You need to look up the history of the KKK before this conversation goes any further. They used to literally have posters and literature saying “The strong left hand of the Democratic Party”.
Voting blue “if you know whats good for you” is entrenched over generations, done at gunpoint and the end of a rope.
Correct because to not be racist is a hindrance on white men’s source of power…. RACISM… ding ding ding
“Don’t let the left stop you from being racist, we cannot be dominated”
Is that what you’re saying? Sounds like it.
It has nothing to do with being able to be covertly racist without repercussions. Anti-racist policies use shame and coercion to try and force a specific outcome.
For example, If we worked together and you tell a joke (I believe you’re black, correct?) everyone is supposed step in and tell you that that’s wrong and report you to HR. I’ve sat through a training with this specific scenario. What you said might not have even been racist. It’s just a matter of whether or not it could be deemed racist. That’s what I mean by subjective.
Even if it was objectively racist, I don’t believe it’s an individual’s responsibility to correct someone else’s behavior nor do I think you’re the same as the offending individual (in this case racist) if you don’t.
You’re free to step in. That’s your choice, but it’s a choice. The anti-racist types don’t want you to have a choice because ultimately it’s not actually about reducing racism it’s about subverting individuality.
Do you believe the action of correcting should be encouraged though?
I don’t know how most conservatives will act. That’s part of my point. Some conservatives would. Some would laugh. Some would roll their eyes and go about their day.
Fixed it
This may sound like a cop-out, but I think that’s a difficult question to answer.
On the one hand, part of me wants to emphatically say yes. We should encourage people to act
or not act certain ways for the good of the individual and society and there are some obvious examples that most of us would agree on. I also think empowering people to stand against wrongdoing, for lack of a better term, is generally a good thing.
However, I firmly believe few things in life are black/white and as a society we don’t often agree on what the right thing is. There are some pretty obvious example of this problem to. So it’s not an easy question to answer. I’d have to think about it more.
I don’t even remember that, I’ll have to try and find it. It can be fun to re-read old threads to see how you’ve changed or not changed.
You’d have an answer for me if I asked if transgenderism should be encouraged.
You could tell me all the positive things you encourage your kid/children to do.
It’s not just aimed at white men. Look at the recent Harvard ruling that was necessary because the Ivy League was discriminating against Asians.
Fundamentally DEI is about victimization. It just so happens to be that the DEI types think specific groups are the most victimized and thus need the most help. They do not believe in individual agency only collectivity.
I whole-heartedly reject this notion.
I agree with her. I believe we’ve seen a similar shift in feminism as well. The messaging for both used to be “let’s treat everybody as equals”, or “judge people by their character, not by their skin color or sex”. I am all on board with those ideas. Now we have prominent people saying certain people are victims and some are oppressors (or racists) based on sex or color.
The new ideas are in conflict with the old ones. You can’t judge people as individuals by their character and also believe all whites are racists or that all men are oppressors.
I do believe that the new ideas are held by a minority, but they are quite vocal. In many cases they are not open to debate either. The best selling book “white fragility” makes the argument that if you’re white you are racist, and if you are white and offended by that statement or try to refute it, that being offended or try to defend yourself means you are racist. What type of logic is that? It is a claim with another claim of disagreeing with the initial claim means you are proof of the initial claim.
I do support some of the new ideas like training to be aware of bias. I just can’t get behind claiming groups of people are racist or oppressors based on skin color or sex. It’s too racist / sexist for my liking.
People champion things that are at the forefront of their mind and experience. Why do you expect the aforementioned group of “white” people NOT to downplay something they don’t experience.
Further it seems like the USA is the most sympathetic country to others plights from what I’ve seen. Other countries are not so tolerant wouldnt you agree?
Lastly, why do you think your fiancé has experienced such racism both abroad and in the USA? Would like to know your take on what’s driving racism since it’s clearly not a US, UK or conservative issue.
I am a free speech believer. I think you have the right to say what you want and I have the right to disagree with you.
I don’t like the term “correcting” so much. It assumes that the one doing the correcting is correct. We’ve seen many instances where the “corrector” is wrong, but acts as if they are some white knight (no pun intended), and that it isn’t possible they might be wrong. We see this with some of the anti-racists too (IMO). I think we should be encouraging discussion and friendly debate. I think we are less likely to go down a wrong path with discussion / debate as all sides are considered.
I value coming to correct conclusions. I think that is difficult if we are given what to believe top down, and then have some try to enforce that way of thinking upon those that don’t agree.
You asked me “Do you believe the action of correcting should be encouraged though?” That’s a very broad question and the answer is really it depends.
What specifically do you mean though? If you truly have gender dysphoria / are transgender what is there to encourage or discourage? It’s a disorder as far as I can tell. I don’t encourage or discourage schizophrenia either. I think we should encourage treatment. I think we should discourage the romanticization of it.
This is a more specific question, but it’s still too broad for a yes or no answer and illustrates my point. A portion of society thinks we should encouraged transgenderism and we should actively be against anti-trans bigotry. Again, this is spelled out in DEI training and company policies across America now. It’s a fireable/cancelable offense. So, for example, if I support female swimmers standing against Lia Thomas being in their competitions then I’m a bigot. If I ignore things said about Thomas then I’m also a bigot via the anti- doctrine.
But to the question, should we correct people that discourage transgenderism? Or is it okay to be against it? How about with kids? How about as a treatment for gender dysphoria? How about just as a cosmetic for people that feel a certain way?
This argument is playing out now as we speak. Certain jurisdiction think schools should not have to tell parents when their kid says they’re trans or non-binary and even help them transition without their parents knowledge. A lot parents are furious about it and a lot of parents support the schools. So, as a society, who should we encourage?
Drag queen story hour is another example playing out right now. So is transgender athletes in locker-room and competitions.
I have my opinions on specific examples, but I’m also not so arrogant as to try and speak for society.
Yes and parts of society don’t agree with me on those things.
It’s like, I think we should discourage obesity and that seems pretty cut and dry to me, but if my 400 pound co-worker tells me they’re having an entire cake for lunch I better praise them for their bravery and not suggest they go for a walk or maybe eat a salad every once in a while… That would make me an anti-fat bigot and I’d be lucky to keep my job. That’s DEI in a nutshell.
It started as Celebrate Diversity.
Then became Celebrate Diversity Or Else!
Now its Vengeance Is Ours!
All while politicians slip up every so often and say what they really mean about re-education camps and population control.
Anybody else skeptical of the evolving motives of this leftist movement?
“Its for your own good.”.
I am highly skeptical of both sides.
Because it presupposes that you can’t be non racist, ever, for one. It’s how woke inc. can create a permanent income/power stream. Create a disease for which there is no cure, only management.
I don’t believe most people, conservatives included, deny racism as traditionally defined exists outright.
In the era of Jussie Smollet and BLM, however, it’s hard for us to take blatantly 1920’s style KKK racism and/or the redefinition of racism to “everything white people do is inherently racist” seriously.
And I don’t believe all of your stories for what it’s worth. Maybe a couple of them happened. Like “the usual stares”, which you’re probably misinterpreting anyways. Maaaybe a random comment here or there but I doubt it. Most likely silent judgement by the one in ten at worst. But… it’s undoubtedly there.
This might be the first time I’ve agreed with one of your posts.