We are all Slave now.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Fair enough. Willie Horton was some rancid shit, but that was more Atwater than anything else. Bush 41's record on race matters was otherwise decent. (Even crediting his wife's dumb comments on Katrina to him.)

W's hit job on McCain's daughter in 2000 was far worse. I don't give him a pass like the old man. I think he knew what he was doing and is just a hyper-competitive prick.

But generally, old line GOP voters simply did not pay attention to matters of race or sex. They were pocketbook voters. Call them clueless, criticize them for their ignorance -- that's all fair. But my fucking 90 year old grandparents who only voted R because they had a business and that's what you did when you had a business back then weren't racists. They were just people who figured it was always better to pay less in taxes. They'd have never voted for someone like Trump (because they were Eastern European immigrants who knew what demagogues looked like).

You are arguing that people of your grandparents generation were not racist. Have you any understanding of history?

Leaving aside that everyone’s grandparents were racist, you’re talking about people who lived in Jim Crow America and when racism was bipartisan.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

You are arguing that people of your grandparents generation were not racist. Have you any understanding of history?

Leaving aside that everyone’s grandparents were racist...

This would be where I rest my case.

What can you do with this kind of thinking? It’s generalizing to an extent which would be hard to believe if not written on the page in front of me.

It’s also a reading comp failure. I’m arguing my grandparents, an example of most northern GOP voters of the time, were classic tax voters. They didn’t even think about racism or sexism. They were transactional immigrants.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

This would be where I rest my case.

What can you do with this kind of thinking? It’s generalizing to an extent which would be hard to believe if not written on the page in front of me.

You are totally OK with generalizations of such scope, so long as they are absolving white people of racism.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You are totally OK with generalizations of such scope, so long as they are absolving white people of racism.

? Some whites are racist, some aren’t. Some conservatives are racist, some aren’t. We can argue percentages, but none of those statements are controversial.

You seem to miss that you and I agree.

Adder’s the outlier here, repeatedly arguing that ALL conservatives and all people of a certain generation are racist. That’s an objectively indefensible position.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

To be clear, I don't think you're succeeding in making the points you think you're making. I am just trying to distill exactly how you think about this shit.

As far as I'm concerned, if you continue to support someone like Trump you have decided that you don't give a fuck about racism at best. Your values system allows you to make a judgment that if you get what you want, you're okay enough with that such that you understand your support enables outright racism. Every decision has repercussions. You don't get to vote for a racist piece of shit and discount his racism when he starts doing racist shit. You own that. But, hey, at least you got what you wanted.

TM

Agreed. You are an enabler if you don’t care.

But what if on your laddering of moral issues, overturning Roe tops all else? I don’t know what to call that person.

My sole thinking here is Adder is using too broad a standard. I think we all know that, but there’s reluctance to acknowledge it.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

? Some whites are racist, some aren’t. Some conservatives are racist, some aren’t. We can argue percentages, but none of those statements are controversial.

You seem to miss that you and I agree.

Adder’s the outlier here, repeatedly arguing that ALL conservatives and all people of a certain generation are racist. That’s an objectively indefensible position.

Here’s a good question to ask yourself - how would your grandparents react if they were told that their daughter was dating a black man?

Heck, my father went batshit crazy when my uncle jokingly suggested that my sister was dating a black dude when she was in college. My Irish cop great uncles and grandfather would have arrested the guy (“loitering” or “vagrancy” were terms of art for cops in the pre-war fiefdom of Patsy McCall) and beaten the shit out of him.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

? Some whites are racist, some aren’t. Some conservatives are racist, some aren’t. We can argue percentages, but none of those statements are controversial.

You seem to miss that you and I agree.

Adder’s the outlier here, repeatedly arguing that ALL conservatives and all people of a certain generation are racist. That’s an objectively indefensible position.

You are having an argument about semantics and/or the burden of proof, and you keep imagining that you are disagreeing about what people actually think.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You are totally OK with generalizations of such scope, so long as they are absolving white people of racism.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

?

I'm sorry if I confused you by referring to things you said earlier today. Let me help.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

But generally, old line GOP voters simply did not pay attention to matters of race or sex. They were pocketbook voters. Call them clueless, criticize them for their ignorance -- that's all fair.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

[T]he establishment Rs are a different lot. And there are a lot of them still out there, wandering, lost and confused. They still vote R because they don't like the alternative, but they don't like the crazies within their party, either.

Adder'd lump them under the term "racist." Seems unfair to do that to the old guard. I recall a time when moderate Ds and moderate Rs weren't all that unlike. I'd never label of those moderate Ds a "socialist" or some other excessive descriptive. In that same spirit, I'd never call an old establishment R a "racist." It's a bit too much.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I'm sorry if I confused you by referring to things you said earlier today. Let me help.

Adder said ALL people of my grandparents’ (and presumably his) generations were racist, and ALL modern conservatives are racist. My generalizations were as to quite finite groups. He spoke for an entire generation. There just a lil difference there. Just a tad...

But you knew that. Regroup. Take a different shot.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Take a different shot.

OK. Since you weren't answering it anyway, take this question as rhetorical instead of serious:

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?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Here’s a good question to ask yourself - how would your grandparents react if they were told that their daughter was dating a black man?

Heck, my father went batshit crazy when my uncle jokingly suggested that my sister was dating a black dude when she was in college. My Irish cop great uncles and grandfather would have arrested the guy (“loitering” or “vagrancy” were terms of art for cops in the pre-war fiefdom of Patsy McCall) and beaten the shit out of him.

My mom (who was born into an America that had just passed a law hating on people from her parents' homeland, which you might think would make her a bit more evolved?) would joke about my cousin's grandkids, who were half black. I'd say "Mom, you know half your grandson's girlfriends have been black?" She met, and was pleasent to, his eventual Haitian GF. She died before he got married, so do not know how welcoming she would have been evnetually.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Here’s a good question to ask yourself - how would your grandparents react if they were told that their daughter was dating a black man?

Heck, my father went batshit crazy when my uncle jokingly suggested that my sister was dating a black dude when she was in college. My Irish cop great uncles and grandfather would have arrested the guy (“loitering” or “vagrancy” were terms of art for cops in the pre-war fiefdom of Patsy McCall) and beaten the shit out of him.

My cousin married a black woman in the late 80s. My grandmother was fine with it. Her only concern was that something must have been wrong with any woman who wanted to marry my cousin. (He ultimately screwed up the marriage and she divorced him.)

This was the Eastern European side of the family. I can see how the Irish could be a bit more difficult on these issues. But the lace curtain variety (my relatives are part English) tend to be more accepting. It might not be entirely genuine. Might be partly about appearances, about signalling enlightened thinking. But I suspect they'd have accepted a person of any race or background, as decent people should. If your kid loves somebody and don't accept them based on race or ethnicity, you're a fucking ogre.

My great uncle also accepted his gay son. Was a struggle for a bit, but he evolved in a tremendous hurry.

Neat thing about thinking about people individually, rather than generalizing and seeing them all in categories, or tribes? When you do that, it's near impossible to see them as an "other." You can't help but see them as simply another human being, which makes it near impossible to hate them.

[Adder]

My grandparents were all good liberals who didn't hate anyone but every once in awhile would say some pretty racist things out of ignorance. Sebby would call them "not racist" but would be wrong. Like pretty much all of us, they had negative racial attitudes. They also lived in a society that didn't force them to examine them (especially in Minnesota and rural Wisconsin).

People with unexamined negative racial attitudes are racists. It doesn't mean they are irredeemable - I'd bet Hank's grandma would have come around - but if we can't recognize our family's (and our own) racial baggage, we're not going to make any progress.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You are having an argument about semantics and/or the burden of proof, and you keep imagining that you are disagreeing about what people actually think.

Um, Adder has doubled down on his absolute position several times. Not only is anyone voting GOP today a racist, but all of our grandparents were racists.

And you've been angling to make the argument that, using impact as the deciding metric, anyone voting for a conservative is a racist. The problem is, you've a respect for basic logic and common sense, so you understand that as emotionally attractive as the argument might be, it's absurd. I don't think Adder has your discipline.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

OK. Since you weren't answering it anyway, take this question as rhetorical instead of serious:

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?

Yes. If they harbor racists views that they keep to themselves, they are still racists. Expressing the view isn't requisite. Hold the view and you're a racist.

I'd also call any person who votes for or supports a racist policy where he could have voted for a non-racist policy with no adverse impact to himself a racist. Example: You work in an industry that is not at all impacted by the election of Candidate A (Racist) or Candidate B (Non Racist). You stand to neither gain nor lose from the election of either. All of those things being equal, you vote for Candidate A. This is causing a racist impact for no reason. I'd conclude there that you either are subconsciously racist or have needlessly contributed to a racist impact, and there are no mitigating factors (you weren't compelled to vote for the racist out of any valid incentive or problem with the opposing candidate). I'd be comfortable with someone labeling your a racist.