Is Racism an overused term?

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me

Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#1  Postby Philosch » March 2nd, 2017, 5:59 pm

Racism is becoming a grossly over used term nowadays. For instance the so called Muslim band I have heard described as racist when clearly Muslim is not a race. That's a relatively easy case to spot. Let's take the case of Trump saying that a Judge of Mexican decent would probably rule against him in a case where the plaintiffs were Mexican. Is this a racist statement?
The definition of racism is something like the following: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

So now using that definition, is the above statement by Trump racism? I'm going to make the case that it's not. His statement maybe be boorish, may be pompous, may be denigrating to the judge calling into question his impartiality and may even be even liable or slander in some cases but it's not racism. Trump's statement might even be considered rational from one perspective, it's actually quite reasonable to assume that a human being will side with one group he's more closely linked than another. Trump does not say that he is somehow superior to the judge because of the judges race. He does not say the judge is inferior or in anyway not as capable of judging as a white judge. Those would clearly be racist statements by the above definition.

Here's why people get confused on this issue. The man says something that's derogatory about another person and in the same sentence the other's person's race is mentioned, therefore regardless of wording, sentence structure or intent, it's a racist statement. I assure you this is just laziness on the part of the reader. Trump's statement about the judge is truly insulting and the judge in question has every right to be upset that his integrity as a judge has been called in to question. Trump should have apologized for certain. But none of that makes what he said a racist statement, it's a stupid statement but not a racist one. There are countless other examples of this in todays public discourse.

This is important because as more and more decisiveness wells up in society, we need to be very clear about what these labels mean. True racism that's based on a belief in the superiority of one race over another is an extremely bad thing. But we need to be able to have constructive disagreements and discussions about culture and politics that don't get mired and side tracked by accusations of racism being thrown around which are intended to immediately discredit someone who may have a perfectly defensible and important point of view.

Since I'm white should I have been disqualified from commenting on a policy decision by president Obama? Can we not have a proper discussion of immigration and national security or on terrorism having to do with a particular extreme religious point of view without the water being muddied with racism accusations? This is a big problem that needs addressing. It allows true racism to abide and maintain itself hidden in the shadows.
Philosch
 
Posts: 407 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 25th, 2012, 3:42 pm

Is Racism an overused term?



Become a member for less ads

Already a member? Login
 

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#2  Postby Ranvier » March 3rd, 2017, 11:24 pm

This is a complex topic that may only superficially appear relate to race. I would have to look up a particular psychology study, I don't recall at the moment where I found it, where the experiment involved a white man in the elevator. At one time this Caucasian man was dressed as a biker, with leather jacket and leather pants with extensive Tattoos (fake) on hands, neck, and face. Needless to say he was made to appear "threatening" by all the stigma associated with bikers. Women, one at a time, were allowed to join the "biker" on the elevator with cameras recording their behavior. Guess where most women stood in the elevator? It turns out that some women did not get onto the elevator at all but those that did stood in the corner behind the "biker"with dominant hand exposed but protecting the back and the weaker side. At another time, the same man was dressed in expensive suit and tie with clean haircut. Similarly, women were allowed on the elevator one at a time but this time women stood right next to the "businessman". The conclusion is that we are evolutionarily programmed to assess the danger from experience and knowledge.

Racism is an unjustified prejudice towards a specific group of people without the presence of perceivable immediate danger. However, it's more politically correct or even easier to visualize such prejudice, when an employer chooses out of three candidates an Asian American for an IT position. This is an inherent human nature as the study had demonstrated. The judge described in your OP and referenced by President Tramp could be upheld by such crude description but he couldn't be able to prove to be slanderous given the ratio of Black and Hispanic man in prison system vs White. Then we would have to discuss the political agendas and the methods of verbal and none verbal communication methods used to achieve specific goals. We would have to further discuss the current silliness in political correctness that is actively assaulted by Trump within his political agenda and the power of manipulation using stereotypes.

Generally I would say this: Whenever one uses labels to describe someone (homophobe, racist, or sexist), it's a personal attack and not the means to address the wrong doing of someone's behavior or actions.
User avatar
Ranvier
 
Posts: 538 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: February 12th, 2017, 1:47 pm
Location: USA

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#3  Postby Philosch » March 4th, 2017, 12:58 am

I don't disagree. Sometimes it can be racism in disguise as well. But sometimes it's just bad form or some other form of ignorance and we do a disservice to call it racism all the time. If everyone is a racist then how bad is racism? Real honest to goodness racism is insidious and should be called out. As you pointed out racism is "unjustified prejudice" verses perfectly rational discrimination (as in recognition not the pejorative use of discrimination) of a threat. There's a difference between profiling and racism. Words have meanings and appropriate usage. By over using terms we undermine them. That's my real point. The above example you give is not racism but it's rational discrimination based on appearance. It may not be fair in some sense and it may not even be accurate in a particular case but statistically it might be justifiable, I don't really know.
Philosch
 
Posts: 407 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 25th, 2012, 3:42 pm

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#4  Postby Ranvier » March 4th, 2017, 2:58 am

I completely agree with you, although when calling out racists, I would like to find out and help them change their reality that causes them to be racist. People that are comfortable in their life and with who they are, rarely demonstrate extreme behavior (anger or hate) or ideology.

-- Updated March 4th, 2017, 3:04 am to add the following --

I'd ask them: "tell me what really troubles you?"
User avatar
Ranvier
 
Posts: 538 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: February 12th, 2017, 1:47 pm
Location: USA

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#5  Postby LuckyR » March 5th, 2017, 1:47 pm

While it is true that the specific term "racism" is used where bigotry or discrimination would be more accurate, like it or not the term actually communicates the true message of what the speaker is trying to get across, most of the time.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
LuckyR
 
Posts: 2259 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#6  Postby Philosch » March 5th, 2017, 7:45 pm

LuckyR wrote:While it is true that the specific term "racism" is used where bigotry or discrimination would be more accurate, like it or not the term actually communicates the true message of what the speaker is trying to get across, most of the time.


Well I completely disagree hence why I posted what I posted. If someone is displaying bigotry then I would say the racism label was acceptable. My point was that it is over used where words like ignorance or callousness would suffice. Besides your sentence doesn't seem internally consistent....on the one hand you say other words would be more accurate and then you say like it or not the term actually is close to the true intention of the speaker? Which is it? Is racism a properly used accurate term or not in your opinion? In the story about the Mexican judge and Trump, is that racism by the given definition or not? My argument is that it is not but if you think it is explain it?

-- Updated March 5th, 2017, 7:47 pm to add the following --

Ranvier wrote:I completely agree with you, although when calling out racists, I would like to find out and help them change their reality that causes them to be racist. People that are comfortable in their life and with who they are, rarely demonstrate extreme behavior (anger or hate) or ideology.

-- Updated March 4th, 2017, 3:04 am to add the following --

I'd ask them: "tell me what really troubles you?"


Yeah, sometimes what appears to be racism is really cultural ignorance as apposed to a true belief in racial superiority.
Philosch
 
Posts: 407 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 25th, 2012, 3:42 pm

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#7  Postby Fooloso4 » March 5th, 2017, 8:26 pm

Philosch:

Racism is becoming a grossly over used term nowadays. For instance the so called Muslim band I have heard described as racist when clearly Muslim is not a race.


The meaning of words change. Consider, for example, the term ‘anti-Semitic’. Not all Jews are of Semitic heritage, Arabs who are themselves of Semitic heritage who are hostile to Jews are called anti-Semitic, but someone who is hostile to Arabs is not thereby labeled anti-Semitic.

Muslim does not define a race, but:

The United States Supreme Court unanimously held that "race" is not limited to Census designations on the "race question" but extends to all ethnicities … Wiki “Race and ethnicity in the United States”


and Muslim is an appropriate ethnic identification.

In addition, the meaning is no longer limited to claims of superiority or inferiority, but rather bias based on race/ethnicity.

Let's take the case of Trump saying that a Judge of Mexican decent would probably rule against him in a case where the plaintiffs were Mexican. Is this a racist statement?


Yes. He is claiming that the judge would determine the case based on race. One could say that Trump accused the judge of racial bias and one could say that Trump himself was guilty of racial bias because he maintained that race would be the determining factor.

Trump's statement might even be considered rational from one perspective, it's actually quite reasonable to assume that a human being will side with one group he's more closely linked than another.


Should judges be assigned based on the race/ethnicity of the plaintiff or defendant? Some of us believe it is possible for a judge to judge based on the merits of the case, unless there is evidence that a particular judge sides with those of like descent in a significant number of cases where the evidence does not support the judgment.

The man says something that's derogatory about another person and in the same sentence the other's person's race is mentioned …


But that is not what happened here. Trump’s claim was that because the judge was Mexican he would be biased in favor of Mexicans. The claim was that the case would be decided on race. If race is made an issue then it is racist.
Fooloso4
Moderator
 
Posts: 2668 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#8  Postby LuckyR » March 5th, 2017, 9:50 pm

Philosch wrote:
LuckyR wrote:While it is true that the specific term "racism" is used where bigotry or discrimination would be more accurate, like it or not the term actually communicates the true message of what the speaker is trying to get across, most of the time.


Well I completely disagree hence why I posted what I posted. If someone is displaying bigotry then I would say the racism label was acceptable. My point was that it is over used where words like ignorance or callousness would suffice. Besides your sentence doesn't seem internally consistent....on the one hand you say other words would be more accurate and then you say like it or not the term actually is close to the true intention of the speaker? Which is it? Is racism a properly used accurate term or not in your opinion? In the story about the Mexican judge and Trump, is that racism by the given definition or not? My argument is that it is not but if you think it is explain it?




The Trump/judge situation is a perfect example of what I am describing. The actual situation does NOT state implicitly that the Orange one feels that people of Mexican heritage are specifically inferior to him. So by your definition the comment is not racist. OK, I can buy that and if this was the Lexographic Forum, then the issue would be solved. However, while I don't know the Orange one personally, I am exceedingly familiar with the rich, privileged and entitled-feeling, soft white boy type of his generation. So the dude is racist and his racism fueled his comment (which is itself NOT racist, by your stipulated definition). Thus calling his comment racist (incorrectly) actually gets across the essence of the speaker and his message even though both lie outside the exact words of his comment.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
LuckyR
 
Posts: 2259 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#9  Postby Philosch » March 5th, 2017, 10:38 pm

LuckyR wrote:
Philosch wrote:(Nested quote removed.)


Well I completely disagree hence why I posted what I posted. If someone is displaying bigotry then I would say the racism label was acceptable. My point was that it is over used where words like ignorance or callousness would suffice. Besides your sentence doesn't seem internally consistent....on the one hand you say other words would be more accurate and then you say like it or not the term actually is close to the true intention of the speaker? Which is it? Is racism a properly used accurate term or not in your opinion? In the story about the Mexican judge and Trump, is that racism by the given definition or not? My argument is that it is not but if you think it is explain it?




The Trump/judge situation is a perfect example of what I am describing. The actual situation does NOT state implicitly that the Orange one feels that people of Mexican heritage are specifically inferior to him. So by your definition the comment is not racist. OK, I can buy that and if this was the Lexographic Forum, then the issue would be solved. However, while I don't know the Orange one personally, I am exceedingly familiar with the rich, privileged and entitled-feeling, soft white boy type of his generation. So the dude is racist and his racism fueled his comment (which is itself NOT racist, by your stipulated definition). Thus calling his comment racist (incorrectly) actually gets across the essence of the speaker and his message even though both lie outside the exact words of his comment.


Wow, so even though you don't know him personally, you know his "type" and so therefore you declare him to be a racist. Very interesting. Sounds an awful lot like a bigoted comment to me. The "Orange One, soft white boy type " are you serious? You are making my point. I'm certainly no Trump supporter, only used that story because of the blatant hatred and demonization of the guy. He may even be worthy of demonization, even if his is rich, feels privileged and entitled, those would be characteristics you could assign to him. Those things are not racist characteristics however, so it must be nice to be you, someone who can just declare people of a certain disposition to be racist, not with evidence, just because YOU know the type. You are exactly the kind of judgmental person I was trying to reach with this post. Call him a moron if he acts moronic, call him a misogynist if he belittles and degrades women, call him a racist when he discriminates against someone because of their race. Don't just throw out the racist label because "you know" the type, makes you sound completely ignorant, actually makes you sound guilty of the same type of closed minded certainty a racist would be guilty of. What you have stated is that the end justifies the means. Calling his comment racist was incorrect but that's okay because everybody (or at least you) already knows he's a racist. You cannot seriously justify that reasoning.

-- Updated March 5th, 2017, 11:41 pm to add the following --

Fooloso4 wrote:Philosch:

Racism is becoming a grossly over used term nowadays. For instance the so called Muslim band I have heard described as racist when clearly Muslim is not a race.


The meaning of words change. Consider, for example, the term ‘anti-Semitic’. Not all Jews are of Semitic heritage, Arabs who are themselves of Semitic heritage who are hostile to Jews are called anti-Semitic, but someone who is hostile to Arabs is not thereby labeled anti-Semitic.

Muslim does not define a race, but:

The United States Supreme Court unanimously held that "race" is not limited to Census designations on the "race question" but extends to all ethnicities … Wiki “Race and ethnicity in the United States”


and Muslim is an appropriate ethnic identification.

In addition, the meaning is no longer limited to claims of superiority or inferiority, but rather bias based on race/ethnicity.

Let's take the case of Trump saying that a Judge of Mexican decent would probably rule against him in a case where the plaintiffs were Mexican. Is this a racist statement?


Yes. He is claiming that the judge would determine the case based on race. One could say that Trump accused the judge of racial bias and one could say that Trump himself was guilty of racial bias because he maintained that race would be the determining factor.

Trump's statement might even be considered rational from one perspective, it's actually quite reasonable to assume that a human being will side with one group he's more closely linked than another.


Should judges be assigned based on the race/ethnicity of the plaintiff or defendant? Some of us believe it is possible for a judge to judge based on the merits of the case, unless there is evidence that a particular judge sides with those of like descent in a significant number of cases where the evidence does not support the judgment.

The man says something that's derogatory about another person and in the same sentence the other's person's race is mentioned …


But that is not what happened here. Trump’s claim was that because the judge was Mexican he would be biased in favor of Mexicans. The claim was that the case would be decided on race. If race is made an issue then it is racist.


So by the logic of your entire response, anytime someone says someone else is racist because of their race, the person making the claim is racist as well yes? In terms of words and their meanings changing over time, I don't disagree that this sort of thing happens, I just think that it's a problem. If almost everybody will be considered a racist before too long then what does the word really mean? My point was it is an over used label. I just don't agree that it's a racist comment simply because race was mentioned. I don't care that the popular culture has been pushing the word and expanding it's meaning. The fact that a court actually allows the meaning of legal definitions to slide and expand over time based on the popular culture's usage is an even bigger problem. I don't doubt that it happens, I just think it's a huge mistake.

I know that he was claiming the judge was going to be biased because he was a Mexican. That means he is calling the judges impartiality into question as I stated. So his comment is certainly insulting and degrading, he should've clearly apologized. But it should only be racist if he then claimed that only Mexican judges have this problem, white judges are better at being unbiased. Then I would apply the racist label. It's all about labeling people with derogatory labels which seek to automatically invalidate anything else they may say. Just because I assume someone will be biased against me because of what group or race they belong to doesn't make me racist. it may make me ignorant but not necessarily racist.

Trump's statement might even be considered rational from one perspective, it's actually quite reasonable to assume that a human being will side with one group he's more closely linked than another.


Should judges be assigned based on the race/ethnicity of the plaintiff or defendant? Some of us believe it is possible for a judge to judge based on the merits of the case, unless there is evidence that a particular judge sides with those of like descent in a significant number of cases where the evidence does not support the judgment.


Don't mischaracterize my post here, I said the statement may be rational from one perspective. We should certainly not select judges based on race. However I might point out that juries are supposed to be selected with some sense of commonality with the accused in criminal cases in order to safe guard against prejudices of race, social status and even gender. There are also statistics kept on judges to score their impartiality so to speak, so the fear of partiality based on race and other factors is not irrational or they wouldn't bother to keep track. Is a black teenager in a court down Mississippi a racist if he complains that the jury and judge are all white men in their 50's? No, he is being quite rational is he not?

Remember I'm not defending Trump's comment, I think his comment was abhorrent, I'm just concerned that labeling everything as racism is a "cry wolf" scenario.
Philosch
 
Posts: 407 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 25th, 2012, 3:42 pm

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#10  Postby Togo1 » March 6th, 2017, 2:38 pm

I think anyone who arrests over a hundred people on the basis that they belonged to a particular ethnic group is fairly safe to call racist, however you define the term.

But I think it's teh definition that's causing you trouble here. Time was when racism was basically just if you didn't like people from certain ethnic minorities. That was a pretty useless definition because you had to claim to know someone's mind, which isn't really possible. Thus noone could be called racist, and it was just a term of abuse.

Times have moved on. The key point to calling something racist nowadays is two components. a) the exercise of power over them, in b) a manner that descriminates by race. So the KKK, who claim to be a traditional community support group who want to protect their community, something that _just happens_ to involve the odd lynching of Black folk, are racist. Not because they secretly hate Black people, but because they go around harrassing and even killing them. We don't actually know how the feel about Blacks, and it doesn't matter what they think or feel. They're still racist, because they exercise power in a descriminatory fashion.

This is a far more useful definition, because it means we don't need to worry about the guy who mutters about hating Black people - he's as descriminatory as all get out but he has no power, so we don't really care. Similarly, the guy in social services who makes housing decisions and doesn't really like people who are ethnically different from him isn't an issue, provided it doesn't interfere with his job. The point is not how people think, or feel, or what they believe, What matters is what they do.

Of course, racists *hate* this change, because they've been hiding behind the 'private thoughts' exclusion clause for years, claiming that because they don't hate Blacks in their heart of hearts, they can't possibly be racist. They just want seperate drinking fountains because they think it's for the best. Awww... bless. I ran into one guy who literally wanted ethnic minorities to be loaded into cargo containers in chains, and mailed to what ever country he felt they belonged in. But he wasn't racist, he said, because he honestly thought they'd be happier in the long run.

So, now that's the definition sorted out, back to Trump. Racist? Yes, of course he is. He dismissed a judge's impartality explicitly because he was a member of an ethnic minority, he locked up people in airports around the country on the basis of their ethnic identity, even though they had committed no crime and had a legal right to be there. And so on. We don't actually know what his beliefs about various ethnic groups are, we don't know what his feelings are, and we don't know his full motivations. And that doesn't matter. We know he's racist because of his actions. That's all we need.
Togo1
 
Posts: 494 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: September 23rd, 2015, 9:52 am

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#11  Postby Philosch » March 6th, 2017, 7:00 pm

So, now that's the definition sorted out, back to Trump. Racist? Yes, of course he is. He dismissed a judge's impartality explicitly because he was a member of an ethnic minority, he locked up people in airports around the country on the basis of their ethnic identity, even though they had committed no crime and had a legal right to be there. And so on. We don't actually know what his beliefs about various ethnic groups are, we don't know what his feelings are, and we don't know his full motivations. And that doesn't matter. We know he's racist because of his actions. That's all we need.


And so here we go again. I made my point quite clearly about his claim towards the judge. He didn't have people in airports locked up because of their ethnicity, it was supposed to be a ban based on national origins. Now others claim it was a "Muslim" ban which of course is a religious test so you are just not accurate either way. Whether the ban was ill advised or not you are spewing the same stuff as the last Trump hater. You admit you don't know whether he has any feelings about this or that ethnic group and yet try to claim you can call him a racist based on actions that had nothing to do with race but rather nationality. Why, because it's just clear to you that anyone so arrogant and insensitive is quite obviously a racist. His actions through out his lifetime do not jive with someone who has been a racist but whatever, you stick to your story and further the cause of people who want to create more division. He's a bumbling spoiled rich narcissist, I have no problem saying that. But throwing the racist claim around is just nonsense. Now if you can find an example of actions that were racially motivated I'll accept your claim.

