Page 17 of 23

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:52 am
by john9blue
radiojake wrote:
john9blue wrote:the scientific classification of animals is also a human construct. that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or make it less valid as a scientific field of study.


It has all to do with 'who' makes the classifications, and for what purpose. Animals do not name themselves - We project a name onto them. In many circumstances, the classifications of animals has stemmed from our interpretation of which animals are to be exploited, eaten, or left alone, all of which is based on a heirarchy created to fulfil the needs and wants of the dominant hegemon.

In many ways, different 'races' did not name themselves, they had the classification projected onto them, also based on the hierarchy created to fulfil the needs and wants of the dominant hegemon.

Yes, the two disciplines are similar - Just because I am pointing out the fallacy in the classification of human 'races' does not mean that there is not inherent domination involved in our classification of other living things (It's just that this domination is harder to be seen and heard, because we are no longer equipped with those sensory abilities)


why does the identity of the person making the classification, and their purpose, matter?

and why do you think that all classification has to be about a hierarchy of domination? we recently reclassified pluto as a satellite instead of a planet; did we do that because of some selfish motivation?

maybe i'm misunderstanding your point... are you saying that racial categories have no basis in reality, and are entirely abstract?

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:26 am
by radiojake
john9blue wrote: are you saying that racial categories have no basis in reality, and are entirely abstract?



Precisely

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:29 pm
by Woodruff
john9blue wrote:
radiojake wrote:
john9blue wrote:the scientific classification of animals is also a human construct. that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or make it less valid as a scientific field of study.


It has all to do with 'who' makes the classifications, and for what purpose. Animals do not name themselves - We project a name onto them. In many circumstances, the classifications of animals has stemmed from our interpretation of which animals are to be exploited, eaten, or left alone, all of which is based on a heirarchy created to fulfil the needs and wants of the dominant hegemon.

In many ways, different 'races' did not name themselves, they had the classification projected onto them, also based on the hierarchy created to fulfil the needs and wants of the dominant hegemon.

Yes, the two disciplines are similar - Just because I am pointing out the fallacy in the classification of human 'races' does not mean that there is not inherent domination involved in our classification of other living things (It's just that this domination is harder to be seen and heard, because we are no longer equipped with those sensory abilities)


why does the identity of the person making the classification, and their purpose, matter?


Because therein belies the motives, objectivity and capabilities.

john9blue wrote:maybe i'm misunderstanding your point... are you saying that racial categories have no basis in reality, and are entirely abstract?


Precisely correct.

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:33 pm
by john9blue
Woodruff wrote:Because therein belies the motives, objectivity and capabilities.


biology doesn't give a crap about any of that.

Woodruff wrote:
john9blue wrote:maybe i'm misunderstanding your point... are you saying that racial categories have no basis in reality, and are entirely abstract?


Precisely correct.


then how do you explain cultural and biological differences between people with genetic roots in different areas of the world? how is that not "real"?

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:35 pm
by Woodruff
john9blue wrote:
Woodruff wrote:Because therein belies the motives, objectivity and capabilities.


biology doesn't give a crap about any of that.


Biology is irrelevant to the concept of "race".

john9blue wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
john9blue wrote:maybe i'm misunderstanding your point... are you saying that racial categories have no basis in reality, and are entirely abstract?


Precisely correct.


then how do you explain cultural and biological differences between people with genetic roots in different areas of the world? how is that not "real"?


Perhaps you can point out the cultural and biological difference between people that relate to "race"?

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:48 pm
by john9blue
instead of getting sucked into another one of woody's pointless battles over trivial definitions, i'll leave this here so we're all on the same page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28cl ... _humans%29

see if you can't find cultural and biological aspects of race in the first paragraph.

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:52 pm
by Woodruff
john9blue wrote:instead of getting sucked into another one of woody's pointless battles over trivial definitions, i'll leave this here so we're all on the same page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28cl ... _humans%29

see if you can't find cultural and biological aspects of race in the first paragraph.


This has nothing to do with "trivial definitions", but I wouldn't expect you to recognize that.

How about this statement: "Among humans, race has no taxonomic significance; all people belong to the same hominid subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens."

And this: "As people define and put about different conceptions of race, they actively create contrasting social realities through which racial categorization is achieved in varied ways.[15] In this sense, races are said to be social constructs.[16][17] These constructs can develop within various legal,[15][18] economic,[18] and sociopolitical[19][20] contexts"

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:59 pm
by john9blue
Woodruff wrote:
john9blue wrote:instead of getting sucked into another one of woody's pointless battles over trivial definitions, i'll leave this here so we're all on the same page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28cl ... _humans%29

see if you can't find cultural and biological aspects of race in the first paragraph.


This has nothing to do with "trivial definitions", but I wouldn't expect you to recognize that.

How about this statement: "Among humans, race has no taxonomic significance; all people belong to the same hominid subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens."

And this: "As people define and put about different conceptions of race, they actively create contrasting social realities through which racial categorization is achieved in varied ways.[15] In this sense, races are said to be social constructs.[16][17] These constructs can develop within various legal,[15][18] economic,[18] and sociopolitical[19][20] contexts"


those are both true. there's definitely aspects of race and racial traits/differences that are constructed by society. i'm not saying that constructed racial categories/traits don't exist, i'm saying that they have a real, biological basis (which doesn't make them necessarily correct).

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 4:23 pm
by Phatscotty
Morgan Freeman, at it again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqhdPr_RvSQ
"The Tea Party is going to do whatever it needs to do to get this black man outta the White House" Yes Morgan, this has nothing to do with the economy or Obama's 32% approval rating on it, nothing to do with his lack of leadership, or 15 other major factors. It's all because of the color of his skin. Peris Morgans goes even further, saying he would like to see Obama give Republicans a bloody nose. CIVILITY POLICE!!!!!! omg omg omg !

Hypocrite alert, not just for Peirs, but also for Freeman, who not too long ago said this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2d2SzRZvsQ
"I'm gonna stop calling you a white man, and you stop calling me a black man." Freeman should have taken his own advice.

Bringing up racism on false pretense is complete degeneration of the issues and shut down to all thinking.

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:09 pm
by Nobunaga
Phatscotty wrote:...
Bringing up racism on false pretense is complete degeneration of the issues and shut down to all thinking.


... And, you failed to mention, a liberal's last line of defense when her facts don't hold up.

...

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 10:47 pm
by john9blue
Nobunaga wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:...
Bringing up racism on false pretense is complete degeneration of the issues and shut down to all thinking.


... And, you failed to mention, a liberal's last line of defense when her facts don't hold up.

...


for those without facts, it's also the first line of defense.

Re: Poll on Racism

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 11:18 pm
by DangerBoy
Nobunaga wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:...
Bringing up racism on false pretense is complete degeneration of the issues and shut down to all thinking.


... And, you failed to mention, a liberal's last line of defense when her facts don't hold up.

...


Now, now, now [-X

Who could that be?

Re: Poll on Racism: Morgan Freeman Strikes Back!

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:24 pm
by Phatscotty
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 ... e_man.html

When Ebony asked actor Samuel L. Jackson where he stood, his answer raised some eyebrows. Obama's "message didn't mean sh*t to me," Jackson said, according to the New York Post. "I just hoped he would do some of what he said he was gonna do." Implying that Obama has not yet been able to behave like a "scary" "n*gga," Jackson said he hopes Obama will be more "scary" in his second term, "cuz he ain't gotta worry about getting re-elected." "I voted for Barack because he was black," Jackson said.


Samuel L. Jackson believes Obama's character, policies and agenda are irrelevant. Jackson said he voted for Obama because he is black.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 ... z1mJNhRRId


http://www.politico.com/blogs/click/201 ... 14201.html

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 9:26 pm
by Lootifer
Ahahahaha.

“I voted for Barack because he was black. ’Cuz that’s why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them,”


Well done: You and your "american thinker" blogger missed the point of his statement and immediately jumped on the sound bite.

The blogger being an american thinker is almost too ironic :lol:

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:15 pm
by BigBallinStalin
Lootifer wrote:Ahahahaha.

“I voted for Barack because he was black. ’Cuz that’s why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them,”


Well done: You and your "american thinker" blogger missed the point of his statement and immediately jumped on the sound bite.

The blogger being an american thinker is almost too ironic :lol:


No wonder I haven't voted for anyone. No politician looks like me... :(

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:38 pm
by Phatscotty
Lootifer wrote:Ahahahaha.

“I voted for Barack because he was black. ’Cuz that’s why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them,”


Well done: You and your "american thinker" blogger missed the point of his statement and immediately jumped on the sound bite.

The blogger being an american thinker is almost too ironic :lol:


I thought it was well done for sharing 2 links from 2 different points of view, but none of your post deals with the actual topic at hand, so........yeah great idea to focus solely on the way I shared the racist comments.

You miss my point, Jackson's point, and even your own. If you vote for someone just because they look like you, then it goes without saying that their policy, agenda, and campaign promises don't matter....which is....wait for it.....what the soundbyte/truth of the comment is.

And fyi, the American thinker is just the name of the website, and thinking is something you have not done yet if you think that me sharing the entire articles, from both sides, is "immediately jumping on a soundbyte". What it is doing is pointing out blatant racism.

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:42 pm
by pimpdave
Sounds to me like more of these candidates need to wear cool sunglasses if they want my vote.

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:53 pm
by pimpdave
Oh hey, check it out. Coincidentally, I have that same pair! Obama is the coolest, most effective, brilliant and amazing president this country has ever had.

Image

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:59 pm
by Lootifer
Ok PS, there are a couple of things that jump up at me from the links and your/the bloggers comments on the situation; some are obvious, some not so much:

- Sammy is none too smart (obvious)
- His main point is not that he voted for Obama because he is black but the [fallaciously founded] argument that two wrongs make a right: rephrasing... "dem der white folk wont vote for a black man so ima cancel dem out and not vote for a white man, herpa-dee-derp".

Samual is an idiot, but it doesnt make him racist for supporting a black man (your premise).

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 11:14 pm
by john9blue
Lootifer wrote:Samual is an idiot, but it doesnt make him racist for supporting a black man (your premise).


voting for a black man because he's black isn't racist?

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 11:15 pm
by Lootifer
john9blue wrote:
Lootifer wrote:Samual is an idiot, but it doesnt make him racist for supporting a black man (your premise).


voting for a black man because he's black isn't racist?

No, and i've discussed the reasons for this earlier in the thread.

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 11:34 pm
by john9blue
Lootifer wrote:No, and i've discussed the reasons for this earlier in the thread.


link me so i can see how you managed to justify that LOL

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 11:48 pm
by pimpdave
I like how this thread conveniently resurfaces after Herman Cain is out of contention.

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 11:55 pm
by Mr_Adams
pimpdave wrote:I like how this thread conveniently resurfaces after Herman Cain is out of contention.


I like how that fact is completely irrelevant.

Re: Poll on Racism: Samuel Jackson

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:05 am
by Phatscotty
Lootifer wrote:Ok PS, there are a couple of things that jump up at me from the links and your/the bloggers comments on the situation; some are obvious, some not so much:

- Sammy is none too smart (obvious)
- His main point is not that he voted for Obama because he is black but the [fallaciously founded] argument that two wrongs make a right: rephrasing... "dem der white folk wont vote for a black man so ima cancel dem out and not vote for a white man, herpa-dee-derp".

Samual is an idiot, but it doesnt make him racist for supporting a black man (your premise).


He's not racist for supporting a black man. He is racist for making his decision based solely on skin color. I think that is as clean as a match to being racist as it gets. If you say you will only vote for someone who is black, you also say that you are not supporting someone else because they are white/purple/yellow/green......NOT BLACK!

I understand this is a "progressive" attitude, which makes total sense when it comes to the issue of racism. I also understand sometimes the racism is so blatant that you can't even see it until after you give it some thought.