Erm no, there’s positive bias and negative bias, Jeong demonstrated negative bias on numerous occasions, occasions where a white counterpart would of been immediately fired. I’m calling for an equality of punishment, I’m well aware of inequities within the system, this doesn’t let her off the hook, or anyone for that matter.
Where have I implied in any of my posts that I think this would happen, from my recollection it’s you making that assumption about me and others.
Not asking for perfection, just asking for equality of punishment. She apologised and keeps her job, so if a white journalist working for NYT in the future does a similar thing, they should apologise and keep their job, if not, I’m calling bullshit on the double standards.
Just because there’s inequities doesn’t give her an excuse to make racist jokes, how many times have I reiterated this point for it to go over your head.
By what you’re implying you’re saying Jeong got mad and racist but shouldn’t be fired because she experiences the everyday inequities of the system and can’t be held accountable for her own actions.
I watched the video and what we’re discussing isn’t the videos definition of white fragility, they mentioned hair touching, wrong ethnicity and the guy keeping silent when his white counterpart says there’s no racism, the latter of which I’ve never implied in this thread.
Note the ‘?’ but it is more likely than some bullshit idea of racial superiority.
Great job on ignoring the fact that the fluid concept of ‘white’ didn’t even exist when those countries rose. But I can get how you like regurgitating the bullshit from “Hitlers Bible” but maybe you should put down your copy of ‘The Passing of the Great Race’ and other eugenicist literature.
The rise of Europe as a world power had nothing to do with their hypersensitivity to topics around race.
But to answer your question, had the indigenous people of the Americas possessed the proper immunity to disease the results would have been different. The fact that you believe that some special trait of ‘whites’ allowed that conquest to happen just demonstrates how ignorant you are. ‘Race’ is not a biologically meaningful term.
No I am saying that there is a different standard, despite your choice to label it as racism and not prejudice. If we can’t agree to use two different terms there you will just keep coming back with strawmen.
Feel free to suggest any terms you wish and I’ll engage, the two concepts we need to deliniate between are:
dislike for someone
AND
dislike for someone with power
Provide some terms you would accept so that we quit talking past each other and I will re-engage but I am going to give up as I tried to do so and was ignored.
Ryan, you keep saying “she’d of” and “he’d of”. Please: it’s “have”, not “of”, as the apostrophe-d replaces “would”.
That segment of white voters (which does not include me) requires some coddling, yes. And we had better get to coddling them if we want to retake power!
I know you were mainly being cheeky and this is a bit of a tangent/nitpick…but isn’t it more like you “diluted” the black race? Seems to me like “diluting” the white race would require a nonwhite man to procreate with a white woman.
Why not try to address the myth based ‘racial anxiety’ that they experienced vs pandering to white nationalist terrorists.
I can’t accept throwing fellow Americans under the bus yet again just because we lost one election. Hell half that loss was due to poor candidate choice too.
The Republican party is where it is because of the southern strategy and a desire to court bigots, there is no reason to hand the other party to them too.
If the country can forget that ‘Catholics’ were the terrifying immigrant hordes we can address the current islamophobia and anti-Hispanic hate with the truth and not by resorting to complacency.
To be honest the white nationalists will most likely try to bring on their downfall of the US before Trump is out of office anyway and those actions are far more likely to swing the voters back anyway. That is going to be horrific, but unless we get lucky and the white nationalists chicken out like they did in the past the current administration won’t do anything about it.
So by you own deinifition, she is someone in a position of authority, being a journalist who can shape public opinion, and who used that power to disparage a whole group of people for jokes.
This is why I am increasingly regarding you as someone who looks at people through an ideological lens.
And again, I’m going to stress this because you keep ignoring it, prejudice can be racist, they are no mutually exclusive, and I have provided the example twice in this thread to you and you have ignored it.
So it’s “pandering to white nationalist terrorists” if we abstain from dragging people solely for traits they were born with and cannot change, and urge others to do the same? :dubious:
ETA: Thanks, Ryan. I love the cite from rationalwiki BTW!
Ryan_Liam: ignore any past words used, your personal definitions and mine.
Provide me two words, even if you make them up that describe those two concepts.
Unless I have terms that you will accept I can’t explain my position to you and it is highly unlikely that you will randomly happen on my beliefs by creating random scenarios of what my beliefs may be by chance.
No one is doing that, anti-white racism isn’t a thing unless you cherry pick definitions based on the broadest definition possible. That said anti-white prejudice, yes. You are cherry picking an inexact term so that you feel justified in your fake outrage and your agenda does not include standing up for the oppressed.
The fact that you have repeated ignored the fact that there may be a difference yet continue to try to force this discussion in this direction shows your posts are in bad faith. Using the word prejudice does not diminish those offences, but ignoring a more precise term even used by the UN so that it fits your argument is just classical confirmation bias.
Here is the UN definition.
Resorting to loose lay descriptive definitions in a dictionary does nothing to change the concepts, it just lets you ignore the points being made.
Here is an example, with the quote taken from a tweet Sarah Jeong has actually made;
RacialPrejudice = ‘basically Im just imagining being white and waking up every morning with a terrible existential dread about how I have no culture’ bias notion against whites implying they have no culture which is also a racist stereotype.
Disclaimer: I’m aware this is a joke, it’s just that it’s a racist joke.
Do I have to make it any clearer how prejudice can be mixed with racism to make it a racially prejudice joke/s? Jesus fucking Christ.
As for your whining about dictionary definitions, in your own fucking link;
Da fuq? You quoted my post, in which I did not use any of the terms you talked about, and then replied with this screed. Did you intend to reply to a different post?
So there exists the possibility of prejudice against people who are white based on their “race” but this isn’t racism? In my lexicon prejudice based on race is racism. I get that you are saying that without a negative power imbalance that prejudice based on race is not racism but I am still not understanding why. Maybe you need another word for prejudice + power imbalance? Is that possible? I can’t see why prejudice based on race is not racism? I also understand that race is a loaded term that I may not be using correctly.
Your definition is how I use the word because that’s how the vast majority of people use it. Of course institutions themselves can be racist but that doesn’t make every member of the undisadvantaged class racist themselves. Except in the sense of having small residual prejudices that everyone has, but to say that that makes everybody racist, full stop, no modifier, renders the word meaningless as surely as attempting to hijack the meaning for something else does.
Do you believe that white swing voters who are turned off by anti-white rhetoric are “white nationalist terrorists”? I’m going to be generous here and assume that you don’t actually believe that, and are being hyperbolic. The alternative is that you are a complete moron.
You quoted my post, in which I did not use any of the terms you talked about, and then replied with this screed. Did you intend to reply to a different post?