Poll on Racism

[Phatscotty]

for sure

[Neoteny]

That's probably actually a deeper question than you can fathom.

[Phatscotty]

That's probably actually a deeper question than you can fathom.

speak for yourself

[Neoteny]

no u

[Phatscotty]

I think only someone with a racial chip on their shoulder would say what you said. you cant reduce racism by holding onto it

[GabonX]

I wanna know who voted "no".

That's probably actually a deeper question than you can fathom.

No, it's actually pretty damn simple. It's as black and white as a question can be...

To the person who voted no: Presuming that I'm white, if I only vote for white people because they are white, is that racist or is it only racist for white people to do this while it's not racist for people of other races?

I know that's a tung twister run on, but the message is there.

[SultanOfSurreal]

I know that's a tung twister

lol

[Neoteny]

"Racial chip on my shoulder?" I'll admit that I'm sometimes arrogant and pretentious, and I do think you are a bit lacking in some areas, but I don't know that I can admit to having one of those...

The way the question is worded and how "racist" could be defined are what prompts my statement. If it's a question of whether it is racist to oppose someone for office because you feel his race is less capable in office, then I'd say that it's obviously probable. If it's "as racist" to support as to oppose due to differing physical features, I'm not so sure. If you are deciding between two politically identical candidates except that one is white and one black, and I pick the white guy because I am also white (suppose I'm superficial like that), it's hard to say if I feel that's racist. Is it wrong to support the bald guy because I too am bald? It seems that if you consider race to be nearly arbitrary like I do, you can pick between "races" for something silly like similarity to oneself or something subjective like aesthetics and not necessarily be racist. I feel this because racism seems to be more about the capabilities of an individual rather than how he looks. If I acknowledge that both individuals are equally politically competent, and pick the white guy because he has the same skin tone as me, I'm not sure I would consider myself racist (nor would I consider a black man racist for doing the same thing). It seems that there's a subtle wrinkle there that you have not considered.

[GabonX]

I know that's a tung twister

lol

Should be tongue.

Cry me a river.

[SultanOfSurreal]

I know that's a tung twister

lol

Should be tongue.

Cry me a river.

why should i be crying over how stupid you are again?

[Neoteny]

I wanna know who voted "no".

That's probably actually a deeper question than you can fathom.

No, it's actually pretty damn simple. It's as black and white as a question can be...

To the person who voted no: Presuming that I'm white, if I only vote for white people because they are white, is that racist or is it only racist for white people to do this while it's not racist for people of other races?

I know that's a tung twister run on, but the message is there.

Like I said, I feel like it is not necessarily racist. If you vote based solely on skin color in the real world, I'd say you are probably either racist or politically inept. But I don't think voting solely on skin color need be inherently racist. As a white man, would it be racist for me to vote for a black man who is politically identical to a white man just because I think darker skin tones are more presidential or otherwise aesthetically pleasing?

Also, "woman" should be interchangeable with many situations in this scenario.

[GabonX]

"Well it's just not that simple. There's not enough information to answer the question! Is one of the candidates oppressed in some way? What kind of impact will this have on society? Has the race of one of the men been oppressed historically which would warrant affirmative action?

This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for a few days to try to come to a conclusion.

[GabonX]

I wanna know who voted "no".

That's probably actually a deeper question than you can fathom.

No, it's actually pretty damn simple. It's as black and white as a question can be...

To the person who voted no: Presuming that I'm white, if I only vote for white people because they are white, is that racist or is it only racist for white people to do this while it's not racist for people of other races?

I know that's a tung twister run on, but the message is there.

Like I said, I feel like it is not necessarily racist. If you vote based solely on skin color in the real world, I'd say you are probably either racist or politically inept. But I don't think voting solely on skin color need be inherently racist. As a white man, would it be racist for me to vote for a black man who is politically identical to a white man just because I think darker skin tones are more presidential or otherwise aesthetically pleasing?

Also, "woman" should be interchangeable with many situations in this scenario.

So I guess that means that it's ok for white people to only vote for white people.

Good to know!

[Neoteny]

"Well it's just not that simple. There's not enough information to answer the question! Is one of the candidates oppressed in some way? What kind of impact will this have on society? Has the race of one of the men been oppressed historically which would warrant affirmative action?

This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for a few days to try to come to a conclusion.

Don't be silly. Just because you can't read for comprehension doesn't mean you need to resort to stereotyping.

[Phatscotty]

"Racial chip on my shoulder?" I'll admit that I'm sometimes arrogant and pretentious, and I do think you are a bit lacking in some areas, but I don't know that I can admit to having one of those...

The way the question is worded and how "racist" could be defined are what prompts my statement. If it's a question of whether it is racist to oppose someone for office because you feel his race is less capable in office, then I'd say that it's obviously probable. If it's "as racist" to support as to oppose due to differing physical features, I'm not so sure. If you are deciding between two politically identical candidates except that one is white and one black, and I pick the white guy because I am also white (suppose I'm superficial like that), it's hard to say if I feel that's racist. Is it wrong to support the bald guy because I too am bald? It seems that if you consider race to be nearly arbitrary like I do, you can pick between "races" for something silly like similarity to oneself or something subjective like aesthetics and not necessarily be racist. I feel this because racism seems to be more about the capabilities of an individual rather than how he looks. If I acknowledge that both individuals are equally politically competent, and pick the white guy because he has the same skin tone as me, I'm not sure I would consider myself racist (nor would I consider a black man racist for doing the same thing). It seems that there's a subtle wrinkle there that you have not considered.

yes, a wrinkle in time-space on the quantum physics level of racism it seems. slice and dice and twist with mist anyway you like. your interjections aim to complicate a simple question based upon a universally agreed definition to racism.

