Social Justice out of control

[skepticalbip]

I think you missed the point. Use words that other people feel are respectful. If a word or phrase is believed to be an insult, then don't use it to describe that group of individuals. It's as simple as that.

I think you are missing a lot here. Those most vociferous about "being respectful" will call someone (they don't know) racist based often only on the person being white or, worse yet, a white male. The irony is that the most disrespectful among us are those who accuse others of being disrespectful.

As far as your, "Use words that other people feel are respectful." How the hell, in a climate where "acceptable" ideas are constantly in flux, is someone to know what some other person feels is respectful? Few of us are psychic and what one person finds perfectly acceptable another will call 'disrespectful' and vice-versa.

A functional society is a tolerant society and the "social justice" movement is as intolerant of others and other ideas as the old KKK.

I would say that respect for others is tolerance for their different ideas and beliefs of what is acceptable.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I don't want a world where we are forced to treat each other respectfuly. It's nice if people are. But I don't want it forced upon me or anyone.

On social media anybody having any kind of frank conversation about race is immediately branded a racist. Even when the things said aren't.

I've read Guns, Germs and Steel. I understand why brown countries aren't as rich as white countries in spite of the races having very similar brains. Or I think I do. But it's perfectly logical to make the connection that the poverty of brown countries is because of that the people there are brown. Its got to be OK to have that opinion. Free thought and free expression is sacred to me.

There's a bit of a double standard at work, there. Calling someone a racist is also freedom of expression. It may not be productive, but then again, the overwhelming majority of things people express aren't worth the space they occupy on a database.

I'd like to know what social media contributes to the common good by giving morons a platform, because social media has been popular for a while now and I don't see how it has helped anything.

The word racist today has become synonymous with "pure evil". There's got to be some sort of grey area between being Hitler incarnate and a air headed hippie. Right now we're under tremendous social pressure to all be anti-racists where the mere acknowledgement that we may not sit on all the answers is blasphemy.

To me racism is when we think less of someone because of their race. Just thinking that other races are different shouldn't be seen as racism.

And most importantly we have got to stop confusing culture with race. It's perfectly fine to think that Is Islam is the worst thing ever. That doesn't make you a racist. Even though that belief often correlates with being racist.

To sum up. Today racist is the worst thing we can be. So associating anything we don't like with racism is a great way to always win an argument. Far too many things are labelled as racism today.

 

[skepticalbip]

... snip ...
To sum up. Today racist is the worst thing we can be. So associating anything we don't like with racism is a great way to always win an argument. Far too many things are labelled as racism today.

I would disagree. The word "racist" has been so misused and overused that it is rapidly on the way to being meaningless. In many cases, it only means that the person using it is angry but incapable of expressing themselves any other way.

 

[bigfield]

The word racist today has become synonymous with "pure evil". There's got to be some sort of grey area between being Hitler incarnate and a air headed hippie. Right now we're under tremendous social pressure to all be anti-racists where the mere acknowledgement that we may not sit on all the answers is blasphemy.

To me racism is when we think less of someone because of their race. Just thinking that other races are different shouldn't be seen as racism.

Perhaps I'm part of the problem you're describing, but I don't know what you mean by "we may not sit on all the answers". There are some things we do know, and one of them is that racism is not a scientific theory. There's no reason to keep entertaining the idea that it is.

And most importantly we have got to stop confusing culture with race. It's perfectly fine to think that Is Islam is the worst thing ever. That doesn't make you a racist. Even though that belief often correlates with being racist.

As you say, the two often correlate, and I think there's good reason to suspect that racism often inspires an extreme fear of Muslims. I also think it's irrational and harmful to conflate all Muslims in general with the ultraconservatives in Al Qaeda.

 

[Copernicus]

The word racist today has become synonymous with "pure evil". There's got to be some sort of grey area between being Hitler incarnate and a air headed hippie. Right now we're under tremendous social pressure to all be anti-racists where the mere acknowledgement that we may not sit on all the answers is blasphemy.

To me racism is when we think less of someone because of their race. Just thinking that other races are different shouldn't be seen as racism.

Perhaps I'm part of the problem you're describing, but I don't know what you mean by "we may not sit on all the answers". There are some things we do know, and one of them is that racism is not a scientific theory. There's no reason to keep entertaining the idea that it is.

And most importantly we have got to stop confusing culture with race. It's perfectly fine to think that Is Islam is the worst thing ever. That doesn't make you a racist. Even though that belief often correlates with being racist.

As you say, the two often correlate, and I think there's good reason to suspect that racism often inspires an extreme fear of Muslims. I also think it's irrational and harmful to conflate all Muslims in general with the ultraconservatives in Al Qaeda.

Racism is very difficult to define, because race is usually has no clear objective or biological definition. However, racism clearly is about an attitude towards certain socially-defined demographic categories. People used to (and sometimes still do) call different ethnicities (Italian, Mexican, Polish, people with black or brown skin, etc.) "races". Racism is treating individual members of the identified social group as if they fit a stereotype. And there are a lot of different ways in which people do that, sometimes benign and sometimes malignant. So assuming that a black individual is a supporter of Democratic candidates in an election is a form of racism, but it is also an expectation based on a generalization that happens to be true. That may not be a terribly malignant form of racism, but it can become that when Republican officials seek to gerrymander districts in such a way as to lessen the voting impact of certain neighborhoods that happen to be largely African American in population. Republicans see it as "political" gerrymandering, which SCOTUS seems to think isn't racist, but there is a case to be made that it is a malignant form of racism.

 

[DrZoidberg]

The word racist today has become synonymous with "pure evil". There's got to be some sort of grey area between being Hitler incarnate and a air headed hippie. Right now we're under tremendous social pressure to all be anti-racists where the mere acknowledgement that we may not sit on all the answers is blasphemy.

To me racism is when we think less of someone because of their race. Just thinking that other races are different shouldn't be seen as racism.

Perhaps I'm part of the problem you're describing, but I don't know what you mean by "we may not sit on all the answers". There are some things we do know, and one of them is that racism is not a scientific theory. There's no reason to keep entertaining the idea that it is.

Well, because of a lack of research. Because its funding has been blocked on ideological grounds since 1945. When Watson was asked whether he thought there were genetic differences between the races brains he said he didn't know. Which is the correct and scientific answer. He was branded a racist and his book tour was cut short because of it. I think the anti-racists have stopped being the good guys. I also don't think the racists are the good guys.

And most importantly we have got to stop confusing culture with race. It's perfectly fine to think that Is Islam is the worst thing ever. That doesn't make you a racist. Even though that belief often correlates with being racist.

As you say, the two often correlate, and I think there's good reason to suspect that racism often inspires an extreme fear of Muslims. I also think it's irrational and harmful to conflate all Muslims in general with the ultraconservatives in Al Qaeda.

But its got to be OK to have that opinion. The idea that milder forms of Islam encourage the extreme forms is a perfectly logical belief. So I don't think it's irrational to make that connection. It might lead to an irrational fear of Muslims. But the belief itself I don't think is irrational

 

[DrZoidberg]

Perhaps I'm part of the problem you're describing, but I don't know what you mean by "we may not sit on all the answers". There are some things we do know, and one of them is that racism is not a scientific theory. There's no reason to keep entertaining the idea that it is.



As you say, the two often correlate, and I think there's good reason to suspect that racism often inspires an extreme fear of Muslims. I also think it's irrational and harmful to conflate all Muslims in general with the ultraconservatives in Al Qaeda.

