What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

I might be a racist. Who's with me? (1 Viewer)

Please read the definition before answering.

  • Yes, I'm a racist.

    Votes: 23 31.9%

  • No, I'm not a racist.

    Votes: 48 66.7%

  • Smoo

    Votes: 1 1.4%
  • Total voters
    72
timschochet said:
Example: Anecdotally I have witnessed asian students perform and score much higher on AP exams than the general population for many years. This seems to reinforce the findings in Herrnstein and Murray's book The Bell Curve with regard to IQ.

In order to be racist you would have to believe that there is something intrinsic among Asians, not related to upbringing or environment, that makes them smarter.

For example: let's say you took 100 Chinese babies and placed them in the inner city, to be raised by poor black and Latino parents. If you believe that, as those kids grow up, they would perform at a higher level than the children around them, you are a racist.
Click to expand...
If you took 100 white babies and put them with black families would that make them more likely to become NFL running backs?

 
timschochet said:
I hear this a lot, and I think it's a misinterpretation of libertarianism. The government is not forcing Sterling out- that's what you should be concerned with as a libertarian. The NBA is a private institution, so if they want to get rid of Sterling, that shouldn't bother you (at least from a libertarian POV.)
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

EDIT: Second thought. Not sure I would call an NBA team a private institution due to the amount of public financial support that all of them get. I'd be surprised to find out that the owner built the Staples Center with his own money.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford said:
Hooper31 said:
Aaron Rudnicki said:
The guy who owns the Clippers I guess
Click to expand...
I have to admit that all the talk about that guy nudged me into starting this thread.

I'm fairly uncomfortable with the notion that not liking black people means that he isn't allowed to own and operate a business. I think the dude is a complete doosh, but the libertarian side of me doesn't like where this is going.
Click to expand...
He's at the very least okay with institutionalizing racism. If he owned the company outright, people could just choose to not work for him. But there's a draft. Do you think people should be forced to work for him to work in their chosen professions?
Click to expand...
I never thought that was the issue since his thoughts and beliefs didn't affect the way he ran the team. Besides Baylor, whose case was dismissed, did any of his employees have an issue? It seemed like they were caught off gaurd (no pun intended).
 
Henry Ford said:
He's at the very least okay with institutionalizing racism.
Click to expand...
Not sure where you are getting this. This seems a stretch. From the little I've heard of the phone conversations he's making comments about not bringing black people to his games. I get the feeling people are so filled with outrage they aren't able to try and think of plausible explanations and/or interpretations. This guy is the face of evil now and that's all some people choose to see. It sounds like he's referring to a specific group of people she would bring that he doesn't like, not really all (or any) black people. On top of that the phone conversation sounds like a total setup. She knew what she wanted him to say and got him to say it. Again, the guy sounds like a real doosh, but isn't it sort of silly to blanket him the hate of the world now?

I don't know. There's something horribly incongruous about his comments and his ownership of an NBA team that I can't mesh.

If he owned the company outright, people could just choose to not work for him. But there's a draft. Do you think people should be forced to work for him to work in their chosen professions?
Click to expand...
The draft is not a slave trade. Any person can choose not to work for an NBA team. There are many other leagues someone could choose if their skills were in demand and they didn't want to work for an NBA owner.

 
Hooper31 said:
Henry Ford said:
He's at the very least okay with institutionalizing racism.
Click to expand...
Not sure where you are getting this. This seems a stretch. From the little I've heard of the phone conversations he's making comments about not bringing black people to his games. I get the feeling people are so filled with outrage they aren't able to try and think of plausible explanations and/or interpretations. This guy is the face of evil now and that's all some people choose to see. It sounds like he's referring to a specific group of people she would bring that he doesn't like, not really all (or any) black people. On top of that the phone conversation sounds like a total setup. She knew what she wanted him to say and got him to say it. Again, the guy sounds like a real doosh, but isn't it sort of silly to blanket him the hate of the world now?

I don't know. There's something horribly incongruous about his comments and his ownership of an NBA team that I can't mesh.

If he owned the company outright, people could just choose to not work for him. But there's a draft. Do you think people should be forced to work for him to work in their chosen professions?
Click to expand...
The draft is not a slave trade. Any person can choose not to work for an NBA team. There are many other leagues someone could choose if their skills were in demand and they didn't want to work for an NBA owner.
Click to expand...
I'm getting this from listening to his statements in the audio. If you haven't heard them all, I'm sure that's confusing.

 
Most of us know Shick isn't racist and from reading that definition it seems like his out is the word "especially". If it said "exclusively" then it's a different story. Also, ones definitions of inferior and superior need to be understood. Words are tricky.

 
Hooper31 said:
timschochet said:
I hear this a lot, and I think it's a misinterpretation of libertarianism. The government is not forcing Sterling out- that's what you should be concerned with as a libertarian. The NBA is a private institution, so if they want to get rid of Sterling, that shouldn't bother you (at least from a libertarian POV.)
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

EDIT: Second thought. Not sure I would call an NBA team a private institution due to the amount of public financial support that all of them get. I'd be surprised to find out that the owner built the Staples Center with his own money.
Click to expand...
Are people on welfare public institutions?

 
AAABatteries said:
Most of us know Shick isn't racist and from reading that definition it seems like his out is the word "especially". If it said "exclusively" then it's a different story. Also, ones definitions of inferior and superior need to be understood. Words are tricky.
Click to expand...
Help me out here. If I'm not racist because I believe that different races have varying abilities/characteristics/attributes that are measurable, what am I? I can't get past what I observe.

If I could choose the world we live I would choose for all people across the board to have equal potential in all faculties. That said, I don't observe this to be true. I see some races are bigger, faster, stronger. I see some races have a higher mean IQ. I struggle badly with the notion of IQ. I'm not sure that intelligence is actually measurable. If it is measurable, and its hereditary, that means that some races are born with more/less intelligence. I don't like that idea, but it seems to be case.

 
Hooper31 said:
timschochet said:
I hear this a lot, and I think it's a misinterpretation of libertarianism. The government is not forcing Sterling out- that's what you should be concerned with as a libertarian. The NBA is a private institution, so if they want to get rid of Sterling, that shouldn't bother you (at least from a libertarian POV.)
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

EDIT: Second thought. Not sure I would call an NBA team a private institution due to the amount of public financial support that all of them get. I'd be surprised to find out that the owner built the Staples Center with his own money.
Click to expand...
Poor definition of what makes the NBA private or public, but since you brought it up, yes the Staples Center was privately funded.

 
Hooper31 said:
AAABatteries said:
Most of us know Shick isn't racist and from reading that definition it seems like his out is the word "especially". If it said "exclusively" then it's a different story. Also, ones definitions of inferior and superior need to be understood. Words are tricky.
Click to expand...
Help me out here. If I'm not racist because I believe that different races have varying abilities/characteristics/attributes that are measurable, what am I? I can't get past what I observe.

If I could choose the world we live I would choose for all people across the board to have equal potential in all faculties. That said, I don't observe this to be true. I see some races are bigger, faster, stronger. I see some races have a higher mean IQ. I struggle badly with the notion of IQ. I'm not sure that intelligence is actually measurable. If it is measurable, and its hereditary, that means that some races are born with more/less intelligence. I don't like that idea, but it seems to be case.
Click to expand...
I don't think that you think that makes one race better than another but rather just different. Again, words are tricky - today racist is a highly inflammatory word that is most often used to show someone's hatred for races other than their own. I don't believe that's you.

 
AAABatteries said:
I don't think that you think that makes one race better than another but rather just different. Again, words are tricky
Click to expand...
Agree with you here.

- today racist is a highly inflammatory word that is most often used to show someone's hatred for races other than their own. I don't believe that's you.
Click to expand...
True again. I don't hate any groups of people because of their race, but I can see people getting defensive when their differences are acknowledged. Its not a stretch to me getting labeled as a hater because I fail to latch onto the utopian view that we're all the same.

 
Hooper31 said:
Henry Ford said:
He's at the very least okay with institutionalizing racism.
Click to expand...
Not sure where you are getting this. This seems a stretch. From the little I've heard of the phone conversations he's making comments about not bringing black people to his games. I get the feeling people are so filled with outrage they aren't able to try and think of plausible explanations and/or interpretations. This guy is the face of evil now and that's all some people choose to see. It sounds like he's referring to a specific group of people she would bring that he doesn't like, not really all (or any) black people. On top of that the phone conversation sounds like a total setup. She knew what she wanted him to say and got him to say it. Again, the guy sounds like a real doosh, but isn't it sort of silly to blanket him the hate of the world now?

I don't know. There's something horribly incongruous about his comments and his ownership of an NBA team that I can't mesh.

If he owned the company outright, people could just choose to not work for him. But there's a draft. Do you think people should be forced to work for him to work in their chosen professions?
Click to expand...
The draft is not a slave trade. Any person can choose not to work for an NBA team. There are many other leagues someone could choose if their skills were in demand and they didn't want to work for an NBA owner.
Click to expand...
Sterling is an old kook coot. He was obviously in a jealous rage, he's got a hooker girlfriend, he's had several, and he says plainly he doesn't care she's hooring around, just so long as it doesn't end up embarrassing him buy having it wind up in the public eye. He's obsessed that his part black, part Mexican girlfriend will either be into, or be perceived as being into, black guys. He also had a problem with Magic Johnson, a beloved figure in the sport, specifically, who had been trying to buy the team for several years now, and guess who she rolls with and then publicizes it knowing full well how the old coot will react. It was a perfect storm, stupid, greedy girlfriend, dinosaur billionaire already hated by his team, race, personal enmity with a well liked superstar who already wanted his team, and the modern news cycle. This is ugly, ugly stuff.

However Sterling's history with racist behavior and abusive behavior goes back years. He also invited this woman to tape him over a long period of time, something like 100 hours or something. Think Richard Nixon, think paranoia - he thought it would protect him, instead it destroyed him. Basically this guy got what he deserved but so has the NBA, they were greedy too and they loved this guy and his money and having a 2nd option in L.A. as long as no one knew what he was about.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Christo said:
Hooper31 said:
timschochet said:
I hear this a lot, and I think it's a misinterpretation of libertarianism. The government is not forcing Sterling out- that's what you should be concerned with as a libertarian. The NBA is a private institution, so if they want to get rid of Sterling, that shouldn't bother you (at least from a libertarian POV.)
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

EDIT: Second thought. Not sure I would call an NBA team a private institution due to the amount of public financial support that all of them get. I'd be surprised to find out that the owner built the Staples Center with his own money.
Click to expand...
Are people on welfare public institutions?
Click to expand...
No, but primarily because people aren't institutions. I don't think it's a stretch to say that rhetorically, a number of people would argue the shift from being simply poor to being welfare recipients shifts people from being private burdens to public burdens.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hooper31 said:
AAABatteries said:
I don't think that you think that makes one race better than another but rather just different. Again, words are tricky
Click to expand...
Agree with you here.

- today racist is a highly inflammatory word that is most often used to show someone's hatred for races other than their own. I don't believe that's you.
Click to expand...
True again. I don't hate any groups of people because of their race, but I can see people getting defensive when their differences are acknowledged. Its not a stretch to me getting labeled as a hater because I fail to latch onto the utopian view that we're all the same.
Click to expand...
Theres a difference between believing that racial differences tend to exist and treating other people as being defined by their race.

It's one thing to believe that black folks tend to be better athletes, it's another to suggest that we shouldn't bother Jimmy with math or science so he can focus on his ball skills.

 
NCCommish said:
And which abilities are there you think each race comes with out of the womb?
Click to expand...
There is technically no such thing as different human races but within what we call races there are genetic differences. As for how this would affect abilities it would only be noticeable on the extreme ends of the distribution curve. For example it's rare for a non-black person to break 10 second in the 100m dash, but it's almost as rare for a black man as well.

 
Hooper31 said:
timschochet said:
I hear this a lot, and I think it's a misinterpretation of libertarianism. The government is not forcing Sterling out- that's what you should be concerned with as a libertarian. The NBA is a private institution, so if they want to get rid of Sterling, that shouldn't bother you (at least from a libertarian POV.)
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

EDIT: Second thought. Not sure I would call an NBA team a private institution due to the amount of public financial support that all of them get. I'd be surprised to find out that the owner built the Staples Center with his own money.
Click to expand...
So long as the decision to remove Sterling was not made by the government, it doesn't bear upon libertarian concerns.
 
cstu said:
NCCommish said:
And which abilities are there you think each race comes with out of the womb?
Click to expand...
There is technically no such thing as different human races but within what we call races there are genetic differences. As for how this would affect abilities it would only be noticeable on the extreme ends of the distribution curve. For example it's rare for a non-black person to break 10 second in the 100m dash, but it's almost as rare for a black man as well.
Click to expand...
Exactly. "Men of West African descent have a genetic predisposition to a protein that enhances fast twitch muscle growth" isn't the same thing as "black men are faster."

 
parasaurolophus said:
timschochet said:
Example: Anecdotally I have witnessed asian students perform and score much higher on AP exams than the general population for many years. This seems to reinforce the findings in Herrnstein and Murray's book The Bell Curve with regard to IQ.

In order to be racist you would have to believe that there is something intrinsic among Asians, not related to upbringing or environment, that makes them smarter.

