• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is this scenario racism, Can minorities be racist?

Is this scenario racism, Can minorities be racist?

  • Total voters
    65
Oh Jeez...another day...another half dozen new race-based threads on debatepolitics.com.

Do you people think of anything else?
 
Empirica said:
1.)Of course it's "racism"
2.) although current social standards do allow for certain minority discretion in Western Cultures_
3.)But I fully support your right to hire employees according to whatever standards you believe to be best for business_
4.)And IMO; no government has the right to force a business owner to hire or cater to people they otherwise would not_
5.)Of course this only works when we're all on the same page and there's no acceptions, exclusions or double standards_
Click to expand...

1.) correct
2.) not in this western society
3.) we all have this right already, i can do so as long as it doesnt violate the rights of others or break the law. I have NO RIGHT to violate the rights of others or break the law.
4.) good thing government doesnt do this
5.) this already exists in most places, gays will have national equal rights soon
 
shrubnose said:
Nope, you're wrong again.

I'm a realist, as I have said poor, powerless people's racism has very little effect on those that it's directed it towards.

A few men with rocks can't defeat powerful empires.
Click to expand...

Haha, so god damn racist. You just said that in an absolutely identical scenario, it would be racist if he was white, but not if he wasn't.

To you being black means being poor and powerless, even if you own your own business, no exceptions.
 
Paschendale said:
Racism is not one person's opinion. Racism is a societal preference. A person's action is a symptom of societal prejudice. Can a minority person hold racist views? Of course. But their views are relatively harmless. Society will never act to enforce their views. For every comedian at the Apollo who makes fun of "whitey", white people aren't denied jobs based on their race. The OP's scenario is extremely unlikely and even if it happened once, it would never be widespread enough to make a significant impact on the prosperity of white people as a whole. Nobody decides they don't want to rent an apartment to a white family. Non-white families face that kind of discrimination frequently.

Donald Sterling saying that he doesn't want black people at his games... it doesn't really matter. Except that black people have been banned from public events, and are sometimes discouraged from going to them now. White people aren't. If a black owner had said the exact same thing about white people, it would have held no power. It could not realistically come to pass. That's what racism and bigotry and prejudice really are. Not one person shooting off their mouth. But the societal reinforcement behind it.
That's racism with teeth. That's the only kind that matters.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




That's exactly what I'm talking about.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Haha, so god damn racist. You just said that in an absolutely identical scenario, it would be racist if he was white, but not if he wasn't.

To you being black means being poor and powerless, even if you own your own business, no exceptions.
Click to expand...

The bolded actually blew my mind just a little, and the fact that shrubnose said it makes it even more surprising, as he generally seems to be pretty logical thinking. Anyone who is in the position to hire and fire, wields a certain amount of power. The skin color doesn't matter, and the actual amount of power/ numbers of people one is responsible for, doesn't matter either. If you have enough influence to hire and fire, you have power, and if you use that power to discriminate based solely on race, then that is racist actions.
 
AGENT J said:
10 definitions in this thread alone prove the bolded statements factually wrong.

The rest is opinion and some I even personally agree with but its still only opinion and has zero impact on the definition of what racism is.
The op is factually racist. Even if I was the only contracting company that practiced that way and there were 1 million others and unemployment was 0% it would still be factually racist and racism.

Impact/power has zero effect on the words racist and racism definition.

Just like if a 5'6" 150lb man with no formal ability or training to fight, who never lifted a weight in his life decided to threaten me and tell me in a room fool of people he is going to kill me. Its still a threat. The judge isnt going to say its relatively harmless, society doesnt take the little guy seriously, its not significant and he couldnt realistically kill you with his bare hands, so it doesnt matter and no so no laws were broken.
Click to expand...

I don't think you're right in the slightest. It is only because of the power behind expressions of racism to even care about them. They only exist because of societal divides. To reduce racism away from a societal problem to a personal one is, I would contend, part of the move to diminish criticism of racism and allow it to flourish. We can condemn Sterling or Bundy all we like, but that does nothing to combat the actual problem. Society still allows racial oppression to continue. Remember the satirical bits about how Bundy was in trouble for not using the appropriate code words? That's really the truth. There's all kinds of racial oppression going on, and none of it happens to whites. But use of code words is one way to disguise it, as is trying to turn what is really a societal problem into a personal one.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Haha, so god damn racist. You just said that in an absolutely identical scenario, it would be racist if he was white, but not if he wasn't.

To you being black means being poor and powerless, even if you own your own business, no exceptions.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




That's your opinion, which you are entitled to and I will ignore.

IOW: Take a hike.
 
shrubnose said:
Nope, you're wrong again.

I'm a realist, as I have said poor, powerless people's racism has very little effect on those that it's directed it towards.

A few men with *rocks can't defeat *powerful empires.
Click to expand...
Is there a particular "*powerful empire" which you believe to be in need of "defeat" by some oppressed minority, Shrub???

21st Century "racism" is about hate and it's only connection to "power" is how it is used to further an ideopolitical agenda_

Hate can divide and destroy a nation__This is the danger of a Democrat Party that promotes racial division for political gain_

And hate can bash a white man's skull in with a *rock just as effectively as it can choke the life out of a lynched black man_
 
DA60 said:
Oh Jeez...another day...another half dozen new race-based threads on debatepolitics.com.

Do you people think of anything else?
Click to expand...
It's either race or rape. Take your pick.
 
Paschendale said:
1.)I don't think you're right in the slightest.
2.) It is only because of the power behind expressions of racism to even care about them.
3.)They only exist because of societal divides.
4.) To reduce racism away from a societal problem to a personal one is, I would contend, part of the move to diminish criticism of racism and allow it to flourish.
5.) We can condemn Sterling or Bundy all we like, but that does nothing to combat the actual problem.
6.) Society still allows racial oppression to continue.
7.) Remember the satirical bits about how Bundy was in trouble for not using the appropriate code words? That's really the truth.
8.) There's all kinds of racial oppression going on, and none of it happens to whites.
9.) But use of code words is one way to disguise it, as is trying to turn what is really a societal problem into a personal one.
Click to expand...

1.) you dont have to think IM right because you arent arguing against me. You are arguing against 10 defintions that all prove those bolded parts factually wrong. This fact wont ever change unless you can prove why 10 different dictionaries are all wrong.
2.) this is an opinion which im fine with you having but it doesnt negate the definition of racism
3.) see #2
4.) its not reducing it, it using the factual DEFINITION instead of a made up one, so this contention has no feet to stand on
5.) I agree and this also doesnt change the definition of racism
6.) see #5
7.) yes meaningless to the definition of racism
8.) this is factually false
10.) another opinion that has no impact on the actual discussion.

DO you know what the OP is about and whats its asking because it doesnt seem that you do. You seem to want to discuss a completely and factually different topic.

Can you point out anything that you said that has any impact to the factual definition of racist and racism and "changes it"
 
lizzie said:
The bolded actually blew my mind just a little, and the fact that shrubnose said it makes it even more surprising, as he generally seems to be pretty logical thinking. Anyone who is in the position to hire and fire, wields a certain amount of power. The skin color doesn't matter, and the actual amount of power/ numbers of people one is responsible for, doesn't matter either. If you have enough influence to hire and fire, you have power, and if you use that power to discriminate based solely on race, then that is racist actions.
Click to expand...

correct

I have no idea how 10 definition so f a word can be posted and then people just invent thier own.

Power/impact is no included in the definitions there for its meanignless to those words.
 
shrubnose said:
Nope, you're wrong again.

I'm a realist, as I have said poor, powerless people's racism has very little effect on those that it's directed it towards.

A few men with rocks can't defeat powerful empires.
Click to expand...
Rhodesia: 1979. Minority Whites are in power and control. They discriminate against the Blacks? Racist or not?
Zimbabwe 1989. Majority Blacks discriminate against Whites Racism or not?
 
shrubnose said:
I'm a realist, as I have said poor, powerless people's racism has very little effect on those that it's directed it towards.
Click to expand...

and there you have it
its still 100% factually racism

effect/power/impact doesnt change anything in the OP question, it has ZERO impact to its definition.
 
AGENT J said:
Can you point out anything that you said that has any impact to the factual definition of racist and racism and "changes it"
Click to expand...

"2: racial prejudice or discrimination" I'm talking about discrimination. Actual discrimination, instead of hurt feelings. As I said before about your OP, there would be very few situations where a business would simply not hire and white employees, and even if there were a few, it wouldn't make an overall impact. There are plenty of alternatives. But parts of our society really do take that stance en masse with other races. Discrimination doesn't happen in any meaningful way on a personal level. It happens on a societal level.

Haven't you seen enough stupid arguments over "definitions of marriage" not to hold dictionary definitions as sacrosanct?
 
Paschendale said:
1.)"2: racial prejudice or discrimination" I'm talking about discrimination. Actual discrimination, instead of hurt feelings.
2.) As I said before about your OP, there would be very few situations where a business would simply not hire and white employees, and even if there were a few, it wouldn't make an overall impact. There are plenty of alternatives.
3.) But parts of our society really do take that stance en masse with other races. Discrimination doesn't happen in any meaningful way on a personal level. It happens on a societal level.
4.) Haven't you seen enough stupid arguments over "definitions of marriage" not to hold dictionary definitions as sacrosanct?
Click to expand...

1.) that doesn't change anythign, discrimaintion again does excist or not excist based on power/impact.
discrimination has a definition too.

dis·crim·i·na·tion noun \dis-ˌkri-mə-ˈnā-shən\
: the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people or groups of people
: the ability to recognize the difference between things that are of good quality and those that are not
: the ability to understand that one thing is different from another thing

nothing here that says it MUST be on some high level in fact it says it can be just an individual and again this has no impact to the words racism or racist.

2.) which is 100% meanignless to the definition of the words racist/racism
3.) by definition this is factually false
4.) yes I have seen people try to argue against the dictionary and they are always wrong including same sex marriage since it supports SSM.

Like i said, I understand there could be a debate about power and impact but those debates and separate topics do nothing, ZERO, ZILCH to impact the definition of racism/racist.

You havent even provided one logical and factual reason why 10 definitions are wrong and I should go with your made up opinion that cant be supported.

I agree with you about different impacts but that's ALL it is, "different impacts", its still 100% factual racist and racism. This fact wont change.

Tell me why its factually NOT racism?
 
AGENT J said:
The scenario:

Where: USA
When: today 5/12/2014

I'm a black guy that owns a contracting Company. Its smaller, about 20 employees.

Lets call it Agent J's Home Improvements and Landscaping.

I dont hire any white people, I think they arent trust worthy simply because they are white so I deny everyone that applies. For me White = dishonest.


Am I a racist, is this racism?

For reference here the definition of racism:

Racism:
rac·ist noun or adjective
1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2: racial prejudice or discrimination


heres links to 9 more
racism noun - definition in the American English Dictionary - Cambridge Dictionaries Online
racism - definition of racism by Macmillan Dictionary
Racism | Define Racism at Dictionary.com
racism: definition of racism in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)
American Heritage Dictionary Entry: racism
racism - definition of racism by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
Collins English Dictionary | Always Free Online
Heinle's Newbury House Dictionary of American English
https://www.google.com/search?num=3...XEsATUsYDIDA&ved=0CCgQvwUoAA&biw=1600&bih=815
Click to expand...

No it is not racism because white males under 40 are not a protected class. Now if you include white females and whites over 40 then yes. Also I think the behavior is racist but it is legal assuming the age and gender requirements put forth.
 
voyager1 said:
1.)No it is not racism because white males under 40 are not a protected class.
2.) Now if you include white females and whites over 40 then yes.
3.) Also I think the behavior is racist but it is legal assuming the age and gender requirements put forth.
Click to expand...

1.) 100% false
in america they most certainly are, WE ALL ARE lets review WHO is protected

one can not illegal discriminate based on gender/sex, (race,color, national origin), religion, age or disability
sexual orientation is now also protected in many areas

everything in red applies to a white male of 39

2.) already proven factually false
3.) yes the behavior is racist
4.) wrong has already proven its factually illegal

glad I could help clear up the confusion
 
AGENT J said:
1.) 100% false
in america they most certainly are, WE ALL ARE lets review WHO is protected

one can not illegal discriminate based on gender/sex, (race,color, national origin), religion, age or disability
sexual orientation is now also protected in many areas

everything in red applies to a white male of 39

2.) already proven factually false
3.) yes the behavior is racist
4.) wrong has already proven its factually illegal

glad I could help clear up the confusion
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying, but let's talk real world. What recourses does a white male have under 40. How many lawsuits do you see? Like I said legal yes moral no. Oh and let's not even get started on "at Will employment."

Sorry I may have read more into your question :)
 
voyager1 said:
1.)I understand what you are saying, but let's talk real world.
2.) What recourses does a white male have under 40.
3.) How many lawsuits do you see?
4.) Like I said legal yes moral no.
5.) Oh and let's not even get started on "at Will employment."
6.) Sorry I may have read more into your question :)
Click to expand...

1.) real world is all i ever talk because fantasies are easily defeated by facts
2.) same as us all. If rights were violated or laws were broken. When im not busy and bored I could go look for a case i looked up before where a WHITE guy sued because there was proof he was passed over for a promotion based on race and it was given to a BLACK FEMALE. since there was proof HE WON because he has the same rights as us all, also the best part is the judge was also a black female.
3.) there are many out there all one has to do is look be honest and not biased, also mathematics and REAL WORLD reality would also suggest that naturally there are less casess of this because it happens less by default/mathematics.
4.) no its factually ILLEGAL to discriminate against a white male 40 year old
as far as morals thats subjective and meaningless to the discussion
5.) this also has nothgin to do with the OP
6.) possible I know ive made my share of mistakes on this site but theres only one factually correct answer and the question was very specific and very clear.
 
AGENT J said:
correct

I have no idea how 10 definition so f a word can be posted and then people just invent thier own.
I have no idea how 10 definitions of a word can be posted and then people just invent thier own.

Power/impact is no included in the definitions there for its meanignless to those words.
Power/impact is not included in the definitions therefore its meanignless to those words.
Click to expand...

jeez Im such a horrible typer lol
I gotta slow down and pay better attention
 
lizzie said:
I just figured you use auto-correct. :lol:
Click to expand...

well sometimes that is the case but the vast majority of the time im typing on a keyboard.

BUT im a geek so i have multiple screens :), most times im doing other things with many windows open, Im muilti-tasking (not very well obviously) and im also in a rush lol
 
Cephus said:
Absolutely and without question, you would be racist. Anyone who pays attention to skin color is, by definition, racist.
Click to expand...

I wasn't speaking in the first person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom