• 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!

Why the Trump comments on Haiti and Africa were so disturbing to so many

ataraxia said:
Yes, the comments were shockingly crude and hurtful.

But that's not ultimately the real problem. The problem is the darkness of the worldview underlying it. The problem comes from a worldview that thinks that if someone comes from a place that's currently a mess socially, politically, and economically, then it's because of something innate to people from that part of the world. It is who they are, and always have been. Something genetic. Not due to social/historical/political factors which are contingent. So these people are seen as something other than quite human. Not like us, who live in a place that has its act together (well, more or less, at least for now).

But social, political, economic problems are contingent, not innate to people native to a particular geographic location. Anyone with any knowledge of history knows that. And they can be addressed and fixed. Anyone who has studied any economics or sociology also knows that. All parts of the world, throughout history, have had periods of peace and prosperity, and periods of social and political messes. But if you think the current mess of a certain place is something innate to the people who are born there, this is the mindset that allows the dehumanization of those people, and that is the real reason why Trump's comments were so disturbing. If where they are coming from is a mess, that must mean that these people are innately incapable of anything else, and they will just ruin us as well if they come. That was the reason the Irish and German immigrants were so feared and hated as immigrants a century ago. If they are somehow genetically and innately different from us, they must innately be incapable of having proper systems of governance, or peace and stability, or business success, or scientific/technological advancement. It's like trying to teach a dog to speak. It's just fundamentally incapable of doing so. This is the beginning of dehumanization of others. So if they are so different from us, they must not feel pain like us either, or humiliation, or they must not have ambitions of a better life like us. Or they must not love their loved ones like us. We cannot put ourselves in their shoes, because we think they are so different. And so the empathy goes. And that is the most dangerous first step toward the dehumanization of others.

So it's OK to treat them as something other than a fellow human being.

That's why this mindset of speaking of or treating other human beings in such a heartless and cruel way, just because where they happened to have been born is currently messed up, is so ultimately dangerous. We cannot forget our sense of humanity. That transcends our being from the US or Haiti, or tall or short, or with a bald head or a full head of hair, or having blue eyes or brown.

We are all human beings. We cannot let contingent social and political problems of where we were born define us, and we must not allow others to do that.
Click to expand...



That same mindset thinks the same of minority communities hear in the USA.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
So what? That obviously does not address the rest of the post that you chose to snip from the quote. Because Harvard does not accept 95% of its applicants does not, in any way, indicate that those not selected would not make "good model students". The point remains - since you can't accept everyone then what criteria do you use to decide which few, among the many applicants, are accepted?
Click to expand...

It's my understanding that there is an extensive vetting process. Despite Republican rhetoric, they just don't open the floodgates, and let everyone in.

Excluding criminals and terrorist, and those entering illegally, it should be first come first serve, IMO.
 
ataraxia said:
Yes, the comments were shockingly crude and hurtful.

But that's not ultimately the real problem. The problem is the darkness of the worldview underlying it. The problem comes from a worldview that thinks that if someone comes from a place that's currently a mess socially, politically, and economically, then it's because of something innate to people from that part of the world. It is who they are, and always have been. Something genetic. Not due to social/historical/political factors which are contingent. So these people are seen as something other than quite human. Not like us, who live in a place that has its act together (well, more or less, at least for now).

But social, political, economic problems are contingent, not innate to people native to a particular geographic location. Anyone with any knowledge of history knows that. And they can be addressed and fixed. Anyone who has studied any economics or sociology also knows that. All parts of the world, throughout history, have had periods of peace and prosperity, and periods of social and political messes. But if you think the current mess of a certain place is something innate to the people who are born there, this is the mindset that allows the dehumanization of those people, and that is the real reason why Trump's comments were so disturbing. If where they are coming from is a mess, that must mean that these people are innately incapable of anything else, and they will just ruin us as well if they come. That was the reason the Irish and German immigrants were so feared and hated as immigrants a century ago. If they are somehow genetically and innately different from us, they must innately be incapable of having proper systems of governance, or peace and stability, or business success, or scientific/technological advancement. It's like trying to teach a dog to speak. It's just fundamentally incapable of doing so. This is the beginning of dehumanization of others. So if they are so different from us, they must not feel pain like us either, or humiliation, or they must not have ambitions of a better life like us. Or they must not love their loved ones like us. We cannot put ourselves in their shoes, because we think they are so different. And so the empathy goes. And that is the most dangerous first step toward the dehumanization of others.

So it's OK to treat them as something other than a fellow human being.

That's why this mindset of speaking of or treating other human beings in such a heartless and cruel way, just because where they happened to have been born is currently messed up, is so ultimately dangerous. We cannot forget our sense of humanity. That transcends our being from the US or Haiti, or tall or short, or with a bald head or a full head of hair, or having blue eyes or brown.

We are all human beings. We cannot let contingent social and political problems of where we were born define us, and we must not allow others to do that.
Click to expand...



Let's be clear, China less than 25 years ago was a "****hole" to most Americans.

Let's set aside the idea of "fixing" Haiti's or anyone else's problems, as that is NOT raised in the OP. Let's look at this for what it is, a statement, the meaning of which Trump has defended saying "I did not use those words". In other words it's what I meant.

That is one thing for Americans to sort out on their own, but what about the rest of the world, your "allies" who are seeing a monster emerge from your "Oval Office"....that while Hawaiians dive for shelter with a nuclear warning blaring through the air, the president is at ease singling out of a woman with colored skin to entertain his guests with some rhetoric.

Nuclear alarms and "those places are **** holes" at approximately the same time doesn't alarm anyone?

And btw, can we please set aside Trump's "denial"? One, we've heard two thousand too many and two, in this case he denies "those words" but fully supports the attitude behind them.

The man is a pig. A pig with a "big button". A pig who is also a bully, racist and obviously a bit dim if not retarded
 
Lovebug said:
Why? Because it is completely acceptable for some to assume that these comments are racist. It is perfectly ok to make these comments about Bible thumping gun clingers because we assume they are white. The selective outrage is really sad.
Click to expand...



There is mixing apples and oranges and there mixing manure with pure ****.


I am amazed the lengths people will go to to cover a dick head like Trump.
 
beancounter said:
It's my understanding that there is an extensive vetting process. Despite Republican rhetoric, they just don't open the floodgates, and let everyone in.

Excluding criminals and terrorist, and those entering illegally, it should be first come first serve, IMO.
Click to expand...

OK, but let's count the 12 million illegal aliens (as having come first) and take a 12 year pause before resuming our legal immigration at a rate of 1 million/year.
 
Fearandloathing said:
There is mixing apples and oranges and there mixing manure with pure ****.


I am amazed the lengths people will go to to cover a dick head like Trump.
Click to expand...

Take Trump out of the equation and get back to the fact that most people have feelings, not just some. Everyone has a right to be offended, or none of us do.
 
Lovebug said:
Take Trump out of the equation and get back to the fact that most people have feelings, not just some. Everyone has a right to be offended, or none of us do.
Click to expand...

False equivalence. It's not OK to judge entire groups of people because the country they were born in is currently politically unstable or lacking in the level of economic prosperity to your level of taste. But you can still call a racist bigot a racist bigot. One is a problem outside an individual's control for which they should not be judged. The other is a highly dangerous and dysfunctional character flaw of that individual.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom