What is your definition of racism?

[Ktoyou]

It seems no one has posted the actual dictrionary defintion of racism?


Definition of racism

1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

Actually, i think that is racialism and quite rare today.

I think 'racism' is when the looks of a person has in common with a group and that group is seen as separate, and should be assumed as different. The truth is people have problems with the looks of other people.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

You failed to connect the definition as given with the movement. It isn't a prima facie case, so your conclusion is really just more assumption, a lot of lumber and nary a nail to be seen.

Incorrect. But your oblivious beligerence is to be expected from someone in your profession. You're a huge part of the greatest problem. You don't even know what the Bar actually is.

 

[ok doser]

Incorrect. But your oblivious beligerence is to be expected from someone in your profession. You're a huge part of the greatest problem. You don't even know what the Bar actually is.

a good place to get a beer or three?

 

[Town Heretic]

Incorrect.

Demonstrably correct. You reposted the definition and then declared the connection you never got around to making. Here it is again, in full:

It seems no one has posted the actual dictrionary defintion of racism?
Definition of racism
1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
b : a political or social system founded on racism
3: racial prejudice or discrimination

By dictionary definiton, the BLM doctrine and political program is racist; just as anti-liberals have known all along.

That's you declaring without making the case.

But your oblivious beligerence is to be expected from someone in your profession.

Only someone in need of a distraction or who isn't prepared to make the point would try your tactic, conflating a literal reposting of what you did and a note on what you didn't with belligerence.

Or maybe the plain truth offends you.

You're a huge part of the greatest problem.

I'll agree I'm a problem for you if that's your approach.

You don't even know what the Bar actually is.

Slight of hand won't work with me. You confuse vocabulary with merit. It's just a vehicle and you haven't taken yours anywhere yet.

 

[Ktoyou]

On the Asians outscoring whites, the bias is more towards ‘being well behaved’, as in following the rules and controlling ones emotions. This mild difference disappears with any culture where following rules is paramount. Germans outscore Americans, yet are seen as the same race.
Fifty years ago, there was less crime done on impulse. At the same time, thoughtful crime has always been far higher amongst those who have higher incomes.

All land was once owned by someone else. Why we care so much today is more the difference. How many French people are decedents of Celts, or Goths?

There is only one honest dialogue on the looks-different prejudice, and then all people are biased.

The man who made the video has some issue with ‘white people as victims’

 

[Crucible]

Definition of racism

1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

I think 'racism' is

The definition of 'racism' isn't the definition, but what one 'thinks' it should be.

Explains a lot

 

[intojoy]

After you define it, give examples in your own life that you deem to be racist. If you don't like a certain culture, does that make you racist? If yes, where does race come into play other than a particular race seems to be the main members of that culture?

“The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is exceedingly corrupt: who can know it?”
**Jeremiah‬ *17:9‬ *ASV‬‬
http://bible.com/12/jer.17.9.asv

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Demonstrably correct. You reposted the definition and then declared the connection you never got around to making. Here it is again, in full:

That's you declaring without making the case.

Only someone in need of a distraction or who isn't prepared to make the point would try your tactic, conflating a literal reposting of what you did and a note on what you didn't with belligerence.

Or maybe the plain truth offends you.

I'll agree I'm a problem for you if that's your approach.

Slight of hand won't work with me. You confuse vocabulary with merit. It's just a vehicle and you haven't taken yours anywhere yet.

I've learned that liberals' confirmation bias makes any real effort futile. Your mildly demented worldview, which you think is accurate and valid, is not going to change. It's an epistemological fact.

And my point about the Bar is the most significant topic for anyone to address. It's sad you don't know why.

I don't need to appeal to anyone and convince them. Truth is truth, regardless of whether you will ever access it.

 

[Angel4Truth]

I don'think that's true. Many, many, people believe #1 in some form. They are just not willing to admit it in public because being called a "racist" is considered the worst form of public shaming.

In the video I posted "A Conversation About Race" the filmmaker asked people questions about race. He told them that the NBA is over 80% African-American. He then asked them why there are so many African-American players in the NBA? A lot of the people said because African-Americans are "better athletes" than whites! They actually said that on camera! Then the filmmaker told the people that whites perform better than African-Americans academically and asked them why that is so? He asked them if it is possible that whites are "more intelligent" than black people in general. Not one person was willing to admit this possibility. The filmmaker then asked him why are they so willing to accept that blacks are better athletes than whites but not willing accept the possibility that white people are more intelligent than black people. It seems to me that the filmmake exposed hyocrisy.

I watched it, its excellent.

 

[Crucible]

 

[Crucible]

Racism is believing race is classifiable by ability and worth.

People will philosophize anything to twist things around- it's not rocket science, there is nothing difficult about it- many people just don't want to admit that they misuse the term to falsely shame others.

 

[Town Heretic]

I've learned that liberals' confirmation bias makes any real effort futile.

That must come in real handy for you, if this sort of thing is how you meet difference. And by "that" I mean what follows. People who can't make an argument for their position will often as not find a reason and means to dodge having to.

On the plus side, your latest is funnier than most, given I'm not a liberal. . . real confirmation bias in unintended illustration.

You're just a Word Power version of the typical declaration in lieu of argument or illustration crowd.

Your mildly demented worldview, which you think is accurate and valid, is not going to change. It's an epistemological fact.

Again, declaration and the occasionally interesting word or phrase does not an argument or illustration make. You might as well be without a wrench if all you do with it is hang it on a wall.

And my point about the Bar is the most significant topic for anyone to address. It's sad you don't know why.

The capitalized Bar should reference one of the examinations I took, or its not being used in a way that would give someone not privy to your circumstance or group insight into another meaning. If you're not following conventions, providing context is your job, as I did with "that" above.

Here's that sentence of yours again in all it's declarative, contextual want:

"You don't even know what the Bar actually is."

Either you're speaking correctly to my education and I noted it, or you're incorrectly capitalizing a standard...or you just need to flesh that out a bit, provide some additional context, supra.

I don't need to appeal to anyone and convince them. Truth is truth, regardless of whether you will ever access it.

The last refuge of the rhetorically unprepared: I don't need to prove anything, because its true. A neat freehand circle.

I thought that was your meat, a more ornamental declaration with the same deficiency in support and assumption in premise, but I always like to give anyone who appears to have a position the chance to make their case.

 

[Town Heretic]

You aren't more than technically "in" an argument by being present for it. People who declare in lieu, who offer no argument of parts, authority to sustain their declared "truth" or illustration that can be met with reason aren't actually arguing. They're talking a bit while they search for the crown they appear to feel entitled to wear.

Your posts are a pretty strong illustration. I've lost track now of how many times you've set out a "truth" about women in general, been asked to provide any authority, data, and/or reason in support without your making the attempt as you move to the next likened nonsense.

Nice graphic though. It doesn't make a case either. It's just, humorously enough, a bit of shouting that allows the author to inferentially claim victory.

 

[ok doser]

I've learned that liberals' confirmation bias makes any real effort futile.

not sure if you've encountered purex - he mixes confirmation bias with his own bizarre constructed realities


he's a real hoot! :darwinsm:

 

[annabenedetti]

not sure if you've encountered purex - he mixes confirmation bias with his own bizarre constructed realities


he's a real hoot! :darwinsm:

PureX is a good-hearted man. Whether I agree with him or not, his posts are always thoughtful and thought-provoking, and I'm glad he's here.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

That's what the freaks do. They also shout "Hate", "Intolerance", and all the other handy catch phrases designed to shut people down.

 

[ok doser]

That's what the freaks do. They also shout"Hate", "Intolerance", and all the other handy catch phrases designed to shut people down.

 

[ok doser]

PureX is a good-hearted man. Whether I agree with him or not, his posts are always thoughtful...

they are "thoughtful" in the same way hillary is "experienced" :darwinsm:

and thought-provoking

he's a wonder, all right! :chuckle:

and I'm glad he's here.

oh, me too

the circus wouldn't be the circus without the clowns :thumb:

 

[Crucible]

You aren't more than technically "in" an argument by being present for it. People who declare in lieu, who offer no argument of parts, authority to sustain their declared "truth" or illustration that can be met with reason aren't actually arguing. They're talking a bit while they search for the crown they appear to feel entitled to wear.

Your posts are a pretty strong illustration. I've lost track now of how many times you've set out a "truth" about women in general, been asked to provide any authority, data, and/or reason in support without your making the attempt as you move to the next likened nonsense.

Nice graphic though. It doesn't make a case either. It's just, humorously enough, a bit of shouting that allows the author to inferentially claim victory.

Yall shove claims down people's throat and then, as if to be high inquisitors, assume that we must prove otherwise- and even if we do we're still somehow racist. It's an inevitable dead end to a stool mound.

That's how the Left patently operates, and that's how you all operate. None of you have ever actually presented a case which verifies your claims. Instead, it's just been a mass of false correlations and skewed observations.

Yall can't even get passed your own platitudes, which makes these type of conversations a waste of time whether it be about race or whichever.

 

[Town Heretic]

Yall shove claims down people's throat and then, as if to be high inquisitors

There's just one of me and I present arguments. You yell and stamp foot a great deal and run for the hills when challenged to sustain your claims. You don't merit sympathy, let alone the "ganged up on" victim's card you play there.

assume that we must prove otherwise

Rather, if you claim something is true then it is incumbent on you to provide argument and proof. Any fool can shout the sky is made of mustard.

- and even if we do we're still somehow racist.

First get to the "do". You haven't, so you can't then tell anyone what happens...or it's just more unsupported declaration.

It's an inevitable dead end to a stool mound.

Neat circles you travel in...and by travel I mean use.

That's how the Left patently operates, and that's how you all operate

That's another habit I noted in responding to pp, the ol declare them and their part, also sans proof or argument.

None of you have ever actually presented a case which verifies your claims.

Not true. I never make a claim that a thing is true without offering the things you still seem unable or unwilling to advance. Should I offer you a partial laundry list of quotes? I'll do it if you then publicly admit to spreading assumptions instead of fact.

I omit the remaining declarations the way you omit argument, authority, and fact to support them.