Racism is very difficult to define, because race is usually has no clear objective or biological definition. However, racism clearly is about an attitude towards certain socially-defined demographic categories. People used to (and sometimes still do) call different ethnicities (Italian, Mexican, Polish, people with black or brown skin, etc.) "races". Racism is treating individual members of the identified social group as if they fit a stereotype. And there are a lot of different ways in which people do that, sometimes benign and sometimes malignant. So assuming that a black individual is a supporter of Democratic candidates in an election is a form of racism, but it is also an expectation based on a generalization that happens to be true. That may not be a terribly malignant form of racism, but it can become that when Republican officials seek to gerrymander districts in such a way as to lessen the voting impact of certain neighborhoods that happen to be largely African American in population. Republicans see it as "political" gerrymandering, which SCOTUS seems to think isn't racist, but there is a case to be made that it is a malignant form of racism.

I'm sorry but assuming a person belonging to a group fits the stereotype of that group cannot be racism. Stereotypes exists because they so often are true. They almost always have a factual basis. Which is frustrating for those of that group who don't fit.

I have a Romanian gypsy friend. He's middle-class and grew up in a typical Romanian well off family. He isn't part of a clan or any of the other stuff gypsies are associated with. He's well educated and smart. He looks like a gypsy. So sucks for him. But he's not bitter about it. He acknowledges the situation and makes sure to dress well and speak in a well mannered way. So people won't put him in the gypsy box. He's still proud of his heritage but isn't an idiot about it. He's well aware of that the stereotypes about gypsies are distressingly often true.

I also have an Iranian friend. He's lived in Denmark for 20 years. Last year he changed his name to a Danish name and took his Danish wife's name. Why did he do this? He was starting to look for a new job. He thought that the Muslim stereotypes would be working against him. It's just being smart about it.

Social patterns in groups don't go away because we ignore them. Rather the opposite. If there's a negative stereotype about a group isn't it better to acknowledge it and talk about how it came to be?

In Denmark if you buy drugs on the street the guy selling it will probably be Muslim. That's a stereotype based on how reality looks like. They also all dress the same. Which baffles me since that surely makes life increadibly easy for the cops. But I digress.

 

[bigfield]

Well, because of a lack of research. Because its funding has been blocked on ideological grounds since 1945. When Watson was asked whether he thought there were genetic differences between the races brains he said he didn't know. Which is the correct and scientific answer. He was branded a racist and his book tour was cut short because of it. I think the anti-racists have stopped being the good guys. I also don't think the racists are the good guys.

I'm getting at a more fundamental point: as a scientific concept, race doesn't work.

This article explains it better than I can:
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/reich-genetics-racism/558818/

Race is a concept defined by society, not by genes. It’s true that people around the world differ genetically due to their ancestry, and that people’s racial identity may be statistically correlated with their ancestry, albeit unreliably. But “race” does not mean “ancestry,” and it’s a loaded term for scientific outreach: Biological races are not a current scientific concept and often reinforce historical biases.

Basically, the concept of race has a couple of problems:
1. The races we commonly use to categorise people don't line up that well with our genes.
2. Humans constantly mix through migration and interbreeding.

In that context, it doesn't make a lot of sense to ask that geneticists do research based on race. They study populations, geographical clines, and specific genes, but these are not the same as races.

And most importantly we have got to stop confusing culture with race. It's perfectly fine to think that Is Islam is the worst thing ever. That doesn't make you a racist. Even though that belief often correlates with being racist.

As you say, the two often correlate, and I think there's good reason to suspect that racism often inspires an extreme fear of Muslims. I also think it's irrational and harmful to conflate all Muslims in general with the ultraconservatives in Al Qaeda.

But its got to be OK to have that opinion. The idea that milder forms of Islam encourage the extreme forms is a perfectly logical belief. So I don't think it's irrational to make that connection. It might lead to an irrational fear of Muslims. But the belief itself I don't think is irrational

Your argument is getting to a point now where you are defending a relatively small number of people, relative to the amount of people who express an irrational phobia and call for travel bans, clothing bans, bans on mosques etc.

 

[Worldtraveller]

I don't want a world where we are forced to treat each other respectfuly. It's nice if people are. But I don't want it forced upon me or anyone.

On social media anybody having any kind of frank conversation about race is immediately branded a racist. Even when the things said aren't.

I've read Guns, Germs and Steel. I understand why brown countries aren't as rich as white countries in spite of the races having very similar brains. Or I think I do. But it's perfectly logical to make the connection that the poverty of brown countries is because of that the people there are brown. Its got to be OK to have that opinion. Free thought and free expression is sacred to me.

There's a bit of a double standard at work, there. Calling someone a racist is also freedom of expression. It may not be productive, but then again, the overwhelming majority of things people express aren't worth the space they occupy on a database.

I'd like to know what social media contributes to the common good by giving morons a platform, because social media has been popular for a while now and I don't see how it has helped anything.

Also, I think Dr Z might want to explore some other, less moderated, forums. Since he's actually posting here, where one is more or less obliged by da rulz to be respectful.

I'd be happy to make some recommendations.

 

[Worldtraveller]

I think you missed the point. Use words that other people feel are respectful. If a word or phrase is believed to be an insult, then don't use it to describe that group of individuals. It's as simple as that.

I think you are missing a lot here. Those most vociferous about "being respectful" will call someone (they don't know) racist based often only on the person being white or, worse yet, a white male. The irony is that the most disrespectful among us are those who accuse others of being disrespectful.

As far as your, "Use words that other people feel are respectful." How the hell, in a climate where "acceptable" ideas are constantly in flux, is someone to know what some other person feels is respectful? Few of us are psychic and what one person finds perfectly acceptable another will call 'disrespectful' and vice-versa.

A functional society is a tolerant society and the "social justice" movement is as intolerant of others and other ideas as the old KKK.

I would say that respect for others is tolerance for their different ideas and beliefs of what is acceptable.

There's so much bullshit in the post, I could fertilize my whole yard!

 

[southernhybrid]

I think you missed the point. Use words that other people feel are respectful. If a word or phrase is believed to be an insult, then don't use it to describe that group of individuals. It's as simple as that.

I do have some to add that I found a bit humorous. Somewhere I had mentioned my white friend who is married to a black man and has four children with him. She went on a screed last week on FB about how she hates White people. I so wanted to tell her to look in the mirror and check her race, but of course that wouldn't have helped, so I ignored her comment. I really need to close my FB account down. I rarely go there. I have posted once or twice in the last year and I see nothing positive about that type of social media.

Right now, a lot of people are all worked up, but it's likely that this too will pass as it always does over time. I am mildly hopeful that a few positive things will come from the BLM movement. I've already seen a little bit of it, but if the protests become more violent and less meaningful, the result will probably result in a backlash.

I don't want a world where we are forced to treat each other respectfuly. It's nice if people are. But I don't want it forced upon me or anyone.

On social media anybody having any kind of frank conversation about race is immediately branded a racist. Even when the things said aren't.

I've read Guns, Germs and Steel. I understand why brown countries aren't as rich as white countries in spite of the races having very similar brains. Or I think I do. But it's perfectly logical to make the connection that the poverty of brown countries is because of that the people there are brown. Its got to be OK to have that opinion. Free thought and free expression is sacred to me.

Oh please. Spare me your nonsense. Nobody is forcing your to be respectful of others. But, if you want to be respectful of others, you won't refer to them using insulting terms.

I agree that the accusations of who is racist has gotten a bit absurd. I don't think it's helpful to call other people racist, but I see nothing wrong with telling people that some of their comments sound bigoted or insulting. Using insulting words can lead to misunderstandings, even when that was never the intention of the user. I don't think the "social justice movement" per se has gone too far because there is still an awful lot of social injustice in the world. I'm most familiar with the injustices in my own country.

We used to say, "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me", when I was a child. And, I am the type of person who doesn't get hurt by words, but that little phrase isn't true for all. Words are very hurtful to a lot of people, so I try to show them respect by not using those words. Nobody is forcing me to be respectful. Nobody is forcing you to be respectful. You have every right to be an in sensitive jerk if that's your preference.

And, nothing is sacred to me. .

 

[DrZoidberg]

I'm getting at a more fundamental point: as a scientific concept, race doesn't work.

This article explains it better than I can:
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/reich-genetics-racism/558818/



Basically, the concept of race has a couple of problems:
1. The races we commonly use to categorise people don't line up that well with our genes.
2. Humans constantly mix through migration and interbreeding.

In that context, it doesn't make a lot of sense to ask that geneticists do research based on race. They study populations, geographical clines, and specific genes, but these are not the same as races.

You are preaching to the choir. What I'm defending is the idea that those who don't agree aren't completely crazy. I want it to be OK for everyone to be allowed to have they or for everyone to have their own opinion on it and that they should feel free to express it. Whatever it is.

And most importantly we have got to stop confusing culture with race. It's perfectly fine to think that Is Islam is the worst thing ever. That doesn't make you a racist. Even though that belief often correlates with being racist.

As you say, the two often correlate, and I think there's good reason to suspect that racism often inspires an extreme fear of Muslims. I also think it's irrational and harmful to conflate all Muslims in general with the ultraconservatives in Al Qaeda.

But its got to be OK to have that opinion. The idea that milder forms of Islam encourage the extreme forms is a perfectly logical belief. So I don't think it's irrational to make that connection. It might lead to an irrational fear of Muslims. But the belief itself I don't think is irrational

Your argument is getting to a point now where you are defending a relatively small number of people, relative to the amount of people who express an irrational phobia and call for travel bans, clothing bans, bans on mosques etc.

I'm defending people to be allowed to have whatever beliefs they have and they shouldn't be persecuted for it.

 

[Worldtraveller]

You are preaching to the choir. What I'm defending is the idea that those who don't agree aren't completely crazy. I want it to be OK for everyone to be allowed to have they or for everyone to have their own opinion on it and that they should feel free to express it. Whatever it is.

And most importantly we have got to stop confusing culture with race. It's perfectly fine to think that Is Islam is the worst thing ever. That doesn't make you a racist. Even though that belief often correlates with being racist.

As you say, the two often correlate, and I think there's good reason to suspect that racism often inspires an extreme fear of Muslims. I also think it's irrational and harmful to conflate all Muslims in general with the ultraconservatives in Al Qaeda.

But its got to be OK to have that opinion. The idea that milder forms of Islam encourage the extreme forms is a perfectly logical belief. So I don't think it's irrational to make that connection. It might lead to an irrational fear of Muslims. But the belief itself I don't think is irrational

Your argument is getting to a point now where you are defending a relatively small number of people, relative to the amount of people who express an irrational phobia and call for travel bans, clothing bans, bans on mosques etc.

I'm defending people to be allowed to have whatever beliefs they have and they shouldn't be persecuted for it.

No, you're specifically advocating for people to be allowed to behave towards others in a way that those on the receiving end might find offensive, threatening, bullying, or otherwise intimidating, and for there not to be consequences.

You can believe what you want (for instance, I'm actually not allowed to express what I believe about you on the forum) but you can't expect there to not be consequences when those beliefs are expressed by actions.

Read this a few times. I can try to explain it again using smaller words if needed.

 

[DrZoidberg]

You are preaching to the choir. What I'm defending is the idea that those who don't agree aren't completely crazy. I want it to be OK for everyone to be allowed to have they or for everyone to have their own opinion on it and that they should feel free to express it. Whatever it is.

And most importantly we have got to stop confusing culture with race. It's perfectly fine to think that Is Islam is the worst thing ever. That doesn't make you a racist. Even though that belief often correlates with being racist.

As you say, the two often correlate, and I think there's good reason to suspect that racism often inspires an extreme fear of Muslims. I also think it's irrational and harmful to conflate all Muslims in general with the ultraconservatives in Al Qaeda.

But its got to be OK to have that opinion. The idea that milder forms of Islam encourage the extreme forms is a perfectly logical belief. So I don't think it's irrational to make that connection. It might lead to an irrational fear of Muslims. But the belief itself I don't think is irrational

Your argument is getting to a point now where you are defending a relatively small number of people, relative to the amount of people who express an irrational phobia and call for travel bans, clothing bans, bans on mosques etc.

I'm defending people to be allowed to have whatever beliefs they have and they shouldn't be persecuted for it.

No, you're specifically advocating for people to be allowed to behave towards others in a way that those on the receiving end might find offensive, threatening, bullying, or otherwise intimidating, and for there not to be consequences.

You can believe what you want (for instance, I'm actually not allowed to express what I believe about you on the forum) but you can't expect there to not be consequences when those beliefs are expressed by actions.

Read this a few times. I can try to explain it again using smaller words if needed.

OK, you got me. Yes, that is what I am arguing for. There can be consequences. But those consequences should never be anything more than an interesting conversation, at worst. They shouldn't be risking their jobs or feel their lives threatened

 

[Worldtraveller]

You are preaching to the choir. What I'm defending is the idea that those who don't agree aren't completely crazy. I want it to be OK for everyone to be allowed to have they or for everyone to have their own opinion on it and that they should feel free to express it. Whatever it is.

And most importantly we have got to stop confusing culture with race. It's perfectly fine to think that Is Islam is the worst thing ever. That doesn't make you a racist. Even though that belief often correlates with being racist.

As you say, the two often correlate, and I think there's good reason to suspect that racism often inspires an extreme fear of Muslims. I also think it's irrational and harmful to conflate all Muslims in general with the ultraconservatives in Al Qaeda.

But its got to be OK to have that opinion. The idea that milder forms of Islam encourage the extreme forms is a perfectly logical belief. So I don't think it's irrational to make that connection. It might lead to an irrational fear of Muslims. But the belief itself I don't think is irrational

Your argument is getting to a point now where you are defending a relatively small number of people, relative to the amount of people who express an irrational phobia and call for travel bans, clothing bans, bans on mosques etc.

I'm defending people to be allowed to have whatever beliefs they have and they shouldn't be persecuted for it.

No, you're specifically advocating for people to be allowed to behave towards others in a way that those on the receiving end might find offensive, threatening, bullying, or otherwise intimidating, and for there not to be consequences.

You can believe what you want (for instance, I'm actually not allowed to express what I believe about you on the forum) but you can't expect there to not be consequences when those beliefs are expressed by actions.

Read this a few times. I can try to explain it again using smaller words if needed.

OK, you got me. Yes, that is what I am arguing for. There can be consequences. But those consequences should never be anything more than an interesting conversation, at worst. They shouldn't be risking their jobs or feel their lives threatened

Never? That's pretty definitive.

You're saying you can't think of any actions that someone can do towards someone that might result in them losing their job, or possibly being sued? You need to work on your imagination (or, you know, read some news about the stupid racist shit that's going on (and gets filmed) in the US).

 

[bigfield]

You are preaching to the choir. What I'm defending is the idea that those who don't agree aren't completely crazy. I want it to be OK for everyone to be allowed to have they or for everyone to have their own opinion on it and that they should feel free to express it. Whatever it is.

That's ultimately where we disagree, then.

I don't think this notion of unfettered expression actually produces much, if anything, of value. In order to have constructive discussion, including discussion involving extreme differences of opinion, you have to set some standards. Like, it's OK to say some stupid things, but it's not OK to be a recalcitrant fuckwit all the time. Without standards, the noise drowns out everything else.

What do you think we gain from platforms, particularly social media, that allow anyone to express any opinion?

I'm defending people to be allowed to have whatever beliefs they have and they shouldn't be persecuted for it.

I agree that thought-policing is bad. It should be OK to stay silent, reserve judgment, or keep one's thoughts to oneself.

 

[DrZoidberg]

You are preaching to the choir. What I'm defending is the idea that those who don't agree aren't completely crazy. I want it to be OK for everyone to be allowed to have they or for everyone to have their own opinion on it and that they should feel free to express it. Whatever it is.

And most importantly we have got to stop confusing culture with race. It's perfectly fine to think that Is Islam is the worst thing ever. That doesn't make you a racist. Even though that belief often correlates with being racist.

As you say, the two often correlate, and I think there's good reason to suspect that racism often inspires an extreme fear of Muslims. I also think it's irrational and harmful to conflate all Muslims in general with the ultraconservatives in Al Qaeda.

But its got to be OK to have that opinion. The idea that milder forms of Islam encourage the extreme forms is a perfectly logical belief. So I don't think it's irrational to make that connection. It might lead to an irrational fear of Muslims. But the belief itself I don't think is irrational

Your argument is getting to a point now where you are defending a relatively small number of people, relative to the amount of people who express an irrational phobia and call for travel bans, clothing bans, bans on mosques etc.

I'm defending people to be allowed to have whatever beliefs they have and they shouldn't be persecuted for it.

No, you're specifically advocating for people to be allowed to behave towards others in a way that those on the receiving end might find offensive, threatening, bullying, or otherwise intimidating, and for there not to be consequences.

You can believe what you want (for instance, I'm actually not allowed to express what I believe about you on the forum) but you can't expect there to not be consequences when those beliefs are expressed by actions.

Read this a few times. I can try to explain it again using smaller words if needed.

OK, you got me. Yes, that is what I am arguing for. There can be consequences. But those consequences should never be anything more than an interesting conversation, at worst. They shouldn't be risking their jobs or feel their lives threatened

Never? That's pretty definitive.

You're saying you can't think of any actions that someone can do towards someone that might result in them losing their job, or possibly being sued? You need to work on your imagination (or, you know, read some news about the stupid racist shit that's going on (and gets filmed) in the US).

Violence should be met with violence. But just words. If we meet words with violence we will get an increasely extremist and violent world, as well as a dumber world

 

[DrZoidberg]

You are preaching to the choir. What I'm defending is the idea that those who don't agree aren't completely crazy. I want it to be OK for everyone to be allowed to have they or for everyone to have their own opinion on it and that they should feel free to express it. Whatever it is.

That's ultimately where we disagree, then.

I don't think this notion of unfettered expression actually produces much, if anything, of value. In order to have constructive discussion, including discussion involving extreme differences of opinion, you have to set some standards. Like, it's OK to say some stupid things, but it's not OK to be a recalcitrant fuckwit all the time. Without standards, the noise drowns out everything else.

What do you think we gain from platforms, particularly social media, that allow anyone to express any opinion?

Forums are different than from society at large.

Forums need to be moderated. Society shouldn't be. And that's important. Otherwise the most dominant group will bully, oppress and silence the others.

I'm defending people to be allowed to have whatever beliefs they have and they shouldn't be persecuted for it.

I agree that thought-policing is bad. It should be OK to stay silent, reserve judgment, or keep one's thoughts to oneself.

Bah. That's not really free thought. If we can't speak freely we can't think freely either. We are a social species. We need to express ourselves or we die inside

 

[Worldtraveller]

Violence should be met with violence. But just words. If we meet words with violence we will get an increasely extremist and violent world, as well as a dumber world

Maybe this is because you live outside the US, but in the US, lots of words have the potential for violence (like calling police on black people for being black). Do we have to wait until those threats actually turn into violence to act? Because that's sorta how we got where we are, and it gives a distinct 'advantage', for lack of a better word, to those who instigate the violence over those who are subject to said violence.

Sorry, but the world just ain't as simple as your absolutes paint it to be.

I'm willing to talk about this, but it appears you haven't actually examined your basis for this very deeply.

I've actually had a lot of training in self defense, and a lot of that involves ways to de-escalate, and recognizing when things probably won't de-escalate and acting quickly and decisively. In theory, my self defense would make me the aggressor in your world. The cops take advantage of your kind of thinking all the time, yelling that they feel threatened, or 'stop resisting' as they are beating the shit out of a helpless victim.

 

[Copernicus]

...
Racism is very difficult to define, because race is usually has no clear objective or biological definition. However, racism clearly is about an attitude towards certain socially-defined demographic categories. People used to (and sometimes still do) call different ethnicities (Italian, Mexican, Polish, people with black or brown skin, etc.) "races". Racism is treating individual members of the identified social group as if they fit a stereotype. And there are a lot of different ways in which people do that, sometimes benign and sometimes malignant. So assuming that a black individual is a supporter of Democratic candidates in an election is a form of racism, but it is also an expectation based on a generalization that happens to be true. That may not be a terribly malignant form of racism, but it can become that when Republican officials seek to gerrymander districts in such a way as to lessen the voting impact of certain neighborhoods that happen to be largely African American in population. Republicans see it as "political" gerrymandering, which SCOTUS seems to think isn't racist, but there is a case to be made that it is a malignant form of racism.

I'm sorry but assuming a person belonging to a group fits the stereotype of that group cannot be racism. Stereotypes exists because they so often are true. They almost always have a factual basis. Which is frustrating for those of that group who don't fit.

You are confusing valid generalization with stereotyping. Stereotyping is about an individual's attitudes and judgments about a socially-defined group of people. It is usually used to justify discriminatory or prejudicial treatment of that group. For example, there is a popular myth among white supremacists that dark-skinned people are more dishonest, stupid, and lazy. If a black neighbor doesn't cut his lawn, a prejudiced person might see that as directly related to his race, whereas a white neighbor who doesn't cut his lawn is just lazy. If a woman becomes hysterical, than might be seen by a male chauvinist is just female behavior, whereas a male becoming hysterical might be seen as just momentarily traumatized. Stereotypes are usually harmful generalizations that drive harmful social policies.

I have a Romanian gypsy friend. He's middle-class and grew up in a typical Romanian well off family. He isn't part of a clan or any of the other stuff gypsies are associated with. He's well educated and smart. He looks like a gypsy. So sucks for him. But he's not bitter about it. He acknowledges the situation and makes sure to dress well and speak in a well mannered way. So people won't put him in the gypsy box. He's still proud of his heritage but isn't an idiot about it. He's well aware of that the stereotypes about gypsies are distressingly often true.

I also have an Iranian friend. He's lived in Denmark for 20 years. Last year he changed his name to a Danish name and took his Danish wife's name. Why did he do this? He was starting to look for a new job. He thought that the Muslim stereotypes would be working against him. It's just being smart about it.

These are not examples of stereotyping, valid or otherwise. They are examples of people who feel themselves victimized by discriminatory behavior, which is the kind of behavior that bigots justify with false and unfair stereotypes.

Social patterns in groups don't go away because we ignore them. Rather the opposite. If there's a negative stereotype about a group isn't it better to acknowledge it and talk about how it came to be?

In Denmark if you buy drugs on the street the guy selling it will probably be Muslim. That's a stereotype based on how reality looks like. They also all dress the same. Which baffles me since that surely makes life increadibly easy for the cops. But I digress.

No, you've got it backwards. Your generalization is an opinion about reality that is based on a stereotype. And you have just told us that you trust stereotypes to be grounded in truth, and that is why you rely on them to make such generalizations. This is the kind of subjective reasoning that leads to scapegoating and abusive discriminatory treatment of minorities. If you did some actual research on the ethnicity of street dealers in Denmark, you might even find that the majority are not Muslims.