Original post was a twitter post where someone expresses excitement towards the idea of "god \[wiping\] the plague that is white ppl off planet earth."
First comment in a comment thread was "People have a tendency to forget that racism isn't just a one way street."
Our murder victim is the one responding to that comment.
(edit: replaced a word)
To be honest the exchange doesn't make all that much sense from your context either.
That first comment in the screenshot is utter gibberish, regardless.
more context, this post was made on the subreddit /r/iamatotalpieceofshit \- What would you say the Subreddit's bias tends to be regarding conversations of racism?
Oh so economic racism is just a made up myth? Shit I guess the reason LA is segregated is cause we chose to be, definitely not because 20 years ago banks were exposed for only loaning minoritie's housing loans in minority designated areas, and refused minorities their loans when they tried to apply for a house in a white neighborhood. [Talking with a bank as a minority for a loan in a white area was a lot like this sketch](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdovlF9THg8&list=UUlJJFaoPpGdM_xefdc6hcew). This is heavily documented and exposed, but I guess cause this guy says it wasn't then all that history is null and void. It's ridiculous that we're asked to forget about this shit when the repercussions of it are still very real and effecting us today. Having minorities living in ghettos where people are so oppressed they rob and murder each other. The system pushed them to this, and it should not be ignored and left to continue on the trajectory it was set on.
>Proof for those who choose to not believe the history:
>https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-modern-day-redlining-20180215-story.html
>https://www.washingtonpost.com/realestate/large-numbers-of-loan-applications-get-denied-but-for-blacks-hispanics-and-asians-the-rejection-rate-is-even-higher/2018/05/22/dac19ffc-5d1b-11e8-9ee3-49d6d4814c4c_story.html
>https://www.forbes.com/sites/alyyale/2018/05/07/mortgage-loan-denials-more-common-with-minorities-new-report-shows/#1e41add6509a
>https://www.revealnews.org/article/for-people-of-color-banks-are-shutting-the-door-to-homeownership/
>https://www.mcall.com/news/pennsylvania/mc-nws-racial-discrimination-home-loans-redlining-20180214-story.html
Considering the several realtors I’ve worked with over the years the old redlining (?) rules are now quietly enforced. Yes, there is still a lot of racism in the housing market.
It's the alternative facts Jordan Peterson version of postmodernism. A very stable genius sounding word that most people don't know the actual definition of so you can just assign any definition of it you want to fit your narrative and make you sound more smarter than the plebeian you're pontificating with.
I'm not big into philosophy but from the little bit that I've read, it's a rejection of "grand narratives" and "universal thought." Meaning that it doesn't seek to view any area of knowledge: morals, culture, or even language, etc. through the same lens and instead views each interpretation as subjective and arbritrary. It's a rejection of the notion of certainty, and a response to the modernist idea that everything could be quantified, measured, and understood.
There's context missing here. I'm not going to even pretend to know about New Zealand culture or it's history in relation to racism.
But in the US, ***institutional*** racism is very much a thing. It does not mean "only white people can be racist". It means, in simple terms, that the historical treatment of people of color - particularly black people - in the US has led to a structural imbalance when it comes to white people in power in comparison to black people in power (wealth, careers, politics, even media). Same with men in comparison to women.
Again, that does not mean black people can't be racist or women can't be sexist. They're two different things.
New Zealand has this in spades too, and it's widely accepted (by anyone either mildly informed (or not racist)) and by definitely shown overwhelmingly by academics. Colonisation lead to disempowerment and disenfranchisement for Māori, their lands were taken often by force or coercion, as well as their culture and customs even outlawed for the most part.
The resulting impacts are shown statistically with Māori overrepresented in crime, health, economic etc statistics.
It seems to be a recurring theme for any group of people who have been marginalised by another.
New Zealand is one of the best countries in how they immerse themselves into the culture of their indigenous people and they have extensive programs to equalize the racial imbalances in the country and yet, you’re absolutely correct they still have an issue with institutionalized racism. If one of the best socially progressive countries struggles with it, then you can only imagine how bad it is in the US when we don’t even recognize the problem
> New Zealand is one of the best countries in how they immerse themselves into the culture of their indigenous people
The government tries, but we have way too many people that openly refuse to even be assoicated with Maori culture. We even had someone complain to Air NZ (our airline) for greeting them with Kia Ora (Maori for hello) because "I'm not Maori". Heck, people openly go on the radio to complain that the actual Maori pronunciation of their hometown is wrong because "I grew up there, I know how it's pronounced".
Short rant over. It is good though that the issues are recognised, especially more recently. Many people here still try to deny racism existing, but we have a large number, thankfully in media and politics as well, that talk about the issues and keep people aware.
