Does racism automatically make someone a bad person?

tritium

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

I have never met someone who wasn't raciest in some way or other. I've met loads of people who claim to not be racist at all but that surface is very very easily scratched away.

I think prejudiced would be a more accurate term in my experience here

tritium

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

I have never met someone who wasn't raciest in some way or other. I've met loads of people who claim to not be racist at all but that surface is very very easily scratched away.

I think prejudiced would be a more accurate term in my experience here

raah!

Feathers wrote: »

Yep, agreed.



Yes, but they're not great examples. If you don't curse purely because your parents told you not to, you're ignorant of the meaning of the word & how it will affect those around you. If you don't drink & drive because the government told you not to, your ignorant if the fact that alcohol can inhibit our ability to control a car.

In both cases, you don't understand why you're taking that action which again, is the definiton of the word.

You do understand why you are taking the action, because your parents or the government told you to. And there are easier examples. Saying "hurting people is bad because my parents told me it was", is ignorant, if you have received this from your parents. You miss the point if you go back steps, Because I can just declare the first point given to you by your parents or society as something about which you are ignorant.

Nobody would judge someone for having an irrational fear, but banning all Irish people from the shop is treating them indiscriminately as one group, which presumably is done through ignorance or immorality.

What presumably? I said she didn't want any of them because she was afraid of them all. She is indiscriminately afraid of them.

If an eloquent, well dressed Irish man came into the shop, clearly not a drunk & she was still afraid, she would be acting ignorantly to assume that she is threatened because of his Irishness.

This again contradicts the terms of the example. She has an irrational fear of irish people. It's not because she doesn't know not all irish people are drunkards, she is afraid of all irish people because many of them are drunkards.

If she wasn't afraid but banned him anyway, shed be acting immorally.

Again this contradicts the terms of the example. She is afraid of irish people.

You can't say:

"This is a bad example because 'description of different scenario' "

I still can't see a third option that isn't simply condoning racism. Unless you're saying all the other nice things she does make up for being willfully racist?

I did say a large amount of different things in my post in conjunction with that example. That she might do other nice things was one of them, but only a minor side point. And it's not possible remain discussing productively this without going deeper into the definitions of things like racism and what is good or bad, what constitutes ignorance, and the extent to which a person is responsible for their views.

Wabbit Ears

tritium wrote: »

I think prejudiced would be a more accurate term in my experience here

What some label prejudice an awful lot of people are nowadays calling racism, just socially acceptable racism within your own peer group?

old hippy

There is no "acceptable" form of racism. Casual, "jokey" and so forth. We should not defend racists, rather try and educate. And that goes towards anyone of any race/religion. I often end up arguing with my mate (she's black Zimbabwean) who complains that "all Nigerians are the same", "you can tell gays by the way they dress" :rolleyes: etc.

Everyone is capable of it - but I believe everyone can move beyond such pettiness, too.

Annasopra

old hippy wrote: »

There is no "acceptable" form of racism.

Agreed but sometimes you have to just agree to disagree and just not talk about the issues with family or close friends.

tiger55

cometogether wrote: »

Discrimination against someone based on race, ethnicity, nationality, creed etc. Is the definition not fairly straightforward?

Is this racism?

A MOB went on a wave of random race violence on Temple Bar, which left five Dubliners with horrific injuries.



One man -- a Dublin DJ -- was almost killed in the attack as he suffered serious head injuries when he was set upon by the gang.


The level of violence has shocked gardai and the many witnesses to the race hate orgy -- believed to be the first of its kind in the city.


One member of the African gang was arrested today in pre-dawn raids by detectives across the capital.


Five Dubliners, all aged in their 20s, were left with horrific injuries in the October 2010 attacks, which have only come to light now.


http://www.herald.ie/news/race-hate-gang-in-temple-bar-orgy-of-violence-27984181.html

tiger55

So immigrants are allowed to flood into Ireland and its racism to object to this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce31wo8wKzI

old hippy

mango salsa wrote: »

Agreed but sometimes you have to just agree to disagree and just not talk about the issues with family or close friends.

Bit difficult with my family and friends. We're United Colors of Benneton, know what I mean

Annasopra

tiger55 wrote: »

So immigrants are allowed to flood into Ireland and its racism to object to this?

Yes

old hippy

tiger55 wrote: »

So immigrants are allowed to flood into Ireland and its racism to object to this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce31wo8wKzI

What flood? Get a grip of yourself, man.

Annasopra

old hippy wrote: »

Bit difficult with my family and friends. We're United Colors of Benneton, know what I mean

Oh I know but when you come from a monocultural background it's much more difficult.

Hande hoche!

tiger55 wrote: »

So immigrants are allowed to flood into Ireland and its racism to object to this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce31wo8wKzI

I would say more xenophobic. If you were fine with white immigrants but not those of other races, it would racist.

humanji

tiger55 wrote: »

Is this racism?

A MOB went on a wave of random race violence on Temple Bar, which left five Dubliners with horrific injuries.



One man -- a Dublin DJ -- was almost killed in the attack as he suffered serious head injuries when he was set upon by the gang.


The level of violence has shocked gardai and the many witnesses to the race hate orgy -- believed to be the first of its kind in the city.


One member of the African gang was arrested today in pre-dawn raids by detectives across the capital.


Five Dubliners, all aged in their 20s, were left with horrific injuries in the October 2010 attacks, which have only come to light now.


http://www.herald.ie/news/race-hate-gang-in-temple-bar-orgy-of-violence-27984181.html

If the reason teh gang attacked people was because of their race, then it's racist. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious.

tiger55 wrote: »

So immigrants are allowed to flood into Ireland and its racism to object to this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce31wo8wKzI

The video is meaningless. As for objecting to immigrants, if you're objecting solely on their race, then you're being racist.

old hippy

mango salsa wrote: »

Oh I know but when you come from a monocultural background it's much more difficult.

All the more reason to challenge those ingrained views, IMHO

Leftist

tiger55 wrote: »

So immigrants are allowed to flood into Ireland and its racism to object to this?

is this even in response to any other comment here or just a declaration?

Clandestine

tiger55 wrote: »

So immigrants are allowed to flood into Ireland and its racism to object to this?

No it isn't

Stereomaniac

For sure it is, especially because people can remember Ireland just being all white, largely Catholic.

Clandestine

old hippy wrote: »

What flood? Get a grip of yourself, man.

What flood you say? Ireland has had it pretty easy so far, but Sweden and the UK have not. Crime rates and rape rates have shot up in those countries as a result of immigrants (they commit crime at a much higher rate), and whites are becoming a minority too. No joke.

Annasopra

old hippy wrote: »

All the more reason to challenge those ingrained views, IMHO

Challenging - yeah fine but when the views are so ingrained they are unchangable sometimes you have to give up

humanji

Clandestine wrote: »

What flood you say? Ireland has had it pretty easy so far, but Sweden and the UK have not. Crime rates and rape rates have shot up in those countries as a result of immigrants (they commit crime at a much higher rate), and whites are becoming a minority too. No joke.

Unless you can back that up with solid facts, then that's just plain racism.

Hande hoche!

Clandestine wrote: »

What flood you say? Ireland has had it pretty easy so far, but Sweden and the UK have not. Crime rates and rape rates have shot up in those countries as a result of immigrants (they commit crime at a much higher rate), and whites are becoming a minority too. No joke.

Is that no the issue of the socio-economic background of the immigrants themselves? Are crime rates higher for more well to do immigrants in those countries?

danniemcq

Clandestine wrote: »

What flood you say? Ireland has had it pretty easy so far, but Sweden and the UK have not. Crime rates and rape rates have shot up in those countries as a result of immigrants (they commit crime at a much higher rate), and whites are becoming a minority too. No joke.

Correlation does not imply causation.

Please back up statments like this with facts

Leftist

Clandestine wrote: »

What flood you say? Ireland has had it pretty easy so far, but Sweden and the UK have not. Crime rates and rape rates have shot up in those countries as a result of immigrants (they commit crime at a much higher rate), and whites are becoming a minority too. No joke.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/dec/11/census-2011-religion-race-education
UK 86% White

how do people like this even try to respect themselves.

