Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The conversation we are having is, why does Sebby insist that some people who knowingly and intentionally do racist things are, nonetheless, not "racists"?
Saying that you are "not comfortable calling him a racist" nicely gets at the key to this little debate, which is that it's about your comfort rather than some distinction in other people's behavior that you can describe or explain.
|
I explained it perfectly. A contractor voting for Trump purely so he can get work on Keystone XL? Racist?
You can't get around that, so you say it's a distinction without a difference, because impact is impact. I say, agreed in part. I think impact can be a basis on which to call someone a racist.
The question is how do we measure when the threshold for such impact to allow for such indictment has been met?
This stuff gets terribly subjective. And yet so many seem so certain they know. You yourself don't even know the answer to that question. just a few posts ago, you recognized the difference between aiders and abettors of racism and racists, but could not offer a rule as to when one bled into the other.
My only point is Adder's rule, where almost everyone was a racist, is not wise way to make the measurement. If you disagree with that, I think you're viewing this issue a bit illogically.