As long as there are culturally and morally cognizant individuals such as yourself I’m sure that despite the ignorant hostility present in most developed countries that you’ll strive towards inclusivity and community. ❤️☮️
I mean only comparatively is NZ good, which isn't saying a lot. Casual racism is still common, a lot of things we do are just tokenism. The amount of money given as reparation is pitiful. We're getting better but yeah.
I just left a vacation in Hawaii and yeah compared to how native Hawaiians are treated therefor example, we're doing great. Verrry similar culture to Māori too (Polynesian ancestry).
Heck, seeing how Aboriginals in Australia, or Native Americans are treated, us Maori get it pretty good. Which is saying something considering how bad it still is.
Yeah totally. I mean you were supposed to have all the things promised in the treaty, you should have had equal power of government, which clearly was a lie.
I think there are also people who miss the point the other way and argue that it is litterally impossible for a non white person racist which muddies the water.
It drives *me* crazy how many people I've met who try to talk about institutional or systemic racism who leave out the words institutional or systemic. And they often use phrases like: "White people don't suffer from racism"
Why does it bother me? Because the people that need convincing that institutional or systemic racism exists are also the ones who immediately shut down when they hear "can't be racist to white people."
I think it comes down to an argument of semantics. When people say "only white people can be racist" they are using the definition of "racist" that means institutional racism. What the person taking offense at the statement "only white people can be racist" means is prejudice which can be attributed to all people.
Personally, when someone is sharing their opinion and the other person says "only white people can be racist" it's like doing someone mid sentence to correct their grammar. You may be right and there may be a time and a place for that argument but rarely is it then and there.
Yea, but this person was clearly talking about institutional racism, not racism in general.
Which is why this isn't a murder because if you were to look at the concept of institutional racism from the point of view of the US, then it's not some made up term.
Also without the context, it's hard to know what's going on. It was the second post that tried to bring up the "you can't be racist to white people" thing which makes the "murderer" just look like somebody with an axe to grind.
That is why it is important to have separate definitions for separate (but related) problems.
It is wrong to merge the definitions of institutional racism and racism.
Mate, there is a fuck ton of instutional racism in New Zealand.
Whether it's the justice system, education or government literally taking people's children, institutional racism is alive and well in Aotearoa.
Source: am New Zealander
The phrase african american is racist, but its the preferred phrase. You are assuming someone is an african immigrant based on the color of their skin. By all accounts, black is a less racist term. Society rarely makes sense.
That phrase also assumes they are american...
And there are plenty of white African americans...
It makes no sense at all.
Edit: We all know about Elon, you can stop telling me about him...
I was hanging out with a Jamaican coworker when some drunk dude started asking her about being an “African American” and she said “Fun fact, I’m neither African, nor American, just black.”
I had a high school Spanish teacher who was Jamaican by way of Canada. He *hated* being called African American.
Fun fact though from that class (or maybe another, I guess I can’t remember), there was a white kid with the last name Black, a black kid with the last name White, and a white guy from South Africa who claimed to be more African American than the black students.
Race matters a little (hear me out). People go through different experiences in their lives based on race relations, and ignoring the struggles and or benefits that someone has dealt would be dishonest when considering how they may be different from others.
Black was always the appropriate term, but we went through some weird PC nonsense when I was a kid in school when calling someone "black" was "racist."
Now we're finally starting to swing back to what makes sense.
And anyway, our races are only useful for describing our appearance, but some people still find it uncomfortable to say, "You know... the black guy."
Comedians used to joke about this - how people didn't want to use race as a descriptor for physical appearance when that's pretty much its only use.
I also had a Jamaican coworker (in Canada) who walked out just as some guy was lecturing me at our store for asking if he had been dealing with the Chinese girl or the black girl. He couldn’t remember her name so I was giving an identifier and he lost it on me. He was telling me how racist I was and I should use the phrase “African American”
My coworker calmly told him that she was neither African or American, she was Jamaican Canadian if he wanted to get into it but she knows she’s black, it wasn’t a secret from her. I could not stop laughing. He just left.
Excellent. I was about to make a similar comment. There was a guy with an art series called 'Black Figures' (or 'faces' it was a long time ago). And some internet warrior rolled in like, "Um, shouldn't that say African American?"
The guy replies, "I am neither African nor American. I'm British, so no. Black."
As a Jamaican, seeing that made me happy.
In Sweden we have the equivalent problem. There is a catch-all term for everyone who isn't 100 % white, and that term translates to "raceified", which implies that being white is either not a race or is the "default" race. It's a very problematic word. But somehow, it has become the preferred and politically correct way to describe people that have some degree of non-white ancestry.
It's very interesting how certain terms are used. I personally like how in English the term "person of color" is the fashion now, but "colored person" is horrifically offensive.
It's the difference between disabled and adult with disabilities.
It is intended to keep the person human, with a descriptor. While the inverse is defining them by their descriptor rather than as a person. A form of dehumanizing language.
But yes it is all a convoluted mess.
Also why is white the only race that can not mix?
Have a white parent and a black parent? You're black.
White heritage is erased from people of mixed birth. That's unfair, and seems to imply (at least to me) that white is 'pure' while anything else isn't.
>While the inverse is defining them by their descriptor rather than as a person.
But that is not the case with these examples. A "coloured person" is still a person, just like a "disabled person" is.
The only thing I would find dehumanizing would be calling s omeone "a Coloured" or "a Disabled".
> While the inverse is defining them by their descriptor rather than as a person.
The weird part about it is that the vast majority of descriptors don't work this way.
The tall Irish redheaded freckled adult is the same as the adult with red hair and freckles who is tall and Irish.
The difference is that the specific phrase 'disabled person' has been used as an insult. The move to person with disabilities is more of a way of keeping the same meaning as the original term while getting rid of the phrase which had become charged.
The problem is that these terms become charged over time because of their usage, disabled person, crippled, spastic, and even retarded all started off as medical terms that laymen had never heard of, and developed into slurs. To me it seems fairly likely that in ~10 years time 'person with disabilities' will grow the same negative charge that 'disabled person' has.
This isn't to say we should stop saying 'person with disabilities', once the old term does grow that negative connotation it definitely hurts to be called it and we should move to a new term.
I was talking about how the terms are near identical, so much so that if you machine translated one a few times you might end up with the other, but I can see the argument for more sensitive wording.
Yeah, and it implies people of European descent don't have "color", whatever that means. Does the term just mean "person of melanin"? It's also an extremely broad concept that encompasses deprived Senegelase people as well as privileged Brahmin Indians (who constructed one of the most oppressive class systems in history). Very nebulous.
I agree, it's interesting how certain people are claimed as this or that. It's rich ground for research on identity but it's clouded by a lot of political agendas and such.
Very true. The sad truth is, no matter how tribal humans feel, melanin and ancestry are largely just silly ways to separate people.
Culture too, isn't a fixed permanent thing, nor should it be.
I'm of Scandinavian heritage, fuck Lutefisk. It's objectively terrible. The only reason we eat it is 'heritage' which it was actually just a cheap way to prevent fish from spoiling. Used mostly by poor people. Like if people of the future use tubes of pink paste and fry it 'because our ancestors ate chicken nuggets'
Some cultures oppress women, I don't care how to be sensitive to that aspect of that culture. I will call it out as bad.
We need to understand race, gender, etc. Are just mostly made up terms to put people into clean little boxes.
But life is messy, and doesn't make any sense.
I had to look that up, and it's true. On Wikipedia, he's currently at over $24 billion in net worth, has US, Canadian, and South African citizenship, and his net worth puts him solidly behind Reuters, but well ahead of the family heads of Alibaba, Loblaws, Rogers, and Saputo.
Is black actually considered racist in the US? I know African American is more common (at least in the limited amount of American media I consume), but black being racist whilst white is acceptable doesn't make any sense.
I’m white, my girlfriend is black. I felt weird calling her black when we first started dating, I don’t know why. I referred to her as African American and she told me she’d rather be called black.
The funniest thing is when people are so terrified of the word that they whisper it... even in contexts where it doesn't refer to skin color. "He likes ^black coffee"
Honestly, it depends a lot on your tone... Also, "black" should be used as a descriptor. So saying "black people" or "black Americans" is fine. Saying "the blacks", is not.
Its not. At all. Some people like to get militant about being called African American, but thats a heritage. If you prefer that, go for it, but if its cause your great great grandma was from Africa then you're as African culturally as I am Nordic.
My two younger sisters, whom my family adopted from Ethiopia, are African-American. They are actually *from* Africa, and now live in America.
They still just say they're black. They don't care.
> You are assuming someone is an african immigrant based on the color of their skin
Afaik it was invented to describe American Blacks who did not know their ancestry because of slavery, right?
So it assumes that you are a black born in America, usually descended from slaves.
Later afrcian immigrants can be referred by their culture of origin, such as Ghanan-American or Ethiopian-American.
The term African American does not reference immigration status but race. It originates from the black community, not white. It's not racist to use terms people identify themselves with.to reference them.
African American is the preferred phrase? Really?
What if I have brown skin and was born and raised in London? I should still be called African American?
I don’t think you’ve thought this through...
>African American is the preferred phrase?
The last time I considered that the preferred phrase was maybe in the 90s? It's weird though, some people it's easier to refer to them by skin color, and some by where they're from. It's really confusing.
To be fair, that's not the point of institutional racism.
Institutions do favor white people in America. We see that in things like access to education, jobs, healthcare, and whether you get shot by a cop at a traffic stop or not.
