Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
That's not what I said. What I meant by agnostic on race is what I said -- people who don't even think about the subject. These people exist.
Or they live somewhere where race issues do not occur. And it's interesting that you assume these people isolate themselves. Have you considered that growing up in an area where race issues are not prominent could be unintentional? I highly doubt anyone in NE British Columbia runs into race issues very often. Has this person isolated himself? If you grow up in a town where nearly everyone is white, by dumb chance of birth, are you isolating yourself? You seem to suggest culpability in your use of "isolated themselves." Are you suggesting ignorance of race matters is negligent, or a bad act, on the part of such people?
This can be applied to any group. If you grow up in the North and have never visited the South, your view of Southerners is based on second hand definitions. If you've never met a German, your view of Germans is based on second hand definitions.
You can apply this reasoning to any group of people with whom you've not interacted. I don't understand the point being made here.
I do. I myself am thinking about race here, for the purposes of this discussion. I will be on vacation in two weeks, at which point I will not watch TV and will try to avoid newspapers. I will not think about race. At all. I will see people of various races, but I will have no reason to think about the fact that we come from different backgrounds, as it will be immaterial.
If I grew up on a farm in Utah, I'd never think about race. I think there are a ton of people out there exactly like me.
If you say these people have had the luxury of not thinking about race, I'd say that's true. I'd also say this has nothing to do with my point, and actually proves my point: There are a lot of people out there who don't think about race. And there are even more people out there who don't think about race very much.
You asked me a question about a bigoted country club. I was responding to your inquiry.
For the 10th time, I AGREE WITH THAT. What I do not agree with was Adder's loopy extensions of this reasoning to the propositions:
1. All Americans are racist; and,
2. All of our grandparents were racist;
3. Because America is comprised of systems which incorporate and perpetuate structural racism.
But if you vote GOP, do you own the fact that you're enabling racists within the party? ABSOLUTELY.
No, that's you and everyone here bristling at any challenge to the narrative. When I offer skepticism about the studies you cite to prove the point that the Trump vote was all about racism, I do so because, while those studies are evidentiary, they don't prove the point convincingly. And they certainly don't prove the point to the extent Adder or anyone else can run around here saying "All GOP voters are racists."
Trump has a significant amount of racist supporters. He also has a significant amount of supporters who are just greedy, want manufacturing jobs, hated Hillary, always vote GOP, etc. The list of reasons people voted for Trump and he was elected is a very long one.
Is racism a big part of it? Yes. But when you say it's the only part of it, or discuss it exclusively without reference to the other reasons people voted for Trump (which creates the narrative racism is the only cause), you're off, and someone needs to pick up the other side of the argument. When I disagree with you on this point, it's an argument of degree.
Ty will ask why I feel the need to do this. And if one buys into the logic that it's all defensiveness, white fragility, they'll try to discount my challenge as emotional. It's not. I join the statement that a large segment of Trump voters are racist. I will not join the statement that all or nearly all of them are racists. That's a step too far. And it is flatly absurd to state that all Americans are racist using the reasoning Adder and Ty have offered. That a person is born into a society filled with racist impacts, with structural racism, renders him an automatic racist strikes me as such a profoundly illogical statement, I have to wonder how someone could ever absorb it. (My suspicion is because studies on issues of race and gender are not done by the most rigorous academic minds, who tend to go into hard sciences, and because anthropology and psychology are inherently soft sciences. This has led to a body of credentialed but dubious work people like Ty and Adder will either buy into or use as intellectual cover.)
We are never going to see eye to eye on that burden of proof. I accept it in certain situations (law enforcement, certain regions of the country, certain fields), but that burden shifting does not apply universally.
TM
|
