# To what extent can a group member's character be inferred from others'? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 6, 2014, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677 "2014-02-06T18:08:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2014, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/81 "2014-02-07T19:31:29Z")
> [@Karrius](#): > > lance, do you admit, as an **official policy** as stated in their **official party platform** republicans have came out against equal rights for gays or not? > > Do you think, then, that this makes homophobia an **official policy** of the republican party or not? > > In your eyes, can people be held responsible for the **official policies** of the groups they belong to, or not? You’ve completely moved the goalposts, dude. This used to be about whether you could be held responsible for what other people who were members of a group or supported the group did, not the official policies. So if there are racist Republicans somewhere, that means all Republicans are racist. Have you abandoned that argument? If so, great. If I don’t get a chance to respond, have a nice weekend. Get out more. Meet people. There are decent, honest Republicans all around you, and many even disagree with their party about some issues, like gay rights. There are even gay Republicans. Maybe you’ll meet some. Also, FYI, right now on some rightwing board, a rightwinger is saying that liberals and Democrats are evil, and that you can’t name a single Democrat who isn’t. And that’s just as stupid. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2014, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/82 "2014-02-07T19:38:56Z")
> [@Karrius](#): > > I’m curious, lance. Can you name _one_ prominent Republican who has come out against: I’m not **lance** , obviously, but as I (a decidedly non-prominent Republican) have come out against those things, I thought I’d give it a shot, in the person of Jon Huntsman. > [@Karrius](#): > > -Homophobia (claiming gays are evil, destroying marriage, are equivalent to pedophiles, etc) [Marriage Equality is a Conservative Cause, by Jon Huntsman](http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/marriage-equality-is-a-conservative-cause485/) > [@](#): > > Marriage is not an issue that people rationalize through the abstract lens of the law; rather it is something understood emotionally through one’s own experience with family, neighbors, and friends. The party of Lincoln should stand with our best tradition of equality and support full civil marriage for all Americans. > [@Karrius](#): > > -Sexism (calling women whores, saying women-only health coverage shouldn’t be covered, saying the wage gap is the fault of women, etc) Not a lot on this one: [Romney Supporter Jon Huntsman Breaks with Mitt and Backs Women’s Freedom](http://www.politicususa.com/2012/10/25/romney-supporter-jon-huntsman-its-fingers-chalkboard-time-hear-men-talk-womens-health-issues.html) > [@](#): > > JON HUNTSMAN: I cringe. It’s like fingers on a chalkboard every time I hear men talk about women’s health issues. When I hear them talk about things like this, it makes me cringe. It doesn’t deserve to be part of our political discourse right now. People want the economy fixed, they want our competitive prospects enhanced, and they want Americans brought together as one. This is a complete waste of time for Americans, and they know it, and they’re angered by this kind of talk. > [@Karrius](#): > > -Racism (saying Obama is an evil radical muslim Kenyan, and so on) From “Marriage Equality is a Conservative Cause”: > [@](#): > > We must be happy warriors who refuse to tolerate those who want Hispanic votes but not Hispanic neighbors. [A GOP Opportunity on Immigration, by Jon Huntsman](http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872396390443855804577600892810188600) > [@](#): > > For far too long we as a nation have tolerated an ugly nativist strain that dresses itself up with legitimate concerns about security and the breakdown of the rule of law. This is nothing new. It wasn’t long ago that “Irish need not apply” signs dotted Boston, and laws in some places banned speaking German. But we would be fools not to learn from our history, since our competitors—like Singapore, which is working to attract immigrants—surely are. > > Republican leaders at the Tampa convention have a real opening through the platform committee to project immigration reform as central to a 21st century economic vision. This isn’t just good policy. It’s also good politics. > [@Karrius](#): > > -The Republican party’s anti-science agenda (against evolution, global warming, stem cell research, etc) [Jon Huntsman Trashes GOP, Expresses Campaign Regrets](http://www.buzzfeed.com/zekejmiller/jon-huntsman-trashes-gop-expresses-campaign-regre#HTWF2) > [@](#): > > “So I had to say I believe in science — and people on stage look at you quizzically as though you’re was an oddball,” Huntsman said, explaining why he was “toast” in Iowa. [urlhttp://www.deseretnews.com/article/695228198/Huntsman-appears-in-climate-ad.html]Huntsman Appears in Climate Ad > [@](#): > > “We in the West are already wrestling with the critical issue of greenhouse-gas emissions,” his statement says. “This ad is an effort to encourage congressional action, which is imperative to a nationwide, comprehensive approach to clean our air and create new economic-development opportunities for our state and nation.” [Huntsman on Evolution - ‘Call Me Crazy’](http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/huntsman-on-evolution-call-me-crazy/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0) > [@](#): > > In a Twitter message sent Thursday afternoon, Mr. Huntsman wrote: > > To be clear. I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy. > > The