Race War

[Einherjar86]

That's the problem: they're not "inherent." That's racism.

 

[Dak]

That's the problem: they're not "inherent." That's racism.

Are we arguing over semantics now? Common practice amongst a subgroup. Having spent the first 20 years of my life in amongst a high population ratio of blacks, and the last 7 years living amongst or married to mexican americans, I can say that the "common traits" are indeed common. They are not obviously, without exception. Are you suggesting we take no notice of tendencies in the people around us? Edit: I can also say that having also spent the first 20 years alternately around white baptists, the stereotypes about them are mostly true as well.

 

[Vimana]

I think he means they're conditional characteristics and not inherent.

 

[Einherjar86]

Are we arguing over semantics now? Common practice amongst a subgroup. Having spent the first 20 years of my life in amongst a high population ratio of blacks, and the last 7 years living amongst or married to mexican americans, I can say that the "common traits" are indeed common. They are not obviously, without exception. Are you suggesting we take no notice of tendencies in the people around us? Edit: I can also say that having also spent the first 20 years alternately around white baptists, the stereotypes about them are mostly true as well.

There's no matter of semantics. "Inherent" and "common traits" are not the same at all. When you say "inherent" you imply something innate, something irremovable. The traits you're making note of are culturally conditioned and have nothing to do with the subjects themselves.

Observing even "common" traits leads us into notions of classification and definition that identify subgroups or peoples based on details that are external to the groups themselves, but by the logic of stereotypes, are assumed "inherent" (just as you said). This is the foundation of racism.

 

[Dak]

So where do the common traits spring from? They do not come from thin air. A innate proclivity must be present to one degree or another.

 

[Vimana]

There's a difference between stereotyping people and feeling they are inferior to oneself because of those stereotypes.

 

[Dak]

There's a difference between stereotyping people and feeling they are inferior to oneself because of those stereotypes.

Correct. Racism is simply "I am better than you because of my ancestory/skin color".

 

[Vimana]

Rather than "Russians like to drink" or "Mexicans like to eat tacos."

 

[Einherjar86]

So where do the common traits spring from? They do not come from thin air. A innate proclivity must be present to one degree or another.

I completely disagree! Obviously, something like "blacks have black skin" isn't a stereotype because it's biologically determined. The fact that blacks comprise a larger percentage of prison inmates in the United States, however, is not biologically deteremined. There is nothing innate about that; that fact derives from culturally determined conditions that cause black people to participate in crime to a wider extent. It has nothing to do with the claim that "black people are just predisposed to criminal action."

There's a difference between stereotyping people and feeling they are inferior to oneself because of those stereotypes.

This has nothing to do with inferiority, which is where I think both of you are deriving these misconceptions from. Racism, at its core, is the belief that culturally determined conditions are actually inherent, biologically determined conditions. Ideas of inferiority and superiority only come about later. Racism, first and foremost, is a belief that inherent or innate characteristics of race determine their social or cultural achievements.

 

[Vimana]

One can still laugh at a racist joke and not perpetuate the idea that the characteristics being joked about are inherent to the people.

 

[Dak]

I completely disagree! Obviously, something like "blacks have black skin" isn't a stereotype because it's biologically determined. The fact that blacks comprise a larger percentage of prison inmates in the United States, however, is not biologically deteremined. There is nothing innate about that; that fact derives from culturally determined conditions that cause black people to participate in crime to a wider extent. It has nothing to do with the claim that "black people are just predisposed to criminal action."

I was refering more to things like choice of dress style and food. Laws are completely random and arbitrary, as is punishment, and thusly irrelevant.

Racism, at its core, is the belief that culturally determined conditions are actually inherent, biologically determined conditions.

So you are saying that biology has played no role at all? I think you are seeing this through the lenses of "western civilization being progress" as opposed to anything else. There is no problem suggesting that biology and genetics had something to do with the advancements technologically by some "Races" versus others. The problem is seeing this as somehow a superior or inferior development.

 

[Vimana]

The reason saying a biological base is silly is because the genetic differences between different groups of humans are not big enough to make them have different average intelligence.

A child from a tribe in Africa raised by a professor is going to grow up seemingly more intelligent than a child from China raised by a tribe in Africa.

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

Correct. Racism is simply "I am better than you because of my ancestory/skin color".

True. Racism and stereotyping are too often confused with one another.

I disagree with Onder being the same as a gypsy, however. I've said before that I am in favor of the state giving financial aide to its citizens in a constructive manner, and therefore I'm probably more of a Milton Friedman (who I used to detest until I did a bit more reading on his ideas) capitalist rather than a Murray Rothbard capitalist. State aide should be earned and merit based, just like compensation is rendered in the private sector. Gypsies in Europe and ghetto/trailer trash in America do nothing to earn their money from the state.

 

[Dak]

The problem is the state does not earn it's funds. It takes them by force.

@Vimana: We aren't talking about intelligence, we are talking about predisposition to activities. The seperate cultural environments did not spring up out of thin air. Cultural stereotypes are not more or less intelligent. They are merely different.

 

[Vimana]

Even still, cultures reflect their environments. I don't see any evidence suggesting culture reflect genetics.

 

[King Richard]

RIP

 

[Einherjar86]

I'm actually shocked by some of what I'm reading.

One can still laugh at a racist joke and not perpetuate the idea that the characteristics being joked about are inherent to the people.

But as long as the joke exists, so does racism. One can laugh ironically, but that means that people still believe the "truth" of the joke's logic, or that at least the idea is still prevalent in society.

I was refering more to things like choice of dress style and food. Laws are completely random and arbitrary, as is punishment, and thusly irrelevant.

Choice of dress style isn't inherent either. A culture might use some of its natural surroundings to create clothing and shelter, but there's nothing biological about a people that dictates they will wear necklaces of beads and red loincloths.

So you are saying that biology has played no role at all? I think you are seeing this through the lenses of "western civilization being progress" as opposed to anything else. There is no problem suggesting that biology and genetics had something to do with the advancements technologically by some "Races" versus others. The problem is seeing this as somehow a superior or inferior development.

Vimana responded to this for me:

The reason saying a biological base is silly is because the genetic differences between different groups of humans are not big enough to make them have different average intelligence.

 

[Vimana]

But as long as the joke exists, so does racism. One can laugh ironically, but that means that people still believe the "truth" of the joke's logic, or that at least the idea is still prevalent in society.

I agree with that. While I don't think the jokes are only for racist people, I do agree that the mockery of racism that is often used in the jokes can only exist with racism.

 

[Dak]

But as long as the joke exists, so does racism. One can laugh ironically, but that means that people still believe the "truth" of the joke's logic, or that at least the idea is still prevalent in society.

You still can't correlate the jokes and an actual feeling of superiority based on skin color.

Choice of dress style isn't inherent either. A culture might use some of its natural surroundings to create clothing and shelter, but there's nothing biological about a people that dictates they will wear necklaces of beads and red loincloths.

I was leaning more towards the very "spartan" style of some cultures versus the "highly decorative" leanings of others.

Vimana responded to this for me:

I cetainly said nothing regarding a difference in intelligence.

 

[Vimana]

But you said something that implies it, like technological advancement.