Clandestine

humanji wrote: »

Unless you can back that up with solid facts, then that's just plain racism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_London
Read the "race and crime section". Blacks make up 10% of London's population

"Immigrants are overrepresented in Sweden's crime statistics. In a study by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention in 1997-2001, 25% of the almost 1,520,000 offences were found to be committed by people born abroad, while almost 20% were committed by Swedish-born people with a foreign background. In the study, immigrants were found to be four times more likely to be investigated for lethal violence and robbery than ethnic Swedes. In addition, immigrants were three times more likely to be investigated for violent assault, and five times more likely to be investigated for sex crimes. Those from North Africa and Western Asia were overrepresented." Immigrants born outside Sweden make up 14% of Sweden's population

Just two examples. I'll update this when I find more

Clandestine

Leftist wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/dec/11/census-2011-religion-race-education
UK 86% White

http://www.ethnicity.ac.uk/census/869_CCSR_Bulletin_How_has_ethnic_diversity_grown_v4NW.pdf
White British:
1991-93%
2001-87%
2011-80%

That is a huge and worrying drop imo

Leftist

Clandestine wrote: »

http://www.ethnicity.ac.uk/census/869_CCSR_Bulletin_How_has_ethnic_diversity_grown_v4NW.pdf
White British:
1991-93%
2001-87%
2011-80%

That is a huge and worrying drop imo

80%? dangerously close to a minority.

As for Sweden's poultry 86% white populace? dear me, they are down to their last numbers.
Does it hurt when you try to spell your name?

Clandestine

Leftist wrote: »

80%? dangerously close to a minority.

As for Sweden's poultry 86% white populace? dear me, they are down to their last numbers.

Do you not realise this is occurring at a fast but steady rate? The population is not going to disappear next year, but in 20-30 years who knows where it'll be?

Leftist

Clandestine wrote: »

Do you not realise this is occurring at a fast but steady rate? The population is not going to disappear next year, but in 20-30 years who knows where it'll be?

Probably still around unless they died.

I certainly hope it's educated to a degree that it views opinions like yours like we today view opinions based on physical anthropology.

Dostoevsky

Leftist wrote: »

80%? dangerously close to a minority.

As for Sweden's poultry 86% white populace? dear me, they are down to their last numbers.

Why bother being a sarcastic prick with your answer? Challenge the post's content or find some other discussion. Making cheap shots like that is thanks-whoring at its most cringeworthy and does nothing for those of us interested enough in this issue to read this thread, but who are not knowledgeable enough yet to comment about it.

Leftist

Dostoevsky wrote: »

Why bother being a sarcastic prick with your answer? Challenge the post's content or don't. Making cheap shots like that is thanks-whoring at its most cringeworthy and does nothing for those of us interested enough in this issue to read this thread, but who are not knowledgeable enough yet to comment about it.

I refuse to believe that!!

humanji

Clandestine wrote: »

Do you not realise this is occurring at a fast but steady rate? The population is not going to disappear next year, but in 20-30 years who knows where it'll be?

The population will still be there. You'll know them by the way they live there.

Nodin

biko wrote: »

There was no real ethnic difference between the Tutsis and the Hutus, and they got along most of the time.
But one day the Hutus killed about a million Tutsis.
Racist crime?

In the mind of the Hutus it was, for which one can greatly blame the Belgians. Some reading is required on your part.

humanji

Dostoevsky wrote: »

Why bother being a sarcastic prick with your answer? Challenge the post's content or find some other discussion. Making cheap shots like that is thanks-whoring at its most cringeworthy and does nothing for those of us interested enough in this issue to read this thread, but who are not knowledgeable enough yet to comment about it.

And you stop insulting other users and back-seat modding.

Nodin

tiger55 wrote: »

A MOB ////injuries.
One man -- a Dublin........to light now.
http://www.herald.ie/news/race-hate-gang-in-temple-bar-orgy-of-violence-27984181.html

There was no evidence that race was a factor in that, whatsoever.

tiger55 wrote: »

So immigrants are allowed to flood into Ireland and its racism to object to this

.....do please explain this, as its news to the rest of us.

Thomas20

In the mind of a white anti-racist, 5 or 10% brown in a white country is not enough, that much can be evidenced in this thread.

Nodin

Thomas20 wrote: »

In the mind of a white anti-racist, 5 or 10% brown in a white country is not enough, that much can be evidenced in this thread.

....wha?

tritium

Nodin wrote: »

There was no evidence that race was a factor in that, whatsoever.

From reading the report the 'official source' seems to indicate that they believe this is a race motivated incident. Do you have reason to cast doubt on this?

Nodin

tritium wrote: »

From reading the report the 'official source' seems to indicate that they believe this is a race motivated incident. Do you have reason to cast doubt on this?

....there's no evidence of it whatsoever, no other paper reported it. The "source" was anonymous, no victim is quoted as being racially abused by the members of the gang.....it was a series of violent muggings.

http://www.herald.ie/news/race-hate-...-27984181.html

There was no evidence that race was a factor in that, whatsoever.

But I bet if it were white thugs beating on black folk , it would have been a race crime, right Nodin???

:rolleyes:

Nodin

Jake1 wrote: »

But I bet if it were white thugs beating on black folk , it would have been a race crime, right Nodin???

Why? White people can't mug without being racist?

tritium

Nodin wrote: »

....there's no evidence of it whatsoever, no other paper reported it. The "source" was anonymous, no victim is quoted as being racially abused by the members of the gang.....it was a series of violent muggings.

OK so you're giving the benefit if the doubt. Can I (genuinely) ask, if the story was five white kids who had attacked various black people on a crime spree, would you give the same benefit of doubt?

Nodin

tritium wrote: »

OK so you're giving the benefit if the doubt. Can I (genuinely) ask, if the story was five white kids who had attacked various black people on a crime spree, would you give the same benefit of doubt?

...that would depend on a number of things - was there racist abuse? were there only black people in the area? and so on.

Henlars67

Nodin wrote: »

....there's no evidence of it whatsoever, no other paper reported it. The "source" was anonymous, no victim is quoted as being racially abused by the members of the gang.....it was a series of violent muggings.

I agree with you there. There isn't the evidence to suggest it was definitely race related so therefore nobody should really go accusing the gang of racism.

Funny though, that on the other thread, where there was also no definitive evidence of racism against a well known black person you insisted that it was race related.

You seem to think that only white people can be racist. That sounds like racism to me.

jank

Nodin wrote: »

Why? White people can't mug without being racist?

Well it certainly would have raised suspicions and may have been officially catagorised as one.

crockholm

Leftist wrote: »

80%? dangerously close to a minority.

As for Sweden's poultry 86% white populace? dear me, they are down to their last numbers.
Does it hurt when you try to spell your name?

Leave Sweden's poultry out of this,they've enough to be worrying with christmas being just around the corner.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Well it certainly would have raised suspicions and may have been officially catagorised as one.

.....it may have had aliens involved, given we're talking about something that didn't happen.

henlars67 wrote:

Funny though, that on the other thread....

...if you want to discuss the other thread, I'd suggest that's the place for it.

kowloon

My Grandfather is heading for the century, grew up in the middle of Dublin. One day in Balbriggan he shouts out (he's quite deaf) 'Look at all the ****!'. He's not a bad person, but he can't change at this stage. I'm sure anyone who heard could have taken offence.

The first black person I ever met was a mate of my Dad's from Malawi. I asked him how long he would have to live in Ireland before he turned white. A kid these days wouldn't ask that question but back then people were leaving the country, not moving in.

Itwasntme.

biko wrote: »

There was no real ethnic difference between the Tutsis and the Hutus, and they got along most of the time.
But one day the Hutus killed about a million Tutsis.
Racist crime?

False. I am a Tutsi and there is an ethnic difference between Hutus and Tutsis. Yes, those lines have been blurred by intermarriages over time but we are ethnically different. Recent history books will tell you that this is not the case and that Hutu and Tutsi is an economic dichotomy engineered by the Belgians to further their own agenda but most of those books were not written by Rwandans and their knowledge of our history is very limited. Rwandan oral history tells a different story.

We also did not 'get along' most of the time and neither did it just happen that one day the Hutus decided to annihilate all Tutsis. And while we are all of the same race, it was most definitely a hate crime along the lines of a racist crime.

Friend Computer

jank wrote: »

Well it certainly would have raised suspicions and may have been officially catagorised as one.

Don't be silly, Jank, there isn't a history of systemic discrimination against black people! That's all a fantastical re-writing of history, created by the liberal-commie alliance to dupe innocent young men into leaving their pure white women to be corrupted!