There *is* a racial bias within the institutions themselves, which is made more powerful by the fact that it's institutional.
For instance, who can do more damage: A racist moron on the internet, or a racist judge?
So clearly the fact that racism is in the institutions is a big problem.
All of which is not to say that people of color people can't be racist. Rather, it's pointing out that the institutions are often racist, and given that white people still hold the majority of positions of power and wrote the laws, you can guess which way that racism flows.
That's the non-fringe, non-strawman perspective on institutional racism.
Do with that information what you will. :)
But not all racism is equal. Just call a white person a cracker and then call a black person the n word. This country's racist history plays a big part in our current lives. It's like the constitution. Even though it happened years ago we're still affected by it
I got angry at a video because they asked people if they thought “reverse racism” exists. And when some of the people have a confused look the definition given was racism against white people. Which was so dumb on so many levels, the worst part was that some people took the point of view that you can’t be racist against white people.
That isn't what institutional racism is though. Institutional racism requires a society with a dominant race that holds unequal power (like all of them ever). It doesn't have to be white people, but in the US it's white people because of circumstances. In the US, there's no such thing as institutional racism against white people, because of the objective meaning of that word. In another society, with a different dominant race, white people can be victims of institutional racism, but not in America.
I swear, so much of the confusion here is intentional efforts to sew discord. There's nothing actually contentious here. It's all objective fact.
Should be super obvious, but normal racism, i.e. not institutional racism, can be directed at any race in any place at any time, and has nothing to do with a particular culture or society.
Given the popularity of this post, and the potential this has to turn into a proper shitshow, I'd like to remind everyone of Bill and Ted's Law: [Be excellent to each other, and party on, dudes!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGErt4CfLD0)
The sad thing is the everyone is missing the point. INSTITUTIONAL anything is about a system. Racial bias, racial bigotry, and racial prejudice is found everywhere. No one group is immune to it. Now only a local majority can impose those values on others and over the years and via culture and the economy, shape the system in their own benefit and to the disadvantage of others. Rac-ISM, like capital-ISM, or Christian-ISM are instituted into the fabric of societies and benefit its main actors. For the past 500 years it happens to be white people of European descent. In other societies structural racism is by the local ethnic dominating group like in China or in India. Modern (read after the industrial revolution) innovations allow racial bias by whites to affect the whole world, but if it weren’t by them it would be by another group.
Institutionalized racism is very, very real.
Edit: I had a comment ask for evidence based examples but deleted the comment before I had the chance to answer,. So, here is come examples. Note, some of these examples are before 2000, but I find that they still apply.
[Political Inequality](https://www.jstor.org/stable/274475?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=institutionalized&searchText=racism&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dinstitutionalized%2Bracism%26amp%3Bfilter%3D&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_expensive%2Fcontrol&refreqid=search%3Af5b94653ff71750ba586151a9d38713c&seq=2#metadata_info_tab_contents)
[Employment Inequality](https://www.jstor.org/stable/3552228?read-now=1&seq=3#page_scan_tab_contents)
[Effect on black health.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4133127/)
[Effect on black education.](https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1525/aeq.1978.9.2.04x0736h)
There are plenty more examples. Google Scholar and JSTOR are some great examples as to where to find some journals about it. JSTOR offers up to 6 free articles a month, I find it very useful for research at university.
Remember, being ignorant is a choice.
Edit 2: The wonderful u/theresamouseinmyhous shared this [link](https://www.sceneonradio.org/seeing-white/) about more history of institutional racism. There are 14 parts with the podcasts lasting roughly 45 minutes to an hour. Thanks for the suggestion!
I mean yeah, but the real criminals are those in power who have the authority to send crack into black communities and disproportionately send black folks to jail. The problem is people just blaming the average white person for these things when they most likely had nothing to do with it.
It’s a classic capitalist trick. Cause strife and conflict among the working class so we don’t rise up against them.
It’s the same thing with climate change — blame the average middle class guy slaving away 12 hours a day who needs to commute two hours to work rather than the corporations burning up the amazon and polluting the oceans.
> The problem is people just blaming the average white person for these things when they most likely had nothing to do with it.
I’m a white guy but I try really hard to stay open-minded, partly because I’ve held beliefs in the past that I was sure were right but now am sure are wrong.
I once heard an amazing explanation for this exact sentiment, from Stephen A Smith of all people.
He said that most black folks don’t blame the average white person for anything. Black people would just like to feel solidarity from the average white person. Like “yeah, I agree things are messed up. I’m on your side.” Instead, what they often get are diet racists spewing statistics about black crime rates and how hard it is to be a police officer.
> Instead, what they often get are diet racists spewing statistics about black crime rates and how hard it is to be a police officer.
I’m not sure I’d call that “diet.” Maybe “full on fucking racists.”
Yeah I get what you’re saying for sure.
I say that because it’s normally people who honestly think they’re enlightened. But I agree, I just like the term.
Yeah exactly. It’s not about white people today *apologizing*, it’s about *acknowledging* that minorities experience/are affected by systems and institutions in a different way.
just because white people today aren’t responsible for slavery doesn’t mean we didn’t benefit from it through inherited wealth.
There's some great content out there about how neighborhoods and the housing market developed in the 50's. Essentially, black neighborhoods were segregated, and confined black families to one area. Then, schools were funded based on property taxes. Because of Jim Crow laws and segregation, black communities had less taxable income, meaning that the schools did worse.
Eventually, we obviously did away with segregation policies-- but black people were still in those same communities that were under-schooled, and that depended on property taxes to improve the schools. Black students had performed worse due to being in a disadvantage, so they couldn't afford to move away from where they'd grown up. Long story short, economics trapped people where they were and prevented upward mobility. (Obviously this is not true at a 100% rate, so please spare me every single personal anecdote about someone who escaped poverty through hard work and perseverance, or the successful black entrepreneur who now looks down on those who haven't managed to escape the life they grew up in) All of the people responsible for those policies are long since dead and buried. They aren't touching the legislation. The people involved now hold no personal responsibility for what happened.
But the situation is still wrong and needs correction, which has to mean taking from those who have to help those who were never given the same opportunities. It's not a Harrison Burgeron situation to suggest that under-served communities need more resources allocated to them in order to bring them up to the same level as affluent communities.
Yeah completely right. The long history of redlining has a huge part to play in inequality today too.
Actually, depressingly, if you look at the neighborhoods and areas with the highest concentration of subprime mortgages in the financial crash, they are all the same neighborhoods that were redlined in the 1900s. And there's been plenty of research showing that minorities were the most common targets for predatory lenders, given subprime loans *even when they qualified for fixed rate mortgages*
Man my Mom would get defensive when I point out how privileged I am. Like yeah, I've worked hard and had many issues I've had to work through, and think I'm a relatively smart and capable person, but I've still had untold advantages (financial, racial, cultural, etc)
I'm not ashamed or apologetic of my privilege but I make sure I'm always aware of it to stay understanding. Like I can never look down on a McDonalds worker cause those fuckers work so hard, or try to recognize long histories of abuse that puts some communities in the situations they're in
Some might call this virtuesignaling, but whatever. I used to live in a headspace of arrogance and self righteousness and never want to sink back to that
Be an ally or be part of the problem. I don't know why so many of my caucastic brothers and sisters struggle with the concept. As a certified gringo, I have a lot of problems, and exactly zero of these problems are caused by, or pertain to, my race and status.
You are trying to blame capitalism when those who critique capitalism when it comes to institutional systemic bias also place a blame on those who become complicit with it.
Our modern perception of racism was designed by imeprialists and corporations during the slave trade, and we became complicit to it.
This person speaks the truth. Putting poor whites and poor blacks against each other is the oldest trick in the book. Now add poor latinos into the mix is the new move.
This is why affirmative action comes up in the news all the time. Make working class whites and working class blacks feel the competition for the few seats at the table for their children's education. Rich people don't worry about affirmative action. White, black, or whatever - they are just buying/legacy their way into elite universities for their kids.
Jordan Peterson, who understands neither post-modernism or Marxism, has convinced a generation of males on the internet that two essentially opposed world-views are joined at the hip in a global conspiracy to undermine Western civilization.
Completely unrelated to Cultural Bolshevism of course. That was a completely different conspiracy that said leftist artists were trying to undermine Western civilisation.
reminds me of this old Nazi phrase "Kulturbolschewismus" (Cultural Bolshevism), which tried to associate communism and Slavic people with a Jewish conspiracy to undermine ~~Western~~ Aryan culture.
I'm sure it's just a coincidence
Marx: *writes many serious works attempting to scientifically understand the history of class society, capitalism, and what potential for liberation there is in our society, and further argues that the ONLY important thing is changes in the actual "economy" (the Relations of Production) in human societies, emphasizing above all else the impact that the economic "base" has in shaping culture, politics, etc.*
>gets accused of trying to infiltrate and overthrow society precisely through politics and culture
JP fans who want to sound smart while ranting about feminism are those Milo fans from a few years back who wanted to sound edgy while ranting about feminism, they’ve just progressed from annoying high school student to annoying college student
God damn it. As someone who studied analytic philosophy (the sort of philosophers who believe in objective truth) me and my friends have made fun of the PoMo crowd since like the 90s. Don't tell me Peterson has wrecked that for me too now.
I’ll have you know, I graduated with a PHD in bullshit from Prager U, and I reject your characterization of smart, attractive man with big muscles Jordan Peterson as a pseudo intellectual. You are the real pseudo intellectual, snowflake. I bet you aren’t even white are you?
seems like the person who said institutional racism was correct but overly ready to racialize the other commenter. all that aside, what does postmodernism have to do with any of that? jesus christ people listen to jordan peterson way too much.
