Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarley
I think it is relevant to the discussion here, certainly more relevant than some woman inadvertently hailing Hitler. The types of simplistic analyses that you and Iowa are advocating are contributing to the intellectually vacuous nature of U.S. politics. Statements such as "Trump is a racist," "Hilary is a criminal," "Trump is a fascist," etc. are over-simplifications of important issues this election. But rather than appealing to the rational person, these statements represent emotional appeals to the average dolt.
Having said that, it's tough to assign blame for what is occurring. I'd say the lack of legitimate news media, the adversarial nature of an entrenched two party system, and the weak education system in the States are the primary contributing factors to the situation we are in.
|
Well, this is the first time I've been called "intellectually vacuous" in a while. But I am sorry: when someone says "black people are lazy", it isn't vacuous to say they are a racist. It's accurate. If you were talking about Mitt Romney (who also got accused, much more unfairly, of racism in 2012) you would have a point.
But your point here rests on a distinction around what "race" is rather than one around what "racism" is--and when it comes to describing someone's attitudes toward and tendency to judge other human beings, that just isn't a relevant distinction. There is more than one way to be intellectually vacuous: one of those ways is to insist on foolishly semantic distinctions between identical behaviours: such as by saying Bob, who hates black people is a racist, while Bill, who hates muslims and Mexicans, is something else.