Re: We are all Slave now.
 

OK. You're not parsing. You're doing something more disingenuous - characterizing by omission.

Okay. You're entitled to that opinion. But that has nothing to do with the fact that what Adder said is simply not defensible. Neither his point nor your opinion supporting it would survive the thinnest of 12(b)(6)s.

And as I said to you yesterday, I am happy to call lots of people racist. Here's the list I offered yesterday, which is by no means exclusive:

"Tell a racist joke? Racist.
Sentence the black kid harshly while the white kid gets leniency? (I've seen this up close a bunch.) Racist.
Exclude other races at work because you're not comfortable with them? Racist.

The list could go on forever.

Half the fucking justice system is racist. If you don't believe me, talk to law enforcement sometime. Talk to prison guards. Talk to probation officers. The racism drips out of these people in every other statement. I'm happy to generalize a bit there because it's so damn pervasive.

Are some comedians trading on racism? Hell yes.

But do I infer racism quickly? No. I wait for proof, as is required before making any inference."

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Fuck you. I have bent over backwards to try to have a conversation on your terms, literally, and to make sense of what you have said. Fuck this "disingenuous" shit. I'm not the one who quoted the Oxford dictionary -- that was you. I'm just reading the literal words you posted. When the definition says "shows or feels" prejudice, it means something different than "shows and feels" prejudice. If you don't understand what "or" means, go figure it out.

I didn't read the rest of your post because fuck you for calling me disingenuous. I'll read it later when the moment passes.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I took you to be weaving around an obvious point. If I read you wrong, I am sorry. But the definition so clearly refutes Adder’s reasoning, it’s hard to see how one could argue otherwise.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I don't think you understand what a mic drop moment is, and that I dropped it earlier.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Of course it can. Who do you think has never wondered if they should cross the street at night to avoid someone in part because of their race? Or had less than charitable thoughts about an athlete or performer based on racial stereotypes? Or made fun of a person of color's non-typical name?

People (not me) used to call one of my high school classmates, who was a great student and musician in the band, an "oreo."* Teammates (and this one I have to cop to) used to rub the head of one of my few black teammates for "luck" before football games (in my defense, I truly did not see the racial issue at the time). What I did was racist, even though I wasn't aware of it.

I mean, do you remember the ethnic "jokes" of our (or at least my) youth? Maybe there's an argument that Millennials are doing a lot better (if so, that would be thanks to the PC movement of the '90s on), but yes, literally everyone our generation and older has shown bias against people of color.

I was going to refrain from pointing out that you're actually attempting to rely on a dictionary definition in a discussion of something deeply complex and nuanced, but you keep doing to so I will say: you can't be serious with this line of argument.

You also apparently either have lived some sort of crazy charmed life or you have had your head up your ass for your entire life.

You simply cannot get it through your head that it's not an insult, put down, or even moral judgment. It's an aspect of our culture that we need to recognize and accept if we even have any hope of eradicating it. Insisting otherwise is doing the opposite.

*ETA: Relatively recently, there was a racial incident of some type (can't remember what, thus squishy language) at our high school. He commented on Facebook about an article about it that he did not experience any of that when we were in school, which was heartening.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I am not weaving around anything. The WHOLE thing we have talking about, in different ways, is whether someone is a "racist" if they do prejudiced things without the specific intent to be prejudiced. That's the essence of the conversation. You keep talking past what TM and Adder (and I) have tried to say to you because you use the word "racist" in a narrower than other people do.

Oxford's definition shows this. To paraphrase, accurately, Oxford says a "racist" is someone who shows OR feels OR acts intentionally out of prejudice. You reject Oxford's definition -- you use the word only to mean someone who feels or acts intentionally out of prejudice, and you demand real proof of that feeling or intent, which can only come from someone describing racist beliefs. TM and Adder and I are all wiling to call someone a racist if they show prejudice, whether or not there is proof that they feel it or intentionally act out of prejudice. (We also are more willing to infer feelings of prejudice based on indirect proof, such as their actions.)

Pro tip: If you are going to try the whole dictionary-definition gambit, check to first to make sure the definition supports you and not the other guy.

Further pro tip: When you blew dictionary-definition gambit because you didn't check and you got it wrong, don't double down by accusing the other guy of deceit.

I generally agree with what Adder said about the ubiquity of prejudice. I read a book in college, Prejudice, by Gordon Allport, which explains why people are wired to be prejudiced, so I don't see it as a stigmatic moral failing the way I think you do -- I see it as a part of the human condition to be acknowledged and overcome.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Nice try. You aren't reframing this to fit your argument.

Here is what Oxford says:

racist
noun

A person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

Here is what I wrote when asserted that Oxford supports your position:

Sure, you can argue one can show discrimination toward others unintentionally. But Adder's point was that because we live in this country, we are (like our grandparents) all automatically racist.

That's flatly nuts, unless you believe that ALL people in this country at some point show discrimination toward others. That cannot be said. There is no way anyone can satisfy that standard.

The clarity you seek is something I've repeatedly provided:

You may not logically (and certainly not credibly) make the statement that all of our grandparents were racists, or that all current Americans are racist, simply because they were born into a society filled with racist systems.

Why? Because it's impossible. You would have to prove, using the Oxford definition, that everybody in those groups at some point showed discrimination or felt discriminatory feelings toward others. That's an unsustainable claim.

You are the one stating that I am insisting on intent. Do you see me saying that in what I've written above? No. I am saying Adder's proposition is flatly absurd.

You wish to argue with me about whether racism requires intent? Okay. Different issue. But one I also answered earlier, numerous times, when I said there are several circumstances in which one could be unintentionally racist.

But again -- THAT IS NOT ADDER'S POINT. His point, that we are ALL born racists because we live in a racist system, is indefensible. I already ripped it to ribbons on the issue that it's factually impossible to prove and facially absurd. I could also attack it from the perspective that it entirely removes human agency and assumes we are idiot vessels acting on social malware injected into us from date of birth, without exception. (Meaning not a single man can overcome this "original sin.")

By the way, let's say I'm born here but at age 10 I move to Venezuela. Am I still inherently racist? Is there any country I could move to that would end the inherent racism? Suppose I move to Germany before age of reason? Still racist? Is there a time spent living in another country after the elapse of which this racism hardwired into all Americans is expunged?

Come on. You know, I know, everybody looking at this discussion rationally knows, the statement "All Americans (or all of any nation of tens or hundreds of millions) are racist" is hyperbolic and frivolous.

I have no misapprehension about possibly changing a mind here. You're dug in pretty hard, so no amount of logic is going to sway you or Adder from that ludicrous proposition. But I'd like you to say it to ten people on the street:

"Every American is inherently racist as a result of having been born here."

Even in a crowd of liberals, at least half of the people will say, "How the hell do you get to that conclusion?"

Utopia
 

I can't wait to meet all those people in flyover land who are completely agnostic about race. Given the fact that they don't think about race at all, I would move there. But if I did, it would ruin everything!

TM

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Is American society racist? Yes.

Does that make every American necessarily racist? No.

Can you get around this? No. Because to do so you would have to prove every American is racist. What about the word "impossible" do you not grasp?

Your anecdotes are illustrative, but on what basis do you conclude we can extrapolate your experience to ALL Americans?

And the really dipshit thing about this conversation is I'm giving you an out. All you have to say is that some percentage of people are not racist. Which is a fact. I've said it now a dozen times -- this is an argument of degree. You're using some nebulous definition, and a very tenuous theory that culture around one makes him a racist regardless of his own thoughts or actions, to push this absolute theory.

Axioms are hard to assert. You're pushing a dubious theory like its gravity. And what's really strange is, I agree with you that we live in a racist system. You pretty much make the case that needs to be made right there, and yet you insist on saying what's indefensible: All Americans are racist. I'm baffled.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Just so you're aware, shouting "nah uh" repeatedly is not "ripp[ing] to ribbons.

You've pointedly ignored any discussion of actual facts and people, aside from your saintly grandparents.

Yes, we have way less agency than we believe.

If I've given you the impression that this is an America-only issue, I apologize. It's not. Venezuela and Germany (!!) have their own issues with racism and other prejudices and out groups too, I have no doubt, even if I can't speak to them in detail.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

You and I have been trading posts on this for days. If you think I've been simply repeating what Adder has been saying, you haven't been reading what I've said. Among other things, I asked you:

Are there any circumstances in which you are comfortable calling a white person a "racist" where he or she has not openly advocated for white supremacy or self-identified as a racist?

You said:

Your first paragraph covers the second ("feels") and third ("believes") part of the Oxford definition. Your second paragraph speaks to the first ("shows"), but you only believe someone shows prejudice if there is no other possible motivation for what someone does. So, George H.W. Bush makes Willie Horton a household name, but you don't want to call him racist, presumably because the "adverse impact" of his not doing that would have been that he would have been less likely to be President. In the real world, this means you are not willing to call racists "racists" because there might have been some other "mitigating factor" explaining the racist things they did. You will call hypothetical prison guards and joke tellers and voters racist, because you can exclude from the hypothesis anything else that might be a mitigating factor. Again, your racism is like an electron -- it could be flying all over the place, but it's impossible to ever pin it down in practice.

Tell me why that isn't an accurate description of how you think about this.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

It would seem you simply do not have the capacity to understand this concept. Let's try to make it as absolutely easy and straightforward as possible.

Racism is not necessarily intentional. Surely you understand what implicit/unconscious bias is, correct? If you acknowledge that this principle exists (and I believe we've all taken the implicit bias test* which proves that everyone harbors bias) and you can understand it, maybe you'll get there. You just have to let go of the idea that all racism is something people do to other people with the intent to harm (with that intent having to be proven beyond any doubt at all) or out of malice. Implicit bias and the resulting behavior influenced by implicit bias is racism and it is not intentional.

Please read the Yellow Paper on confirmation bias. I guarantee you the participants weren't sitting there reading memos with the intent to grade memo writers differently based on their race. But they did. That is racism. And it happens everywhere, constantly. http://nextions.com/wp-content/uploa...per-series.pdf

TM

*Take it, if you haven't. https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/Study?tid=-1

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I don't have to prove anything. I've said something that anyone who has given the topic any amount of thought (or read what some of what people of color have written on the topic) realize is completely uncontroversial. Each and everyone one of us has racial biases. I know this because I do, because everyone I know does, because I try to hear black people when they talk about it, and because I've had some exposure to the science and history regarding people and groups (heck, I know someone who's always prattling on about politics as tribalism). To me, this is not a hard thing to admit.

What's weird to me is how difficult it is for (some, but a disturbingly large number if Dr. DiFranco and TM are to be believed) white people to admit it to themselves. It's weird to me how difficult it is for you admit it.

I simply do not believe that your youth included exactly none of the low-grade racial biases of the type mine did, and I note you haven't asserted that it didn't.

Maybe that's because you defined that stuff as "not racist," which is consistent with your own strange way of using that word.

Were your arguments really so unquestionably convincing, you'd think someone, anyone, would be agreeing with you.

I honestly do not think anyone is completely free of racial bias. If you think there's some quantum of bias below which a person is not "racist" then, okay, some of us are not racist. Great rhetorical victory you've won there.

The culture makes our thoughts and actions racist. How do you still not grasp this?

Re: Utopia
 

Fuck, they can't even rub your hair for luck.

Calling Dr. Ty, Dr Adder
 

So I own a bike rental company on the Hudson River. NYC installs bike rental stands all over the City. My business drops 50%.

Why can't I sue the City to get it to stop citing Detroit Edison (gov can't give light bulbs away as it impacts a store that sells them)?