We are all Slave now.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

At a certain point in time, the decrease of oppression to a certain level means that the group being oppressed now bears some personal responsibility for their situation? What?

That argument can be logically made. Refuting it is another issue.

Also, the argument wasn't that the oppression is the oppressed group's fault. It's that the group's disadvantages can be argued, after a time, to be partly the group's fault.

Totally agree that using groups here does not work when discussing allegations of personal responsibility. I made exactly that argument myself. But the issue was raised initially by Klein and Harris using groups, so we're stuck with a flawed hypothetical.

Even though groups can't be personally responsible by definition because it's a concept that can only apply to an individual, those groups have to take responsibility for their circumstances? Uh...?

The Klein and Harris debate used groups. I agree groups do not work.

You're not making any sense at all.

I'm pinning Ty down as advocating that certain arguments should not be made. At core, my point is very simple: If you wish to assert claims that certain groups have been oppressed and consequently suffer disadvantages, you invite a rebuttal that the groups may bear some responsibility for some of those disadvantages. Arguing whether it's true or not is of no interest to me. What is of interest to me is Ty's suggestion, and Klein's, that such rebuttal should not be raised or considered. That strikes me as soft censorship.

TM[/QUOTE]