There's the emotional response.To paraphrase Potter Stewart: I know it when I see it.
And I sure as hell see it in our President.
link?Sure, when a Republican says something it is racist but if a Democrat says something he/she just misspoke.
Exactly....this isn't complicatedHow about just the actual definition?
Racism
noun
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
Of course it is. It's a purely subjective approach that you can't/don't want to articulate objectively. You want free reign to label things as you like when you like. That's part of the problem.It certainly is not.There's an emotional response.
Just because one has difficulty articulating an exact definition doesn’t mean it’s a purely subjective approach- that was the whole point of Potter Stewart’s ruling on pornography (“I know it when I see it”) which I paraphrased.Of course it is. It's a purely subjective approach that you can't/don't want to articulate objectively. You want free reign to label things as you like when you like. That's part of the problem.
Seems like he wants to understand where people are coming from. Are there people giving non answers? Yep....I don't think that's the intention of the thread. This isn't difficult. We have really good definitions for our words. This one happens to be pretty clear and easy to identify. It's not obscure until people want to label something "racist" that isn't.Just because one has difficulty articulating an exact definition doesn’t mean it’s a purely subjective approach- that was the whole point of Potter Stewart’s ruling on pornography (“I know it when I see it”) which I paraphrased.
In some instances the whole purpose of asking for a definition is an attempt to confuse the issue. This thread is an example of that IMO.
I really disagree with you about this. But it doesn’t interest me to pursue the argument so let’s leave it at that.Seems like he wants to understand where people are coming from. Are there people giving non answers? Yep....I don't think that's the intention of the thread. This isn't difficult. We have really good definitions for our words. This one happens to be pretty clear and easy to identify. It's not obscure until people want to label something "racist" that isn't.
If you have problems articulating the definition, rely on the dictionary. That's what it's there for. If you want to make the event/situation/comment "racist" and it doesn't fit the definition, then you're the problem, not the definition. I had this same conversation with jon_mx over "socialism". You guys are ridiculous with this stuff. If anyone is attempting to "confuse the issue" its those of you who are labeling things incorrectly.
Of course it doesn't....you want to be able to label things as you see fit...the emotional response that Trip alluded to and that you pushed back on. I get that...just be honest with what you're doing.I really disagree with you about this. But it doesn’t interest me to pursue the argument so let’s leave it at that.
In legal and technical papers terms are defined to limit confusion. Would you give us the examples you alluded to of defining terms so as to enhance confusion? And how exactly is this thread an attempt to “confuse an issue”?In some instances the whole purpose of asking for a definition is an attempt to confuse the issue. This thread is an example of that IMO.
Look- in truth I really don’t care if we label what Donald Trump wrote on Sunday as racist, or bigoted, or ignorant, or hamburger.In legal and technical papers terms are defined to limit confusion. Would you give us the examples you alluded to of defining terms so enhance confusion? And how exactly is this thread an attempt to “confuse an issue”?
Quite frankly, constant discussion over a topic that can’t be defined and is often selectively applied sounds pretty damn confusing as is. Not sure how you can increase that confusion simply by asking people what they mean.
The OP never mentioned Trump. His question had a broader scope about a term that has been entrenched in political debate well before Trump.Look- in truth I really don’t care if we label what Donald Trump wrote on Sunday as racist, or bigoted, or ignorant, or hamburger.
What I want is a society in which we all agree that what Trump wrote was wrong and worthy of condemnation. I am a believer in political correctness.
Yes I know. But just before he started the thread he made clear his thoughts in another thread that what Trump said wasn’t racist.The OP never mentioned Trump. His question had a broader scope about a term that has been entrenched in political debate well before Trump.
That's not what this thread is for Tim...why are you trying to make it about something it isn't? Is this spill over from some other back and forth you were having? It's pretty clear, if he started another thread, it was because he wanted to keep that back and forth separate from this particular question. So stick to topic and stop trying to make this thread something its not.Look- in truth I really don’t care if we label what Donald Trump wrote on Sunday as racist, or bigoted, or ignorant, or hamburger.
What I want is a society in which we all agree that what Trump wrote was wrong and worthy of condemnation. I am a believer in political correctness.
Who’s the speaker and what’s the context?Question for the group:
Would you consider this "racist?"
I don't dislike black people. Just the ones that act like "n's" word.
That’s fine. I’ll leave you to it then.That's not what this thread is for Tim...why are you trying to make it about something it isn't? Is this spill over from some other back and forth you were having? It's pretty clear, if he started another thread, it was because he wanted to keep that back and forth separate from this particular question. So stick to topic and stop trying to make this thread something its not.
This is a simple, yet important question to be answered.
I'm not sure this matters. I can't think of a single context where "n" word is not racist...it was a term created to demean and mock black people. That's it's origin and primary meaning. I'm not sure it matters that black people co-opted it and made an alternate definition to use among themselves.Who’s the speaker and what’s the context?Question for the group:
Would you consider this "racist?"
I don't dislike black people. Just the ones that act like "n's" word.
-er or -a? Who said it?Question for the group:
Would you consider this "racist?"
I don't dislike black people. Just the ones that act like "n's" word.
Sure it matters.I'm not sure this matters. I can't think of a single context where "n" word is not racist...it was a term created to demean and mock black people.
Context always matters.Sure it matters.
What I’m trying to get out is that something like Chris Rock’s famous comedy routine fits the description that Bucky laid out. A person is saying that they have no problem with black people, but they don’t like N-word types. The messenger and the context of the message changes whether people would define the message as “racist”
Now here’s an example where a white person uses the N-word and it wasn’t intended to be racist. Barbara Walters uses the term because she’s reading from copy and the term is an integral part of a news story. Walters’ black coworker, Sherri Shepherd, suggests that Barbara Walters’ intent and the context doesn’t matter, but shouldn’t it?
Why did you cut out part of my comment in your response? That's the crux of both of these examples. I would agree that Chris Rock's use isn't really different than what Bucky said. I'd consider both racist. It's clearly a demeaning term to a subset of his race and meant to be a distinction of superiority/inferiority. Just like if I used the term "white trash" to demean white people that I don't think live up to a standard (thus making them inferior).Sure it matters.
What I’m trying to get out is that something like Chris Rock’s famous comedy routine fits the description that Bucky laid out. A person is saying that they have no problem with black people, but they don’t like N-word types. The messenger and the context of the message changes whether people would define the message as “racist”
Now here’s an example where a white person uses the N-word and it wasn’t intended to be racist. Barbara Walters uses the term because she’s reading from copy and the term is an integral part of a news story. Walters’ black coworker, Sherri Shepherd, suggests that Barbara Walters’ intent and the context doesn’t matter, but shouldn’t it?
What is the purpose of this thread? To discuss what the term "racism" means to each of us individually, or to come to consensus on a working definition? It seems to me that you've asked a loaded question in looking for a single working definition of a term that you apparently believe, given the links you've provided, is far more nuanced and confusing.
BothWhat is the purpose of this thread? To discuss what the term "racism" means to each of us individually, or to come to consensus on a working definition?
I just googled “definition of racism”....guy. These were the two links that popped up.The problem with this approach is that the two links you provided are just two white guys spouting off on their views on the term racism.
Fair enough.Why did you cut out part of my comment in your response? That's the crux of both of these examples. I would agree that Chris Rock's use isn't really different than what Bucky said. I'd consider both racist. It's clearly a demeaning term to a subset of his race and meant to be a distinction of superiority/inferiority. Just like if I used the term "white trash" to demean white people that I don't think live up to a standard (thus making them inferior).
In my comment I wasn't considering situations where the word was being reported on. I was considering situations where it was being used by people in conversation. So I guess that is a context (where it's being reported on) that it being spoken isn't completely inappropriate/racist.
This is a good point...perhaps. I guess it would require more "what exactly do you mean" kinds of questions to those using the term.Fair enough.
But in the context of of black people like Chris Rock making fun of #####s or white people making fun of white trash isn’t that distinction and criticism more about behavioral differences than race? They’re not saying that a subset of their race is inferior due to race, they’re saying that subset of their race is inferior due to behavior. The fact that the speaker is drawing a distinction within their race shows that they don’t believe that the negative aspects of the worst behaved people within their race apply to their race on the whole.
Nobody has provided a definition...more anecdotal references than anything.
I think the entire racism conversation in this country is inefficient at best as a result of not having a working definition. The lack of definition actually compounds the problem.
.Use of power against another due to race.
Nobody has provided a definition...more anecdotal references than anything.
I think the entire racism conversation in this country is inefficient at best as a result of not having a working definition. The lack of definition actually compounds the problem.
How about just the actual definition?
Racism
noun
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/how-do-we-know-if-something-is-racist-an-expert-explains/Nobody has provided a definition...more anecdotal references than anything.
I think the entire racism conversation in this country is inefficient at best as a result of not having a working definition. The lack of definition actually compounds the problem.
Nobody has provided a definition...more anecdotal references than anything.
I think the entire racism conversation in this country is inefficient at best as a result of not having a working definition. The lack of definition actually compounds the problem.
Maybe have a bit more discretion in your links. That second one actually had this text:I just googled “definition of racism”....guy. These were the two links that popped up.
Feel free to provide other articles that address the definition.
I'd suggest that anyone who even partially equates taxation with slavery probably isn't entering into a discussion on the definition of racism with good intentions.Slavery is dehumanization. Libertarians are its most avid opponents. Libertarians oppose even the partial slavery that results from coercive taxation.
Does Trip have you on ignore or something?How about just the actual definition?
Racism
noun
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
Nobody has provided a definition...more anecdotal references than anything.
I think the entire racism conversation in this country is inefficient at best as a result of not having a working definition. The lack of definition actually compounds the problem.