• 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!

Which scenario is racism?

Simple question. Which guy is racist and practicing racism?

  • A.) Black guy owns Ford Dealership, he won't hire whites because he thinks all whites are dishonest

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • B.) White guy owns a Ford Dealership, he won't hire blacks because he thinks all blacks are lazy

    Votes: 4 5.2%

  • C) Both guys

    Votes: 73 94.8%
  • Total voters
    77
Status
Not open for further replies.
LaylaWindu

LaylaWindu

One with the Force
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
5,435
Reaction score
1,675
Location
PA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Simple question. Which guy is racist and practicing racism?

A.) Black guy owns Ford Dealership, he won't hire whites because he thinks all whites are dishonest
B.) White guy owns a Ford Dealership, he won't hire blacks because he thinks all blacks are lazy
C.) Both A and B
 
Both are. :shrug:

In order to think either of those thoughts they would have to think that the people that they do hire are superior to the race that they're not hiring.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Both are. :shrug:

In order to think either of those thoughts they would have to think that the people that they do hire are superior to the race that they're not hiring.
Click to expand...

Correct, by definition both are and your explanation is right.
 
LaylaWindu said:
Simple question. Which guy is racist and practicing racism?

A.) Black guy owns Ford Dealership, he won't hire whites because he thinks all whites are dishonest
B.) White guy owns a Ford Dealership, he won't hire blacks because he thinks all blacks are lazy
C.) Both A and B
Click to expand...

Racism: the belief that a race is inferior or superior to other races. Both your examples fit.
 
Dictionary definition 2b (as valid as any other definition), regarding racial majority privilege (a social system based on racism): only option B applies. This is also true for the academic definition, for the same reason.

According to dictionary definition 1 (the most basic, a child's understanding), both would apply.

Blacks, as a minority power, do not have the ability to oppress whites as a whole and thereby engage in a social system based on racism.

I ascribe to dictionary definition 2b, racism is more than racial bigotry.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
Dictionary definition 2b (as valid as any other definition), regarding racial majority privilege (a social system based on racism): only option B applies. This is also true for the academic definition, for the same reason.

According to dictionary definition 1 (the most basic, a child's understanding), both would apply.

Blacks, as a minority power, do not have the ability to oppress whites as a whole and thereby engage in a social system based on racism.

I ascribe to dictionary definition 2b, racism is more than racial bigotry.
Click to expand...

So you choose to ignore facts, and present strawmen, got it. Thanks for being honest about your denying of facts. :)
 
LaylaWindu said:
So you choose to ignore facts, and present strawmen, got it. Thanks for being honest about your denying of facts. :)
Click to expand...

Like I care what you think. Get educated.
 
LaylaWindu said:
So you choose to ignore facts, and present strawmen, got it. Thanks for being honest about your denying of facts. :)
Click to expand...

That is not what he is doing. He is setting out the definition which he is using, from among those that fit the word, and basing his answer around that. There is no singular definition, there are several for the word "racism". As long as you set out which definition you are using, there is nothing wrong with using any of those definitions.
 
LaylaWindu said:
I didn't tell you what I think, I presented facts :)
Click to expand...

Sadly enough, you think so. Which is reason enough to disregard your opinion.

I'll give you a fact. According to dictionary definition 2b, option A is not racism; it does not contribute to a social system based on racism.

But, hey, stick with the child's definition. Some people can't grasp anything more.
 
Redress said:
That is not what he is doing. He is setting out the definition which he is using, from among those that fit the word, and basing his answer around that. There is no singular definition, there are several for the word "racism". As long as you set out which definition you are using, there is nothing wrong with using any of those definitions.
Click to expand...

My question didn't ask for a sociological theory or power being needed, I only asked what scenario is racist. Also even going by his subjective opinion more info would be needed since the definition 2B would still be racists for the black guy if in a country where whites were the minority. BUt most importantly, the definition he is setting out does not negate the other definitions, the remain. Now with that said, if he would like to acknowledge that fact then I'll take retract my statement. Otherwise he is making a strawman since nobody here argued that its racism based on his laid out definition. I certainly never have.
 
LaylaWindu said:
Also even going by his subjective opinion more info would be needed since the definition 2B would still be racists for the black guy if in a country where whites were the minority.
Click to expand...

In social dynamics, the majority in question is power not population. Social context is global. Whites in developing countries enjoy privilege. You don't think so? Ask any white that visited or lived in one.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
Sadly enough, you think so. Which is reason enough to disregard your opinion..
Click to expand...
Again I only posted facts and it funny it bothers you.
ecofarm said:
I'll give you a fact. According to dictionary definition 2b, option A is not racism; it does not contribute to a social system based on racism.
Click to expand...
True, good thing I didn't ask based on 2b not does it stop A from being racism. :) (which is what factually makes your argument a strawman just like i said, unless of course you can show us where I asked about 2b and said it doesn;t apply?)
ecofarm said:
But, hey, stick with the child's definition. Some people can't grasp anything more.
Click to expand...
Childs definition? based on what? Oh that's right, your butthurt opinion of being proved wrong. :) I love this. Dishonesty like yours is part of the problem and slows the progress of race relations. So sad especially in in america 2017. Sigh, well at least the majority of people understand the correct answer is C and you are not representative them.
 
LaylaWindu said:
My question didn't ask for a sociological theory or power being needed, I only asked what scenario is racist. Also even going by his subjective opinion more info would be needed since the definition 2B would still be racists for the black guy if in a country where whites were the minority. BUt most importantly, the definition he is setting out does not negate the other definitions, the remain. Now with that said, if he would like to acknowledge that fact then I'll take retract my statement. Otherwise he is making a strawman since nobody here argued that its racism based on his laid out definition. I certainly never have.
Click to expand...

You may not have asked for his particular definition, but you did not limit it to a certain definition either. Therefore his is just as valid as yours or mine. If you get upset every time some one does not answer just how you want, you are going to have a very unpleasant time of things. It really does help to look at other viewpoints and try and understand them, not reject them out of hand because you don't like them.
 
ecofarm said:
Social context is global. Whites in developing countries enjoy privilege.
Click to expand...

:shock: No it's not, another inaccurate statement by you. HAHAHAHA
(I love how you always try to add qualifiers and things nobody ever said to your statements, it cracks me up)
 
Redress said:
You may not have asked for his particular definition, but you did not limit it to a certain definition either. Therefore his is just as valid as yours or mine. If you get upset every time some one does not answer just how you want, you are going to have a very unpleasant time of things. It really does help to look at other viewpoints and try and understand them, not reject them out of hand because you don't like them.
Click to expand...

IRONY. Can you point out where I don't understand them and I rejected them? Thanks
 
LaylaWindu said:
IRONY. Can you point out where I don't understand them and I rejected them? Thanks
Click to expand...

First, look up the word "irony" in the dictionary. It does not mean what you think it does.

Next, I would be happy to point out where you rejected them:

LaylaWindu said:
So you choose to ignore facts, and present strawmen, got it. Thanks for being honest about your denying of facts. :)
Click to expand...

LaylaWindu said:
I didn't tell you what I think, I presented facts :)
Click to expand...

LaylaWindu said:
My question didn't ask for a sociological theory or power being needed, I only asked what scenario is racist. Also even going by his subjective opinion more info would be needed since the definition 2B would still be racists for the black guy if in a country where whites were the minority. BUt most importantly, the definition he is setting out does not negate the other definitions, the remain. Now with that said, if he would like to acknowledge that fact then I'll take retract my statement. Otherwise he is making a strawman since nobody here argued that its racism based on his laid out definition. I certainly never have.
Click to expand...
 
Redress said:
First, look up the word "irony" in the dictionary. It does not mean what you think it does.

Next, I would be happy to point out where you rejected them:
Click to expand...

Actually I nailed it and you are further proving it. Weird, no where in there do I see me rejecting the 2B definition, in fact in one of my posts I told him it 2B is in fact correct if that was the only judgment. Wanna try again.? Just in case you are confused, I asked you to show where I rejected the 2B definition, thank you.
 
ecofarm said:
Like I care what you think. Get educated.
Click to expand...

*reeducated

There, I fixed it for you. Oh, and sociology is a joke of an area of study, well, at least in how it exists in various areas in academia today.
 
Redress said:
That is not what he is doing. He is setting out the definition which he is using, from among those that fit the word, and basing his answer around that. There is no singular definition, there are several for the word "racism". As long as you set out which definition you are using, there is nothing wrong with using any of those definitions.
Click to expand...

Yes, there is definitely something wrong with it as they are wrong. Period. They are social conditioning to reinvent terms to control how people think. We already have a term for what he described, "systemic racism". Notice the modifier. No need to reinvent the base term of racism from some BS field of study.
 
ecofarm said:
Sadly enough, you think so. Which is reason enough to disregard your opinion.

I'll give you a fact. According to dictionary definition 2b, option A is not racism; it does not contribute to a social system based on racism.

But, hey, stick with the child's definition. Some people can't grasp anything more.
Click to expand...

You don't understand how the dictionary works, do you? It goes in order of precedence. I'll give you a hint 2b is lower in precedence.
 
LaylaWindu said:
Actually I nailed it and you are further proving it. Weird, no where in there do I see me rejecting the 2B definition, in fact in one of my posts I told him it 2B is in fact correct if that was the only judgment. Wanna try again.? Just in case you are confused, I asked you to show where I rejected the 2B definition, thank you.
Click to expand...

Eh...I reject the 2b definition as not being valid because, well...it isn't.
 
Fishking said:
You don't understand how the dictionary works, do you? It goes in order of precedence. I'll give you a hint 2b is lower in precedence.
Click to expand...

It's as valid as any other dictionary definition. You just don't like that definition.

If you'd prefer, we can use the academic definition. It postulates the same.
 
Fishking said:
Eh...I reject the 2b definition as not being valid because, well...it isn't.
Click to expand...

It's just in the dictionary for giggles, right?
 
Fishking said:
Eh...I reject the 2b definition as not being valid because, well...it isn't.
Click to expand...

It IS a valid definition, it just doesn't negate the other definitions. Just like Definition 3 of blue (relatinging it to a mood) is valid but doesn't negate the other definitions of blud based on color. So if I asked you if if navy blue and royal blue are examples of blue you would say yes. Only a completely dishonest uneducated moron would say give the hilarious answer of no and then claim it's true because navy blue and royal blue aren't feelings or a moods. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom