Can you be racist to a White Person? (POLL)
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Plagioclase
Sure, for justified reasons. It's not racism.
The reasons are not justified. I agree it is not strictly racism however it is just as wrong.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
Original post by DiddyDec
The reasons are not justified. I agree it is not strictly racism however it is just as wrong.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
It can be completely justified. There are plenty of ways that we discriminate for justified reasons, e.g. discriminating against people without a PhD if we're looking to fill a postdoctoral position. If we find that there is institutional racism that is unfairly discriminating against people of a certain race because of a predominantly white establishment - and whilst the intensity of this discrimination varies, it does exist - then introducing more concrete means to reverse this is justified.
The argument that it's not fair and unmeritocratic only works if you assume the system without positive discrimination is meritocratic in the first place... which isn't the case, as psychology proves due to the many biases that humans have. Positive discrimination is a tool we have to overcome these biases. It's an attempt to make the system more meritocratic, not less.
Original post by TheArtofProtest
And I have maintained that if it was on an individual basis, then your point has some merit.
If it was on an institutional level, then your point flies out of the shattered glass ceiling.
If it was on an institutional level, then your point flies out of the shattered glass ceiling.
Newspeak?
How do you determine what is at an 'institutional level', what is a 'glass ceiling'?
These are just abstract and non-existent terms used to justify any argument because no logical, scientific or quantitative data can disprove the existence of such concepts. It is pure fantasy.
Original post by goldbangles
Look at your crummy little chart lol
Firstly that's from US, and it's from 2004, economic trends always vary over the years. Who's also to say it's credible source. You just googled and pasted the first chart you saw, huh? You are an embarrassment to any chance that your statements could be valid.
Firstly that's from US, and it's from 2004, economic trends always vary over the years. Who's also to say it's credible source. You just googled and pasted the first chart you saw, huh? You are an embarrassment to any chance that your statements could be valid.
Actaully you simply have to google it yourself and see any chart you like.
You clearly have no idea how debate or factual evidence works.
Original post by Oblivion99
Your black friends arent black at all. If you were around my friends, you wouldnt even be on tsr atm 
Your black friends are black because my friends wouldn't agree. You are winning logic my friend
Original post by Plagioclase
It can be completely justified. There are plenty of ways that we discriminate for justified reasons, e.g. discriminating against people without a PhD if we're looking to fill a postdoctoral position. If we find that there is institutional racism that is unfairly discriminating against people of a certain race because of a predominantly white establishment - and whilst the intensity of this discrimination varies, it does exist - then introducing more concrete means to reverse this is justified.
The argument that it's not fair and unmeritocratic only works if you assume the system without positive discrimination is meritocratic in the first place... which isn't the case, as psychology proves due to the many biases that humans have. Positive discrimination is a tool we have to overcome these biases. It's an attempt to make the system more meritocratic, not less.
The argument that it's not fair and unmeritocratic only works if you assume the system without positive discrimination is meritocratic in the first place... which isn't the case, as psychology proves due to the many biases that humans have. Positive discrimination is a tool we have to overcome these biases. It's an attempt to make the system more meritocratic, not less.
I'm not sure you actually understand what positive discrimination is. It is only to do with race and gender. So that renders your example of PhDs completely irrelevant.
It is not justified in the UK, in fact it is illegal.
Original post by TheArtofProtest
"We shouldn't employ women because it would destroy our hegemony".
"We shouldn't employ POC because it would destroy out hegemony".
You need to start seeing beyond gender and skin colour and see everyone as being adequately qualified, instead of thinking negatively about what would happen if you employed a woman or POC.
Spoiler
"We shouldn't employ women because it would destroy our hegemony".
"We shouldn't employ POC because it would destroy out hegemony".
You need to start seeing beyond gender and skin colour and see everyone as being adequately qualified, instead of thinking negatively about what would happen if you employed a woman or POC.
As far as I can see it's a simple fix. Leave gender and race off the application, of course that leaves the name issue, but I wouldn't think that's the key area an employer would look at.
Original post by TheArtofProtest
Institutionally - No.
Institutionally - No.
Try telling that to white farmers in Zimbabwe.
Original post by TheArtofProtest
"We shouldn't employ women because it would destroy our hegemony".
"We shouldn't employ POC because it would destroy out hegemony".
You need to start seeing beyond gender and skin colour and see everyone as being adequately qualified, instead of thinking negatively about what would happen if you employed a woman or POC.
Spoiler
"We shouldn't employ women because it would destroy our hegemony".
"We shouldn't employ POC because it would destroy out hegemony".
You need to start seeing beyond gender and skin colour and see everyone as being adequately qualified, instead of thinking negatively about what would happen if you employed a woman or POC.
Bizarre accusations from a deranged lunatic. There is no hegemony, there's no conspiracy. You are simply absurd.
Original post by IAmNero
I was in a debate in an A level history class, and a student claimed that you could not be racist to a white person because white people have not experienced systemic opression.
What is systemic oppression?
Original post by N-R-G
What is systemic oppression?
Institutional Oppression is the systematic mistreatment of people within a social identity group, supported and enforced by the society and its institutions, solely based on the person's membership in the social identity group.
(Not my definition)
Original post by goldbangles
Still boggles my mind that white people are in Zimbabwe. Not even black people want to be there.
Ummm, have you even been there in your life?
Original post by sadly
How is that even possible? White colonists and their children (today) enforce Eurocentric beauty and superiority so how in the world can you be racist towards them? That is so funny LOL 
I voted no
I voted noSo the 120 million whites enslaved by Arabs wasn't racist?
Original post by sadly
How is that even possible? White colonists and their children (today) enforce Eurocentric beauty and superiority so how in the world can you be racist towards them? That is so funny LOL I voted no
I voted noAnd proved you don't understand what racism is.
Original post by IAmNero
Ummm, have you even been there in your life?
Are you about to tell us what a delightful place it is and how that nice Mr Mugabe has made great strides, using democratic processes, in taking his people from relative poverty to absolute riches now that the white man is not in charge?
Original post by goldbangles
How is that seriously racism? It's prejudicial. Not racist.
http://downloadpolitics.com/showthread.php?68-Fun-******-Facts!-Part-1
By your logic this isn't racist as well, just prejudicial.
Oh. wait... those are facts.
Original post by TheArtofProtest
You do realise that interviews will have to be held?
You might as well just put everyone through an agency and they provide the workers, without any preference.
You might as well just put everyone through an agency and they provide the workers, without any preference.
It's an impossibility either way. There is no real fix
Original post by Good bloke
Are you about to tell us what a delightful place it is and how that nice Mr Mugabe has made great strides, using democratic processes, in taking his people from relative poverty to absolute riches now that the white man is not in charge?
Actually, I was going to say the exact opposite. But my point is, I have visited there, and to say that the entire country is a shithole as the poster implied isn't true.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