message was a direct shot at his newest rival, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, who said this week that climate change was “a scientific theory that has not been proved” and called evolution “just a theory.” > [@Karrius](#): > > -The Republican party’s theocratic bent (insisting atheists shouldn’t be considered citizens, forcing Christianity on others, claiming all Muslims are evil, etc) From “Marriage Equality is a Conservative Cause” > [@](#): > > All Americans should be treated equally by the law, whether they marry in a church, another religious institution, or a town hall. This does not mean that any religious group would be forced by the state to recognize relationships that run counter to their conscience. Civil equality is compatible with, and indeed promotes, freedom of conscience. > [@Karrius](#): > > Just one republican who’s against all that and is prominent - I don’t even care if it’s a blogger, just one. If these so-called good Republicans exists, I want to see **one** of them. I think I did a decent job of it. > [@Karrius](#): > > And yes, people who flat-out claim that the majority of scientists and rational thinking people are liars are bad people. Sorry, but there is NO way you can be a creationist and a good person - the two are mutually exclusive. Either you trust facts and science, or you don’t. Creationism doesn’t require thinking scientists are liars, though certainly some of them do. ---
**Author:** ![Karrius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/71c47a/32.png) [@Karrius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Karrius)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2014, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/83 "2014-02-07T19:40:53Z")
I have never claimed “If there are racist republicans somewhere, that means all Republicans are racist”. I would appreciate you not outright putting words into my mouth with “Have you stopped beating your wife?” style questions, especially when you refuse to answer any questions aimed at you. My claim was that if you join a group that is full of racists, and don’t in any way challenge them, and even help them achieve their goals, you’re bad. My claim is that if a racist member of a group is celebrated, welcomed, liked, etc, even though their racism was clear and known, then that group is tainted. My claim was that if you join a political party that has bigotry as one of its STATED GOALS, I will assume you are a bigot until you prove otherwise, and “Oh, no, I’m not really a bigot” is not proving otherwise. You have to act and PROVE you’re not a bigot if you’re going to join a group with bigotry as a goal. These DON’T apply just to right wing groups. If you want to be a group of civil rights activists who hold up Susan B. Anthony as an idol, I’m going to get the fuck away from your group because that’s gross as hell due to her extreme racism, and throwing some people under the bus in favor of others. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2014, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/84 "2014-02-07T19:45:33Z")
Fuck, even _I_ can name one reasonable Republican, though she recently retired. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2014, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/85 "2014-02-07T21:21:42Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > So all Republicans are racist? Just the racist ones. But you can say the Republican Party is racist ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2014, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/86 "2014-02-07T22:09:10Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > So all Republicans are racist? We’re back to that again? One can agree that not all Republicans are racist, and the questions raised in the OP still remain open. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2014, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/87 "2014-02-07T22:28:43Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > But you can say the Republican Party is racist You can? This worries me, as a registered Republican. Can you provide the portion the current platform that advocates a view that humans can be divided in races with shared traits, that they can then be ranked as superior or inferior, or that members of different races should be treated differently? ---
**Author:** ![Karrius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/71c47a/32.png) [@Karrius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Karrius)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2014, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/88 "2014-02-07T23:46:17Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > I’m not **lance** , obviously, but as I (a decidedly non-prominent Republican) have come out against those things, I thought I’d give it a shot, in the person of Jon Huntsman. I knew about Jon Huntsman, however, I didn’t know he had come out against ALL of that - I expected him to only hit about half the list. I will apologize, and agree I was being too sweeping,. I do however want to point one thing out, quoted from wikipedia: > [@](#): > > A month after dropping out of the race, Huntsman offered the opinion that there was a need for a third party in America. In an appearance on the MSNBC talk show Morning Joe on February 23, 2012, Huntsman said that a third party would be a healthy development in the presidential election process. > > I think we’re going to have problems politically until we get some sort of third party movement or some voice out there that can put forth new ideas. Someone’s going to step up at some point and say we’ve had enough of this. The real issues are not being addressed and it’s time that we put forward an alternative vision, a bold thinking. We might not win, but we can certainly influence the debate. > > Huntsman said he was not throwing his own hat in the ring as a third party presidential candidate in 2012.[77] > > The Republican National Committee reacted by withdrawing an invitation for Huntsman to appear as a speaker at a Republican fundraiser in Palm Beach, Florida, in early March.[78] In early July, Huntsman announced that he would not be attending the 2012 Republican National Convention for the first time since he attended as a Reagan delegate in 1984. Huntsman issued a statement chiding the Republican Party for what he perceived as its failures to focus on the daunting socio-economic issues facing America. > > I will not be attending this year’s convention, nor any Republican convention in the future until the party focuses on a bigger, bolder, more confident future for the United States — a future based on problem solving, inclusiveness, and a willingness to address the trust deficit, which is every bit as corrosive as our fiscal and economic deficits. Dude doesn’t even want to show up to the republican conventions anymore and speaks to it with a “we”. It really feels like the only reason he’s still a republican anymore is that it doesn’t matter, due to him joining a non-partisan group. That does not bode well. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2014, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/89 "2014-02-08T02:02:21Z")
Sure, like myself, Huntsman will probably be leaving the Republicans if they don’t change. That’s to be expected, though, when you ask for someone who’s criticizing his fellow party members, it’s going to be a disaffected outsider. Thanks for reading and acknowledging that he’s a prominent Republican (for now) who has come out against all that stuff, though, it took a while to put together. ---
**Author:** ![j666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9de0a6/32.png) [@j666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/j666)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2014, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/90 "2014-02-08T02:04:44Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Challenge accepted, but I claim the right to firmly plant the goalposts before play begins: They don’t count if they’re so vague or innocuous that they might appear on either or any party’s platform. Has to be differentiating policy positions. Then we just debate over their value. Okay, opposition to beating puppies does not count. ---
**Author:** ![larryg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9d8465/32.png) [@larryg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/larryg)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2014, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/91 "2014-02-08T03:13:38Z")
Reagan’s supply side economics failed, Bush Sr’s trickle down economics failed, the George Bush tax cuts for the well off version of trickle down failed, but the Republican party still “believes” in the policies. The panama war was a joke, the nicaraguan war was a joke, the Afghan war failed in every aspect from capturing the Taliban to rebuilding ( except for the drug lords ), and the Iraqi war failed and costs are estimated to reach three trillion with disability claims, etc. Republicans still “believe” in those policies and decisions. What is the glue of the Republican party other than a belief that poor people are poor because they do not work, homosexuals are decadent ( Bush Jr ’ s winning issue), the militery solution is always best ? At what point do these blind beliefs become a character flaw? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2014, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/92 "2014-02-08T18:00:25Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Sure, like myself, Huntsman will probably be leaving the Republicans if they don’t change. That’s to be expected, though, when you ask for someone who’s criticizing his fellow party members, it’s going to be a disaffected outsider. > > Thanks for reading and acknowledging that he’s a prominent Republican (for now) who has come out against all that stuff, though, it took a while to put together. OTOH that is an example of “the exception that proves the rule”, IMHO there are still many moderate republicans and independents that are not aware of how extreme the current crop of Republicans is, they are now up to the point of disposing the few moderate ones or to make them irrelevant. Even when there is a need of reaching for minorities, crap like this is what we get from the group as a whole: > **[Wall Street Journal Whacks Boehner For Caving To ‘Talk-Radio’ On Immigration](https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/wall-street-journal-boehner-immigration-reform-talk-radio)** > > The conservative editorial page of the Wall Street Journal isn’t impressed with... > [@](#): > > Wall Street Journal Whacks Boehner For Caving To ‘Talk-Radio’ On Immigration > [@](#): > > After Boehner’s immigration pitch earlier this week was met with derision from conservatives, the Journal on Thursday highlighted the real reason for the punt. > > > [@](#): > > > > So great is the House GOP fear of a talk-radio backlash that it won’t even pass smaller bills that 75% of Republicans agree on. There will be nothing to codify the legal status of children of illegal immigrants who have lived here for decades. And no expanded green cards for foreign graduates of U.S. colleges, a policy Mitt Romney endorsed. And no cleaning up the work-visa morass that has obliged U.S. farmers to hire illegals to harvest their crops. > > And the Journal doesn’t buy the logic that Republicans should steer clear of the issue before this year’s midterms. > > > [@](#): > > > > Some Republicans who do want to vote for immigration reform say they don’t want to divide the party over such a contentious issue in an election year. Better to take this up in 2015, they say. But the opponents will raise the same furor whenever it comes up, and Democrats will be less likely to compromise figuring they can use the issue to drive minority voter turnout in 2016. So, it is not just party before country, but it is even the party that is altering the character that they claim to have. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/93 "2014-02-10T02:58:13Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > You can? This worries me, as a registered Republican. Can you provide the portion the current platform that advocates a view that humans can be divided in races with shared traits, that they can then be ranked as superior or inferior, or that members of different races should be treated differently? Yes, you should be worried that the party you belong to is unabashedly racist, has racists in its leadership positions, and cater to racists for votes. If you haven’t heard about their immigration policies, maybe you should read up ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/94 "2014-02-10T03:04:18Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Yes, you should be worried that the party you belong to is unabashedly racist, has racists in its leadership positions, and cater to racists for votes. If you haven’t heard about their immigration policies, maybe you should read up :dubious: [Please, point me to the racist parts.](http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/republican_party_immigration.htm) ETA: [Alternate source.](http://www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_Reforming/#Item11) ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/95 "2014-02-10T16:29:27Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Not really an applicable analogy; the **Democrat Party** at the time was fiercely internally divided on the issue. The only comparable division in today’s GOP is between the crazy and the not-crazy. WRT racism, nobody in today’s GOP is against it in the “We’ve got to do something about this!” sense, that’s a Democratic monopoly now. (my bold) I’m just going to use this as an example where someone unintentionally used a slur for the Democratic Party. That and the fact that doing so unintentionally is not a big deal. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/96 "2014-02-10T20:27:31Z")
Human Action, are you going to accept my evidence for racism? Of the scale of racism in post #6, which ones would you accept and which ones would you not? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/97 "2014-02-10T20:49:16Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Human Action, are you going to accept my evidence for racism? I must have overlooked the evidence. I asked you for the portion of the current Republican platform that advocates a view that humans can be divided in races with shared traits, that they can then be ranked as superior or inferior, or that members of different races should be treated differently. The closest you came to answering that in the subsequent post was a reference to immigration policy, so I asked what in the immigration policy was racist, to no avail. If you’re saying that the racism **doesn’t** appear in the party platform, including the immigration policy, but can be demonstrated in other ways, that’s fine, but you should say that, instead of shifting gears like this. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Of the scale of racism in post #6, which ones would you accept and which ones would you not? I’ll run through them, though some sort of firm definition of “racist” might be in order first. I gave one above, and will apply it unless you see fit to substitute a different one. > [@](#): > > When the majority of a group are of a particular bent (lets just use racists as the example) are racist and express it openly Nope. > [@](#): > > When the majority of a group are racists but don’t express it openly Well, if they don’t express it, it’s rather hard to know. > [@](#): > > When a plurality of a group are racist and open/are racist but don’t express it openly Same problem here. > [@](#): > > When an influential minority of a group are racist and open/are racist but don’t express it This one’s unclear, how can they be both openly racist and not expressing their racism? > [@](#): > > When the leadership that dictates group policy are racist and open/are racist but don’t express it Same issue. > [@](#): > > When some important faction of the group that needs to be placated and catered to in order for the group as a whole to achieve their goals are racist and open/are racist but don’t express it And again. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/98 "2014-02-10T22:34:01Z")
What I’m trying to do is avoid offering clearly racist behavior and attitudes by Republicans, and have you come out and say it doesn’t count, there’s not enough, etc. To me the evidence is clear, but to you, it may not be convincing. Just trying to figure out what you would deem acceptable evidence so we don’t go through this again 10 posts from now Anyways, it doesn’t look like you’d care for my evidence when you responded “Nope” to my contention that “When the majority of a group are of a particular bent (lets just use racists as the example) are racist and express it openly”. If racists are the majority, you still don’t call the group racist. I guess you are one of those all or nothing people, I’d have to prove 100% of the GOP are racists for you to even consider it. That’s a fight I’m not going to bother having because its impossible. I will, however, continue to refer to the GOP as a racist party because they are and you can continue to search for that elusive 100% confirmation ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/99 "2014-02-11T14:20:05Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > What I’m trying to do is avoid offering clearly racist behavior and attitudes by Republicans, and have you come out and say it doesn’t count, there’s not enough, etc. To me the evidence is clear, but to you, it may not be convincing. Just trying to figure out what you would deem acceptable evidence so we don’t go through this again 10 posts from now That’s sensible. I gave one possibility already: a party platform that advocates a view that humans can be divided in races with shared traits, that they can then be ranked as superior or inferior, or that members of different races should be treated differently. You seem to agree that there is a different between a racist organization, and an organization with racists in it, based on post #6. I submit that the Republican Party is the latter. While you seem to feel that some of their policies (such as immigration policy) is racist, (that is predicated on a a view that humans can be divided in races with shared traits, that they can then be ranked as superior or inferior, or that members of different races should be treated differently), that’s not at all self-evident. The policies of the Republican Party are not racist on their face, I invite you to show me otherwise. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Anyways, it doesn’t look like you’d care for my evidence when you responded “Nope” to my contention that “When the majority of a group are of a particular bent (lets just use racists as the example) are racist and express it openly”. If racists are the majority, you still don’t call the group racist. I guess you are one of those all or nothing people, I’d have to prove 100% of the GOP are racists for you to even consider it. That’s a fight I’m not going to bother having because its impossible. I will, however, continue to refer to the GOP as a racist party because they are and you can continue to search for that elusive 100% confirmation Oh, I must have misunderstood. “Nope” meant that that criterion didn’t apply to the Republican Party. On re-read, I see how that was unclear. My mistake. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677/100 "2014-02-11T16:40:23Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > That’s sensible. I gave one possibility already: a party platform that advocates a view that humans can be divided in races with shared traits, that they can then be ranked as superior or inferior, or that members of different races should be treated differently. Things need not be so clear cut as to specify distinctive lines between races. The fact that the GOP have demonized other races and held themselves up to be some model of American exceptionalism, given their history of division, their callous attitude towards minorities, proves to me that they are racists. They don’t have to come out and say “We believe the white race is superior to all others” for me to infer from their actions In fact, the party platform is the worst place to look for these divisions. While they may hate other races, they still want their votes and a platform speaks to a national public strategy more than individual members doing racist things in their own districts. > [@Human\_Action](#): > > You seem to agree that there is a different between a racist organization, and an organization with racists in it, based on post #6. I submit that the Republican Party is the latter. While you seem to feel that some of their policies (such as immigration policy) is racist, (that is predicated on a a view that humans can be divided in races with shared traits, that they can then be ranked as superior or inferior, or that members of different races should be treated differently), that’s not at all self-evident. The policies of the Republican Party are not racist on their face, I invite you to show me otherwise. And I believe that it is both, the GOP is both a racist organization and an organization with racists in it. My view isn’t predicated on your criteria of clear dividing lines between races but on policy, things they talk about, and the way they are exercising that power. You may disagree, but part of being racist can be subtle, like supporting a policy that disproportionately affects a race. Voter ID laws being pushed by the GOP is a huge part of that. You can say its targeted towards Democrats or the poor, but when a majority of those targeted are minorities, then its not an “or” issue, its an “and” issue, meaning the policies are not just politically motivated or racist, they are politically motivated AND racist Anyways, so that I don’t turn this post into a novel, there’s a wonderful little thread over in the Pit detailing all of the nakedly stupid ways the GOP has used their power. Browse any page there and you’ll find something racist. Pay especially close attention to how they treat Obama, especially when the subject of his birth or family comes up. Immigration is another one, the GOP can’t seem to talk about this without saying something racist about foreigners. Somebody has calves the size of cantaloupes and its not a white guy! Or maybe it was the time they “accidentally” claimed that Rosa Parks eliminated racism. Or the bumper sticker before the 2012 election that asked people to not “re-nig”. Or ask any GOP about welfare and see what race the example of a welfare taker is (or just ask Rick Santorum about his experience with lazy “blah” people). Or say “thug” and see who they point to as an example. Or how about the fake outrage over the not-so-new Knockout game perpetrated by black youths on vulnerable white people. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-what-extent-can-a-group-members-character-be-inferred-from-others/680677.md?page=6)