Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
-If we adopt your position that all men are racists because it's impossible not to be racist (which is true within that definition) aren't we just lumping race into a large bucket of other stimuli in response to which people develop biases?
|
1. If so, so what?
2. I mean, sure, if you just want to ignore history.
And yes, you provided those answers in what came next. I'm just don't see the problem you're seeing. The history (and present) of anti-black racism is different from racism or bias against other groups. It also has a lot in common with racism against, for example, native and Asian people too, especially looking into the past.
As a bit of a tangent, some
local historians have been looking back on restrictive covenants in deeds in Minneapolis. I helped look some of them in via their online crowdsource project. The language used was fascinating, seeming to begin with "no negroes" and expand out other groups (e.g., Jews, moslems, turkmen, and other anachronistic terms I can't remember right now).