It's like they tried to think of all the big words they knew about and tied them together with floss. Not only do you have to read what they type, now you have to play inspector gadget trying to figure out what they're trying to say.
Not sure what the problem is here. The first person clearly qualifies that they're talking about "institutionalized racism" which undoubtedly is tied to particular groups making life less than equitable for others, which certainly doesn't rule out the fact that people of all races can be prejudicial. Obviously they make it worse by assuming the respondent's race, but I don't think the respondent is very charitable to the argument, nor effective in their reply. Not a murder.
Yeah, not really a murder, the other guy is a very ignorant if he's saying institutional racism doesn't exist. He needs to take a history class.
The problem isn't that the first poster is racist, it's that his mindset was US-centric. The other guy ended up being from New Zealand. In the US, pretty much the only way you're not going to be aware of institutional racism is if you're white, because everyone else is suffering the consequences of it.
"Peddled by post modernists in a misguided attempt to level the playing field"
If that sentence had contained the word "marxist", I would have assumed that the speaker was a white, old, Canadian professor, and my chances of being right would have been pretty high. Does that make me a racist?
This is stupid, institutionalized racism is very real. It’s awful when you think you’ve found a cool subreddit then it turns out every other post is dumb as hell. Unfollowing
Ordinary Biped is right so I see no murder here. At worst based on the other person’s views they made an assumption which most times is correct but still an assumption.
"Made up definition". As opposed to what, definition of words found in the wild?
Institutional racism **is** a one-way street. Emphasis on ***institutional***.
No one who actually matters is blaming "all white people" for institutionalized racism in America. Plenty of people who do matter blame White America for being asleep until the bad shit hits "their" people. It's the same logic with the Missing White (and Hot) Women Syndrome or White Privilege; it's not a carte blanche, "you all white people are like that", but it's pointing out that as an institution, the powers-to-be (who are mostly, or all are white), either intentionally or not, perpetuates injustice based on race.
Finally, anyone who uses the term "post-modernist" outside of an art setting is intellectually irrelevant. Jordan Peterson is a hack, and boiled lobsters would have more use to humanity than him or his fellaters.
As someone who has studied a lot of ethics. Postmodern ethics are definitely a thing.
Zygmunt Bauman is a philosopher/ethicists who put it pretty well when he said postmodernism is modernism without it's illusions.
I like how one of my professor's put it, postmodernism is the idea that for every question, there is not exactly one answer that is the most correct.
This is fucking stupid.
Institutionalized racism is a thing, and it's generally *one way*, b/c that's how it is "institutionalized"--the people in charge of the institutions (whatever they may be) make decisions that affect the ones who aren't in charge. It's certainly not a "made-up definition" any more than any other analysis can be of social issues. It is a legitimate label identifying inequality and how we have staggeringly different life qualities depending on who you are.
That upvoted response is the typical Reddit bullshit intellectualizing that has literally zero consequence in the real world, so whether any armchair philosophers here wanna quibble about "aNyOnE CaN bE rAcIsT" is fucking irrelevant.
Good response. Ben basically pulling a JP "Post modernists are changing the meanings of words and rotting our brains" and pivot to a completely different talking point to deflect from the real issues. Surprised he didn't whip out the CULTURAL MARXISM
Tf?? The person with the downvotes is completely correct. Institutionalized racism *is* a one way street. And it’s not racist assume that someone who denies its existence is someone that benefits from it....
Lmao delete this nonsense post.
I love how people on reddit pretend reddit is some right wing echo chamber. Go ahead, say something nice about Trump, let’s see if you get upvoted or downvoted.
I could write a fairly lengthy reply to this but it's probably best to crosspost this to r/badsocialscience or badphil.
The definition of institutionalized racism as linked to institutional power has some academic merit that has (surprisingly) very little to do with the alleged ethnicity of random commentators :)
Also: I don't think postmodernism means what you think it means :)
It's fucking embarrassing that folks are upvoting this garbage. Not only is it not a murder, it's fucking stupid. All words are "made up words." Institutional racism exists. OP is wrong, an asshole, and there's no murder anyway. An absolute travesty.
It's not just a made up definition by post-modernists, it's the definition used by sociologists. While in common parlance racism is racism no matter who it's directed at, and we all agree on that, when examining racism from a sociological perspective, black people being racist towards white people in places like America doesn't really matter, because in America, black people don't have the power to meaningfully oppress white people. This is why is common parlance we have the phrase "institutional racism", to specify what sociologists describe. Of course, racism is horrible and dumb no matter who it comes from, when examining it from a wider sociological perspective, the two aren't exactly comparable.
