User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 88

Thread: Fighting Racism

  1. #51
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackDog View Post
    I guess I'm not making sense to you because I'm not talking about integration in that sense.

    The idea is that interracial marriages should occur at a basically statistically random likelihood. If this isn't happening, then we have to presume that racial differences, either through living in different kinds of neighborhoods or through personal preference or through whatever other factors, are responsible.
    Thanks for the clarification first off. This sounds like a Utopian goal. I don't think humans are ready to give up tribalism yet. Let alone "can". I believe there is a hard wired aspect to this. Heuristic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Additionally, I can't think of a single society where this is currently occurring. I realize that an example society is not necessary but it sure would be practical. I'm skeptical to say the least.

    That said is there any evidence that this goal yields benefits? Has there been any research done on the subject? Basically, why is this goal of integration necessary if there is legal integration and equality of opportunity?
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #52
    Senior Member BlackDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    MBTI
    NiTe
    Enneagram
    9w8 so/sx
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    What you advocate is technically genocide (removing the genetic signature of a group of people).

    Of course, I am the only one on here who will point this out.
    Ummm, no. I'm advocating the combination and mixing of peoples. Their genetic signature is there just as much as before, only it's mixed with the genotypes of many other peoples. Plus, there is no 'hard line' of racial difference anyway; these differences are in no fundamental way significant. Or at least I don't believe so.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    If the excepted results are not occurring, then you should ask yourself whether your hypothesis was correct. Maybe it is time to adopt a different political stance? The reality is that in a situation where people from different ethnic groups must share living space they will generally self-segregate. This can be partially changed by creating a common culture and language (the "melting pot" concept) but as we have seen, a racial barrier will still remain.
    The expected results are not occurring because people continue to believe in race. It's a fairly obvious thing that we can see, unlike many other things like intelligence, temperament, propensity for heart disease, etc. Just because it is obvious doesn't mean it is significant compared to these other factors, or that humans are logical to weigh it. It just means its obvious.

    A solution is to 'help' people further by using education to strongly encourage them to look past race. Since we agree race is an illogical means of segregating populations, why isn't this a good project? We're helping them pay attention to more important factors.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    The only way you could convince people to interbreed is through government indoctrination and coercion. The idea that the state knows better than me who I should fuck is not just unacceptable, it's moronic.
    The state is meant to look out for the welfare of all the people. You can only call it 'government indoctrination and coercion' if you do in fact believe that race is an important enough difference to make mating/marital decisions off of. If you in fact don't believe that, then it is the government helping people to put things in proper perspective, and to pay attention to more important factors.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Your view is that if people will not naturally conform to your ideal, they must be made to do so. My suggestion would be to build a more organic society that takes cultural differences into account. The nation-state, however, is an ideologically abhorrent concept to almost everybody on the political left.
    'Organic society' is a temporary and unstable situation. They don't have to be 'made' to do so; they can be educated to pay attention to more important things.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Before I leave I will ask you directly: what are you personally doing to bring us closer to utopia? Are you having children with a woman from another racial group? Do you live in a diverse (read: impoverished, dangerous) neighbourhood? Somehow I suspect the answer to both these questions is "no".
    My personal behavior has little to do with my position; either my case is logical given my premise that different 'races' is unstable, or it is not. Nor do I think my plan would be 'utopia'; it would just help unify the population in this specific way.

    I am personally doing nothing to bring about this outcome; that is the responsibility of the ones guiding the 'nation-state'. I'm just pointing out what seems like the logical conclusion of multiculturalism, and saying that I agree with it if it comes.
    Formerly Lion4!5

  3. #53
    Senior Member BlackDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    MBTI
    NiTe
    Enneagram
    9w8 so/sx
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    Thanks for the clarification first off. This sounds like a Utopian goal. I don't think humans are ready to give up tribalism yet. Let alone "can". I believe there is a hard wired aspect to this. Heuristic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Additionally, I can't think of a single society where this is currently occurring. I realize that an example society is not necessary but it sure would be practical. I'm skeptical to say the least.

    That said is there any evidence that this goal yields benefits? Has there been any research done on the subject? Basically, why is this goal of integration necessary if there is legal integration and equality of opportunity?
    I agree that heuristics may well be a primary source of stereotyping. Nothing inherently wrong with that when the stereotyping has no significant bad results.

    I realized reading back that I've very much been overstating my case. Basically, I started this almost as a Devil's Advocate thing; I had a sudden idea "Isn't the end of diversity the logical end of celebrating diversity since diversity was only created by tribalism and barriers, which celebrating diversity breaks down?"

    And I thought I'd try to make a case for that.

    It makes sense to me, but I apologize for overstating my case; this is all just a thought experiment picking up on an idea I once had to solve racial problems.

    I was kind of jumping off of another thought I had, that maybe the reason that the Right in America hung on so much better than in other liberal western democracies (Canada, Japan, Western Europe) is because poor whites in the South were convinced by Nixon to vote Republican because their racial identity trumped their economic interest. And thus maybe that's why we have no 'Labor' party, because of racial division! I don't remember if I read that or thought of it . . .

    And if that were true, then racial division would be an incredibly serious problem for progressivism, and not academic elitist progressivism, but the real thing with teeth . . .
    Formerly Lion4!5

  4. #54
    I could do things Hard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/so
    Socionics
    EIE Fe
    Posts
    7,988

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackDog View Post
    I can see you're upset, but not sure why. It isn't something I 'feel' should happen; I think it is obvious that racial divisions are damaging for a country. In fact, this problem of having multiple 'races' living in a country has been felt deeply by a number of notable American thinkers; Jefferson advocated the end of slavery but felt that the black population would not be able to adjust to freedom alongside their former masters; Lincoln wanted the country to solve the race problem by sponsoring the emigration of all the freed slaves to Liberia.

    That solution is not acceptable.

    The next logical solution is the negation of race and culture in the short term by reeducating the population to value multiculturalism and diversity. That's where we are today. However, this is inherently unstable and continues to cause tension because people feel the contradiction; diversity is supposed to be good, but in actual practice most people don't really like it, or are neutral at best.

    Hence you get a situation where on the one hand media like Fox News feed to one audience a narrative that other 'races' are out to get them, and where on the other all kinds of racial identity politicians say basically the same thing to their respective minority groups. This would not occur if there wasn't still a lot of uncertainty and fear in the population.

    Our academics and elite universities continue to actively work to prop up this current state of affairs; this is shown by what kind of questions they choose to research and make prominent, and what kind of questions they suppress. For example, studies about 'unconscious racism' and positive word associations with the color white are simply grasping at straws, and largely absurd, but needed to prop up an attitude of diversity.

    Academia and research only exist to help their societies. If they can't do that, they have no reason for being. I don't usually express my views on issues like this so baldly, but I really don't see what the reasoning is behind all the adjectives like 'horrible'. I want to help my society in the long run.

    I don't advocate any kind of active 'suppression of academic freedom'; that's already taken care of by what is paid attention to and what is ignored. By what is funded and what is not. Rightly so.

    But if you can't see that society's needs are paramount on a question like this, then I don't understand you at all.


    Well, it certainly explains a lot that you can't see why I am upset. I am not upset with your ideological views on race, and I have no interest in addressing them (for the record I deeply disagree with Kullervo on many issues and Tellenbach is essentially my political antithesis). What I DO take issue with, is your methods. It's objectively wrong on a very deep level. Let's break this down:

    Let's assume for a second that what @Kullervo said is right, that race is a major factor, and it's backed up by irrefutable data and facts that no one in their right mind could deny, and is well regarded by the world. With that in place, let's take your ideal with how to approach this. What you are advocating for is ignoring what is right, and actively pursuing something that is wrong, forcing everyone to accept what you think that is correct (when it's not), and seeking to suppress facts and force your model. You know who does this? Villains do this. Dictators do this. Monoarchys do this. Corrupt individuals do this. Evil vindictive people do this. This is the kind of stuff that caused the banking industury to collapse in 2008. It's is objectively wrong in every which way to Sunday to deny what is true and force falsehoods upon everyone else for the sake of an agenda regardless of what the cause is. I could care less if I deeply agree, or deeply disagree with someone. If they take these steps, they are not to be respected, listened to, taken serious, or heard by anyone else.

    I don't give a shit if you want to help society in the longrun. I don't give a shit if anyone did. It could be to seek the most noble, pure, and utopic ideal ever. However, if you go about it in the methods you claimed as valid (i.e. making falsehoods to acheive and endgoal), then it is COMPLETELY wrong to do so, completely independent of what the end goal is. It doesn't justify that in the slightest.
    MBTI: ExxJ tetramer
    Functions: Fe > Te > Ni > Se > Si > Ti > Fi > Ne
    Enneagram: 1w2 - 3w4 - 6w5 (The Taskmaster) | sp/so
    Socionics: β-E dimer | -
    Big 5: slOaI
    Temperament: Choleric/Melancholic
    Alignment: Lawful Neutral
    External Perception: Nohari and Johari

    Likes BlackDog liked this post

  5. #55
    libtard SJW chickpea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,963

    Default

    teach children acceptance and tolerance, because a lot of adults are willfully ignorant or damaged beyond repair. see: this thread.

  6. #56
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    I think there's still hierarchies of privilege and power based up race but I dont think its anything like as organised and deliberate as it once was, I also think that race is a bad concept to organise upon in some ways, the outcomes of minorities ethnic nationalisms, like black nationalisms, have been as unprogressive as those of supremacist majority movements, like white nationalists.

    The seperatist, self-empowerment and responsibility messages are all lost in the grievance messages.

    Anyone interested in the ethnic nationalist ideologies and movements should consider the fate of places like Liberia, when in America back to Africa movements were successful, a long, long time ago, with the collusion of white pseudo-racist opinion, and succeeded in sending people back in big enough numbers it created status and class divides in the countries they targeted, between the "returned" and the "natives". It was a disaster.

    The story of Israel-Palestine is well known too, I dont think zionism deserves to be considered as a special case, its ideological commitments to reversing a disporia resembles other nationalist ideas like those of Marcus Garvey and the like.

    I can see all these ideas picking up popularity and gaining traction but I think they are BS, I think there are reactionary and "progressive" versions of them, the outcomes are bad, maybe there's bad and worse, I dont know, I'd prefer that people dont organise on one aspect of their persona or self in that manner.

  7. #57
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chickpea View Post
    teach children acceptance and tolerance, because a lot of adults are willfully ignorant or damaged beyond repair. see: this thread.
    I dont know exactly what you're talking about because I didnt read the thread but I think maybe they have experience that has shaped opinions and you have to respect that, even if you want to change those opinions, starting out from the position that they, either the opinions or the persons holding them, are deficient is methodologically unsound, even if you cant be convinced that in principle its a bad idea.

  8. #58
    Senior Member BlackDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    MBTI
    NiTe
    Enneagram
    9w8 so/sx
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard View Post
    Well, it certainly explains a lot that you can't see why I am upset. I am not upset with your ideological views on race, and I have no interest in addressing them (for the record I deeply disagree with Kullervo on many issues and Tellenbach is essentially my political antithesis). What I DO take issue with, is your methods. It's objectively wrong on a very deep level. Let's break this down:

    Let's assume for a second that what @Kullervo said is right, that race is a major factor, and it's backed up by irrefutable data and facts that no one in their right mind could deny, and is well regarded by the world. With that in place, let's take your ideal with how to approach this. What you are advocating for is ignoring what is right, and actively pursuing something that is wrong, forcing everyone to accept what you think that is correct (when it's not), and seeking to suppress facts and force your model. You know who does this? Villains do this. Dictators do this. Monoarchys do this. Corrupt individuals do this. Evil vindictive people do this. This is the kind of stuff that caused the banking industury to collapse in 2008. It's is objectively wrong in every which way to Sunday to deny what is true and force falsehoods upon everyone else for the sake of an agenda regardless of what the cause is. I could care less if I deeply agree, or deeply disagree with someone. If they take these steps, they are not to be respected, listened to, taken serious, or heard by anyone else.

