Does racism automatically make someone a bad person?

old_aussie

whirlpool wrote: »

Not even "based on." It is solely fear. It manifests itself in different ways, but it is fear.

So if I hate sour cream, I should live in fear of sour cream?

green_bow

solas111 wrote: »

No, they are not necessarily bad people at all. They just hold different opinions and viewpoints to yours but who is to decide that they are wrong and you are right.

The trouble with the PC brigade is that everyone who disagrees with what they think is right is a racist, a bigot or something else. They like to portray themselves as modern and liberal but are they not just old fashioned dictators and the very opposite of what they claim to be?

they are as authoritarian as any religious institution , a secular clergy if you will

woodoo

green_bow wrote: »

I seriously doubt black people are scientifically less intelligent but that's different in saying they might be less academic minded , Asians are more gifted in this area than whites

Do you mean asians are more intelligent than whites.

green_bow

Henlars67 wrote: »

My mate always says, "let the do-gooders spend a weekend on the beer with a gang of them and then see what they think"

not all are simply do gooders , many get paid to spout high minded crap about tolerance and equality etc , those phoneys really grind my gears

raah!

Feathers wrote: »

I'd be inclined to say it does make them at least one or the other. Presume to start with we're leaving aside humour.

After that, if someone holds racist views because of a lack of exposure or education, I'd say they were ignorant.

If someone knows well that there is nothing inherently different about non-white/non-Irish people but choose to treat them worse, I would say they are 'bad people'.

Interested to hear how you have a third category…

Well not everyone who holds racist views holds them because of a lack of knowledge. It is possible to be racist whilst knowing everything about this or that group of people and still chooses to dislike them.

Someone could prefer the appearance of white skinned people to black skinned people, and then say "I'd prefer if only white women came into the shop". Which by some definitions might be considered racist (by the weaker definitions, and if we go to a stricter definition then a lot of thigns which people like to call racist can't be called racist).

This is an aesthetic preference of the person, it has a relation neither to their principles nor their knowledge of this 'race' they don't like the look of.

Furthermore, there is huge subjectivity in the whole thing. The word "superior" which would enter into any discussion of racism has to be treated carefully. It can't just mean "superior sunbathers" it has to be "morally superior". And what is or isn't morally superior to something else is in no way universally agreed upon.

And also, there is no connection between "is" and "ought". So you can't just say "Fact A implise moral truth B". So the fact could be "All races have equal intelligence", but this could never ever imply "all races are of equal moral value (that is no race is morally superior to another).

And lastly, not everyone is responsible for the views they hold. Being raised in a racist country and then automatically being racist doesn't make you bad if you are not responsible for those views. Likewise, people in our society adopting the views of our society and then not being racist doesn't mean they are good.

So a summary, it doesn't automatically make them bad. There are different meanings of bad and not everyone is responsible for their actions. And it doesn't make them ignorant, thinking this is trying to connect to things which it is logically impossible to connect.

woodoo

raah! wrote: »

Someone could prefer the appearance of white skinned people to black skinned people.

A woman on this years Big Brother was given a warning for saying she wasn't attracted to black men.

green_bow

woodoo wrote: »

Do you mean asians are more intelligent than whites.

no , gifted might be the wrong word then , Asians make up the highest percentage of ivy league entrants ( proportionately speaking ) in America nowadays , its as much about culture as anything , jews have always prioritised education very highly , ulster protestants have always been more industrious than irish catholics , irish catholics more talented in the arts

blacks in sport , music

Henlars67

raah! wrote: »

Well not everyone who holds racist views holds them because of a lack of knowledge. It is possible to be racist whilst knowing everything about this or that group of people and still chooses to dislike them.

Someone could prefer the appearance of white skinned people to black skinned people, and then say "I'd prefer if only white women came into the shop". Which by some definitions might be considered racist (by the weaker definitions, and if we go to a stricter definition then a lot of thigns which people like to call racist can't be called racist).

This is an aesthetic preference of the person, it has a relation neither to their principles nor their knowledge of this 'race' they don't like the look of.

Furthermore, there is huge subjectivity in the whole thing. The word "superior" which would enter into any discussion of racism has to be treated carefully. It can't just mean "superior sunbathers" it has to be "morally superior". And what is or isn't morally superior to something else is in no way universally agreed upon.

And also, there is no connection between "is" and "ought". So you can't just say "Fact A implise moral truth B". So the fact could be "All races have equal intelligence", but this could never ever imply "all races are of equal moral value (that is no race is morally superior to another).

And lastly, not everyone is responsible for the views they hold. Being raised in a racist country and then automatically being racist doesn't make you bad if you are not responsible for those views. Likewise, people in our society adopting the views of our society and then not being racist doesn't mean they are good.

Of course that would be racist. You could have used a better example than that.
If somebody was only physically attracted to white women then that wouldn't be racist, but to only want white women in a shop or whatever would of course be racist

green_bow

woodoo wrote: »

A woman on this years Big Brother was given a warning for saying she wasn't attracted to black men.

that was absurd , im not attracted to oriental women , am I racist ?

Henlars67

woodoo wrote: »

A woman on this years Big Brother was given a warning for saying she wasn't attracted to black men.

That isn't in any way racist. An attraction is just something automatic really, nothing you can do about it.

It's an instinct, not a thought out view or opinion.

raah!

Henlars67 wrote: »

Of course that would be racist. You could have used a better example than that.
If somebody was only physically attracted to white women then that wouldn't be racist, but to only want white women in a shop or whatever would of course be racist

Well yes it's racist. But it's only bad "automatically" if you have certain other views about people prefering this or that person in their shop, and it's definitely not ignorant automatically.

Almaviva

ted1 wrote: »

Fair enough , glad you found one word to highlight on black

You cant say that. Its 'highlight in more intense greyscale'.

woodoo

Henlars67 wrote: »

That isn't in any way racist. An attraction is just something automatic really, nothing you can do about it.

It's an instinct, not a thought out view or opinion.

Thats the danger though nowadays you have people making calls on racism that don't have a clue. Its dangerous. That girl will come off the show labeled a racist.

Feathers

raah! wrote: »

Well not everyone who holds racist views holds them because of a lack of knowledge. It is possible to be racist whilst knowing everything about this or that group of people and still chooses to dislike them.

Someone could prefer the appearance of white skinned people to black skinned people, and then say "I'd prefer if only white women came into the shop". Which by some definitions might be considered racist (by the weaker definitions, and if we go to a stricter definition then a lot of thigns which people like to call racist can't be called racist).

This is an aesthetic preference of the person, it has a relation neither to their principles nor their knowledge of this 'race' they don't like the look of.

Of course it doesn't — it's the most bizarre example ever. I've never heard someone say that to not be a racist, you must find all races equally attractive.

raah! wrote: »

Furthermore, there is huge subjectivity in the whole thing. The word "superior" which would enter into any discussion of racism has to be treated carefully. It can't just mean "superior sunbathers" it has to be "morally superior". And what is or isn't morally superior to something else is in no way universally agreed upon.

And also, there is no connection between "is" and "ought". So you can't just say "Fact A implise moral truth B". So the fact could be "All races have equal intelligence", but this could never ever imply "all races are of equal moral value (that is no race is morally superior to another).

Really unclear what you're driving at here.

raah! wrote: »

And lastly, not everyone is responsible for the views they hold. Being raised in a racist country and then automatically being racist doesn't make you bad if you are not responsible for those views. Likewise, people in our society adopting the views of our society and then not being racist doesn't mean they are good.

Which would be the ignorance that people are talking about earlier. But you're saying that people can be racist & not be ignorant (i.e. that they are responsible for their views), but still not be "bad people".

raah!

It's not ignorant to adopt the views of your peers without thinking about them. There is no lack of knowledge there. Just like a child who is raised to think that all races are morally equal without ever thinking about it is not ignorant. It's not that they lack knowledge. These are moral or cultural values.