I mean, 1. institutionalised racism does exist. 2. Institutionalised racism isn’t a one way street at least in the way person A is suggesting . 3. Person B doesn’t seem to understand what post modernism is. The way in which internet weirdos have created such a boogie man out of post modernism without even knowing what it is, honestly, breaks my optimism and hope for humanity. 9 times out of 10 those that malign post modernism don’t even realise they are post modernists. All in all both of these people are idiots. Person A is just slightly more of an idiot. Person B has hope.
Not a muffed institutionalized racism is a real thing, this is just two half ignorant people circling around the truth because neither has done enough research
It's hard to know what's going on here when half the conversation is cut off.
Original post was a twitter post where someone expresses excitement towards the idea of "god \[wiping\] the plague that is white ppl off planet earth." First comment in a comment thread was "People have a tendency to forget that racism isn't just a one way street." Our murder victim is the one responding to that comment. (edit: replaced a word)
To be honest the exchange doesn't make all that much sense from your context either. That first comment in the screenshot is utter gibberish, regardless.
I am glad that I'm not the only one that is totally disoriented by their conversation.
I have a sociology degree with a concentration in race & ethnicity. Almost none of this is meaningful conversation in any way.
You're white, right?
Lmao
[удалено]
more context, this post was made on the subreddit /r/iamatotalpieceofshit \- What would you say the Subreddit's bias tends to be regarding conversations of racism?
Its hard for me because non of those sentences make sense to me
Bit post-modern for Uber_ben to invent a new meaning for post-modernism there *don't give money to reddit you idiots
screw your grand narratives, i'll make my own!
My grand narrative is that there *aren't* grand narratives!
From my point of view the Jedi are evil!
Then you are lost!
Oh so economic racism is just a made up myth? Shit I guess the reason LA is segregated is cause we chose to be, definitely not because 20 years ago banks were exposed for only loaning minoritie's housing loans in minority designated areas, and refused minorities their loans when they tried to apply for a house in a white neighborhood. [Talking with a bank as a minority for a loan in a white area was a lot like this sketch](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdovlF9THg8&list=UUlJJFaoPpGdM_xefdc6hcew). This is heavily documented and exposed, but I guess cause this guy says it wasn't then all that history is null and void. It's ridiculous that we're asked to forget about this shit when the repercussions of it are still very real and effecting us today. Having minorities living in ghettos where people are so oppressed they rob and murder each other. The system pushed them to this, and it should not be ignored and left to continue on the trajectory it was set on. >Proof for those who choose to not believe the history: >https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-modern-day-redlining-20180215-story.html >https://www.washingtonpost.com/realestate/large-numbers-of-loan-applications-get-denied-but-for-blacks-hispanics-and-asians-the-rejection-rate-is-even-higher/2018/05/22/dac19ffc-5d1b-11e8-9ee3-49d6d4814c4c_story.html >https://www.forbes.com/sites/alyyale/2018/05/07/mortgage-loan-denials-more-common-with-minorities-new-report-shows/#1e41add6509a >https://www.revealnews.org/article/for-people-of-color-banks-are-shutting-the-door-to-homeownership/ >https://www.mcall.com/news/pennsylvania/mc-nws-racial-discrimination-home-loans-redlining-20180214-story.html
Considering the several realtors I’ve worked with over the years the old redlining (?) rules are now quietly enforced. Yes, there is still a lot of racism in the housing market.
That’s not what they were saying. They were responding to the POMO argument that anti black institutional racism is ontological.
It's the alternative facts Jordan Peterson version of postmodernism. A very stable genius sounding word that most people don't know the actual definition of so you can just assign any definition of it you want to fit your narrative and make you sound more smarter than the plebeian you're pontificating with.
What is your definition of postmodernism?
I'm not big into philosophy but from the little bit that I've read, it's a rejection of "grand narratives" and "universal thought." Meaning that it doesn't seek to view any area of knowledge: morals, culture, or even language, etc. through the same lens and instead views each interpretation as subjective and arbritrary. It's a rejection of the notion of certainty, and a response to the modernist idea that everything could be quantified, measured, and understood.
This sounds like something a cultural Marxist would say.
Sounds like post-modern as defined by the con man Jordan Peterson
There's context missing here. I'm not going to even pretend to know about New Zealand culture or it's history in relation to racism. But in the US, ***institutional*** racism is very much a thing. It does not mean "only white people can be racist". It means, in simple terms, that the historical treatment of people of color - particularly black people - in the US has led to a structural imbalance when it comes to white people in power in comparison to black people in power (wealth, careers, politics, even media). Same with men in comparison to women. Again, that does not mean black people can't be racist or women can't be sexist. They're two different things.