    I don't give a shit if you want to help society in the longrun. I don't give a shit if anyone did. It could be to seek the most noble, pure, and utopic ideal ever. However, if you go about it in the methods you claimed as valid (i.e. making falsehoods to acheive and endgoal), then it is COMPLETELY wrong to do so, completely independent of what the end goal is. It doesn't justify that in the slightest.
    I agree that it would be morally wrong if an individual (like me) knew all this, was right (a big if), and then set out to reshape our direction. But in actual practice, most people would only have a partial grasp of the issue, and even if they were wrong, they wouldn't realize it.

    In other words, if a knowing actor did all of this, I agree with you. It would corrupt that person. But if lots of well-meaning people did it out of ignorance and fuzzy thinking, then I think overall it would be fine.

    I'm doing nothing to bring about this change; it's just an idea I had.

    But I do appreciate that you pointed this out; before I was trying to be as objective as possible, to kind of play out in my own mind how something like this could really happen in real life. Kind of a Devil's Advocate thing. When I look at it from the personal perspective like you're saying, I can't really disagree with you . . . looks like it's good for my moral character that I'm not in power!
    Formerly Lion4!5

  9. #59
    libtard SJW chickpea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I dont know exactly what you're talking about because I didnt read the thread but I think maybe they have experience that has shaped opinions and you have to respect that, even if you want to change those opinions, starting out from the position that they, either the opinions or the persons holding them, are deficient is methodologically unsound, even if you cant be convinced that in principle its a bad idea.
    i don't presume i have the power to change an adult's opinion on anything, and if i can they probably didn't have a very strong opinion to begin with. if someone is committed to being actively racist/discriminatory, good luck to them.

  10. #60
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,931

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by riva View Post
    What actions would you have recommended to be taken against the man who refused to enter the lift?

    Just let it go; Let it all go? Will letting it go and letting it all go away make it all go away?
    Imo, the state should not interefere, period. Resources are limited (something leftists usually forget) and there are more important things to be dealt with. Not many people would voluntarily donate money to see that white person sued. I think social boycott is the best alternative. That just requires a community of people who believe that the white guy did something morally reprehensible (very easy). He might even get fired from his job if the owner decides he want to improve his rep with dem liberals.

    Essentially, the state and its thousands of regulations should be eliminated.

    Btw, that's the basic difference between liberals and conservatives:



    A bunch of socialists. I'm getting a bit off-topic tho.

    Think of it as a norm. If discrimination is the norm; people would readily discriminate based on negative stereotypes. If letting it all go was the answer what would prevent 'letting it go' turning into something worse and then that something becoming the norm.
    That's something I was thinking about addressing in the aforementioned possible post. For now, here's a fact: a Black person is more likely to rob you than a White person. That's readily verifiable, I believe. An average marxist would attribute that to socio-economic factors, which definitely is part of the equation - kudos for them for recognizing what most conservatives don't wanna face -, but is that all?

    And I am waiting for see your future post. :P
    Heh, let's see. I'm in a good mood and I don't wanna ruin it.

Similar Threads

  1. How many 5 year old could you take in a fight?
    By swordpath in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 06-11-2009, 09:43 AM
  2. [MBTItm] Flowchart Fight
    By ThatsWhatHeSaid in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-06-2008, 02:01 PM
  3. J vs. P... fight!
    By Grayscale in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 03-30-2008, 06:19 PM
  4. Prejudice, bigotry, racism, and sexism...
    By Kiddo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 10-26-2007, 11:37 AM
  5. What Are You Fighting For - Song
    By cosmicdancer in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-22-2007, 05:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO