Angry White People

[jakell]

I don't think that many progressives will object to the attitude provided by blacks when it is provided by blacks, indeed they will feel it is justified in context. I'm not sure that I am in a position to disagree with them, frankly.

You think it would require justification. My approach was to see that one as a default, and the white one as questionable,

The level of abstraction you are introducing will be foreign to a lot of people discussing these topics.

Abstraction? If you can perceive a more basic interpretation then I would be pleased to hear it. It boils down to this, either:

1) The races are fundamentally different in the way they understand identity or..
2) We are the same (my position) and therefore the statistical asymmetry begs an explanation.

This seems pretty basic to me

[tapitsbo]

I think it leaves out the sources of authority over "identity".

I'm not really here to justify black people's attitudes, they can do that themselves.

Where do black or white people's identities get legitimacy from?

Your proposal that we are all the same is in violent disagreement with both progressives and alt-right, etc. types, all of whom are indeed fascinated by difference.

It is in agreement with Bill Nye The Science Guy, though.

[jakell]

I think it leaves out the sources of authority over "identity".

I'm not really here to justify black people's attitudes, they can do that themselves.

Authority assumes a third party, but from what I can see the opinions were personal (ie, no third party)

Again, there is definitely an asymmetry there which is quite marked. 'Justification' seems an inappropriate term when simply looking for an explanation, one could equally question the attitudes of whites, which was my own approach.

Where do black or white people's identities get legitimacy from?

Your proposal that we are all the same is in violent disagreement with both progressives and alt-right, etc. types, all of whom are indeed fascinated by difference.

Dunno, this seems a different question, The poll just looked at attitudes, not their origins.

The proposal that we are all the same is simply one persective to measure these things by. When studying something it is simpler to assume parity from the outset, even if this turns out to be wrong. To start with 'difference' is not a good baseline (even if this turns out to be right) , Occam is my guide in these things

[tapitsbo]

But you brought up the phenomenon of progressives, who would see both the white and black attitudes as justified and not in need of questioning. We've been here before.

Dolezal underscores the importance of legitimacy: we can't all identify according to our whims, and this discussion is indeed not simply about personal opinions (which would suggest an extremist form of individualism, anyways.)

The poll made assumptions that there are "black" and "white" groups. The conductors of the study represent one of many possible third parties. By recognizing these racial groups we've acknowledged differences and moved away from the assumption of parity at the outset - otherwise we'd be asking one group the question, and not break down the results any further. The study itself assumes difference and I find your assumption unusual - it would not be a popular one, certainly not with the progressives who seem to have attracted your concern.

[jakell]

But you brought up the phenomenon of progressives, who would see both the white and black attitudes as justified and not in need of questioning. We've been here before.

Maybe we have a different view of progressives, I see them as being intolerant of the idea of inherent differences between the races, which is what a brief view of the poll seems to indicate.

Dolezal underscores the importance of legitimacy: we can't all identify according to our whims, and this discussion is indeed not simply about personal opinions (which would suggest an extremist form of individualism, anyways.)

The poll to me seemed entirely about personal opinions, that's how I read it.

[tapitsbo]

If there are no differences then how are there different races? One of several possible progressive points of view is the idea that there is no such thing as race, let alone differences between races. Here, we have been given personal opinions expressed as aggregate differences.

I have a really hard time understanding where you're coming from, and difficulty understanding where Joe was coming from with his response to the OkCupid data as well.

I feel your suggestion that "race realism (in quotes) is human" gives us a lot to unpack and feels like it comes with a lot of abstract baggage, to me, personally.

[jakell]

If there are no differences then how are there different races? We have personal opinions expressed as aggregate differences.

Again, a different question. I've been entirely discussing the result of that poll here, and it's asymmetry. Not speculating on the wider issue of race (which granted is a good topic, but a real can of worms)

I have a really hard time understanding where you're coming from, and difficulty understanding where Joe was coming from with his response to the OkCupid data as well.

Then try a smaller window like I do. I'm all up for a proper discussion on race, but the 'Abolish the white race... ' thread is better and already contains some good foundational work.