Here's another example. Now imagine some negative generalisation that is true about a group or race of people, and remember, just because something is a 'general' statement, that doesn't mean it is not a true statement. So for example a general statement 'most A's are B'. Now a person could form a negative opinion of this group A based on this true generalisation. They would not be ignorant, nor would they be necessarily 'bad'.

They are not ignorant because the statement is true, and they are not 'bad people' for a million reasons.

If you think there is no true negative generalisation about groups of people then how about "alot of irish people like to drink, I'm terrified of drunkards, therefore, just in case, I don't let irish people in my shop".

Feathers

raah! wrote: »

It's not ignorant to adopt the views of your peers without thinking about them. There is no lack of knowledge there.

Knowledge involves processing information: If you think all black people are stupid without having interacted with any, purely because your parents did, I'd say that's pretty much a textbook definition of ignorance.

raah! wrote: »

If you think there is no true negative generalisation about groups of people then how about "alot of irish people like to drink, I'm terrified of drunkards, therefore, just in case, I don't let irish people in my shop".

Generalisations are fine, they're how people make sense of the world. Racism occurs though where you apply them to individuals. Of course someone banning all Irish people from their shop is racist.

But your saying they're not bad people because some Irish people are drunks? So it's OK to ban all Irish?

Is racism ever wrong, then, in your opinion?

Karl Stein

hfallada wrote: »

I think Irish people are ignorant rather racist.

Serious facepalm there.

Clandestine wrote: »

On average black people commit a much higher rate of crime than other races in north America,

Why choose race as a variable? Why not chose socio-economic background?

and scientific studies have shown that on average, regardless of environment, they score lower than other races by 15-20 points on IQ tests

These 'scientific' studies only have value in a racist society.

Why choose race? Why not choose foot size?

1ZRed

EdenHazard wrote: »

No but I actually die a little when I hear what I thought was such a good person come out with racist remarks.

We need to get this to happen more often..

raah!

Feathers wrote: »

Knowledge involves processing information: If you think all black people are stupid without having interacted with any, purely because your parents did, I'd say that's pretty much a textbook definition of ignorance.

Ok, well if ignorance is lack of knowledge, and if you don't have knowledge unless you have properly justified your beliefs, then lots of people are ignorant about a lot of things. This means that alot of good beliefs that people have are also ignorant. And it means most people are ignorant of most things.

If you think that it's wrong to say a curse word, purely because your parents told you, then are you ignorant? If you think that if you drink and drive you will crash immediately purely because the government told you are you ignorant?

Generalisations are fine, they're how people make sense of the world. Racism occurs though where you apply them to individuals. Of course someone banning all Irish people from their shop is racist.

But your saying they're not bad people because some Irish people are drunks? So it's OK to ban all Irish?

I'm saying a woman with a fear of drunks, not wanting drunks in her shop, is not necessarily a bad person. It's unfortunate that she is afraid of irish people, but her being afraid of them does not make her bad.

I would not be overly critical of a woman who had a similar fear of black people in her shop, I would assume neither that she is ignorant or immoral.

Is racism ever wrong, then, in your opinion?

Yes! It's just not automatically wrong.

A person with racist views is a person with many other views. You have to look at the whole person. Just like a person who says "racism is bad" is not automatically a good person. Both of these people can be equally ignorant in how they obtain their views.

The status quo now is that racism is bad, perhaps a few years back this was not the case. Is a person who follows the status quo now any less good or bad than a person who followed it some years back?

I don't see how a bunch of people gathering now decrying racism are any different from those similar groups who expressed a similar status quo which was decrying people of an opposite race.

Victor

cometogether wrote: »

Does racism automatically make someone a bad person?

There is the argument that there are no bad people, merely people who do bad things. However, there are some people whose behaviour is dominated by bad things.

