I’ve used that term occasionally, but “Oriental” never meant anything more than Asian to me until all the baggage you have just explained was attached to it. Don’t ask me to carry that baggage.
I am not now, nor have I ever been, a Racist. My thoughts have never run that way, and given half a chance I could blister your ears with arguments about why different races are essentially equal, but have achieved different outcomes in different situations.
Nobody gives a shit about that, but if I utter certain words, phrases, or concepts that have been codified in modern thought as Forbidden, than I offer up myself as that elusive Racist that everybody has been looking for with such diligence for all of their lives.
Political correctness is nothing more complicated than assigning racist views to people who do not view themselves as racist. Maybe I am old fashioned, but I think the term racist should be reserved for those who genuinely don’t like other races.
Nobody’s asking you to do anything: you’re choosing to ignore how language and culture work if you’re pretending that words don’t have connotations, or that you’re entirely in control of the connotations of the words you use.
In all history many folks have said this. I don’t know that anyone has ever said this phrase correctly. It’s one of those phrases like, “I mean no offense, but…” that is always followed by something that contradicts it.
Ah, so you’re suddenly the person who defines what words mean? Sorry, buddy, but you don’t get to choose what the word “racist” means. As for your definition of “political correctness,” it’s absurdly flawed. Virtually nobody, including many Klansmen, view themselves as racist. Whether a person views herself as racist has fuckall to do with whether that person is racist, any more than whether someone thinks he’s a good dancer has anything to do with whether he’s a good dancer, or whether someone thinks she’s an asshole has anything to do with whether she’s really an asshole.
Because I feel that the claim is unsupportable, and more often than not based off of the speaker’s prejudices, rather than a sober and even handed assessment of current and historical realities.
None of which has anything to do with confusing religion with ethnicity, or the relative size and popularity of Islam as a religious movement.
Sorry. You can’t have the word without the baggage. That’s not how words works. The word “Oriental” fell out of favor because the people the word describes disliked it. They disliked it because it had all the connotations that Left Hand described. When you use the term, it still has those connotations, whether you intend them or not.
You know who else says they’re not a racist? David Duke. Not that I’m comparing you to that guy, I’m just saying, statements of one’s own non-racism aren’t worth much, because virtually everyone, including Klansmen, says they’re not racist.
The “elusive” racist? Really? You think ethnic minorities in this country have to work to find racism?
See above re: David Duke. But in this particular instance, “political correctness” is about nothing more than referring to people using the names and terms that they prefer. Which isn’t political at all - it’s simple courtesy.
Everybody is at least a little racist. One has to learn not to be one. No one has learned this lesson completely. Mistrust toward those who look different than our own “tribe” is inborn. Learning is the solution to this inate myopia, this blind-spot in our instinct.
Ok, I’ll bite: What nonsense ? And what of those whom we don’t know and who also look different ? Our senses warn us to be skeptical about such persons. Racism is inate. Or innate. I forget which. You’re splitting hairs, I think.
While “nonsense” may be too harsh a word, you have conflated separate things. It is true that xenophobic feelings tend to be innate. However, you have specifically jumped from “not one of us” to “look different” and from “look different” to “race,” and then made the claim that one had to learn how not to be racist.
This relies on the assumption that everyone grows up in a homogeneous culture in which people who have certain appearances are presumed to be different and then goes further to presume that all such perceived differences are based upon a perception of “race.”
However, a child growing up in an ethnically mixed neighborhood is probably not going to perceive differences based on “race.” Growing up with black, brown, yellow, red, and/or white companions, skin color, facial features, and hair color and texture will probably not be seen as markers for “other,” while clothing, speech patterns, and hand gestures will be seen as markers for “other.”
By basing your assertion on perceived “race,” rather than on simple xenophobia, you have opened the thread to one more hijack over “race.”
Mistrust of others who behave differently is as suspect as any matter of race based upon physical appearence. I’m not conlflating. I’m comparing one form of bias with any other form and stating that our biology prepares us toward suspicion and mistrust of those different than ourselves.
I don’t wish to change the course of this thread and turn it into matter a of race. Your point about which kind of society one is raised in and about xenophobic tendencies many societies have fostered is well taken.
When a person states that they are not racist, the default assumption should be to take that person at their word until they prove otherwise. By your definition, the only way out of the racist box is to act and speak in concert with the parameters that you have defined.
Perhaps the reason that racism is so rampant in our society is that society is suffused with Holy Warriors who are convinced that racism is rampant in our society.
I think that’s a weak argument if you think it through. First, you have to wonder why somebody would choose to pre-emptively state they are not a racist. It’s like the suspiciously specific denial cliche. If a person goes out of his way to deny being a racist before the subject has even been brought up, the likeliest explanation is that he’s frequently been accused of being a racist in the past.
Then you have to wonder why a person would be frequently getting accused of being a racist. The likeliest explanation? The person is a racist.
So in conclusion, when a person states that they are not racist, that claim actually gives you good reason to suspect they are racist.
In my experience, when a person states that they are not racist, the statement is almost always less than sixty seconds away from an astonishingly racist statement. For example, “Man, who nigger-rigged this pipe? Hey, don’t look at me like that, I don’t have a racist bone in my body.” or, “I’m the least racist person you’ve ever met, but it’s just a fact that black people are terrible tippers.” When someone actually isn’t racist, they no more tell you about that than someone who’s actually not planning on murdering you tells you that.
That’s a lot of homework. How much would I have to read if I just embrace racism?
On an entirely coincidental and arbitrary note, please estimate the distance between your ancestors home region and the Caucasus region of eastern Europe.
Nevermind asking me why, it’s just a little question I ask of every new person I meet.
Few people go about proclaiming “I am not racist,” “I am not sexist,” or “I am not bigoted against group X.” In the overwhelming majority of the cases where I have seen a person make such a declaration, it has been to cover the fact that they were about to make a racist, sexist, or otherwise prejudiced remark.
I do not say that the utterance of such a statement should be seen as a declaration that they are lying, but I see no reason to take such a person at his or her word when the evidence lays strongly in the other direction.
And racism was never a matter of “hating” another perceived race. Very few racists actually hate the other people. Racism is about (mis)perceiving differences in various qualities of a group of people, generally dividing people into groups in which one’s own group is superior. Even if it is done with the best of intentions, it is still racism.
There is no need to ask why. It is a silly question that simply demonstrates an ignorance of how the word came to be used regarding people who generally populate Europe, Western Asia, and the Indian subcontinent.