For example: let's say you took 100 Chinese babies and placed them in the inner city, to be raised by poor black and Latino parents. If you believe that, as those kids grow up, they would perform at a higher level than the children around them, you are a racist.
Click to expand...
If you took 100 white babies and put them with black families would that make them more likely to become NFL running backs?
Click to expand...
No. But we're talking about physical attributes. There are physical tendencies among the races that we can point out without being racist: Asians tend to be shorter. Blacks tend to be faster. Etc. And of course there are lots of exceptions. It's usually only when you discuss mental attributes that any distinguishing between races takes on a racist tinge.

 
Was Einstein a genius because of environment or did he have something special within his brain chemistry? Or both?

Are there any races that seem to dominate the genius IQ list?

Is it all due to environment or can there be subtle differences in brain makeup between races?

Are there certain races that seem to excel at various different athletic endeavors? Is that simply because of environment or can dna and evolution somehow explain some of those differences?

Do any of these differences in brain or athletic ability make any race superior to any other race? Overall...of course not. But pointing out some of these things seems to get most labeled as racist or intolerant.

 
timschochet said:
parasaurolophus said:
timschochet said:
Example: Anecdotally I have witnessed asian students perform and score much higher on AP exams than the general population for many years. This seems to reinforce the findings in Herrnstein and Murray's book The Bell Curve with regard to IQ.

In order to be racist you would have to believe that there is something intrinsic among Asians, not related to upbringing or environment, that makes them smarter.

For example: let's say you took 100 Chinese babies and placed them in the inner city, to be raised by poor black and Latino parents. If you believe that, as those kids grow up, they would perform at a higher level than the children around them, you are a racist.
Click to expand...
If you took 100 white babies and put them with black families would that make them more likely to become NFL running backs?
Click to expand...
No. But we're talking about physical attributes. There are physical tendencies among the races that we can point out without being racist: Asians tend to be shorter. Blacks tend to be faster. Etc. And of course there are lots of exceptions. It's usually only when you discuss mental attributes that any distinguishing between races takes on a racist tinge.
Click to expand...
Translated: As long as the positive slant is towards a minority...it's OK.

Bring up any subject that might move that needle away from the minority having the "edge" and ding, ding, ding...We've got ourselves a racist!

 
cstu said:
NCCommish said:
And which abilities are there you think each race comes with out of the womb?
Click to expand...
There is technically no such thing as different human races but within what we call races there are genetic differences. As for how this would affect abilities it would only be noticeable on the extreme ends of the distribution curve. For example it's rare for a non-black person to break 10 second in the 100m dash, but it's almost as rare for a black man as well.
Click to expand...
why would it only be noticeable on the extreme ends of the curve? if one race was predisposed to being 10% better at [math/running/driving] than another race, it would be obvious across the population.

it's not about breaking 10 seconds in the 100m dash. it's about the general performance of the population, not just the outliers.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
tdoss said:
timschochet said:
parasaurolophus said:
timschochet said:
Example: Anecdotally I have witnessed asian students perform and score much higher on AP exams than the general population for many years. This seems to reinforce the findings in Herrnstein and Murray's book The Bell Curve with regard to IQ.

In order to be racist you would have to believe that there is something intrinsic among Asians, not related to upbringing or environment, that makes them smarter.

For example: let's say you took 100 Chinese babies and placed them in the inner city, to be raised by poor black and Latino parents. If you believe that, as those kids grow up, they would perform at a higher level than the children around them, you are a racist.
Click to expand...
If you took 100 white babies and put them with black families would that make them more likely to become NFL running backs?
Click to expand...
No. But we're talking about physical attributes. There are physical tendencies among the races that we can point out without being racist: Asians tend to be shorter. Blacks tend to be faster. Etc. And of course there are lots of exceptions. It's usually only when you discuss mental attributes that any distinguishing between races takes on a racist tinge.
Click to expand...
Translated: As long as the positive slant is towards a minority...it's OK.Bring up any subject that might move that needle away from the minority having the "edge" and ding, ding, ding...We've got ourselves a racist!
Click to expand...
Not sure how you inferred that from what I wrote. But as I mentioned before, I do think its unwise to focus on negative attributes of either a race, culture, or ethnicity. Even if you don't mean to be bigoted, you're going to be perceived that way. And stay away from ALL stereotypes even if they seem positive to you (see Reggie White).

 
timschochet said:
It's usually only when you discuss mental attributes that any distinguishing between races takes on a racist tinge.
Click to expand...
Pointing out white people are slower than black people doesn't have a racist tinge? Pointing out white people have lower IQs than asian people has a racist tinge?

I see that in racial perceptions by society as a whole. I don't like it, but I see it.

 
tdoss said:
Was Einstein a genius because of environment or did he have something special within his brain chemistry? Or both?

Are there any races that seem to dominate the genius IQ list?

Is it all due to environment or can there be subtle differences in brain makeup between races?

Are there certain races that seem to excel at various different athletic endeavors? Is that simply because of environment or can dna and evolution somehow explain some of those differences?

Do any of these differences in brain or athletic ability make any race superior to any other race? Overall...of course not. But pointing out some of these things seems to get most labeled as racist or intolerant.
Click to expand...
Focusing on statistical outliers is a problem. Any viable point to be made needs to focus on the center of the distribution.

 
To me...it's just plainly ignorant to say that a race can have subtle differences or predispositions physically but there's absolutely no differences mentally. All races are exactly the same and have the exact same predispositions mentally...only environment can change the results.

That's a wonderful happy place to live...I agree...but it's my opinion that if we can have physical predispositions due to race...then we can also have subtle predispositions mentally. Afterall...the brain is a physical component, is it not?

 
Hooper31 said:
timschochet said:
It's usually only when you discuss mental attributes that any distinguishing between races takes on a racist tinge.
Click to expand...
Pointing out white people are slower than black people doesn't have a racist tinge? Pointing out white people have lower IQs than asian people has a racist tinge?

I see that in racial perceptions by society as a whole. I don't like it, but I see it.
Click to expand...
got a link to the IQ of asians?

 
tdoss said:
Bring up any subject that might move that needle away from the minority having the "edge" and ding, ding, ding...We've got ourselves a racist!
Click to expand...
I think a rational thinker doesn't have a problem with acknowledging this difference, but society as a whole tends to be emotional and reactionary glomming onto the TMZ / Deadspin response.

 
timschochet said:
parasaurolophus said:
timschochet said:
Example: Anecdotally I have witnessed asian students perform and score much higher on AP exams than the general population for many years. This seems to reinforce the findings in Herrnstein and Murray's book The Bell Curve with regard to IQ.

In order to be racist you would have to believe that there is something intrinsic among Asians, not related to upbringing or environment, that makes them smarter.

For example: let's say you took 100 Chinese babies and placed them in the inner city, to be raised by poor black and Latino parents. If you believe that, as those kids grow up, they would perform at a higher level than the children around them, you are a racist.
Click to expand...
If you took 100 white babies and put them with black families would that make them more likely to become NFL running backs?
Click to expand...
No. But we're talking about physical attributes. There are physical tendencies among the races that we can point out without being racist: Asians tend to be shorter. Blacks tend to be faster. Etc. And of course there are lots of exceptions.It's usually only when you discuss mental attributes that any distinguishing between races takes on a racist tinge.
Click to expand...
The follow up question would be "why?" If we don't really care that Africans are generally taller than Asians, why do we care that Asians are generally smarter than Africans?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hooper31 said:
I might be a sexist too. I don't see an equal number of guys selling themselves to women on the Vegas strip.
Click to expand...
What you don't see is an equal number of women buying. It's not like men would refuse to sell if women were willing to buy.

 
-fish- said:
cstu said:
NCCommish said:
And which abilities are there you think each race comes with out of the womb?
Click to expand...
There is technically no such thing as different human races but within what we call races there are genetic differences. As for how this would affect abilities it would only be noticeable on the extreme ends of the distribution curve. For example it's rare for a non-black person to break 10 second in the 100m dash, but it's almost as rare for a black man as well.
Click to expand...
why would it only be noticeable on the extreme ends of the curve? if one race was predisposed to being 10% better at [math/running/driving] than another race, it would be obvious across the population.

it's not about breaking 10 seconds in the 100m dash. it's about the general performance of the population, not just the outliers.
Click to expand...
That's not how it works. Even if it were true that one race had a mean vertical jump 10% better than another race (30" vs 33") there would still be a majority of population that overlaps.

If you look at this normal distribution curve and imagine it was shifted to the right from 50% to 60% you'd see that something like 90% of both populations are still within the same range.

 
Fennis said:
Hooper31 said:
Fennis said:
got a link to the IQ of asians?
Click to expand...
Take your pick. LINK

You'll find just as many pro vs con arguments there.
Click to expand...
they all seem to pretty much discuss IQ of races in the United States.
Click to expand...
Click the images tab. The notion isn't something I dreamed up to cause a fuss. If you have interest in the topic I would suggest reading The Bell Curve and the five other books that were written as a rebuttal to it.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top