[QUOTE=RenDaHai;1201155]Thats fine. But that definition doesn’t stop the accusation of racism being misused because its not clear enough.[/QUOTE]
The only mind you can change is your own.
I got a bad feeling about this
…but we’ll indulge this thread for now…hasn’t crossed any lines…yet.
[QUOTE=GeneChing;1201170]…but we’ll indulge this thread for now…hasn’t crossed any lines…yet.[/QUOTE]
It’s not political correctness, it’s a lack of will to see humans as humans and to constantly reject anyone and anything that is not like the majority.
the problem is people projecting their crappy attitudes onto other people and then shutting them out of actively participating in the whole, this in turn generates spite and the whole things spirals downwards because no one wants to man up and say it clearly that no one is inherently better than anyone else. No one has a life that is worth more or less than anyone else’s, lest they forfeit that through their own behaviours (murder etc).
People will deflect the result of their own actions and after creating intolerable circumstances for an identified segment of the community and then blaming the community it vilifies for not fitting in.
It is ridiculous. You cannot chain a dog up in your yard and beat it and then expect it to do tricks for cookies. That is the reality of it.
[QUOTE=GeneChing;1201170]…but we’ll indulge this thread for now…hasn’t crossed any lines…yet.[/QUOTE]
Cheers Gene, I fully appreciate what goes on inside this forum reflects on KFM and so sensitive issues have to be treated delicately. But I just wish it wasn’t such a sensitive issue. It should be absolutely fine to talk about racism. But the topic instantly sends up red flags and we all have to choose our words super carefully.
Racist people are of any color/nationality. As are good people. But I’m willing to bet that everyone has, at one time or other, had a racist thought now and then. And it’s not always because the thinker is a full-on racist, but because it’s the lowest denominator they can grasp at, such as if someone of a certain race cuts someone else off in traffic. It’s not proper, but it does happen.
Also, some of the most racist people are highly educated, wear suits and ties, speak in proper grammar, and rarely if ever utter curse words or racial slurs. Quite unlike the typical stereotype of the ‘rabidly racist redneck’.
Race jokes can be funny if they aren’t insulting. What is beyond tiring, however, is when someone is constantly being judged because of their race. Such as, “Oh, you’re Asian, you should know so-and-so because he’s Asian, too,” or worse. That’s only a very kind example. If you’re in the U.S., and you’re white, it’s difficult to get it, unless you’ve experienced it. And you can go most places in the country and not be judged as different, race-wise, excluding certain areas in town. And there aren’t the racial slurs for whites that are equivalent to those for other races.
Anyway, my .02.
Don’t confuse racism with:
Culturalisim
Elitisim
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1201180]No one is inherently better than anyone else. No one has a life that is worth more or less than anyone else’s, lest they forfeit that through their own behaviours (murder etc).
.[/QUOTE]
No we get down to it.
Fantastic.
This is an enlightened observation but it counters itself. You have made provisions for the Murderer. He ignores the human rights of another person and in turn should forfeit his own rights. On this we are in agreement. But where do we draw this line? Only at murder? Are we interested in the result of the action or the intent behind it? What about attempted murder, where is this person on the scale?
Surely then the truth is that peoples lives are NOT equal. Its just that the universe is so complex that we can never weigh one mans life against another, so we have to consider lives to be of equal worth unless overwhelming evidence (such as murder) makes the judgement obvious.
Now this may seem like an inconsequential difference since it does not change the fact that we still respect all lives equally. However it does invalidate extensions of the principle that everyone is equal.
So what is it? Are all people intrinsically equal OR are people only assumed equal until proven otherwise?
[QUOTE=RenDaHai;1201190]No we get down to it.
Fantastic.
This is an enlightened observation but it counters itself. You have made provisions for the Murderer. He ignores the human rights of another person and in turn should forfeit his own rights. On this we are in agreement. But where do we draw this line? Only at murder? Are we interested in the result of the action or the intent behind it? What about attempted murder, where is this person on the scale?
Surely then the truth is that peoples lives are NOT equal. Its just that the universe is so complex that we can never weigh one mans life against another, so we have to consider lives to be of equal worth unless overwhelming evidence (such as murder) makes the judgement obvious.
Now this may seem like an inconsequential difference since it does not change the fact that we still respect all lives equally. However it does invalidate extensions of the principle that everyone is equal.
So what is it? Are all people intrinsically equal OR are people only assumed equal until proven otherwise?[/QUOTE]
Rule of law is where we draw the line. No one of us is so fabulous as to be the one who decides. Universal morality and rule of law help us determine who has breached and who abides.
This is always in flux (rule of law) and adapts to the spirit of the times to ensure that people are dealt with fairly. Of course, this isn’t true of a great many places and it is one groups idea of morality over another and may the strongest win.
Eventually, we should be able to cross the divide and put away our petty views of what constitutes a human being and what doesn’t.
For what it’s worth, where there is yin, there is yang. All yang contains Yin and vice versa. There is no black and white solution and it is folly to seek that. It must be an ever changing thing that moves towards egalitarian,free and filial relations between us each and all.
I think people should just call it what it is, insecurity and hate. Why confuse the issue with multiple definitions that don’t always match the intended definitions of the words they choose to use?
Whats wrong Gene? You afraid some ************ is gonna ****** and ***** to a bunch of ****** for ********** and ***** like the ********* they are?
(jokes, they’re just random stars)
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1201191]Rule of law is where we draw the line. No one of us is so fabulous as to be the one who decides. Universal morality and rule of law help us determine who has breached and who abides.
This is always in flux (rule of law) and adapts to the spirit of the times to ensure that people are dealt with fairly. Of course, this isn’t true of a great many places and it is one groups idea of morality over another and may the strongest win.
Eventually, we should be able to cross the divide and put away our petty views of what constitutes a human being and what doesn’t.
For what it’s worth, where there is yin, there is yang. All yang contains Yin and vice versa. There is no black and white solution and it is folly to seek that. It must be an ever changing thing that moves towards egalitarian,free and filial relations between us each and all.[/QUOTE]
Adapt or die, it’s the law. The only real law we have. The rest are just social constructs struggling to keep up with our nature.
[QUOTE=Syn7;1201227]Adapt or die, it’s the law. The only real law we have. The rest are just social constructs struggling to keep up with our nature.[/QUOTE]
but you couldnt adapt to the hordes of chinese being all rude and spitting everywhere in toronto. thats the future, babby.
[QUOTE=bawang;1201229]but you couldnt adapt to the hordes of chinese being all rude and spitting everywhere in toronto. thats the future, babby.[/QUOTE]
Why would I have to adapt to anything in TO? It’s like the a boring version of NY without all the great stuff! The only think useful about TO, from my perspective, is the airport. I did a few shows out there in the club district. Not a place I really wanna go back to. I pretty much did my thing, got my money and hung out in the hotel till it was time to go.
As for Vancouver, I feel at home in Chinatown. In fact I feel at home everywhere in this city. We grew up VERY multicultural, it’s just normal to me.
Besides, Chinese immigration will start to reverse by 2020. Won’t be long till whiteboys are going there for work.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1201055]Racing is when two or more people fix a specific task to be accomplished and compete to see who can finish in the shortest amount of time!
More come types of racing include, running, car driving, swimming, rowing, skiing, etc.
It is a perfectly harmless activity performed for fun, entertainment the for the acquisition of fame and fortune![/QUOTE]
And as anyone who’s seen the documentary “The Ballad of Ricky Bobby” knows; racing can also be very dangerous!!!
[QUOTE=RenDaHai;1201148]
If we were all in possession of a reasonable degree of common sense then we wouldn’t need any laws or rules to govern ourselves. Rules are there for the people who don’t, or perhaps do not have the capacity to, understand them.
[/QUOTE]
Well, your always going to have the “evil” people who will take advantage of the weaker…But as for common sense laws, society is run by the wealthy and privileged, with the educated and intelligent, (these are not the same things), occasionally getting positions of power.
Culture doesn’t evolve at the same pace as structured society. You always end up with the elite ruling the peasants…and a simple trip to Wal Mart will confirm that most people aren’t yet ready to live in an “enlightened” culture.
At any rate, 500 years from now we will all be looked back upon as savages.
[QUOTE=Kellen Bassette;1201257]
At any rate, 500 years from now we will all be looked back upon as savages.[/QUOTE]
500 years?
[QUOTE=Kellen Bassette;1201257]
Culture doesn’t evolve at the same pace as structured society. You always end up with the elite ruling the peasants[/QUOTE]
american culture promotes elitism. the ultimate dream is to not work. failing that, work as little with the least exertion and intensity as possible.
[QUOTE=bawang;1201262]500 years?
american culture promotes elitism. the ultimate dream is to not work. failing that, work as little with the least exertion and intensity as possible.[/QUOTE]
EXACTLY 500 years.
Racism is acknowledging that a 6’4", 250lb black man will likely beat you to death, with his bare hands, regardless of how many years you study kung foo.
[QUOTE=bawang;1201262]
american culture promotes elitism. the ultimate dream is to not work. failing that, work as little with the least exertion and intensity as possible.[/QUOTE]
But isn’t some degree of elitism good? I mean if you let the peasants rule you get stuff like the cultural revolution happening.
It depends how you use the term, but elitism can be used to imply a kind of meritocracy. (Meritocracy is a system of governance in which power is vested in individuals according to merit. Advancement in such a system is based on intellectual talent measured through examination and/or demonstrated achievement in the field where it is implemented.)
