Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
racism
Jul 6, 2020 20:09:58 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 20:09:58 GMT
Them too! I mean, it's a little like 'come into my office - I want to let you know what your problem is'. Isn't it? That reminds of that sensitivity training scene from rescue me. You should Google it, I'm on me phone and couldn't be arsed lopping it in here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
racism
Jul 6, 2020 20:11:46 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 20:11:46 GMT
Well for example "I surround myself with people who look and think differently to me". It's presented in such absolutist and dictatorial terms and I'm afraid there is a tendency towards this kind of fundamentalist dictat. It's absolutely not how we should be approaching this debate. Funny how the same words can hit people in different ways. I would never read that phrase as absolutist or dictatorial. In my mind, it is just describing benchmarks by which one can measure progress. I cannot honestly say that the statement is fully true of me at this point. I still mostly surround myself with people who look like me and share similar socio-economic status. So I take that prompt as a challenge to broaden my circle. But being old and fairly set in my social circle, that may not be so easy to transform. So I can at least be aware that my view of the world is at least partially colored by whom I have surrounded myself with. Of course - that’s just my reaction to those words. Not trying to make you wrong for yours. But sitting where I am - your description feels a bit... harsh. But what if you were born and live in a small village in the Highlands of Scotland that is pretty much all white, are you meant to up sticks and move to Brixton so you can fulfill the requirement. You might say I'm interpreting the statement too literally, but then it's presented in very literal terms, that's partly my problem with it! I find it ironic that something promoting diversity doesn't recognise diversity in its statement. It might seem a trivial example but it's symptomatic of the way this debate is so often constructed. I should say had the statement said " I am tolerant and open to people of a different ethnicity and culture", I'd have no problem with it. I should also say that I'm in broad agreement with what you and Zyph have posted on the last few pages. I just think we should be wary of absolutist positions that can exclude more than they include.
|
|
toomanyhatz
god
I've met him/her. He/she's great!!
Posts: 3,243
|
Post by toomanyhatz on Jul 6, 2020 20:40:24 GMT
You both sound like you've entered a cult. How so? A cult has a leader that imposes specific rules. How is learning how to relate to a series of individuals on 'their' level rather than guided by your own assumptions and prejudices oppressive? You're being combative, right? You must know how absolutely ridiculous this sounds.
|
|
toomanyhatz
god
I've met him/her. He/she's great!!
Posts: 3,243
|
Post by toomanyhatz on Jul 6, 2020 20:42:00 GMT
Funny how the same words can hit people in different ways. I would never read that phrase as absolutist or dictatorial. In my mind, it is just describing benchmarks by which one can measure progress. I cannot honestly say that the statement is fully true of me at this point. I still mostly surround myself with people who look like me and share similar socio-economic status. So I take that prompt as a challenge to broaden my circle. But being old and fairly set in my social circle, that may not be so easy to transform. So I can at least be aware that my view of the world is at least partially colored by whom I have surrounded myself with. Of course - that’s just my reaction to those words. Not trying to make you wrong for yours. But sitting where I am - your description feels a bit... harsh. But what if you were born and live in a small village in the Highlands of Scotland that is pretty much all white, are you meant to up sticks and move to Brixton so you can fulfill the requirement. You might say I'm interpreting the statement too literally, but then it's presented in very literal terms, that's partly my problem with it! I find it ironic that something promoting diversity doesn't recognise diversity in its statement. It might seem a trivial example but it's symptomatic of the way this debate is so often constructed. I should say had the statement said " I am tolerant and open to people of a different ethnicity and culture", I'd have no problem with it. I should also say that I'm in broad agreement with what you and Zyph have posted on the last few pages. I just think we should be wary of absolutist positions that can exclude more than they include. I would think it would start with, if you ever found yourself in Brixton, trying to figure out what things are like in Brixton rather than assuming it's basically the same as a small village in the Highlands of Scotland.
|
|
|
racism
Jul 6, 2020 20:43:49 GMT
Post by tory on Jul 6, 2020 20:43:49 GMT
Your language strikes me as that of a cult. The semantics are similar.
It sounds like re-conditioning - how you must rewire your thought processes. How you must assume guilt and cleanse yourself in order to be "more aware". How one can be "an ally" or "an advocate".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
racism
Jul 6, 2020 20:57:09 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 20:57:09 GMT
But what if you're not in Brixton, what if you're in the small town in The Highlands. How do you surround yourself with people of colour? You can't obviously. I know it sounds pedantic, but there's a thoughtlessness to this kind of thing. It often feels like it's concocted by university educated white liberals who think everyone is like them.
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Jul 6, 2020 21:48:40 GMT
But what if you're not in Brixton, what if you're in the small town in The Highlands. How do you surround yourself with people of colour? You can't obviously. I know it sounds pedantic, but there's a thoughtlessness to this kind of thing. It often feels like it's concocted by university educated white liberals who think everyone is like them. To a degree, you are right. The problem with the way it is worded on that chart is that it assumes everyone is living in a multiethnic region - and that the lack of diversity in one’s social circle is simply a matter of choice. Ultimately whomever wrote that proved their own point by falling into the very trap they were describing. But instead of using that as an opportunity to dismiss their perspective, what if we pulled back a bit and took stock of the larger point: That EVERYONE has an incomplete view of the world, and that we should all question our assumptions about how others think/feel/live. The spirit of that statement isn’t just about tolerating differences. It is about opening up our eyes/ears/minds to other perspectives. There are a lot of ways to do that. What if you didn’t move, but you made an effort to read the books by authors with other backgrounds? What if you followed different people on social media? What if you looked at a chart like that with less defensiveness about what it gets wrong, and instead think harder about what it is actually trying to get you to see? I’m not singling you out as particularly recalcitrant. I’m just saying, this is a crucial issue - one with real consequences if we don’t all extend each other some real willingness to rethink our positions.
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Jul 6, 2020 21:50:46 GMT
Your language strikes me as that of a cult. The semantics are similar. It sounds like re-conditioning - how you must rewire your thought processes. How you must assume guilt and cleanse yourself in order to be "more aware". How one can be "an ally" or "an advocate". Why are you arguing so hard to not be more aware? Where does that get you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 23:10:55 GMT
But what if you're not in Brixton, what if you're in the small town in The Highlands. How do you surround yourself with people of colour? You can't obviously. I know it sounds pedantic, but there's a thoughtlessness to this kind of thing. It often feels like it's concocted by university educated white liberals who think everyone is like them. To a degree, you are right. The problem with the way it is worded on that chart is that it assumes everyone is living in a multiethnic region - and that the lack of diversity in one’s social circle is simply a matter of choice. Ultimately whomever wrote that proved their own point by falling into the very trap they were describing. But instead of using that as an opportunity to dismiss their perspective, what if we pulled back a bit and took stock of the larger point: That EVERYONE has an incomplete view of the world, and that we should all question our assumptions about how others think/feel/live. The spirit of that statement isn’t just about tolerating differences. It is about opening up our eyes/ears/minds to other perspectives. There are a lot of ways to do that. What if you didn’t move, but you made an effort to read the books by authors with other backgrounds? What if you followed different people on social media? What if you looked at a chart like that with less defensiveness about what it gets wrong, and instead think harder about what it is actually trying to get you to see? I’m not singling you out as particularly recalcitrant. I’m just saying, this is a crucial issue - one with real consequences if we don’t all extend each other some real willingness to rethink our positions. Good points.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2020 6:30:56 GMT
Giving the wording of "I educate peers on how racism harms our profession", I'd take a guess that the diagram was aimed at a specific sector, probably education, more specifically than as a strict flow chart for society as a whole.
|
|
|
racism
Jul 7, 2020 6:46:24 GMT
via mobile
Post by oh oooh on Jul 7, 2020 6:46:24 GMT
Yes - I think it came from a British Council teaching site. It's typical of the sort of language they use.
|
|
|
racism
Jul 7, 2020 7:35:18 GMT
Post by tory on Jul 7, 2020 7:35:18 GMT
Your language strikes me as that of a cult. The semantics are similar. It sounds like re-conditioning - how you must rewire your thought processes. How you must assume guilt and cleanse yourself in order to be "more aware". How one can be "an ally" or "an advocate". Why are you arguing so hard to not be more aware? Where does that get you? Aware of what? Racism? Racism exists. It will always exist. The idea that racism or more accurately, a sense of prejudice towards a group of people can be "cured" is nonsense. I personally believe that this well-meaning intent of trying to eradicate prejudice will, tragically, probably cause more prejudice. It is the way of the modern world. As Mencken said "for every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong". That's not to say that I'm not interested in making sure that people or groups of people are not judged by their skin colour. Far from it. But anti-racism "training" and "bias reconditioning" sounds like something out of a Huxley novel and my initial scepticism is flavoured by the feeling that these Marxist (and they undoubtedly are) ideas will be unconditionally rejected by most people. It's the sort of direction that might even help Trump win a second term if they get further traction, or at least might even allow someone worse than Trump a shot at 2024.
|
|
|
racism
Jul 7, 2020 8:06:40 GMT
via mobile
rayge likes this
Post by daveythefatboy on Jul 7, 2020 8:06:40 GMT
Why are you arguing so hard to not be more aware? Where does that get you? Aware of what? Racism? Racism exists. It will always exist. The idea that racism or more accurately, a sense of prejudice towards a group of people can be "cured" is nonsense. I personally believe that this well-meaning intent of trying to eradicate prejudice will, tragically, probably cause more prejudice. It is the way of the modern world. As Mencken said "for every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong". That's not to say that I'm not interested in making sure that people or groups of people are not judged by their skin colour. Far from it. But anti-racism "training" and "bias reconditioning" sounds like something out of a Huxley novel and my initial scepticism is flavoured by the feeling that these Marxist (and they undoubtedly are) ideas will be unconditionally rejected by most people. It's the sort of direction that might even help Trump win a second term if they get further traction, or at least might even allow someone worse than Trump a shot at 2024. You quoted the phrase “more aware” derisively. I merely pointed out the absurdity of your having done so. I think your whole attempt to make basic empathy seem like some sort of dystopian reprogramming is a dodge. I don’t accept it as a good faith argument, because we both know that it isn’t. Similarly, I’m going to have to challenge you to substantiate exactly where you find a link to anti-racism in Marx’s work. I suspect I’ll be waiting for a while on that one. Ultimately the only real argument you make is one about unintended consequences - essentially hiding behind the idea that we might cause a backlash if we dare challenge the existing system of white supremacy. So just come out and say it. You like things the way they are and your “interest in making sure that people or groups of people are not judged by their skin colour“ isn’t much more than a passing interest. ‘Racism will always be. You can’t change it. If you try, you’ll just cause more and throw us all into a science fiction hellscape.’ That works for you, eh?
|
|
|
racism
Jul 7, 2020 8:51:23 GMT
Post by tory on Jul 7, 2020 8:51:23 GMT
If there was no evidence of the economic, cultural, social and political progress of people of non-white heritage in either the US or the UK during the last four decades, then I think your argument would hold greater weight. If there was no or virtually no representation whatsoever in any realm of what I would call the core institutions that make up society, or where these people were having their progress actively suppressed through evidence of legislation, then I'd agree with you.
But the evidence is surely there - I'd fully admit that in the realm of top performing CEOs, people of African heritage don't seem to have particularly good representation. But in many areas, there is greater representation in core institutions such as law, education and politics. Look at Baltimore for example - virtually every important position in that city is taken by someone of African heritage. They might be on the "wrong" side - but Priti Patel and Rishi Sunak occupy two of the 4 most important offices in government. If that is not evidence of "progress", then I don't know what is.
The UK is one of the most tolerant places in the world. In a survey, 60% of people in this country are happy to live next to people of different heritage. Even amongst the older generation, this only drops to 55%. Compare that to 27% in Italy and 45% in France.
That doesn't mean that racism "has been solved" in the UK. Far from it - but the evidence suggests that the UK is as tolerant a place as there is in the world. Now, the US isn't the UK for sure, obviously. But it is a liberal democracy, which is as good a place for the divisions to slowly dissolve.
I get that racism and white supremacism are much more fully fledged in the US. It's a huge country, so is not entirely analogous to the UK. It also has a settlement issue over its history that I don't feel has been addressed fully. But to me, this approach that this method is taking seems to be far more confrontational and divisive. Perhaps that's for a good reason. However, being an eternal pessimist, I don't see how *this* new method will improve upon what has happened over the last thirty to forty years.
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Jul 7, 2020 15:58:31 GMT
Well you have a nice, comfortable perch to judge from. Those silly people struggling for their rights are probably always getting it wrong from where you sit. But then again - you think their struggles are overstated. I get that the UK and US are different. But even in the UK there are some glaring disparities. Non-white people are still greatly over represented in the prison population. They have less wealth (approximately 10 times less, according to this report: www.runnymedetrust.org/projects-and-publications/employment-3/the-colour-of-money.html ), and a cursory look shows they lag in education attainment, employment and a number of other indicators. So it isn't that non-White people are not struggling in the UK. But at a combined 14% of the population - they are probably politically easier to ignore than in the US, where fully 40% of the population is non-White. You point to Baltimore as an example of Black political representation. But the population of Baltimore is 63% Black, so of course it has Black leaders. Overall, the percentage of representation in the US House just started to come close to proportionally representing non-white populations in the last decade. The Senate is still woefully behind - with 91% percent being White. I could go on and on. But frankly, you live in the same world. If it doesn’t seem like a big problem to you, you obviously don’t want to see it.
|
|