Is it wrong to be racist?

[MrRubix]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

"Incredibly arrogant post here. I agree with your arguments, but do you have to throw in all the purposeless insults to perpetuate the bolstering of your ego? "I'm not even going to listen to what you have to say" is pretty much the worst thing you can do in an argument without getting violent, and you know it. Also, "how do you live with yourselves, you should all die for stupidity" or whatever was unnecessary. "Why is the average FFR'er so dumb?" is also unhelpful and unwarranted, given than the average user realistically has an IQ above 95 and thus isn't that dumb."

To spell out the explicit: I started trolling in this thread pretty hard.
The whole *point* is that it's unwarranted. I'm not sure how I am able to explicitly state my troll-style over the course of 6 years and yet everyone *still* falls for it. The hyper-ego thing *is meant to piss people off*.

Vendetta is correct that we're technically arguing different things, but I felt it was a valid thread to invoke the (in my opinion, more meaningful) discussion. I do believe that asking "Is it wrong to be racist?" is a bit of a flat question. It's like asking "Is life meaningful?" We can certainly debate the backs-and-forths of it all day, but the more interesting questions run a bit deeper.

We can always stay within the "surface-level" threshold of the question if we want. But it's not what I prefer to discuss due to reasons given in the extended analysis.

As for this thread, I think we've gone over most of the relevant details. However, if we are to stick to the topic in itself, my answer is "Yes, it's wrong to be racist -- but we all still do it anyway." We'd like to think we treat people the same, but I don't really think we do. The next question then becomes, "Are you okay with doing something that you think is wrong?"

[Reach]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

Yes, it's wrong to be racist -- but we all still do it anyway.

I think this is pretty important to note, for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, most people are implicitly racist even if they believe they are not. That is we make quick judgments about people based on their race on a regular basis, we just don't express those judgments or dwell on them. You see this arise in experiments when you give people choice tasks where they have to make fast distinctions between people of race based on some criteria. We're inherently biased in the way we make these choices, and this doesn't apply to just race.

In addition, people that deny the existence of race and racial differences have been shown to be perceived as less friendly and more racist in psychological studies where they have to interact with someone of another race.


Anyway, my opinion can be put succinctly. It isn't right to make racial judgments based on prejudice, i.e. judgments made without evidence. However, making statements of fact about race are fine, though often misconstrued as racism, e.g. blacks commit proportionally the most crimes.

I'm highly against anything that embraces a 'reverse discrimination' policy, as I feel it only makes racial issues a bigger problem. We shouldn't consider race as a factor when making formal decisions, regardless of implicit bias.

[revolutionomega]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

I think this is pretty important to note, for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, most people are implicitly racist even if they believe they are not. That is we make quick judgments about people based on their race on a regular basis, we just don't express those judgments or dwell on them. You see this arise in experiments when you give people choice tasks where they have to make fast distinctions between people of race based on some criteria. We're inherently biased in the way we make these choices, and this doesn't apply to just race.

In addition, people that deny the existence of race and racial differences have been shown to be perceived as less friendly and more racist in psychological studies where they have to interact with someone of another race.


Anyway, my opinion can be put succinctly. It isn't right to make racial judgments based on prejudice, i.e. judgments made without evidence. However, making statements of fact about race are fine, though often misconstrued as racism, e.g. blacks commit proportionally the most crimes.

I'm highly against anything that embraces a 'reverse discrimination' policy, as I feel it only makes racial issues a bigger problem. We shouldn't consider race as a factor when making formal decisions, regardless of implicit bias.

I agree with you. I believe that there is a certain "protection" put up by people invoking stereotypes. The difference between stereotypes and racism that people don't understand is the implied hatred in racism. Stereotypes in turn are the layout for the majority, not intended to put a barrier between people, but as a cautionary measure to make sure that you understand that there is likely some form of something for a certain form of person.

Such situations as the mosque in NYC debate are prime examples. Yes, the racist statement is the correlation between terrorism and Islam. Islam is practiced by the majority of Arabs is the stereotype, and this majority is truth, however, the majority of Arabs are not involved in terrorist organizations. The fact that people are relating a truth to a misconception and thus hating the entire group of people is the racist POV.

This making any sense to anyone?

Basically, being racist is not okay, however, some stereotypes exist because they are formed by a majority rule and are often true. If you like a good laugh, however, listen to the song on the Avenue Q album. You shall be enlightened.

[MrRubix]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

I think this is pretty important to note, for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, most people are implicitly racist even if they believe they are not. That is we make quick judgments about people based on their race on a regular basis, we just don't express those judgments or dwell on them. You see this arise in experiments when you give people choice tasks where they have to make fast distinctions between people of race based on some criteria. We're inherently biased in the way we make these choices, and this doesn't apply to just race.

In addition, people that deny the existence of race and racial differences have been shown to be perceived as less friendly and more racist in psychological studies where they have to interact with someone of another race.


Anyway, my opinion can be put succinctly. It isn't right to make racial judgments based on prejudice, i.e. judgments made without evidence. However, making statements of fact about race are fine, though often misconstrued as racism, e.g. blacks commit proportionally the most crimes.

I'm highly against anything that embraces a 'reverse discrimination' policy, as I feel it only makes racial issues a bigger problem. We shouldn't consider race as a factor when making formal decisions, regardless of implicit bias.

Agreed with all points.

Unfortunately, the only way I *ever* see racism coming to an end is if the statistical trends between races converge and equal out. But I do not see this happening. The differences are just emergent properties that have taken such strong root and have perpetuated in a way that is almost exponential. To explain what would be necessary to give someone of a poorer race the same advantages as a kid of a richer race would be stupendous. A lot of it comes from access to resources, and a lot of it comes from parenting and priority-setting.

Racism is probably an unwinnable war, but more generally, any sort of discrimination is an unwinnable war. We're never going to be able to eliminate the bias people have for making decisions differently based on whether or not someone else is white/black/Asian/male/female/gay/straight/richer/poorer/etc. We can operate under all the objective metrics we want, but a large portion of it is left to the subjective decisions of opinion when it comes to things like college and employment, for example.

I think the best we can hope for is colorblindness -- to look at people for their characteristics before making judgments. The problem is that there are situations in which we cannot evaluate those characteristics in an desirably-thorough manner and yet we need to make a judgment call, and it's hard to make certain judgment calls without offense when the statistics of certain things ring factually true. The best you can hope for is a decent understanding of something like Bayes Rule. :P

[DossarLX ODI]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

What about if you had different locations to store your bike? One in a black neighborhood, one in a white? What about if you were the manager making hiring decisions, and most of your qualified candidates weren't black? Likewise for college admissions? What about going the other direction and increasing diversity in the face of meritocracy?

It's easy to say racism is wrong when you're not the one needing to make the call.

I just want to make sure I get this point.

Racism - discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race.

It isn't racist if you don't accept someone into a college or something if you have reasons such as poor performance, etc. You aren't "abusing" the person and discriminating against him/her, you're just looking at how much potential they have with their performance. This seems to be something that a large number of people don't understand. If I didn't vote for Barack Obama because I didn't agree with his plans, does that mean I'm racist? Absolutely not! I'm not abusing him or discriminating against race and physical characteristics, I'm basing my decision off of reasoning.

For some reason, it seems like impressionability plays a huge factor here. People offended because they're taught that a statement such as "you didn't qualify for this position" made to a person that's of a different race is automatically racist. The problem is, if these people think that's racist, chances are highly likely that they are INCREDIBLY ****ing racist themselves! "Racism" is the first thing that's coming to mind in their heads. Whoa, what?

So do any of you have anything to say about people who get offended by racism or about why racism is such a big deal in the first place? Not if it's "wrong", but how racism works?

[Zageron]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

I think I can effectively end this thread, assuming the people here are open minded and sane.

Is it wrong to be racist?

Yes.

Why?

Because any derogatory pre-placement in society, based on historical events or parental teaching/mind washing, is utter bull****. Seeing a middle eastern on the bus and being frightened isn't something that you can quickly escape from. The media blows fear out of proportion and places stereotypes on everyone, it all depends on where you are in the world.

Note: Slang is not racism if you are with friends, joking, and they aren't offended. Generally, due to severe historical reasons, the use of the 'n' word is never acceptable without consequence. (Be them large, or unnoticed.)

---
If any of you have any questions or arguments regarding my reasoning or logic, don't bother asking me about it. You need to be completely biased towards world peace, and have a strong hate towards how the governments and media are currently operating.

If anyone disagrees with this, and supports racism in an argument as 'legit and harmless', you ca..... seriously? The hell is wrong with you?

[ledwix]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

I would argue more in this thread, but my vocabulary is much smaller than everyone else's here, but that does effect the points I make unless you have nothing to say in return to them.

Racism is wrong, in a every way. Does it meant that people aren't racists? not at all. Racism is as much a statistic as murders. this year 150 people got murdered and 110 of those people were black, it was probably gang related, or they might have been living in a cheap run down neighborhood because that was all they could afford and were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
also there is basing first impressions off of first appearance and past experiences, but then there is saying that based off of those assumptions of the other person that you are better than them. I'm definitely not racist, but they jokes racists come up with are pretty good.

Everyone is "racist" to some degree, even you and me who are most likely normal and not seen as ultra-bigoted supremacists to our own races or anything extreme like that. And that's because "racist" is a term slapped onto anything that makes generalizations, however accurate, inaccurate, or backed by statistics, based on the category of ethnicity. The fact that you concluded that the black people who got murdered were probably in a gang or living in a slum shows that you openly accept generalizations about certain races and apply them to your life by basing conclusions off of them. Technically, that's not racist, it's an unavoidable statistic, but at the same time, that is incorrectly categorized as "racist" by many.

The only way to enjoy a racist joke is to see the stereotype, validate it, and then realize it's funny, because you believe it is true to some extent. So there is no way to get around accepting the generalization if you want it to be funny. Otherwise, if you don't accept the generalization in the punchline, you're pretty much sitting there going "that's not cool man, it's incorrect, even."

[ledwix]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

Suppose you have an opportunity to choose between three items, X, Y, and Z. X has a 40% chance of making your day good. Y has a 50% chance of making your day good. Z has a 60% chance of making your day good. If you are to maximize your chances of making your day good, which would you choose? Remember, you have no other information about any of the items other than that they might make your day good.

Suppose your air has nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, carbon dioxide, and argon. Hydrogen has the lightest mass, then nitrogen, then oxygen, then argon, then carbon dioxide. Assume that the air is at uniform temperature, meaning that on average the kinetic energy of each type of molecule is the same. Since the lighter molecules have the same kinetic energy on average as the heavier ones and thus the lighter molecules have higher average speeds, then if you wanted to maximize the chances that you would randomly pick a particular molecule that was moving very quickly, from which element would you pick?

etc. etc. etc.

The reasoning that lets us make very well-informed general decisions about the world is the exact same reasoning that is taboo when you change the problem to a problem of race. Well, when you only see someone and don't talk to them at all, the only thing you instantly notice is the race of the person. Therefore, the ONLY knowledge about the person is race, so you can use whatever statistics you want about race to project probabilities that they will act in certain ways. The only thing known in the first problem was the probability of something making your day compared to another thing. The only thing known in the second was what kind of molecule you could choose to deal with. The only thing known in a situation where you only know a person's race is just that: the race. Further judgment comes when you actually get to know someone more, and their personality turns into some explicit, real, and less expected. Life is one big game theory exercise, and each probability can be seen as conditional, with the conditions being all facts given to you at that moment.

[MrRubix]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

I just want to make sure I get this point.

Racism - discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race.

It isn't racist if you don't accept someone into a college or something if you have reasons such as poor performance, etc. You aren't "abusing" the person and discriminating against him/her, you're just looking at how much potential they have with their performance. This seems to be something that a large number of people don't understand. If I didn't vote for Barack Obama because I didn't agree with his plans, does that mean I'm racist? Absolutely not! I'm not abusing him or discriminating against race and physical characteristics, I'm basing my decision off of reasoning.

For some reason, it seems like impressionability plays a huge factor here. People offended because they're taught that a statement such as "you didn't qualify for this position" made to a person that's of a different race is automatically racist. The problem is, if these people think that's racist, chances are highly likely that they are INCREDIBLY ****ing racist themselves! "Racism" is the first thing that's coming to mind in their heads. Whoa, what?

So do any of you have anything to say about people who get offended by racism or about why racism is such a big deal in the first place? Not if it's "wrong", but how racism works?

That's the unfortunate truth of it. The problem is that if colleges operated on admitting people by merit alone, they'd be full of Asian and Jewish kids and almost no blacks/hispanics/etc. The more fundamental problem is that the only way to fix racism is to technically invoke actions that are largely seen as reverse-racism/discrimination, resulting in backlash. I personally see racism as an unwinnable war. As long as the trends exist, racism will exist. But to eliminate the trends is to step on a lot of toes.

[operationstrawbarry]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

There is nothing wrong about racism. Its you're personal decision to be an racist if you choose and I respect that. If I wanna go out tomolo and be a total asshole, no one is stopping me but the police, and even then, I still can choose. However, nowadays what you hear in the media, racism is a last effort to win an effort using shock value. That I am not in favor with since if you need to go that length, you lost already. Racism is force, and its the wrong kind of force. In this sense, racism isn't individual anymore, its forcing people to do things that they dont want or to make people agree with you by you being racist.

I do agree with this though: everyone is racist. Being arrogent is a main part of it because its refusing to see another point of view. The difference is to what degree you are racist. However, if you are racist but able to back it up with evidence, then I will kindly accept ur arguments. But that isn't how racist people's are.

[awein999]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

We shouldn't ask "is it wrong to be racist", we should ask what is racism? Is it avoidable? Where does it come from? How do we deal with it?

Racism is the judgment of other people on their race, usually viewing one race as superior to another. No it's unavoidable. It is easy for an individual person to say "I'm not racist" but there are always societal trends that do discriminate against certain races and we are racist on a subconscious level at the very least. Trying to stop racism is a form of racism in itself because we are self-conscious towards certain groups of people, or in other words we are still being racist. (Also it often leads to reverse discrimination).

Racism is deeply rooted in our ancestry. It comes from the human mind as a way for people to say they are better or different from one another.
The only way for racism to stop is for everyone to realize that racism doesn't make sense, that it doesn't physically exist and that it is all a notion perceived in the human mind. Unfortunately this is not happening, not even close because our brains have evolved to be "racist". We can deal with racism by acknowledging it is there and coming to terms with our differences.


I apologize if I'm being redundant or repetitive with what other people have said, I'm not going to review 100 posts, I answered the question without looking at most of them.

[Reach]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

That's the unfortunate truth of it. The problem is that if colleges operated on admitting people by merit alone, they'd be full of Asian and Jewish kids and almost no blacks/hispanics/etc. The more fundamental problem is that the only way to fix racism is to technically invoke actions that are largely seen as reverse-racism/discrimination

But how is that 'racism'? Racism by definition involves prejudice, or judgments made without evidence. If colleges operated based on merit alone, by definition they could not be racist.

The sum of all people being admitted based on merit alone is racially skewed, not racist.

For some reason, people view it as racism though, but only in the context of something intellectual. Why is that?

For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=By1JQFxfLMM

Do you notice anything?

I've never seen anyone claim that the 100m dash is racist, despite being racially skewed, and I've never seen Olympic officials engage in reverse discrimination to include more, slower, non-blacks in the 100m dash.

I could go on (basketball is racist, starcraft is racist), but you should see the point. There's an illogical racism label slapped on any selection process that is racially skewed and relies on methods of intellectual assessment. e.g. the TEST must be racist because of course the x-racial pool could not possibly be performing worse than the y-racial pool (you know, just like blacks could not possibly be running faster than whites; must be the turf).

[MrRubix]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

But how is that 'racism'? Racism by definition involves prejudice, or judgments made without evidence. If colleges operated based on merit alone, by definition they could not be racist.

The sum of all people being admitted based on merit alone is racially skewed, not racist.

For some reason, people view it as racism though, but only in the context of something intellectual. Why is that?

For example: I've never seen anyone claim that the 100m dash is racist, despite being racially skewed, and I've never seen Olympic officials engage in reverse discrimination to include more, slower, non-blacks in the 100m dash.

I could go on, but you should see the point.

It's not racist, technically -- but people will interpret it to be, as you stated. A race that is technically below another in terms of average merit is going to feel oppressed and restricted in opportunity. I think there is perhaps less backlash against things like the 100m dash because the opportunity structure is different.

It's conceivably harder to, say, gain access into a school with a race that's statistically of higher merit than it is to simply train yourself for a running event all your life. Athletics are dominated by African-Americans and yet there is ultimately less demand for the average athlete than there is for the average physicist/programmer/etc. Some industries are better suited for high-variance value-adding individuals. It's easier to say "It's not fair that I can't get into the same schools and get the same jobs/education" than it is to say "It's not fair that he's faster than me -- I could theoretically train as hard as I want."

When things seem out of one's hands, the race card is easier to invoke.

[Reach]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

I see what you're saying, and you're right.

The logic still doesn't hold though. The "I could theoretically train as hard as I want" excuse could be applied to school as well; "I could theoretically study as much as I want".

If anything this only goes to prove my point; that by being merit based only, the onus is on the individual to achieve the required standards.

Nobody is banned from libraries or public schools. If anything it's equal opportunity. Factors that contribute to racial skew such as parenting and social class/networking are entirely out of the hands of institutions that are doing the selection, so I fail to see how people can argue for oppression in these cases.


I've been seeing articles everywhere lately about gender gaps in achievement and how women are outperforming men significantly in school. Based on the justification for racial reverse discrimination, I guess we should use reverse discrimination in favor of men too if the problem continues to get worse.

[MrRubix]

Re: Is it wrong to be racist?

I see what you're saying, and you're right.

The logic still doesn't hold though. The "I could theoretically train as hard as I want" excuse could be applied to school as well; "I could theoretically study as much as I want".

If anything this only goes to prove my point; that by being merit based only, the onus is on the individual to achieve the required standards.

Nobody is banned from libraries or public schools. If anything it's equal opportunity. Factors that contribute to racial skew such as parenting and social class/networking are entirely out of the hands of institutions that are doing the selection, so I fail to see how people can argue for oppression in these cases.

Oh, definitely -- opportunity is huge. Even though, logically, both cases of training/studying are possible to achieve, one arguably requires more resources than the other. Some places have very poor library/schooling systems or are ridden with crime. Oftentimes parenting is, on average, poor or directed in such a way that is not conducive to a particular goal that otherwise contributes to a racial divide.