[Neoteny]

So I guess that means that it's ok for white people to only vote for white people.

Good to know!

Well, of course, but you're simplifying again (whether it is because you don't understand, I don't know, sorry the hypothetical bit about the identical politicians went over your head). If a white person is voting for white people because they think white people are better at politics, than it's racist. If they're voting for white people because they are better politicians who happen to be white, then it's not racist.

[Phatscotty]

So I guess that means that it's ok for white people to only vote for white people.

Good to know!

Well, of course, but you're simplifying again (whether it is because you don't understand, I don't know, sorry the hypothetical bit about the identical politicians went over your head). If a white person is voting for white people because they think white people are better at politics, than it's racist. If they're voting for white people because they are better politicians who happen to be white, then it's not racist.

you know what, why don't you try figuring out how to win a game of risk and become an officer before you try fixing the worlds problems ok?

[GabonX]

So I guess that means that it's ok for white people to only vote for white people.

Good to know!

Well, of course, but you're simplifying again (whether it is because you don't understand, I don't know, sorry the hypothetical bit about the identical politicians went over your head). If a white person is voting for white people because they think white people are better at politics, than it's racist. If they're voting for white people because they are better politicians who happen to be white, then it's not racist.

I guess it did go over my head as I can't think of a single instance where two people are exactly the same excluding their race, gender or baldness

[Neoteny]

So I guess that means that it's ok for white people to only vote for white people.

Good to know!

Well, of course, but you're simplifying again (whether it is because you don't understand, I don't know, sorry the hypothetical bit about the identical politicians went over your head). If a white person is voting for white people because they think white people are better at politics, than it's racist. If they're voting for white people because they are better politicians who happen to be white, then it's not racist.

you know what, why don't you try figuring out how to win a game of risk and become an officer before you try fixing the worlds problems ok?

FAIL! Hardcore fail. Way to completely castrate any credibility you may have had remaining. A childish ad hominem about my risk skills (by the way, I've been an officer; it's overrated); I can't believe it.

So I guess that means that it's ok for white people to only vote for white people.

Good to know!

Well, of course, but you're simplifying again (whether it is because you don't understand, I don't know, sorry the hypothetical bit about the identical politicians went over your head). If a white person is voting for white people because they think white people are better at politics, than it's racist. If they're voting for white people because they are better politicians who happen to be white, then it's not racist.

I guess it did go over my head as I can't think of a single instance where two people are exactly the same excluding their race, gender or baldness

I mentioned that it's not likely in the real world, but I was trying to demonstrate that picking someone based solely on color is not necessarily inherently racist. If I pick someone because they are blue (which would be awesome), I don't think it's racist. It's possibly a poor decision, but not racist.

[GabonX]

Well I, and most people, disagree with you on that one.

That said, I don't think racism is a major problem anymore.

[Neoteny]

Well I, and most people, disagree with you on that one.

That said, I don't think racism is a major problem anymore.

I can't speak for most people, but I don't really care if they disagree. Racism goes much deeper than skin color.

More accurately: racism takes the negligible differences between races and amplifies or outright transforms them into something completely different. When one views racial differences as negligible, I feel it is possible to vote based on race in a manner that is not racist. This is not a statement of approval or disapproval of voting in that manner; it is just a statement of how I perceive the situation.

[GabonX]

Do you know what "racist" means?

What exactly, in your opinion, is "racism"?

[Neoteny]

I edited my post, but, more specifically and in short, racism is the view that the differences between races are significant enough to allow for one race to be superior to the other in some fashion.

As such, I think it is theoretically possible to vote based on race and not be racist, but, to add to what I said earlier, individuals (even within a race) are different enough to make the odds of that happening in reality pretty close to zero. Hence, voting based on race is not inherently racist. Voting based on the thought that one race is better than the other is.

[GabonX]

So a race war would not necessarily involve any kind of racism..

Interesting

[Snorri1234]

I edited my post, but, more specifically and in short, racism is the view that the differences between races are significant enough to allow for one race to be superior to the other in some fashion.

As such, I think it is theoretically possible to vote based on race and not be racist, but, to add to what I said earlier, individuals (even within a race) are different enough to make the odds of that happening in reality pretty close to zero. Hence, voting based on race is not inherently racist. Voting based on the thought that one race is better than the other is.

Actually, I'd say the odds are pretty decent. Since it's pretty much a given that not everyone cares about the same things and that people can base their vote on superficial and frivolous reasons it's easy to vote based on race and not be racist.

If you vote for a black man because you believe politics deserves some colour, you're not being racist. You might believe that a mixed group of politicians makes for a more balanced legislation than a group of old white men, and that may very well be untrue, but that's not the same as believing that one race is superior or inferior to others.