• 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
AGENT J said:
I agree this is why your posts are so far behind because dictionaries, encyclopedia, sociology and facts all prove your statments wrong and you fail to grasp that reality. all of them :D
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter what those dictionaries or encyclopedia say, Agent.

ecofarm is arguing that we need to CHANGE that meaning, so countering his position with those definitions really doesn't mean anything.
 
The Mark said:
ecofarm is arguing that we need to CHANGE that meaning, so countering his position with those definitions really doesn't mean anything.
Click to expand...

We don't need to change the meaning. We just need people to see the meaning of the concept. Every sociology department sees the meaning, because the perspective is at the social level. No individual 'does racism'.

He did racism.
He's doing racism.
He's racisiming

Never seen it.

Why?



Because it's not a ****ing individual act.
 
The Mark said:
It doesn't matter what those dictionaries or encyclopedia say, Agent.

ecofarm is arguing that we need to CHANGE that meaning, so countering his position with those definitions really doesn't mean anything.
Click to expand...

no what he said and has said many times is that minorities and people in power can not be racist or practice racism. That is factually wrong.

Now if he has an opinion that it should be changed, thats fine by me But his OPINION doesn't change anythign currently and it still has ZERO support. There are factual words that already describe what he is talking about and its already handled. Racism/racist are based off the word RACE lol. Not powerism not impactism, racism. His OPINION is factually wrong and the argument to change it is mentally inept and illogical.

Why would we ever change the words RACIST and RACISM to including somethign that has nothing to do with RACE. that is mentally retarded.

So my post means exactly what it need to mean. "His statments are factually wrong"
 
ecofarm said:
We don't need to change the meaning. We just need people to see the meaning of the concept. Every sociology department sees the meaning, because the perspective is at the social level. No individual 'does racism'.
Click to expand...
I've always understood the term "racism" to mean "belief that a race is less (important, smart, whatever) because of their race".

Of course, it also applies to some kind of overarching societal belief that one race is better than another.

If you're arguing that it ONLY applies to the societal belief, that IS a change in definition.
 
The Mark said:
I've always understood the term "racism" to mean "belief that a race is less (important, smart, whatever) because of their race".

Of course, it also applies to some kind of overarching societal belief that one race is better than another.

If you're arguing that it ONLY applies to the societal belief, that IS a change in definition.
Click to expand...

Racism is a social construct and thereby must be defined in social context. This always has been and always will be, individual ignorance notwithstanding.
 
ecofarm said:
1.)We don't need to change the meaning.
2.) We just need people to see the meaning of the concept.
3.) Every sociology department sees the meaning, because the perspective is at the social level. No individual 'does racism'.

4.)He did racism.
He's doing racism.
He's racisiming

Never seen it.

Why?



Because it's not a ****ing individual act.
Click to expand...

1.) correct
2.) they already do, join in with the honest and educated people
3.) already proven factually false. Repeat this lie 800 more times. Each time it will be laughed at and there will be zero support to make it true. This is why you keep dodging the request to provide any.
4.) correct because that would be improper english

he practiced racism
he is doing racist things
he is involved in racism


by your broken and factually wrong logic

he did Athleticism
he is doing Athleticism
he's Athleticisming

never seen it guess that means Athleticism is not an individual thing :laughat:
FACTS win again :)
 
AGENT J said:
1.) bigotry has nothing to do with the question in the OP
and to answer your question the answer is no because im not discussing any OPINIONS here.
2.) this is also false the context is MINE LMAO and the OP and the definition of racism/racist. There is no other context.

if you disagree simply answer this question, its a yes no question.

Can a minority and person not in power be racist and practice racism? yes or no?
Click to expand...

Yes.

But I still agree with eco on the social impact not being the same. It's an unfortunate double standard that is based in cultural standards, not law. Though there have been various legal actions taken to instill balance.
 
ecofarm said:
1Racism is a social construct and thereby must be defined in social context.
2.)This always has been and always will be, individual ignorance notwithstanding.
Click to expand...

1.)yep and its factually practiced as a group or an individual
2.) also correct see each of your factually incorrect posts
 
grip said:
1.)Yes.
2.) But I still agree with eco on the social impact not being the same.
3.) It's an unfortunate double standard that is based in cultural standards, not law. Though there have been various legal actions taken to instill balance.
Click to expand...

1.) very good thank you and this is why his statement is wrong.
2.) so do i, i agree 100% never racism by different people can have different impact. But it has ZERO impact on the word racism and his statement is factually wrong.
3.) there's no double standard the words mean the same for everybody, so there cant be a double "standard"
 
ecofarm said:
Racism is a social construct and thereby must be defined in social context. This always has been and always will be, individual ignorance notwithstanding.
Click to expand...
You're one of the very few (only?) people I've ever encountered who holds that position.
I've never seen a dictionary or encyclopedia definition of racism that supports your position. Are you saying that's all wrong and incorrect? That I've been misled for years by everything I ever encountered on the term? How is that possible? It's not.

The only possibility I see is that you and those who agree with you want to change the meaning of the term.

For possibly laudable reasons, granted. But still change it.
 
The Mark said:
You're one of the very few (only?) people I've ever encountered who holds that position.
Click to expand...

Most people who present it are regurgitating, like Chris Matthews, and thus they cannot defend it. Unlike Chris, I'm a bona fide intellectual. Also, I'm not a misogynist, he is. So of course he messed it up, he's not really prepared to understand, he doesn't understand.

But I do and you can.

I've never seen a dictionary or encyclopedia definition of racism that supports your position.
Click to expand...

Most have: 2. system, policy...


The only possibility I see is that you and those who agree with you want to change the meaning of the term.
Click to expand...

It's not changing the meaning.

Racism is a social construct, not an individual act. That's a fact and it always will be.
 
Last edited:
AGENT J said:
1.) very good thank you and this is why his statement is wrong.
2.) so do i, i agree 100% never racism by different people can have different impact. But it has ZERO impact on the word racism and his statement is factually wrong.
3.) there's no double standard the words mean the same for everybody, so there cant be a double "standard"
Click to expand...


You've got a point that the word means the same thing regardless of context. Your logic is hard to argue with sometimes. I see people often liking their own race/culture more out of familiarity, not necessarily hating others completely. I believe it's more a cultural problem than anything to do with skin color. For example, I like Italian and Asian food, but don't understand their language or customs.

Our society is really based on a form of cliquish financial classes and elitism, if you go to the right college, know the right clothes and shoes to wear, car to drive, art to buy, places to vacation and make enough money, you're accepted, regardless of color.
 
ecofarm said:
Most people who present it are regurgitating, like Chris Matthews, and thus they cannot defend it. Unlike Chris, I'm a bona fide intellectual. Also, I'm not a misogynist, he is. So of course he messed it up, he's not really prepared to understand, he doesn't understand.

But I do and you can.



Most have: 2. system, policy...




It's not changing the meaning.

Racism is a social construct, not an individual act. That's a fact and it always will be.
Click to expand...
Every definition I've ever seen includes a #1, which describes an individual act/belief. You're arguing that one definition is wrong and the other right.
 
The Mark said:
Every definition I've ever seen includes a #1, which describes an individual act/belief. You're arguing that one definition is wrong and the other right.
Click to expand...

I arguing that 2. and 3. are part of the definition.
 
ecofarm said:
I arguing that 2. and 3. are part of the definition.
Click to expand...
Well of course they are.

Yet, your words prior to now appear to indicate that you think #1 is NOT part of the definition - or at least that #1 only applies to the majority group(s).
 
grip said:
1.)You've got a point that the word means the same thing regardless of context.
2.) Your logic is hard to argue with sometimes.
3.) I see people often liking their own race/culture more out of familiarity, not necessarily hating others completely.
4.) I believe it's more a cultural problem than anything to do with skin color. For example, I like Italian and Asian food, but don't understand their language or customs.
5.) Our society is really based on a form of cliquish financial classes and elitism, if you go to the right college, know the right clothes and shoes to wear, car to drive, art to buy, places to vacation and make enough money, you're accepted, regardless of color.
Click to expand...

1.) correct its definition doesnt change based on opinions or feelings, thats what prefixes and adjectives are for.
2.) thanks but i cant take credit for it at all. Its just the way the definition of this particular word works. It doesnt allow impact/power to matter.
3.) and that would not be racism because it doesn't fit the definition. TO be racism one must view the other as a lesser and or practice discrimaintion/prejudice based on race.
If its really about comfortability then that is different.

also all racism comes from the same foundation.

Ignorance

there are building blocks on top like:
fear
insecurity
jealousy
its taught
etc but its foundation is always ignorance.

4.) I agree 100% because thats also true. besides ignorance its usually taught and both of those are culture problems,

You take an asian, white and black baby and put them on an island they never become "racist" without outside help. They may not get along but they wont be racist.

5.) in 2014 Id say this is partially true, you are at least "tolerated" but this most certainly wasn't always the case. Many people still feel that <insert famous or rich black(or anything else) person here> is still just a famous or rich nigger and thats sad.
 
ecofarm said:
I arguing that 2. and 3. are part of the definition.
Click to expand...

correct they are PART but never do they NEGATE the other lol

when you read the definition of BLUE does that mean its a feeling or a color? I mean feeling is PART of that definition so by your logic that means blue is ONLY a color lol

Facts win again.

what about the article about an NBA player murdering the whole other team.

did he score a lot or did he physically kill them. Oh **** i used the word kill. does that mean beat them badly in a game or ended thier life?

This is why your statments are factually wrong and your logic completely fails.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
Correct.
Click to expand...

which is factually false and facts prove that.

if you have any to the contrary provide them now

heck we'll take ONE, do you have ONE fact that supports you? . . . . .one lol
 
Last edited:
AGENT J said:
1.) correct its definition doesnt change based on opinions or feelings, thats what prefixes and adjectives are for.
2.) thanks but i cant take credit for it at all. Its just the way the definition of this particular word works. It doesnt allow impact/power to matter.
3.) and that would not be racism because it doesn't fit the definition. TO be racism one must view the other as a lesser and or practice discrimaintion/prejudice based on race.
If its really about comfortability then that is different.

also all racism comes from the same foundation.

Ignorance

there are building blocks on top like:
fear
insecurity
jealousy
its taught
etc but its foundation is always ignorance.

4.) I agree 100% because thats also true. besides ignorance its usually taught and both of those are culture problems,

You take an asian, white and black baby and put them on an island they never become "racist" without outside help. They may not get along but they wont be racist.

5.) in 2014 Id say this is partially true, you are at least "tolerated" but this most certainly wasn't always the case. Many people still feel that <insert famous or rich black(or anything else) person here> is still just a famous or rich nigger and thats sad.
Click to expand...


We're not that far apart in our conceptualization of the subject. We both agree that racism is is based on discrimination, ignorance and social conformity.

What do you think about what Sterling said about Magic Johnson? He seemed to be basing his opinion on misfacts and ignorance?
 
grip said:
1.)We're not that far apart in our conceptualization of the subject. We both agree that racism is is based on discrimination, ignorance and social conformity.
2.)What do you think about what Sterling said about Magic Johnson? He seemed to be basing his opinion on misfacts and ignorance?
Click to expand...

1.) definitely :)
2.) i dont know what he said, i do know he said somethign and magic replied but i dont know what either of them actually said.

I did listen to the whole phone call though and he is a perfect example of what im talking about. He doesn't "accept" people if they are black or minority even if they are rich and famous and respectable, he simply tolerates them.

but anyway if you give me a link or somethign i gladly read it and give you my opinion on his
 
ecofarm said:
I rarely see eye-to-eye with those that rely on the dictionary for understanding.
Click to expand...

That's going to pose a difficulty. For example, how would one know what what I'm saying means? Maybe you think I mean one thing, but I say I mean an entirely different thing.

Frankly, eco, when it comes to racism, you think 90% of all definitions shouldn't apply, and only what you like should apply. That's fine, but recognize that for what it is. Or don't...because who knows what I'm saying if you don't want to go with dictionary definitions. If you want to ignore dictionaries, I could be writing literally anything.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
That's going to pose a difficulty.
Click to expand...

Well, sure. Understanding beyond dictionary definitions (or at least looking at all the definitions listed) is beyond many people.

People are simple and stupid, I know that. You think I don't know that?
 
ecofarm said:
Well, sure. Understanding beyond dictionary definitions (or at least looking at all the definitions listed) is beyond many people.

People are simple and stupid, I know that. You think I don't know that?
Click to expand...

Yeah, let's define things beyond what they mean.

lol, sorry eco, a definition of racism is- whether you like it or not- a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others and/or hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

whether you like it or not. Sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom