1. We have moved to a new forum system. All your posts and data should have transferred over. Welcome, to the new Serebii Forums. Details here
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
    Dismiss Notice
  3. If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders
    Dismiss Notice

Can anyone be racist?

Discussion in 'Debate Forum' started by Sham, Aug 9, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sham

    Sham Aang could never

    I realize this quite a heated topic but I’ve never really outwardly asked a group of people this question (or anyone really). Before the thread starts let me just say, I don’t personally think so. I think anyone can be prejudice but not racist. If one group has a certain amount of power/influence on another group (past or present) racism doesn’t effect them because it doesn’t involve oppression. I think oppression is the key word in deciding if it’s possible to be truly racist to someone.
     
  2. Cometstarlight

    Cometstarlight What do I do now?

    Absolutely anyone can be racist. It doesn't mean everyone is a racist, but everyone has the ability to be one, just like anyone can be prejudice, biased, etc. Being born to a certain culture/time period doesn't mean you're personal biases, etc. are exempt from what would count as racism. Being part of a "community" who's actions are exempt from being racist, not only doesn't make sense, but it sews dissent. At the end of the day, people are people. Doesn't matter what color, creed, sex, etc. you are, people are people. Someone hating or discriminating against someone based on their skin color is racist.
     
    Xuxuba likes this.
  3. Sham

    Sham Aang could never

    I disagree, being “racist” (prejudice) to someone of a race that are the oppressors isn’t the same thing. There’s no power behind it. You think an hispanic/black calling a white person a “racial slur” has more weight than the reverse?
     
  4. FullFathomsFive

    FullFathomsFive Well-Known Member

    This recent definition is an entirely American product born out of a very specific historical context, and even then the phenomena is very well described as systemic racism. People looking to narrow the pool of words we use to describe these prejudices have an agenda.

    Why?
     
  5. Cometstarlight

    Cometstarlight What do I do now?

    I think anyone calling anyone else a social slur isn't right. I don't care what color they are.
     
  6. Sham

    Sham Aang could never

    Actually the term “reverse racism” has been used in serval places including Canada and even as far as South Africa; the more you know. There’s deep rooted power in racism. Someone saying “I don’t like white people” or “you’re a jar or mayo” doesn’t disrupt your life. Stereotypes about races (and ethnicities) can lead to unlawful imprisonments, losing opportunities and much more. You’re allowed to go on with your day but the second the people in power start to believe they’re superior or certain tropes about races it can disrupt your their life. White people are not effected by racism.

    Yeah I never said it wasn’t....?
     
  7. Cometstarlight

    Cometstarlight What do I do now?

    The genocide of white South African farmers would beg to differ.
     
  8. FullFathomsFive

    FullFathomsFive Well-Known Member

    Using any kind of ethnic slur doesn't lead to the target getting imprisoned. You've described racist imprisonment and racist hiring practices as part of a culture of systemic racism. Racist slurs are still just that.
     
    Cometstarlight likes this.
  9. Sham

    Sham Aang could never

    This is why Google is a useful tool, both black and white farmers were being murdered and the main cause of the murders was determined to be for robberies :/.

    So did you miss the part when I said stereotypes? Yes if I’m a cop and I believe most black people are criminals; I’m going to arrest more black people. It’s a simple equation. You’ve turned this from is “racism a universal thing for all people” to “is all racial slurs racist”. The answer is no. It’s a racial slur yes but at most it’s prejudice. Anyone with a 4th grade education knows that using racial slurs doesn’t lead the mass toward imprisonment but it’s surely a domino effect in which the same mindsets are involved.
     
  10. FullFathomsFive

    FullFathomsFive Well-Known Member

    Well, here's a contemporary example: Louis Farrakhan. A colossal, evil racist.
     
  11. Cometstarlight

    Cometstarlight What do I do now?

    Can you place a source for that? (Legitimately asking)
     
  12. Sham

    Sham Aang could never

  13. Cometstarlight

    Cometstarlight What do I do now?

    While Wikipedia is still a source to go to wet one's pallet, you shouldn't ever use it as a direct source. Doesn't mean you're wrong or right, just saying for future references.

    But, I'm not sure if you read the article linked, because the figure of people dying because they were robbing people wasn't proven. Not only that, the guy who quoted this has openly endorsed and encouraged violence against white people. He said that he "thought the attacks were mostly simple robberies, but with a layer of unanswerable rage that fed them." Later goes on to say, “We kill old ones, we kill white people—of course, because we’re killing ourselves. And why do we kill ourselves? Because we’re put in subhuman conditions. Life means nothing. Why the f--- must I care for your life? Life is meaningless.” He uses their poverty level as a justification for killing people, which is never OK.

    The article is titled "the Myth of White Genocide," and while it does go on to say how the numbers aren't settled and that the term was coined by a racist who is trying to lead a revolution against the other revolution, it didn't really debunk it. It just says, "the other side says this," but it doesn't provide studies and numbers. The number of people killed could be under or over counted, but I can't tell reading from this article because it doesn't provide anything of it's own. It's mainly interviewing two racists: A white supremacist and a black supremacist. Both of who are wrong while innocent people (both the ones swept up in either revolution and the bystanders) get killed.

    So yeah, all that to say that anyone can be a racist. Because both sides definitely are in that situation.
     
  14. Sham

    Sham Aang could never

    “He’s using his poverty to claim it’s okay to murder people”. Which still doesn’t support your notion of white farmers being killed of in a genocide. Because let’s face it you brought up that to turn the tables and make seem like white people were in this dangerous situation supporting they’re oppressed and experience racism. If this was a legitimate case where the majority (black people) were killing/targeting off white people in a mostly populated black area than sure its racism. That however isn’t the case (as far as I know). Like I said earlier you’re missing the point. The point is power and the power to oppress but you automatically took it as “white people everywhere and anywhere can experience racism”. That’s the narrative you pushed when you brought up a loosely documented case of white AND black farmers being killed in SA. And let’s call a spade a spade the “white genocide” that’s going there has to do with colonization in some cases (which is still not appropriate in justification for murder). Also I said I used Wikipedia as a synopsis (as in a brief summary) but not as my direct line.
     
  15. Cometstarlight

    Cometstarlight What do I do now?

    I will concede I brought the topic up without all the knowledge on it. Reading on it, it appears that the sticking point right now is that not enough people have been killed for it to qualify as a genocide and that since most farmers are white in SA, it's not determined whether or not it's mainly motivated by "revolution" or race. "According to genocide studies and prevention Professor Gregory Stanton, "early warnings of genocide are still deep in South African society, though genocide has not begun." Still a bad situation.

    It was an example, but what I've been trying to say is that everyone can be a racist. I read the article you linked and it showed racism on both sides. That's what I'm trying to convey. I'm not just talking about white people here. Why is this only a "legitimate" case if the majority is killing the minority? Why is that not racism?
     
  16. FullFathomsFive

    FullFathomsFive Well-Known Member

    Do you not believe that Louis 'Jews are termites' Farrakhan is a racist then?
     
  17. Sham

    Sham Aang could never

    Well killing in itself is an extreme topic. If you show me a group of POC’s (whatever the race) actively targeting white people than yeah I’ll be forced to possibly review earlier statements. However since this is an hypothetical and imaginary scenario (unless proven otherwise I’m willing to listen) it just has no place in this conversation, because it’s going through extreme measures to prove a point.

    Well Judaism isn’t a race (it’s really debated if it’s even an ethnicity) at most it’s a culture and religion. So... prejudice. Also are we really using someone who claimed to be a reincarnation of the Messiah as our argument?
     
  18. FullFathomsFive

    FullFathomsFive Well-Known Member

    Jews are most definitely a race; the word 'genocide' was coined to describe the Holocaust. Whatever else Farrakhan might be, he's a racist, and his particular form of poison is shared by millions of white and non-white people across the globe.
     
  19. Sham

    Sham Aang could never

    Genocide is the direct killing of a LARGE group of people. What are you on? Chechnya has been accused of endorsing LGBT genocide. Unless you’re claiming that constitutes as a race as well?
     
  20. TheWanderingMist

    TheWanderingMist Gaganga, Keeper of the Gates Impartial

    There's two different uses of Jew. One is the ethnic Jew, the people whose ancestry lies in the long-gone region of Judea, and the religious Jew, a person who practices Judaism. Hatred of the former is racism, hatred of the latter is prejudice (assuming they aren't themselves ethnic Jews, which obviously, a lot of them are).

    Anyone can be racist. If you hate someone and/or believe they are subhuman simply for the color of their skin, you're a racist. Plain and simple. Doesn't matter if you're in the majority or the minority.

    A hypothetical example:

    Scenario 1: It's 1859 in Alabama. A slave escapes and kills his abusive master, then heads north on the Underground Railroad. He is not a racist, because he merely killed his oppressor.

    Scenario 2: It's 1859 in Alabama. A slave escapes and kills his abusive master, then heads north on the Underground Railroad. While traveling the Railroad, he kills every white person he sees, even if they are directly helping him, even if they're children. He is a racist, because he is targeting people for their race rather than their actions.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page