It's okay, I'll withdraw the Trump story because Trump haters can't seem to get passed it. The point of my post was not to defend Trump, it was to challenge the over use of the term. I'll refer you to Sam Harris who in several of his podcasts has addressed this issue more eloquently than I. He is certainly no Trump supporter. He is on no uncertain terms a Trump hater. But he points out that by labeling all these actions and stories about anyone who challenges any group of people for whatever reason, as racist is a huge mistake. He(Sam Harris) has been called a racist because he criticizes radical Islam which is neither a race or nationality but rather a religion that's currently reeking havoc on a global scale. Doesn't matter because once you are labeled a racist by people who could care less about what the word means, there is no need to pay any attention to what that person says going forward.
Philosch
 
Posts: 407 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 25th, 2012, 3:42 pm

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#12  Postby Fooloso4 » March 6th, 2017, 7:17 pm

On December 7th, 2015, Trump called for a “total and complete shutdown of the entry of Muslims to the United States.”

Trump surrogate Rudy Giuliani told Fox News in an interview that Trump called him and asked him how to legally implement his proposed Muslim ban when he first announced it.

“I’ll tell you the whole history of it: When he first announced it, he said ‘Muslim ban,’” Giuliani said on Fox News. “He called me up, he said, ‘Put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally.’”

In a March 2016 CNN interview, there was this exchange between Trump and host Anderson Cooper -- Cooper: "I guess the question is, is there a war between the west and radical Islam or between the west and Islam itself?" Trump: "Well, it's radical, but it's very hard to define. It's very hard to separate because you don't know who is who."

In June 2016, after a terrorist attack in Orlando, Fla., Trump reiterated his call for a temporary Muslim ban, saying in a speech: "I called for a ban after San Bernardino, and was met with great scorn and anger, but now many are saying I was right to do so." But he also said he would suspend immigration from areas "where there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies."
Fooloso4
Moderator
 
Posts: 2668 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#13  Postby Philosch » March 6th, 2017, 7:55 pm

Fooloso4 wrote:On December 7th, 2015, Trump called for a “total and complete shutdown of the entry of Muslims to the United States.”

Trump surrogate Rudy Giuliani told Fox News in an interview that Trump called him and asked him how to legally implement his proposed Muslim ban when he first announced it.

“I’ll tell you the whole history of it: When he first announced it, he said ‘Muslim ban,’” Giuliani said on Fox News. “He called me up, he said, ‘Put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally.’”

In a March 2016 CNN interview, there was this exchange between Trump and host Anderson Cooper -- Cooper: "I guess the question is, is there a war between the west and radical Islam or between the west and Islam itself?" Trump: "Well, it's radical, but it's very hard to define. It's very hard to separate because you don't know who is who."

In June 2016, after a terrorist attack in Orlando, Fla., Trump reiterated his call for a temporary Muslim ban, saying in a speech: "I called for a ban after San Bernardino, and was met with great scorn and anger, but now many are saying I was right to do so." But he also said he would suspend immigration from areas "where there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies."


And so what.

Muslim does not define a race, but:

The United States Supreme Court unanimously held that "race" is not limited to Census designations on the "race question" but extends to all ethnicities … Wiki “Race and ethnicity in the United States”

and Muslim is an appropriate ethnic identification.


Muslim is not an appropriate ethnic designation in my view, it is a religious one. Period and end of story. Nothing in the above excerpt dissuades my argument. It's not about Trump and if you read my last post prior to this one you will see that I withdraw the Trump story as Trump haters can't let go of it. In any event stopping people from certain countries (Clearly if you could prove Muslim was an ethnicity you would then have the problem of explaining why 85% of the world's Muslims weren't included) until such time as they can be assured of their intentions, even if such a ban is found to be ill conceived and worthless to it's own case, you couldn't assign "RACISM" as the driving motivation. Ignorance perhaps, over zealousness perhaps, other terms even more appropriate, but you can't make the case it's racism. Look through Sam Harris' podcasts and you will understand what I'm getting at.
Philosch
 
Posts: 407 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 25th, 2012, 3:42 pm

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#14  Postby Fooloso4 » March 6th, 2017, 11:06 pm

Philosch:

And so what.


It shows that Trump’s intent was to ban Muslims, but when he realized that would not work he targeted countries that are predominantly Muslim.

Muslim is not an appropriate ethnic designation in my view, it is a religious one.



You are looking at this backwards. It is the racist’s own “kind” that is the determining factor, not whether they have correctly identified either themselves or those they oppose by race, ethnicity, or even geographical location, as the recent murder of Indian men told to “go back to your own country” shows. Racism as the term is now used is not simply a matter of racial identity. Pointing out that the term is not correctly used in accord with racial distinction is disingenuous and avoids rather than addresses the real issue.
Fooloso4
Moderator
 
Posts: 2668 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Is Racism an overused term?

Post Number:#15  Postby Philosch » March 7th, 2017, 12:54 am

Fooloso4 wrote:Philosch:

And so what.


It shows that Trump’s intent was to ban Muslims, but when he realized that would not work he targeted countries that are predominantly Muslim.

Muslim is not an appropriate ethnic designation in my view, it is a religious one.


You are looking at this backwards. It is the racist’s own “kind” that is the determining factor, not whether they have correctly identified either themselves or those they oppose by race, ethnicity, or even geographical location, as the recent murder of Indian men told to “go back to your own country” shows. Racism as the term is now used is not simply a matter of racial identity. Pointing out that the term is not correctly used in accord with racial distinction is disingenuous and avoids rather than addresses the real issue.


Ah you just are missing my point, for the last time this isn't about Trump. I just don't agree with the use of the term in this and many other cases. We shall have to agree to disagree. Even if his intent was to ban all Muslims from every country as a well thought out plot, it would have been a temporary situation. I don't believe for one second that him saying he wanted to ban all Muslims was a serious thought and nothing more then campaign rhetoric. He may have clearly been over reacting to the global terrorist situation, he may have been pandering to fear but that still does not prove racist intent. Banning Muslims from the countries in question is not irrational even if it is not a well thought out response to the terrorist situation.

Because you and others believe due to his poor rhetorical style that somehow proves his intent and you can judge him to be a racist and I think you are wrong to do so. I'm sure I can find instances where Trump says he respects and believes legal immigration is vital to the country but your own prejudice and bias will likely cause you to say that it's just him saying what he thinks people want to hear or covering up his true evil racist intent. If you believe his attempt to ban Muslims until such time that they could be properly vetted (whether they were already being properly vetted or not lets assume they weren't) is an act of racism then we have nothing further to discuss. The fact is you despise him and so you want to call him a racist, so be it. Also racism is not necessarily a component of nationalism run amok. As far as psycho's killing those Indians, they may have indeed been racist but they are just as much an outlier as other terrorist acts have been in this country. Yep, can't say a word about limiting immigration or having a secure border in anyway or you are a racist xenophobe and you are lumped in with murdering thugs, I think I got it.

I don't agree with your opinion and you don't agree with mine and that's ok. You continue to call whomever you want a racist. I believe strongly that the over use and improper use of the term threatens us and weakens our ability to have necessary critical discourse about such matters like immigration as well as many other cultural and political issues. It creates further division. If you would listen to Mr. Harris, he does a much better job with this point. I give up.
Philosch
 
Posts: 407 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 25th, 2012, 3:42 pm

Next

Return to Philosophy of Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Philosophy Trophies

Most Active Members
by posts made in lasts 30 days

Avatar Member Name Recent Posts
Greta 162
Fooloso4 116
Renee 107
Ormond 97
Felix 90

Last updated January 6, 2017, 6:28 pm EST

Most Active Book of the Month Participants
by book of the month posts

Avatar Member Name BOTM Posts
Scott 147
Spectrum 23
Belinda 23
whitetrshsoldier 20
Josefina1110 19
Last updated January 6, 2017, 6:28 pm EST