Push Pop

Who voted for multiculturalism? We wouldn't have any racism issues if we kept the 3rd world economic migrants out.

wexandproud

when the subject of racism is brought up we all assume its about disslike of eastern europeans,africans, and other minorities. how many of the non racist people on here would like a family of travellers and all their trappings as neighbours

Nodin

Clandestine wrote: »

I have a question for After hours

On average black people commit a much higher rate of crime than other races in north America, and scientific studies have shown that on average, regardless of environment, they score lower than other races by 15-20 points on IQ tests

Is it racist or otherwise immoral to point this out?

Here we go....

push pop wrote:

Who voted for multiculturalism? We wouldn't have any racism issues if we kept
the 3rd world economic migrants out

...think that through again.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

mango salsa wrote: »

I have mixed feelings on this - part of me says yes but then my Dad and Stepmother are racist (but they wouldnt admit to it) and my Mums friends who were like grandparents to me were racist too - I guess like links I think they were just ignorant

This!
+100

Mark Tapley

Clandestine wrote: »

I have a question for After hours

On average black people commit a much higher rate of crime than other races in north America, and scientific studies have shown that on average, regardless of environment, they score lower than other races by 15-20 points on IQ tests

Is it racist or otherwise immoral to point this out?

Its not racist to quote facts but these sort of "facts" are often quoted by racists .

Leftist

it kind of makes you a bad person, but it definitely makes you a thick person.

See the comment about black people and crime in the U.S. A genuinely idiotic comment that only a moron would make, assuming it came from an adult of course.

The majority of prisoners in irish prisons come from low income or welfare income areas. They are white. The majority of prisoners in the U.S come from the same type of 'poor income' areas.
The next question is, why is so much of the black community in america in this low income economic zone? And then we're back at racism and the effects of racism over a prolonged period.

Feathers

raah! wrote: »

Ok, well if ignorance is lack of knowledge, and if you don't have knowledge unless you have properly justified your beliefs, then lots of people are ignorant about a lot of things. This means that alot of good beliefs that people have are also ignorant. And it means most people are ignorant of most things.

Yep, agreed.

raah! wrote:

If you think that it's wrong to say a curse word, purely because your parents told you, then are you ignorant? If you think that if you drink and drive you will crash immediately purely because the government told you are you ignorant?

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.

raah! wrote:

I'm saying a woman with a fear of drunks, not wanting drunks in her shop, is not necessarily a bad person. It's unfortunate that she is afraid of irish people, but her being afraid of them does not make her bad.

I would not be overly critical of a woman who had a similar fear of black people in her shop, I would assume neither that she is ignorant or immoral.

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.

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.

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

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?

biko

I put them on par with sexists and homophobes, they might be sound but they still do be a dickhead sometimes.
Racism is still a very touchy subject, unfortunately it's still ok to be a sexist bastard wifebeater.
The big problem is when the sexist bastard wifebeater is from the Middle East or Africa. To call them a sexists bastard wifebeater then suddenly means you're a racist.
The battered women's shelters are filling up and this is what is wrecking feminists head these days.
They want to be pro-women but can't be seen to be anti-immigration.

Leftist

biko wrote: »

.
Racism is still a very touchy subject, unfortunately it's still ok to be a sexist bastard wifebeater.

No it isn't

biko wrote: »

.The big problem is when the sexist bastard wifebeater is from the Middle East or Africa. To call them a sexists bastard wifebeater then suddenly means you're a racist.

and no it doesn't.

I would be absolutely perplexed if I met someone who was anti-racism but didn't mind violent domestic abuse. A very unusual combination.

tritium

Its an interesting one. I think there are relatively few out and out racists out there but many people who hold some racist views - big difference here! Unfortunately there is a tendency to use the racist label to drive other agendas, so it gets bandied about that so and so is racist without any kind of analysis of the situation or context. Gandhi was apparently a major bigot, but I think overall he was one of the good guys.

Strangely enough this labeling thing is quite selective. For example if I say all blacks are potentially thieves I'm on very thin ice. On the other hand if someone postulates that all men are potential rapists/ paedophiles, there'll be maybe a minor bit of tut tutting but no real outrage.