I'd really like to take some momentum from the Benjamin Zephaniah piece and discuss that along with the NF other British stuff in this thread. I think I'll have to be patient though.

[American Dream]

Probably a meta-goal of much of the stinking bullshit here is to divert attention away from white/nativist violence and bigotry, which should never, ever be condoned and/or supported here on this board.

I think any reasonably thoughtful anti-racist/anti-fascist person can look over this thread for themselves and draw their own conclusions about what various people did and did not say, I will not do your mental work for you.

[tapitsbo]

Jakell - You've been bringing the idea that everyone should be the same, ideas about progressives, white nationalists, race realism, etc. to the table.

So it's not just about the poll - I'm really just trying to get a handle on what you are talking about, jakell

I'm all up for discussion of AD's meta-goals as well as anyone else's.

White/nativist violence and/or bigotry is a very interesting topic and I had very little awareness of the far right, the alt-right, white nationalism, and the like before finding Rigorous Intuition and AD's posts. What they've demonstrated to me is that these groups have a LOT of bark and no bite - of course this is interesting to place in context.

[jakell]

Jakell - You've been bringing the idea that everyone should be the same, ideas about progressives, white nationalists, race realism, etc. to the table.

Certainly. In order to discuss the poll results, other angles need to be used for comparison, there is no other way. I'm not about to run with them into the distance though, but to use them to focus on the poll itself.
The 'abolish' thread already contains good material on the wider issue of race and, for consistency, would like to discuss it there rather than spread it around.

So it's not just about the poll - I'm really just trying to get a handle on what you are talking about, jakell

Possible explanations for the asymmetry in the poll's results, no more, which is what Joe asked me about.
Really I would like to rap some more on the OP, but I think that will be a while coming.

I'm all up for discussion of AD's meta-goals as well as anyone else's.

White/nativist violence and/or bigotry is a very interesting topic and I had very little awareness of the far right, the alt-right, white nationalism, and the like before finding Rigorous Intuition and AD's posts. What they've demonstrated to me is that these groups have a LOT of bark and no bite - of course this is interesting to place in context.

[FourthBase]

Probably a meta-goal of much of the stinking bullshit here is to divert attention away from white/nativist violence and bigotry, which should never, ever be condoned and/or supported here on this board.

I think any reasonably thoughtful anti-racist/anti-fascist person can look over this thread for themselves and draw their own conclusions about what various people did and did not say, I will not do your mental work for you.

I consider myself to be reasonably and thoughtfully anti-racist and anti-fascist, though not perhaps in the non-hyphenated homogenous noun forms of antiracist and antifacist. Forget about "mental work", I'm curious whose posts you think I should be scrutinizing more.

[Karmamatterz]

4th wrote:

Code: Select all

I consider myself to be reasonably and thoughtfully anti-racist and anti-fascist, though not perhaps in the non-hyphenated homogenous noun forms of antiracist and antifacist. Forget about "mental work", I'm curious whose posts you think I should be scrutinizing more.

Amen.

Since when we do have to wear that shit on our sleeve and go to extreme measure be to against racism or fascism? There seems to be at times a belief on this site among a few that unless you're extremely against (name an issue) you must be one of them and you're a fascist, sexist or racist.

[Joe Hillshoist]

I have a really hard time understanding where you're coming from, and difficulty understanding where Joe was coming from with his response to the OkCupid data as well.

I was just pointing out that all that data is just evidence of institutionalised racism. ie Its evidence of the Structural racism that is built into the fabric of US society. And others as well.

I'm getting the impression that people here don't think that really is an actual thing - because of AD posting too much or something.

[tapitsbo]

It would please me if AD would post more often, I find I really get quite a lot out of their posts.

I don't see anyone here who disagrees with the existence of institutional racism, in fact this board is one of the few places I know of where there can be discussions of "racism" in the "structures of society" as you put it, discussions that don't just boil down to "what's good for _ group".

I understand Joe that you would be interested in holding the West to a different standard than much of the rest of the world, since you, you know, live in it (I know you are in the south part of the West, but...)

[Joe Hillshoist]

I don't see anyone here who disagrees with the existence of institutional racism,

Jakell does.