Is this racism?

[Fragony]

When two sets of resumes are sent out, identical ones except for norwegian names on one set and foreign names on the other set, and the norwegian set gets many times the number of calls to interview than the foreign set, then the answer is simply plain old racism.

Maybe it's just safer to hire the Norwegian because of positive discrimination, should he be a screwup you can just fire him without having to deal with the equality-industry. And he's much less likely to fall prey to sudden hijjab-syndrome. A small or middle-sized company can't afford these lawsuits, it's simply not worth the trouble most of the time.

[Subotan]

Sure, and the positively discriminated is going to feel really fine knowing that everybody knows that they got the job because of positive discrimination. And everybody does, good luck being taking seriously.

I only ever hear this argument (that minorities will feel bad about getting recognition of the additional difficulties society puts in their way) from the mouths of straight white middle class men.

The basis is that white, heterosexual males are the subject of positive discrimination too, that they will be preferred over other candidates. Thus legislation is introduced to level the playing field, and force employers to consider candidates who are not white, heterosexual males.

Ding ding! We have a winner!

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I only ever hear this argument (that minorities will feel bad about getting recognition of the additional difficulties society puts in their way) from the mouths of straight white middle class men.



Ding ding! We have a winner!

...because saying white people are racist isn't racist.

White males are overrepresented in education at all levels compared to men of other minorities (excepting some Indian and Chinese demographics) in most Western countries.

[Beskar]

Technically creating the distinction of "white" and "non-white" automatically begins to process of prejudice and discrimination in how you identify the two groups. What makes some one racist is when you begin to bring in stereotypical social behaviours and apply the actions of a minority upon the majority. For simplistic sake, if we took "Philipvs Valindervs Calicvia" views as being "white", then you are unfairly attributing him to many other posters, for example, myself, who does not have his devout faith in his Lord and I think he would be horrified if my own views were being attributed as his own as well.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Technically creating the distinction of "white" and "non-white" automatically begins to process of prejudice and discrimination in how you identify the two groups. What makes some one racist is when you begin to bring in stereotypical social behaviours and apply the actions of a minority upon the majority. For simplistic sake, if we took "Philipvs Valindervs Calicvia" views as being "white", then you are unfairly attributing him to many other posters, for example, myself, who does not have his devout faith in his Lord and I think he would be horrified if my own views were being attributed as his own as well.

I'd be more horrified to be associated with Kadagar.

Anyway - lets talk about those "equality" forms.

Never mind the fact that "Asian" covers "Chinese" and "other", I always have to put "Other White Background" and then "Anglo-Swedish" because there is not "European" option.

for me, that has always encapsulated the idiocy of the whole "racial equalities" thing.

[Beskar]

I'd be more horrified to be associated with Kadagar.

Hah, it was more a teasing simplistic comparison.

Anyway - lets talk about those "equality" forms.

Never mind the fact that "Asian" covers "Chinese" and "other", I always have to put "Other White Background" and then "Anglo-Swedish" because there is not "European" option.

for me, that has always encapsulated the idiocy of the whole "racial equalities" thing.

Then there is British White, irish White, White other, etc. It is just very silly in the end. Should simply be "Are you human?" because end of that day, that is all that matters.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Technically creating the distinction of "white" and "non-white" automatically begins to process of prejudice and discrimination in how you identify the two groups.

So if we make that distinction and then just talk about something else for a while, the process will be chugging along all the time under the surface, and in X amount of time we will be lynching people?

What makes some one racist is when you begin to bring in stereotypical social behaviours and apply the actions of a minority upon the majority.

No it isn't. For example "black people are good at sports" is not racist. An inaccurate stereotype is not racism.

[Tellos Athenaios]

No it isn't. For example "black people are good at sports" is not racist. An inaccurate stereotype is not racism.

You miss the bit about application of said stereotypes (as I read it 't was meant to be a continuation), so it would be more apt to reject a white basketball player from NBA team because we all know "white men can't jump". Think that was what Tiaexz (honestly, Beskar was an easier name) was getting at.

[Beskar]

So if we make that distinction and then just talk about something else for a while, the process will be chugging along all the time under the surface, and in X amount of time we will be lynching people?

Strawman and a slipperly slope.

I am referring to: Self-categorization theory and Social identity theory

You miss the bit about application of said stereotypes (as I read it 't was meant to be a continuation), so it would be more apt to reject a white basketball player from NBA team because we all know "white men can't jump". Think that was what Tiaexz (honestly, Beskar was an easier name) was getting at.

Thank you, Tellos Athenaios.

[Tuuvi]

Technically creating the distinction of "white" and "non-white" automatically begins to process of prejudice and discrimination in how you identify the two groups. What makes some one racist is when you begin to bring in stereotypical social behaviours and apply the actions of a minority upon the majority. For simplistic sake, if we took "Philipvs Valindervs Calicvia" views as being "white", then you are unfairly attributing him to many other posters, for example, myself, who does not have his devout faith in his Lord and I think he would be horrified if my own views were being attributed as his own as well.

This is what I was trying to get at in my incoherent rambling above. I think what racism we have left would go away on it's own if we stopped putting so much emphasis on race & ethnicity.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

You miss the bit about application of said stereotypes (as I read it 't was meant to be a continuation), so it would be more apt to reject a white basketball player from NBA team because we all know "white men can't jump". Think that was what Tiaexz (honestly, Beskar was an easier name) was getting at.

I feel like everything has been run through babelfish in this thread...what is "application of stereotypes" and why is it "more apt" to reject a white basketball player? What does this have to do with innacurate stereotypes not being the equivalent of racism?

Strawman and a slipperly slope.

It's what you said yourself, that's why I was asking you...can you explain in your own words? What did you mean by "automatically begins a process"?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I feel like everything has been run through babelfish in this thread...what is "application of stereotypes" and why is it "more apt" to reject a white basketball player? What does this have to do with innacurate stereotypes not being the equivalent of racism?



It's what you said yourself, that's why I was asking you...can you explain in your own words? What did you mean by "automatically begins a process"?

"White men can't jump" is a racial prejudice, rejecting an NBA player for your team, based on that, is racist.

[Beskar]

It's what you said yourself, that's why I was asking you...can you explain in your own words? What did you mean by "automatically begins a process"?

I didn't intend for it to come across like that, I do recommend the article of Self-categorization theory though from wikipedia, should convey what I am trying to do better. Most of my own academic study has involved a lot from this theory.

But yes, hypothetically over prolonged reinforcement socially to the extreme, it can explain your slippery slope argument. It doesn't mean that is the "natural conclusion", as it is possible to become "non-racist" from such a view point as well.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

"White men can't jump" is a racial prejudice, rejecting an NBA player for your team, based on that, is racist.

Ok I see now. The point being that a positive stereotype about one group is in some way a negative stereotype about the other group. People talk about that with white running backs and stuff, or asian basketball players. But this still shows the failure of our way of talking about racism. You can't just keep stretching the word. You can't extend it to the kind off off the cuff heuristics that people use constantly, and that can't be avoided. Rejecting a white NBA player because you think it's a black sport is only stupid, or bad drafting. We need to stop pulling out the racism and sexism sirens for things that are just stupid. If you tell me that someone is racist, and it later it turns out that they just believe one of those silly sports superstitions, you've committed slander.

Though I still don't understand what beskar said.

I didn't intend for it to come across like that, I do recommend the article of Self-categorization theory though from wikipedia, should convey what I am trying to do better. Most of my own academic study has involved a lot from this theory.

But yes, hypothetically over prolonged reinforcement socially to the extreme, it can explain your slippery slope argument. It doesn't mean that is the "natural conclusion", as it is possible to become "non-racist" from such a view point as well.

But what are we talking about exactly? Prolonged reinforcement of what? You would have to reinforce something specific and strongly negative. Just creating the distinction in no way starts a process towards racism. It's not just possible to become non-racist, by default you aren't racist and naturally stay that way. I don't see an explanation for racism here, unless you equate stereotypes about race with racism.

[PanzerJaeger]

The problem with race in America today, specifically in regard to blacks, is that it has become an industry. All the legitimate goals of the Civil Rights movement were attained long ago, but the people and organizations that made that happen never went away. The movement became a livelihood. And like any industry, it must generate demand for its product. Unfortunately, that product is victimhood. Black people make hundreds of millions of dollars each year making other black people feel disenfranchised and discriminated against. Jackson and the Rainbow Coalition folks make their money shaking down big corporations while Sharpton and his people have turned a history of shameless race baiting into a lucrative protest circuit. Reverend Al has even secured himself a sweet gig on MSNBC. The NAACP is anachronistic as its name, but still fleeces black people across the country through scare tactics and contrived fights with Tea Party types. The president himself built his political career on black victimhood, and has never hesitated to invoke the language of the Civil Rights movement to serve his purposes.

But those are just the figureheads. Underneath them lies a network of people making money off of perceived white racism. From the African American studies departments that have sprung up in colleges around the country, to the government workers who toil away each day counting employees and issuing fines and threats of lawsuits to small businesses for not making racial quotas, to the community organizers in the countless umbrella groups in cities across the country working hard to make sure black people get out and vote for democrats, there are hundreds of thousands of paychecks dependent on black oppression. If that oppression goes away, it’s all gone. The money dries up. The community organizers will have to go back to flipping burgers.

We have reached a point in this country where black leaders are incentivized to promote black victimhood and white guilt. There is no money to be made in a nation where people are not judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. The truly sad thing about the current state of race relations in America is that, as always, blacks suffer disproportionately. Sure it sucks when a white kid loses his spot at his number one college to a black kid with worse grades, but he can at least settle for his number two or three picks. The black kid who decides not to even bother with college because he’s grown up immersed in a culture of victimhood that constantly reinforces the belief that he cannot be successful in anything other than sports or media because of white oppression really suffers.

There is a body of research that supports the idea that such outside pressures create a vicious cycle where black people (and other protected classes) conform to their own social expectations. In essence, black leaders have created an environment of constant perceived oppression. The struggle, which by most measures was ostensibly won many years ago, is made to be endless. (The election of the president, which was played up to white audiences during the election as a symbolic end to the movement has been used to reinforce its importantance to black audiences ever since.) They are told that they live in a country where they can be smarter and work harder than white people and still do worse and many live their lives accordingly.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I agree, but it's even more pervasive than that.

People, for some reason that is alien to me, enjoy casting themselves in the victim role, and do it on the slightest excuse. Over race, over sex, over sexuality, over religion...the police abuses thread has a bunch of this stuff too. The latest there is some guy who decided, after the fact, that he had been intimidated by an apologetic female media relations officer. Maybe they enjoy associating themselves with the real victims and get some enjoyable sense of martyrdom out of it (without the actual pain). I don't see how they aren't ashamed to say that stuff though...

And then the counterpart is people who eager to appear to be fighting injustice, and enjoy "being on the right side".

I think it's much less about it being an industry in a financial sense, more about people finding meaning in their life from taking on a role. The problem is that people are content with just the trappings of the role. Maybe it's the "religious instinct" finding an outlet.