Philosch wrote:Yeah I think you stated what I was getting at a little better then I did. Other posters will have you believe the religious vs racial distinction is irrelevant as is the intent of the ban, the only thing that matters is that a whole bunch of brown people were locked up so therefore it's racist.
Well if it's almost entirely brown people, then yeah, that would be racist. I'm not sure why you regard this as controvertial.
Philosch wrote:This is just a preposterous position to take. The intent of the person acting is irrelevant, consequences are all that matter?
That is the definition being used, yes.
Philosch wrote:Consequentialist nonsense. Very dangerous reasoning.
Can you explain why? This is a poltiical philosophy forum, and this is the closest we've got ot a philosophical precept in the discussion so far. It might be interesting to pursue this.
I'd suggest that there is no inherent value in insisiting on a definition of racism that's impossible to prove in practice, except to neuter the term. Meanwhile there is quite a lot of value in labelling killing a lot of brown people, or refusing to let black people on the bus, as racist, without worrying about matters of intent.
Similarly, Sam Harris argues that the US killing people is fine, because their intent is pure, and that Islamic fundamentalists killing people is not, because their intent is impure. I see certain practical issues in deciding world poltics based on criteria that can't in any way be demonstrated. Do you really not see a problem here?
Philosch wrote:but Sam Harris couldn't be more liberal left wing.
He could be. He is far from liberal on the subject of Islam.
This is simply something I've observed about the Right in politics. I'm sure it occurs elsewhere as well.
Philosch wrote:You would ignore his very vocal and prominent support of several Muslim reformers because "YOU" somehow perceive the effect of his words as denigrating to brown people.
Well, me, Chomsky, and rather a lot of others. And it's nothing to do with 'denigrating' - he's advocating killing people on the basis of their opinions.
Philosch wrote: What is this brown people business, I thought we were talking about Muslims.
Not noticeably. Large populous muslim countries were left off the list.
Philosch wrote:Drawing false equivalencies between the US military accidently causing collateral damage and terrorists deliberately target innocents, beheading them and burning them alive, you are either a Chomsky fan or you are an Islamic apologist.
A Chomsky fan.
Philosch wrote:You should check your sentence again, you realize you have the US military bombing civilians while the Muslims are bombing military targets.
Yes, that was one of the examples Sam Harris used, so it's the one I'm citing. Specifically he was comparing the US bombing of a large Sudanese pharmaceutical plant that produces antibiotics, with an attack on the military personnel of Fort Hood.
Philosch wrote:Freudian slip tipping your true beliefs perhaps? I think you have that backwards.
I'm citing what Sam Harris was arguing.
I'm not sure why you find this controvertial. Did you think that the US military doesn't attack civillians? Did you think that Islamic fundamentalists don't attack military targets?
Philosch wrote:At this point I shall have to just assume from your point of view anybody with light skin is a racist.
That's a pretty extreme reaction to someone explaining to you what definition was being used in an arguement you hadn't understood.
Philosch wrote:I once ran through a red light and I caused a car coming the other way to slam on their brakes. When I looked up the driver of that car was black. At that point based on your rational, the consequences of my actions made me a racist.
Nope, your action there isn't descriminatory in result, nor does it involve the exercise of power, so I don't see that it meets either of the criteria I gave you.
Philosch wrote: Good to know the rules we are now playing by.
Racism is a problem that hurts real people every day. It's not a game.
Philosch wrote: As far as me trying to claim you are a racist, I have no clue where you even got that one....I would never presume to judge whether you're a racist or not. I leave such judgments to you and the other experts on racism.
Sorry, on reviewing your comments, it's quite true that you didn't call me a racist. That was my misreading of the section where you judge that I'm a 'Trump hater', who deliberately conflates narcissism and selfishness with racism in order to promote national divisions. My apologies for the inaccuracy.