rolling "Is This Racist?" thread

^ agree

Again, you're assuming that most people will be alive to that crucial distinction instead of just hearing "RACISM!!!" and acting like it's all equally pernicious.

Not sure the kind of people you're talking about would be alive to the difference between 'racism', 'bigotry' and 'prejudice'. Had Abbott been called out for 'bigotry' against white people, would the reaction have been any different?

Not saying that there isn't a value to the idea of defining racism in terms of power structures but i am not sure what practical difference it's going to make in this context. White people with power claiming victim status illegitimately need to be set straight but the grievance isn't bound up in semantics.

There is a commonly accepted understanding of how racism operates (particularly in America today, but also wrt post-colonialism) that sees racism as being a tool of systemic control and supporting implicit hierarchies. Often when people talk about racism, this is what they are referring to. It is not controversial, I don't think, that there are numerous economic/political/social systems in place that either explicitly or implicitly discriminates against people of color. However, that doesn't mean that the word racism only refers to this understanding and has no other meaning. It also doesn't mean that racism against white people is impossible definitionally (even though, as many people have written on this thread, discussing racism against white people in America tends to be a way of eliding/avoiding actual racism in favor of scoring political points).

should I read this thread before I start trolling it

zach has been really clear that he cares about who defines words, no one has engaged him on that, this is boring now.

I meant to say - it's not controversial, I don't think, to acknowledge those structures. Obviously those structures themselves are very controversial. xp

the important thing here is that ppl who agree 99.8% with each other argue dictionary definitions while the TERRORISTS WIN

It's more that zach was saying that all racism is institutional or derived from it, and we were saying that the odd outliers do exist and there are other definitions (outside of validity in what WE THINK about how racism actually affects people) in play.

But yeah, you just said "in college," right? I don't think anyone has ever been racist against me, and I think the majority of "racism" against supposed white people is a prejudice supposing that the white person in question either holds racist beliefs or conforms to a certain profile and is not, in fact, racism.

I will say, it's amazingly alienating to have gone through a college experience where every black person I talked to when the subject came up, both student and faculty, followed Zach's definition, and then to see a bunch of white ppl 15+ years later being all "no no, people are racist against us too" on a messageboard.

if you are reading contenderizer's posts and coming off w/ this take I have no idea what to tell you other than maybe you should consider rereading them

frogbs otoh sure yeah nobody's defending frogbs

a prejudice supposing that the white person in question either holds racist beliefs or conforms to a certain profile and is not, in fact, racism.

Except that it is.

I think the institutional definition of racism is the most important to be addressed, but acknowledging that there's some variation in the use of the term is really an effective way to get people who are skeptical about the detrimental effects of society-level racism to accept that racism at the personal level comes from somewhere, and that it's endemic, and then you point to systemic racism and they understand that what they thought was only person is in fact the big picture.

um, in fewer words:

Racism in your face is really just the local version of racism all over the place

thanks, I'll be here all night

It is not controversial, I don't think, that there are numerous economic/political/social systems in place that either explicitly or implicitly discriminates against people of color. However, that doesn't mean that the word racism only refers to this understanding and has no other meaning. It also doesn't mean that racism against white people is impossible definitionally (even though, as many people have written on this thread, discussing racism against white people in America tends to be a way of eliding/avoiding actual racism in favor of scoring political points).

― Mordy, Friday, January 27, 2012 11:05 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

mordy OTM

and then to see a bunch of white ppl 15+ years later being all "no no, people are racist against us too" on a messageboard.

lol

tbf, people have been racist *in my favor* my entire life, thinking that I am somehow more capable of doing things because I'm white

cosign. i'm aware as a straight white guy that i've been granted tons of breaks i haven't earned and that anyone else would likely have been denied.

Mostly, this was the internet.

FIN

funny thing about all this is that i do generally agree with zachylon's underlying point. it's at least worth considering the idea that the establishment of "official definitions" might be inseparable from the social mechanisms by which existing power structures perpetuate themselves. it seems reasonable to suggest that the seeming objectivity of texts like newspapers and dictionaries might be complicit in the means by which institutional power presents itself as normalcy. was attempting to make precisely this point in the pitchfork thread the other day (and clashing with iatee as a result).

nevertheless, i think that the attempts to redefine and restrict the usage of "racism" are misguided. [shrug]

The clash in this thread in this thread, as I have read it, boils down to defining racism very broadly and purely as an idea, or defining it with greater reference to how it is propagated and experienced. The white ppl tend to go with the first, while non-whites have a much stronger affinity for the latter.

Both approaches have some validity. The experience of racism predates the term and obviously belongs to those who suffer under it, but its modern form and the term itself were invented by white ppl, so we feel a somewhat proprietary interest in its definition.

Wait - is zachlyon black?

funny thing about all this is that i do generally agree with zachylon's underlying point. it's at least worth considering the idea that the establishment of "official definitions" might be inseparable from the social mechanisms by which existing power structures perpetuate themselves. it seems reasonable to suggest that the seeming objectivity of texts like newspapers and dictionaries might be complicit in the means by which institutional power presents itself as normalcy. was attempting to make precisely this point in the pitchfork thread the other day (and clashing with iatee as a result).

nevertheless, i think that the attempts to redefine and restrict the usage of "racism" are misguided. (shrug)

― his hands are a dirty fountain through which lives spurt (contenderizer), Friday, January 27, 2012 11:31 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

jesus christ ur a wormy motherfucker

zach so obviously otm. hilarious to see so many shlubby whitetards cry about the ways it may be possible if they can just fly away w their imaginations they can be racised against.

Matt P, are you a little illiterate?

shlubby whitetards

u ____ist

He's certainly cranky, at the very least.

a lot illiterate, just did a lot of sb-ing, now i'm a lot done with this thread but your book recommendation above looks a lot good mordy, i'll have to practice being illiterate with it some time. xp

the important thing here is that ppl who agree 99.8% with each other argue dictionary definitions while the TERRORISTS WIN

Terrorists would've won anyway, dude.

did you sb me, Matt P?

The clash in this thread in this thread, as I have read it, boils down to defining racism very broadly and purely as an idea, or defining it with greater reference to how it is propagated and experienced. The white ppl tend to go with the first, while non-whites have a much stronger affinity for the latter.

― Aimless, Friday, January 27, 2012 11:32 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

making this into a race thing in such cut-and-dried terms strikes me as absurdly presumptive (and horribly counter-productive besides). are we really so certain that most people of color people share a common definition of the term? asians, non-white hispanics, native americans, etc? can we say with any confidence that they collectively agree that only people who enjoy a significant social power advantage can be racist? i kind of doubt it. i've known many people of color to complain about the racism of other people of color.

Still waiting to hear frogbs' times when racism is not harmful.

among friends, talking shit to each other?

I mean there's a permeating attitude around here that says "anytime you use a stereotype or put down someone based on their culture, then you are a racist, and racism is always wrong and hurtful", which is okay in theory, but in practice this kind of shit happens all the time. Obviously this discussion has turned a bit but I wasn't a fan of how nobody tries to distinguish between things that are actually harmful and demonstrate our culture divide vs. someone making a joke in bad taste without any real malicious intent, kind of implying that it's all equally bad

well if u ever come back maybe u can c/p a post that shows shlubby whitetards cry about the ways it may be possible if they can just fly away w their imaginations they can be racised against.

eh that's basically every contenderizer post itt?

making this into a race thing in such cut-and-dried terms strikes me as absurdly presumptive (and horribly counter-productive besides). are we really so certain that most people of color people share a common definition of the term? asians, non-white hispanics, native americans, etc? can we say with any confidence that they collectively agree that only people who enjoy a significant social power advantage can be racist? i kind of doubt it. i've known many people of color to complain about the racism of other people of color.

― his hands are a dirty fountain through which lives spurt (contenderizer), Friday, January 27, 2012 11:44 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Mostly, I blame myself - I didn't manage to contribute to the last funds drive, and I understand that stet was just under the level where he was going to write that filter, the one where you can write [racist1] and [racist2], and depending on your setting you see them as "institutionally racist"/"racist" and "racist"/"bigoted".

so absurdly presumptive

Ah, you are a little illiterate.

fuck off limey

what exactly is at stake for you, Matt, with racism ONLY referring to institutional racism or also referring to the concept of judging/stereotyping ppl based on their race? why does the latter become a weasely way for white ppl to imagine racism against them, but the first definition is the legit one?

lol @ asking Matt this and not me when I made the same post with less swearing an hour ago

you should probably answer then. *steams off*

jesus christ ur a wormy motherfucker...

zach so obviously otm. hilarious to see so many shlubby whitetards cry about the ways it may be possible if they can just fly away w their imaginations they can be racised against.

― try again, fascist (Matt P), Friday, January 27, 2012 11:37 AM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

just because i agree in principle with an idea doesn't mean that i have to see equal merit in every application of that idea. i've tried to articulate a fairly complex response ITT.

the immediate and idiotic recourse to cheap playground shaming isn't worth responding to, so...

Your mistake was not swearing tbh xps

I'm okay with anyone answering it. Also, maybe explain what you see as the meaning of the term 'institutional?' Are all of these things examples of institutional racism?
1. A belief in the racial superiority of people on your own race
2. Not hiring qualified POC bc you believe they aren't as intelligent as non-POC
3. Crafting drug policy that targets particular people of color
4. Beating someone up bc you don't like what race they come from
5. Believing that people have different strengths and weaknesses because they belong to an inherent racial category
etc etc

I think they're all examples of racism, but I don't get necessarily what makes them all institutional. Certainly some might have systemic qualities (particularly #3) but racism is not always an institutional conspiracy, I don't think. Maybe it is -- but what do we gain from believing that?

Kind of remembering the battle between black customers and Korean convenience store/bodega owners documented in early 90s LA that didn't need white people to tell each group how to be racist

but its modern form and the term itself were invented by white ppl, so we feel a somewhat proprietary interest in its definition.

Please direct all your "ask a white man" questions to Aimless.

Does a thread exist for the movie Crash?

eh that's basically every contenderizer post itt?

― try again, fascist (Matt P), Friday, January 27, 2012 11:45 AM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

horseshit. nowhere in this thread have i made a big, weeping deal about the ability of white people to be racised against. i've gone much farther out of my way to condemn white complaints of "reverse racism".

i feel like i'm being taken to task by an idiot with an axe to grind.

Well, I don't think it has to be a "conspiracy" for it to be institutional (although it certainly can be). I'm sure many of the roots of institutional racism are learned, just as with personal, bigotted racism.