You haven’t told me at all. You just keep telling me that it does. I think this is because you haven’t thought out your opinion much.
I’m not convinced the problem is on his end.
I think it’s because you’re to dense to grasp what the big picture is.
Look, white people and a white run government has done some shitty things to black people. Black people (as a whole) have not done shitty things to white people. And blacks have never been a majority in government so they certainly haven’t enacted any racist laws towards white people.
That’s why it worse when white people make fun about black folks. White people have actually done some shitty things to black people. The same cannot be said about black folks towards white people.
I am.
He has yet to offer any substantive reasons to support his opinion. He just restates it.
I’m done asking though.
(EDIT - he continued the conversation, so I asked some more).
…
Well, that’s a mercy, at least.
So tell me what it is! What is the “big picture” and why does it matter to this issue?
Yes, I’m aware of that.
So it all comes down to what I asked you before - some people can get away with doing bad things because bad things were done to other people in the same group before.
I categorically reject that idea. Racism, or any other wrong, is just wrong. Always. Making allowances for it only perpetuates it.
(That said, I’m aware that comedy is different.)
Are all wrongs equal though? Is jay walking just as bad as selling crack to school children?
No, but you’ve got the wrong analogy, because we’re talking about one kind of action, not two. The better analogy would be: is white people selling crack to black children better or worse than black people selling crack to white children?
That’s equally as bad, but not the right analogy.
A better one would be What’s worse? Going 10 mils above the speed limit or 50?
It’s one action, different levels of offense.
If we’re were looking at what MHP did in a vacuum, you would be correct in that racism is racism, plain and simple. But life ain’t that simple, there’s all kinds things one must take into account before passing judgement. History being one of them.
Lance, here’s an analogy. Compare these situations:
You’re sitting in a bar minding your own business and watching a football game. You’re a fan of one of the teams playing and you’re happy because your team is winning. Somebody taps you on the shoulder and you turn around. It’s a guy who’s obviously had a few too many drinks and he’s wearing a t-shirt for the losing team. He says in a challenging manner “Are you cheering for those assholes? What’s your problem?” You look over his shoulder and see that five of his buddies, who are also wearing that team’s colors, are standing a few feet away to see what happens.
You’re sitting in a bar minding your own business and watching a football game. You’re a fan of one of the teams playing and you’re happy because your team is winning. Somebody taps you on the shoulder and you turn around. It’s a guy who’s obviously had a few too many drinks and he’s wearing a t-shirt for the losing team. He says in a challenging manner “Are you cheering for those assholes? What’s your problem?” Five of your buddies, who were sitting at a nearby table, stand up and come over towards where you are.
The point is that it’s rarely a true one-on-one situation even in a confrontation between two people. Because usually one person knows he’s in an environment where he is supported and the other person is not. And that environment means the two people are not confronting each other on equal terms.
Huh?
So you’re saying that in one case, it was immoral to say “are you cheering for those assholes?” and in the other case it was okay?
You’re saying that the morality of an act is conditioned on the group identity of the actor and the victim?
No. It’s not.
Wrong is wrong. This is not a football game, and it’s not about a race struggle. Racism is just wrong.
You’re still doing it.
We are not talking about two different levels of offense. We’re talking about (hypothetically) a racist comment. Not once have you argued that what was said was somehow milder than the typical racist comment and therefore less hurtful. Your only argument has been based on the races of the parties involved.
False. Life is that simple. Wrong is wrong. History and context and all that are nothing but moral relativity excuses.
You can test this by elevating the crime, like we did with selling crack. Let’s go straight to murder. Would “history” or “context” make a black murdering a white somehow less an offense than a white murdering a black?
Assuming you mean that *Kieran *doesn’t mean black, Think Baby Names agrees with Hentor.
Another baby name sitereports that in Gaelic, *Kieran *means black, and in Celtic, it means dark-skinned.
I can’t argue with this level of crazy. I hope for your sake you really don’t believe that crap you just wrote.
So wrong isn’t always wrong? It friightens me that you think simple truths about morality are “crazy.”
Support your positions. Calling someone crazy is not supporting your positions.
Start by answering my question about murder. Don’t dodge it please.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think you’re crazy. I do think you’re frighteningly naive and more than a little self-serving in this desire to run a steamroller over history and cultural inertia, though. Racism is not dead. INSTITUTIONAL racism is not dead. It’s morphed. It’s weakened. It’s become socially unacceptable in the general culture. But it still exists and, as such, it has to be accounted for. There IS racial privilege, which is firmly on the European-descended side of things in this country. There are any number of other privileges, also, but we’re focusing on racial here.
Acting like two situations where a white person is being racist to a black person and a black person is being racist to a white person are completely equal, with absolutely no shades of gray or nuances, is either shockingly naive or blatantly self-serving.
No, wrong is always wrong. The concept you fail to grasp is there are different levels of wrong. I never once said what MHP did was right. It’s just not as bad as you’re making it out to be.
ETA: WRT your murder question, I’m not going to address that because you’re cramming racism where there is none.
“Different levels of wrong”
Come on.
(Are you going to use that one with my murder question you haven’t touched yet?)
All true. And all completely irrelevant when considering whether racism is wrong.
Is racism wrong? Yes or no. If you can’t simply answer “no” then you have no business bringing up all the stuff about racism not being dead and all that, do you, since it implies that you think racism is wrong.
Why is is so hard for you to just say a racist act is wrong?
No, you’re the one being self-serving. I’m being an adult.
I didn’t say there weren’t “nuances” or whatever. I said they’re equally wrong. Wrong is wrong. No excuses. To excuse a racist act based on racial history or context is itself racist.