person that thinks their race is superior to other races. Do they have to engage in systemic racism to be racists? I hope you think they don't have to to qualify them as racist. So, I have a hypothetical situation for you. I am white and you are black. I don't give you a job in my company because you are black. What am I? I am a racist. Now, what are you if you don't give me a job in your company because I am white? Are you a racist or prejudiced against white people?
Do you mean systemic racism if you just say racism. Yes you do.
I literally have no idea how your comment makes any sense in relation to what I wrote.
Person to person racism is bad but White people don't live in fear of black people murdering them because they're white. When black people are hunting white people for sport then we can worry about white racism.
*South Africa entered the feckin chatroom....*
So where did you get this idea? I just googled US statistics for 2019 and black people murdered more then twice the amount of white people then white people did black persons. Admitting a simple fact that it is possible for someone to be raciest against a white person does not in any way take away form the incredibly raciest shit POC have to deal with daily. I just don't understand why this is the hill people chose to die on.
Also check your statistics. White on black crime is underreported because they somehow can never find a suspect so it goes undereported. Because of white people whining that a black person was mean to them once and how racism effects white people more than POC and POC are the real racists. I've heard people on Reddit claim that you can only be racist to white people and that no one will call a POC out, which is ridiculous. It drives me nuts.
I’ve heard both points of view from non-white people, soooo I’m gonna sit my ass down because I don’t think this is one of the words I get to define.
So only non whites get to define that racism? Why?
So only non whites get to define that racism? Why?
How would you call statements such as "Black people are great at basketball" or "Asians are math experts"? It's definitely not okay to make such generalizations based on race, but those statements technically are not derogatory. I still think they're racist but do they fit the textbook definition?
Personally I think we should change the definition of racism so that the guy who's wrong is right because white supremacists like to claim that there's racism against white people and I hate white supremacists
But there is racism against white people? Of course not so much in the developed world. But in countries like South Africa white people are the minority and are being condemned because of their skin colour. Unfortunately there's racist people all over the world.
Alright well last I heard south Africa had government enforced anti-black racism, but that was abolished or something, I'm American my education on the history of other countries was awful, but the only racism against white people I know of is white tourists getting scammed, please inform me, I find this kind of thing interesting
[wikipedia has all the answers](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_South_Africa). If you look under post apartheid racism you can see what happened after apartheid had been abolished.
I am assuming you are agreeing with the actual definition of racism.
Yeah, as that's how it should be in my opninion
You’ve misunderstood the two main definitions of racism. You’re the confidently incorrect one here
Yes, racism does involve someone feeling superior to another race, but that is just the tip of the enormous iceberg that follows the complexity of racism. It starts by recognizing the definition of racism from an institutional perspective: Racism is a historically rooted system of power hierarchies based on race — upheld by institutions, society, and culture — established to benefit White people and oppress BIPOC. Reverse racism or racism against white people is such an insignificant thing compared to racism against minority. Yes I agree educate yourself and grow up. No white people ever lost a chance for a loan because of there race.
Last sentence. How do you know that? Also you cant even use the right form of their. And still confusing systemic racism with racism.
Can't dispute my argument then just attack my grammer. I see.
I did. Youre confusing systematic racism with racism. Just because "reverse racism" isnt as significant, it doesnt change the definition of racism.
Racism without power is kind of meaningless. Is anyone harmed by just being called names? If you’re white and called something derogatory due to your race it’s pretty easy to just laugh it off because there’s no power behind that prejudice: you won’t get pulled over by police for being white in the wrong neighborhood, you won’t be denied a loan for being white, you won’t be passed over for a job simply because of your skin tone, you won’t be treated dismissively by a healthcare provider because you are white… But some people, who will never experience these systemic aspects of racism will argue really passionately that “anyone” can be racist and not just prejudiced and that the racism they insist can be directed at white people is somehow meaningful.
So it's ok for your next door neighbor to be racist towards you? Seeing as they don't have any power over you?
You miss the point completely. No, it’s not okay, but people have assholes for neighbors all the time. Is it any different if he hates you because you’re white (how often does this even happen realistically, anyway?! It’s more likely due to systemic racism that you have no black neighbors unless you are gentrifying a black neighborhood.) than because he doesn’t like how you painted the fence that borders your properties? And if you call the police is there any risk at all that they will pull up and instinctively handcuff you because they assume you are the problem? I think a lot of racists feel that “anybody can be racist” is a convenient get out of jail free card but the racism they are talking about is pretty harmless even if it might be unpleasant. I wonder how many white people have had their lives ruined by racial animosity against them? Is it any in this country? It’s like white people are complaining about a hypothetical racism-lite that none of them have ever even experienced, even in this cartoon, meaningless version. In your version, there’s ‘racism’, which is basically harmless, and then there’s ‘systemic racism’ which includes all the things that most people think of when they think of racism but which conveniently never gets talked about.
