Psycnet's diet of "things outside of his sphere of agreement" appears to be the equivalent of a right wing baby boomer reading up exclusively on the things Fox News has told him to be upset about regarding the left.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
You can't think of any situation where somebody called other people racist, despite there being no evidence that they were racists, but simply disagreed with the perspective of the other person?
Usually the evidence is that the perspective they expressed is , in fact, racist.
Better idea: do you have any specific examples of this “racist without evidence” phenomenon in play? Even if just to get an idea of the kind of thing you’re referring to.
18 year old white girl going to prom wearing a traditional Chinese dress. Bullied and being called a racist for "appropriating" another culture.
Just one example that's all over the internet and even mainstream Canadian news right now. I can't actually believe I need to defend that claim because calling people racists without proof is the bread and butter of the left right now.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ashasx For This Useful Post:
I think Rubecube called someone racist earlier today for saying they didn't care about the Redskins' name thing, as if not having any particular concern about matters as trivial as the name of an NFL team could only be the result of an ingrained belief that first nations are inherently inferior as a race. But I don't remember where I saw that or who it was in particular.
The main thing is that there are certain people, yourself included I suppose, who adopt what some of us would consider an excessively broad view of the term "racist", because you recognize that it's a hugely damaging label to apply to someone, and given that it has that discrediting stigma, want to apply it more broadly to people you disagree with on fundamental political issues even if they don't meet the traditional meaning. If someone's tagged successfully as a racist, that's it - they have no further voice or credibility in any debate. Game, set, match, we don't have to hear them out or rebut them. In fact, even giving them the time of day indicates that you yourself must be a racist too, hence Sam Harris being listed on the SPLC's hate watch list for talking to Charles Murray a year ago. This is, incidentally, exactly what people were complaining Psycnet was trying to do by characterizing Peterson and those who support him as "alt right" even if they don't want any truck with Richard Spencer or anyone remotely similar to him.
It's just standard smear tactics, at the end of the day.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Last edited by CorsiHockeyLeague; 05-03-2018 at 05:22 PM.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
I think Rubecube called someone racist earlier today for saying they didn't care about the Redskins' name thing, as if not having any particular concern about matters as trivial as the name of an NFL team could only be the result of an ingrained belief that first nations are inherently inferior as a race. But I don't remember where I saw that or who it was in particular.
It wasn't because the poster said he didn't care, he actively applauds the owner digging in his heels to defend an obvious slur. I'd never accuse someone who was nihilistic or apathetic of racism. Actively cheering someone on for a racist act kind of falls into the racism category, IMO.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
Ah, I see, fair enough then, I retract the statement. I wasn't paying close enough attention apparently, likely owing to nihilism or apathy.
EDIT: Though I guess I should clarify that I disagree that "actively cheering someone on for a racist act kind of falls into the racism category", necessarily - two people can favour the same course of action, one for racist reasons and one for totally non-racist reasons; the intentions matter significantly. I can't think of an example in the Redskins situation particularly, but then, I have had quite a lot of rum.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Last edited by CorsiHockeyLeague; 05-03-2018 at 05:30 PM.
18 year old white girl going to prom wearing a traditional Chinese dress. Bullied and being called a racist for "appropriating" another culture.
Just one example that's all over the internet and even mainstream Canadian news right now. I can't actually believe I need to defend that claim because calling people racists without proof is the bread and butter of the left right now.
Well, the proof would be in the fact that she, a white person, wore a traditional Chinese dress. Doing so can be a sign of cultural appropriation, which is a symptom of system racism.
So again, it’s not as those there’s “no evidence.” There is evidence, it’s right in front of your face. What you mean to say is that terms like racism are used based on evidence that may, in the end, not actually support that conclusion.
Me? I think she was fine to where the dress. I liked her reasoning for it and she stood behind it. But I can also see the evidence some people took as it being a gesture influenced by racism.
To claim that people just walking around calling others racists for no damn reason is false. Evidence that doesn’t convince you =/= no evidence, and you should definitely be aware of the difference.
The fact that you think wearing and appreciating a dress that is not your own culture can be considered racist is the exact kind of bigotry I'm talking about. That is not evidence. That's laughable. And I'm not talking about you in specifics here since you don't find it racist, but it literally makes no sense. The race card is the first thing that's played here.
If white people can only do white people stuff, what's next? Segregation?
I can bring more examples. I can bring up articles calling Peterson a racist or a sexist or whatever deplorable term you can find, but there's absolutely zero evidence that Peterson is any of these things. I suppose that's digressing beyond the point I'm trying to make.
There are just as many bigots (in the absolute sense of the word) on the left as there are on the right.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ashasx For This Useful Post:
Well, the proof would be in the fact that she, a white person, wore a traditional Chinese dress. Doing so can be a sign of cultural appropriation, which is a symptom of system racism.
So again, it’s not as those there’s “no evidence.” There is evidence, it’s right in front of your face. What you mean to say is that terms like racism are used based on evidence that may, in the end, not actually support that conclusion.
Me? I think she was fine to where the dress. I liked her reasoning for it and she stood behind it. But I can also see the evidence some people took as it being a gesture influenced by racism.
To claim that people just walking around calling others racists for no damn reason is false. Evidence that doesn’t convince you =/= no evidence, and you should definitely be aware of the difference.
No. It is only appropriate to call someone racist if they were, in fact, being racist.
No. It is only appropriate to call someone racist if they were, in fact, being racist.
I agree. I was just suggesting that people aren’t going around calling people racist without evidence. That implies people are just going about their day doing nothing questionable and BOOM! They’re a racist.
What does happen is people get called racist when there is evidence of it, even if it’s insufficient. I’ve even been guilty of it myself, but there does come a moment when you kind of “get it,” and realise how big a picture you need to see to make a claim like that.
It is appropriate to call racists racists, and to point out behaviour that could be construed as racist to others who otherwise aren’t, and allow for explanation. What you can’t do is call someone a racist who exhibits behaviour that could be construed as racist, without an opportunity to explain before any such accusation is made.
Just the notion that "cultural appropriation" is a concept that anyone should be at all concerned about is... I want to say controversial, but that sort of undersells it. Hopelessly stupid is closer. I mean, you guys are annoyed by people throwing around the term "SJW" at you, and then you start talking about this kind of stuff as if it's a given that everyone must subscribe to this particular dogma. No, I can't imagine for the life of me why anyone would assume you're part of that tribe.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Also, pay attention man, it’s not like we’re the ones who invented the term or brought it up in this thread. I was just explaining the thought of individuals who use it as a jumping off point to make the racism claim. I barely GAF about cultural appropriation.
I appreciate you quoting me directly and verbatim, sir! Here is you actively applying the term "cultural appropriation" to behaviour and describing that behaviour as racist, which goes a good deal beyond merely commenting on its mere existence and is exactly what I just said you were doing.
Quote:
Well, the proof would be in the fact that she, a white person, wore a traditional Chinese dress. Doing so can be a sign of cultural appropriation, which is a symptom of system racism.
It's right there on this same page. You guys are delusional.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
I appreciate you quoting me directly and verbatim, sir! Here is you actively applying the term "cultural appropriation" to behaviour and describing that behaviour as racist, which goes a good deal beyond merely commenting on its mere existence and is exactly what I just said you were doing.
It's right there on this same page. You guys are delusional.
Dude, I’m literally explaining what cultural appropriation is, and explaining how some people make the leap to racism.
Appropriating elements from a culture (traditional Chinese dress), a privilege born from systemic racism/colonialism et al. The lack of me going “IT’S DEFINITELY THAT, SHES A RACIST” as opposed to what I actually said, which was “doing so (wearing that dress) CAN BE A SIGN OF... (insert term I didn’t invent and made no value judgement on)”
Good... effort though? I don’t know. You caught me Corsi, I pointed out that something fit the definition of something else (without making a value judgement other than, where I specifically said: I THINK SHES FINE TO WEAR THE DRESS), guess i’ll go join my tribe deepest in the Leftistonian Jungle.
*capitalization overused to amuse only myself, not indicative of rage or insanity
Last edited by PepsiFree; 05-03-2018 at 07:51 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
You think wearing a dress from a culture that doesn't match your skin colour is evidence of racism, which is a product of your particular ideology. Even the language you use - "appropriating elements from a culture (traditional Chinese dress), a privilege born from systemic racism/colonialism" - is tied directly to this ideology. It carries with it implicit assumptions about what counts as racism, what's acceptable and unacceptable for white, african american, asian, and other identity groups, and what sorts of behaviours people should be morally concerned about. All of which would be rejected by anyone who doesn't subscribe to identitarian views like the ones you subscribe to. That is why people ascribe the ideology to you - you routinely talk the talk. Fine, you believe what you believe, just don't act so shocked when people make that connection.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