I mean, this seems like a generally good idea.
There is not a problem in principle with having an elite class, especially if they are wiser than most. The problem is is that this is not the case in our society. People who become this class are the ones who are adept at exploiting others, not helping them.
This is only our own fault. It is the things we respect and admire. We don’t place enough value on great achievements but on superficial ones.
If people invested more time and effort into cultivating their own humanity. Of regulating themselves and their attitudes and less time into trying to control the behaviours of others through social constructs, then, the world would probably be a better place just from the conscientiousness of everyone.
Fwiw, I believe the ultimate elitist model that would be viable for a society is that which is found in Republic by Plato. The actual cultivation of people to lead who are brought up to do that from birth and do not have to do anything else but take care of the society and the people within.
Could be an unrealistic Utopia. Probably is when you consider the common person and their desires. But still, on paper, I think PLato had some good ideas about how to create a society.
I think one of the roots of Racism is Culturalism (that is emphasising the importance of culture in determining behaviour).
Culture is implanted on us from birth. And cultural values take hundreds of years to evolve. As every generation teaches the next, so the flaws of that generation are implanted to some extent on the next.
It is undeniable that some cultures are certainly more primitive than others. What is illogical is to assume this is ethnicity based. The culture you have grown up with will have far more effect on your behaviour than your race will. But does that mean that someone from a more primitive culture will therefore be a more primitive person? This is where one root of racism is. It is a bad conclusion to draw because it ignores the potential of the person. It ignores what they are capable of but condemns them for their lack of opportunity, which is of course unfair.
However here we get into a problem. Relativism. When we try to be fair we make another false assumption. That all cultures and ideologies should be equally respected. NO! Simply. It is fine and good to be against some ideologies and some cultures. Being a Nazi IS wrong. Sharia Law IS primitive. Socialism does NOT work. Surely we need to be confident enough to disrespect these ideologies but at the same time NOT disrespect another Human being for holding them. And this is a difficult thing to do.
[QUOTE=RenDaHai;1201340]I think one of the roots of Racism is Culturalism (that is emphasising the importance of culture in determining behaviour).
Culture is implanted on us from birth. And cultural values take hundreds of years to evolve. As every generation teaches the next, so the flaws of that generation are implanted to some extent on the next.
It is undeniable that some cultures are certainly more primitive than others. What is illogical is to assume this is ethnicity based. The culture you have grown up with will have far more effect on your behaviour than your race will. But does that mean that someone from a more primitive culture will therefore be a more primitive person? This is where one root of racism is. It is a bad conclusion to draw because it ignores the potential of the person. It ignores what they are capable of but condemns them for their lack of opportunity, which is of course unfair.
However here we get into a problem. Relativism. When we try to be fair we make another false assumption. That all cultures and ideologies should be equally respected. NO! Simply. It is fine and good to be against some ideologies and some cultures. Being a Nazi IS wrong. Sharia Law IS primitive. Socialism does NOT work. Surely we need to be confident enough to disrespect these ideologies but at the same time NOT disrespect another Human being for holding them. And this is a difficult thing to do.[/QUOTE]
I believe cultural identity is important as it gives people meaning and purpose in some respects. It is to be shared, not held over someone. that is an error that gets made because people feel they are superior based on what they have.
For instance, for some reason in North America, people think that intelligence is associated with wealth for a great part. This of course isn’t true at all and wealth is not an actual measure of overall intelligence. So, that’s an issue, IE: Hubris.
Being a nazi is illegal where I am, so yes, it is wrong to institutionalize hatred.
Sharia law is an attempt at mixing religion with matters of state. this is a recipe for disaster no matter what religion or what state. Not everyone thinks and feels the same an not everyone believes the same thing, so state religions are by that aspect, a throwback, old thinking and un-progressive.
Socialism has aspect of it that work.
Your public roads, your police service, your fire service, your public schools, your libraries etc etc. Everyone puts into the pot and everyone can benefit from these services. That is socialism when it works. That is to say, the services provided must be agreed upon as to what everyone is willing to chip in for.
A bad form of it is when it becomes overarching and inhibits freedom and innovation because of state control. So, economically, a total socialist state is not viable as was demonstrated with the collapse of the USSR and is also evident by the Chinese adoption of capitalism in order to lift hundreds of millions of people out of crushing poverty that was brought on during the hardline communist years.
Cultural relativism hasn’t been acceptable for a while. I think that was made abundantly clear in the last decade alone. Pluralism is another thing though. We must recognize that despite our own ignorance there has to be reason for implementations of laws an practices in a society that we may or may not be aware of. But, if people are being harmed because of what other people “believe” then that is plain old “wrong”. There really isn’t a grey area when harm is done to innocents.