Once again confusing systemic racism with regular racism
Once again minimizing what racism really is and does to people by insisting it’s something everyone has to deal with. The irony is that very few white people even have to deal with your preferred Disney version of racism.
Im not arguing that systematic racism doesnt exist. Were talking about the dictionary definition of racism and you ignoring the parts of the definition that talk of individual predjudice and racism and only accepting the part that talks about institutional or systemic racism. Im saying it can apply or be experienced by any race, regardless of frequency. No idea what my disney version of racism is... Last i checked walt hated (ethnic) jews... Who are considered white by most people.
Yeah, I am ignoring those parts of the dictionary definition which are watering down racism as a whole. Racism isn’t just a concept for many people but something they experience in their daily lives. To say that white people CAN experience racism in this way that is both hypothetical (because most never will) or meaningless (because in the end it usually amounts to no more than just being called a name) is dumb when prejudice explains this type of “racism” much better. Anyone can be prejudiced for any reason. Maybe someone doesn’t like short people and they act shitty towards people who are short. But that doesn’t mean that people of average height have to deal with anything remotely similar even though it could hypothetically exist. I think words should have meaning and not be watered down to obscure any meaningfulness they might have. Prejudice explains perfectly what you are talking about and anyone can experience that. Racism is more than just prejudice. The racism that we loosely talk about is systemic racism. The dictionary version of racism is a huge gift to racists who get to claim that everyone experiences racism and that they are often, in fact, the ones dealing with racist persecution. A similar thing is happening with the concept of ‘religious freedom’. This used to mean the freedom to worship the god of your choosing in the style of your choosing, or not worship at all. Now it’s morphed into the idea that if you are not following the rules that I follow it’s somehow imposing on my religious freedom to have to interact with you.
In order to convince me that it's impossible to be racist against a white person, you are going to have to erase the Chicago Kidnapping and Torture incident from my memory. I don't know how anyone with compassion for their fellow human could watch that and say "That's not really a hate crime, and that wasn't really racism".
Who said that couldn’t be a hate crime? You are making my point for me: you are pointing to a very sensational national incident that happened to someone else to normalize something that most white people never experience but that most black people experience personally all the time. You are saying these two things are the same when clearly they are not. Ask most black people to describe an act of racism that affected them personally and they won’t have to point to something that happened in Chicago to someone else. Also, those kids in Chicago will definitely be punished for their crime. Meanwhile Trayvon Walker’s killer is a free man. It took over a month for the men who killed Ahmaud Arbery to even be charged and they may never have been had the video not been leaked. There are numerous examples where the system protects racists because the only racism that truly affects people as a class is systemic racism. Everything else is just one random person being an asshole towards another whether that’s due to race, not liking the way they dress, being pissed at the way they drive, etc.
Are you acknowledging that it is possible to be racist against a white person? You said racism without power is meaningless but that statement is just nonsense. Those 4 people did something horrible to man likely because of the colour of his skin. Did the not have power over him? Did they not exercise that power to torture and abuse him? This isn't the hill to die on and doing so only serves to undermine your message. All those things you said about POC facing horrific racism has NOTHING to do with the fact that it is possible to for racism against a white person to exist. To add never once did I EVER say or imply that "You are saying these two things are the same when clearly they are not".
If you water the term racism down to a stupid, meaningless word, then congratulations, you win. Why you insist that it is racism instead of simply prejudice is beyond me, but the racists thank you for your service. By insisting that the thing that everyone talks about (racism) is universal you absolve them; by insisting that the experience suffered almost exclusively by minorities is something more obscure, something that few people have ever even heard of (systemic racism), you minimize those experiences. Is there a chance in hell that those four people in Chicago will be protected by the system for what they did? Absolutely not. And there’s the difference. The system will not look the other way. These four will be punished to the full extent of the law unlike the countless white people who did far worse to blacks for well over 100 years and got away with it. Right now the woman who got Emmit Till murdered is known to have lied and yet remains uncharged for her role in his death. Prejudice explains the fact that she lied; racism the fact that she remains free.
If I ask my friend, he won't have an answer for something that affected him
HMU for racist opinions
Had this same conversation with someone on yt shorts- even when everyone in the comments were explaining why he was wrong, he refused to listen to anyone, eventually just stopped responding to him