Pitting Max_S

Just for the folks that might not be following along,

The core question is whether racism itself is considered hate speech, even when no pejorative remarks or factual claims are made - such as questions about my own identity, or of my own morals. I don’t consider myself a racist, but I know some of my opinions go right up to the line. I can avoid slurs and disparaging remarks and still state my positions. But if racism itself is against the rules, I would rather just keep my mouth shut than risk being warned.
Clarification of rule against hate speech - #46 by Max_S?

“I don’t consider myself a racist, but I know some of my opinions go right up to the line.”

Bless his heart.

…is he a lawyer? I’m curious because he does keep talking about laws he’s read.

He absolutely lives up to the trope, where if someone says “I’m not / don’t consider myself racist but” everything after that is racist as hell or otherwise proves you are.

If your opinions go right up to the line, you realize every single person draws the line differently right?

I haven’t ignored Max, because unlike some posters, he has useful stuff to say in other forums, but the ongoing and willful ignorance on this subject is maddening.

Kind of reminds me of a news report I saw about 20 years ago in a town considering the implications of permanent black residents (yeah…). A lady in a diner (interviews in diners with ‘regular folk’!) said she didn’t see anything wrong with having them in town, but wouldn’t want to live next to them. But she’s not a racist or anything!

If they don’t see a lynching, they don’t think there’s a problem.

Broad brush aside, I think what he was saying was “How do you criticize a race without appearing racist?”

I do that, or at least try to. Usually the result is, I don’t think there’s anything bad or wrong, but other people will probably disagree. (Exception for the pregnant man thread.)

It’s infuriating that Ed was unwilling to clearly say whether racism itself is against the rules.

No.

Yes, I realize that. That’s the whole reason I want to know if racism is against the rules, rather than just slurs.

~Max

Well… :wink:

If the mods would come out and say the spirit of the rules precludes racism or things approaching racism I wouldn’t have an issue with that. But in my view it looks like they are doing everything they can to make rules without actually banning racism.

~Max

How about this - whether it’s against the rules or not, maybe just don’t post it. No one finds you quite as interesting as you seem to think you are. Your fascinating racist post that you are so eager to share is actually not fascinating at all. You don’t need to post every idiotic thought that enters your head.

In all seriousness, if you know that your opinions are “right up to the line” of racism, you might want to reconsider those opinions. Rather than posting them.

Makes one wish there was a word for when you criticize an entire race as if everyone that was a member of said ‘’’’‘race’’’’’ was exactly the same.

Not throwing shade, but this is probably the clear meaning of “don’t be a jerk.”

They don’t want to stifle possible future, narrow defined arguments about specific cultural/racial/sexual etc threads, but the damn ‘spirit of the rules’ is very clearly, the don’t be a jerk rule. Seems clear to me.

I agree with you that Ed’s new statement on the topic is an absurd pile of hair-splitting nonsense — racist words are forbidden, but racist thoughts, arguments, and topics are not — that accomplishes absolutely nothing in terms of improving board culture beyond making Ed feel like he did something.

Also, I agree with the other posters in this thread that you’re a fucking racist.

Yup, you’re free to say that businesses shouldn’t be forced to serve, say Blacks and Jews but the mods forbid you to ask if the writer is actually OK with businesses having signs on their front doors saying “NO N****** OR K**** ALLOWED”.
'Cause the reality of the position being advocated is just too much for the delicate sensibilities of the board to bear apparently.
And having my post edited for asking exactly that still bothers me.

Most of my opinions on public policy, or the underlying rationale, go right up to the line of racism - well not necessarily racism, but bigotry.

I take a very narrow legal reading of the constitution. My read of the constitution would undo virtually the entire civil rights movement. No federal right to interracial marriage. No federal right to same sex marriage. No federal right to sodomy with a consenting adult in your home. No federal right to contraception. In the minds of most people, if I were a judge ruling, I would be considered racist/bigoted/etc. Because the impact of my opinions would harm minorities, it is undeniable.

I’m not a fan of government providing normal people with the means to live a comfortable life. Subsistence maybe, comfortable no. This approach to tax policy, welfare spending, etc. disproportionately affects people of color and thus will be considered, by the majority of people, racist.

I believe the national identity is restricted to people who were, at the time, considered part of the nation. So those Native Americans who lived and died enemies of the United States will never, in my opinion, be part of the U.S. national identity. I think that would be highly disrespectful both to them and to the Americans they fought against. But this is plainly discrimination on the basis of race and will be seen by the majority of people as racist. Yet it partially informs my opinions about recognizing an Indigenous Peoples holiday.

I believe each polity has a strong right to self determination. But when you have Republicans who are seen as racist, and people from out of town want to pump in money to prop up the Democrat, saying that’s wrong will mean at least in the mind of some, I come across as racist.

I’m highly skeptical of some voting rights measures that are designed to benefit people of color, not because I have something against people of color, but because I’m highly skeptical of all voting rights measures. But I think for most people who support the measures, that nuance is lost, and skepticism = racism.

I could go on and on… Just this moment, I struggle to think of many policy debates I have participated in where my position wouldn’t have at least one premise many people would consider bigoted.

~Max

Oh honey, you are so close to understanding.

I mean, you won’t, but you’re SO close.

You realize that the constitution isn’t an arbiter of morality, right?

Of course it isn’t. Deep down, I have nothing against interracial marriages - I am the product of one. Nothing against contraception, abortion, same-sex marriage, etc. But “No one cares how you personally feel deep down inside.

~Max

I mean, personally, i think the stuff in the constitution about slaves counting as 3/5 of a person was evil and damaging to our country.