Politics: J'accuse!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I see no problem dismissing views held irrationally, I don't care how heart-felt they may hold them.

That's probably what they thought about you.


I know, I know: They were wrong and you were right.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
"It is fine for a company to have a policy against hiring anyone black, particularly for positions where they interact with the public, because the customers won't like it and our business will be adversely impacted."

Discuss.

Substitute "Asian" for "black," and I've seem someone defend that view.

He was very intelligent and very eloquent.

He was Asian.

He was a potential juror in an age discrimination case.

Not shockingly, he was excused.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I'll take a stab at it. Let's say the person in your class says, "That is so racist! Not all black men are predisposed to be criminals" and your sole response is, "Yu are irrational and mired in the PC orthodoxy." That ignores the substantive argument, which is that the person understood whatever you were saying to mean that you are contending all black men are predisposed to be criminals. It's dismissive. It's basically dismissing everything the person says and thinks. It would be like me dismissing someone's thoughts on the nature of morality by saying "that's just Jesus-freak crap" because the person believes Jesus was a guy who performed miracles and was the son of God and died and then rose on the third day.

But

If you made a substantive point and the people in the class said only "you are a racist, you bastard, eat shit and die" then they are "refer[ring] to substantive issues about race (and gender, etc.) about which people feel differently and strongly, and it sum[ming] up a lot of those differences and wish[ing] them away (and in so doing, disrespects them) by suggesting that the people advocating (i.e., you) them did so out" of bigotry. To use Ty's words.

Agreed. However, (and I sound like a broken record), they must have reached their initial conclusion on a rational basis, meaning that just because race may be tangentally related to subject does not mean that I reached my conclusion based on race.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
No, he's not. But why's he bringing it up? What's served by highlighting differences for no other reason than to say "Hey, they're different than me?"

I posted that in response to the definiton of racism that Club posted.
Club's definition stated that believing that a person's character or abilities was determined by race was racist.

That is a bad definition. Character, fine, that I agree with. But abilities? It is just bullshit to say that race has nothing to do with abilities. Your abilities are determined by your genetics and there are well studies genetic differences in racial groups. It is why you don't see sickle cell anemia in whites. It is why you don't see cystic fibrosis in blacks (not talking about mixed race people). It is why you see Tay Sacks only in azkenazie jews.

If certain races carry different genes for different deleterious traits, why is it racist to acknowledge that certain races carry different genes for different advantageous traits. Especially when there is scientific evidence to support this.

The reason you discuss this is because of something known as scientific inquiry. We learn things about our biology/physiology/genetics that are useful to know when we explore this subject.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop


I know, I know: They were wrong and you were right.

If it's so obviously racism, why do those levelling the accusation have a hard time citing some supporting study that definitively eliminates other explanations?

Or, more generally, how hard is it to present the cogent counterargument to the stupid statement, instead of just saying "stupidface, you're wrong"?

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
In the same way that some on the left can dismiss those on the right as "racist" instead of engaging in a fuller conversation with respect for the other side's views, some on the right can dismiss those on the left as "PC" instead of engaging in a fuller conversation with respect for the other side's views.

I agree that both accusations are (often) used by people who want to thoughtlessly dismiss opinions instead of arguing against them (as you will concede that, on occasion, a dismissive charge of being irrationally PC might be entirely accurate, just as a charge of racism might be).

However, the accusations are otherwise not comparable at all. Accusing someone of being racist is vastly more damaging - and, frankly, threatening - than accusing someone of being PC. People who are PC are subjects of taunting and bad jokes. People who are racists get fired and hounded out of decent society.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
That's probably what they thought about you.


I know, I know: They were wrong and you were right.

I was rational they were not.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Substitute "Asian" for "black," and I've seem someone defend that view.

Substitute "Man" for "Asian" and I've seen many of women defend that view with respect to their choice of doctor/obstetrician/etc. (and Woman/men, too).

(I'm going to confuse not me immensely with that statement, I'm sure)

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
People have heart-felt and varied views about race, etc. In the same way that some on the left can dismiss those on the right as "racist" instead of engaging in a fuller conversation with respect for the other side's views, some on the right can dismiss those on the left as "PC" instead of engaging in a fuller conversation with respect for the other side's views. Both sides convince themselves that the other side had adopted its position out of some kind of orthodoxy and is too irrational to reconsider or change its views.

I, like Club, am confused, but probably because I had to play quick catch-up.

To me, the racist shut-down is totally separate from the PC argument. PC, to me, is embodied in the concept that a college professor can make sweeping and insulting generalizations about white people, or about men, but the same kind of sweeping generalizations about non-white people, or about women, earns horrid scorn and cries of racism or sexism.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I was rational they were not.

Do you have a certificate or something? Maybe something handed down to you by God?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I was rational they were not.

Well, let's put a finer point.

You were attemping to use reason in your argument; they were not.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
So it acts as a balancing agent. Would you rather the debate be permanently tilted in one side's favor?

There's a certain self-righteousness woven through speech of vehement liberals. Its hard not to want to slap a liberal when he's on his high horse, just like its hard not to want to slap a racist.

That you equate "liberal" on one side with "racist" on the other speaks volumes.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Do you have a certificate or something? Maybe something handed down to you by God?

Why yes, its certifies that my thoughts are wholly-detached from emotions.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
That you equate "liberal" on one side with "racist" on the other speaks volumes.

To be clear, though, it speaks volumes about him, not about liberals or racists.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Substitute "Man" for "Asian" and I've seen many of women defend that view with respect to their choice of doctor/obstetrician/etc. (and Woman/men, too).

(I'm going to confuse not me immensely with that statement, I'm sure)

I'm confused too, but if you are rejecting the notion that women should not be allowed to choose women doctors, I'll have to disagree. And, according to my OB-GYN family member, there are plenty of women who will choose male doctors instead of female, for whatever reason.

I've also chosen male doctors, therapists, physical trainers, etc. in part because of their sex, and that's my right as an individual consumer.