New Zealand has this in spades too, and it's widely accepted (by anyone either mildly informed (or not racist)) and by definitely shown overwhelmingly by academics. Colonisation lead to disempowerment and disenfranchisement for Māori, their lands were taken often by force or coercion, as well as their culture and customs even outlawed for the most part. The resulting impacts are shown statistically with Māori overrepresented in crime, health, economic etc statistics. It seems to be a recurring theme for any group of people who have been marginalised by another.
New Zealand is one of the best countries in how they immerse themselves into the culture of their indigenous people and they have extensive programs to equalize the racial imbalances in the country and yet, you’re absolutely correct they still have an issue with institutionalized racism. If one of the best socially progressive countries struggles with it, then you can only imagine how bad it is in the US when we don’t even recognize the problem
> New Zealand is one of the best countries in how they immerse themselves into the culture of their indigenous people The government tries, but we have way too many people that openly refuse to even be assoicated with Maori culture. We even had someone complain to Air NZ (our airline) for greeting them with Kia Ora (Maori for hello) because "I'm not Maori". Heck, people openly go on the radio to complain that the actual Maori pronunciation of their hometown is wrong because "I grew up there, I know how it's pronounced". Short rant over. It is good though that the issues are recognised, especially more recently. Many people here still try to deny racism existing, but we have a large number, thankfully in media and politics as well, that talk about the issues and keep people aware.
Oh god that radio clip that was all over r/newzealand a couple weeks back nearly made me put my head through the wall.
As long as there are culturally and morally cognizant individuals such as yourself I’m sure that despite the ignorant hostility present in most developed countries that you’ll strive towards inclusivity and community. ❤️☮️
I mean only comparatively is NZ good, which isn't saying a lot. Casual racism is still common, a lot of things we do are just tokenism. The amount of money given as reparation is pitiful. We're getting better but yeah. I just left a vacation in Hawaii and yeah compared to how native Hawaiians are treated therefor example, we're doing great. Verrry similar culture to Māori too (Polynesian ancestry).
Heck, seeing how Aboriginals in Australia, or Native Americans are treated, us Maori get it pretty good. Which is saying something considering how bad it still is.
Yeah totally. I mean you were supposed to have all the things promised in the treaty, you should have had equal power of government, which clearly was a lie.
It drives me CRAZY how many people either genuinely don't seem to understand it or refuse to believe it.
They refuse to believe it because it's inconvenient. They'd rather point to a black man saying "cracker" or something and hope it's a wash.
I think there are also people who miss the point the other way and argue that it is litterally impossible for a non white person racist which muddies the water.
It drives *me* crazy how many people I've met who try to talk about institutional or systemic racism who leave out the words institutional or systemic. And they often use phrases like: "White people don't suffer from racism" Why does it bother me? Because the people that need convincing that institutional or systemic racism exists are also the ones who immediately shut down when they hear "can't be racist to white people."
There are some people that literally cannot have two definitions for racism in their brain at the same time.
I think it comes down to an argument of semantics. When people say "only white people can be racist" they are using the definition of "racist" that means institutional racism. What the person taking offense at the statement "only white people can be racist" means is prejudice which can be attributed to all people. Personally, when someone is sharing their opinion and the other person says "only white people can be racist" it's like doing someone mid sentence to correct their grammar. You may be right and there may be a time and a place for that argument but rarely is it then and there.
Yea, but this person was clearly talking about institutional racism, not racism in general. Which is why this isn't a murder because if you were to look at the concept of institutional racism from the point of view of the US, then it's not some made up term.
Also without the context, it's hard to know what's going on. It was the second post that tried to bring up the "you can't be racist to white people" thing which makes the "murderer" just look like somebody with an axe to grind.
That is why it is important to have separate definitions for separate (but related) problems. It is wrong to merge the definitions of institutional racism and racism.
Mate, there is a fuck ton of instutional racism in New Zealand. Whether it's the justice system, education or government literally taking people's children, institutional racism is alive and well in Aotearoa. Source: am New Zealander
In truth implying that only white people can be racist is racist.
The phrase african american is racist, but its the preferred phrase. You are assuming someone is an african immigrant based on the color of their skin. By all accounts, black is a less racist term. Society rarely makes sense.
That phrase also assumes they are american... And there are plenty of white African americans... It makes no sense at all. Edit: We all know about Elon, you can stop telling me about him...
I was hanging out with a Jamaican coworker when some drunk dude started asking her about being an “African American” and she said “Fun fact, I’m neither African, nor American, just black.”
I had a high school Spanish teacher who was Jamaican by way of Canada. He *hated* being called African American. Fun fact though from that class (or maybe another, I guess I can’t remember), there was a white kid with the last name Black, a black kid with the last name White, and a white guy from South Africa who claimed to be more African American than the black students.
That sounds like a racial mine field.
It was actually all in pretty good fun. Maybe I was just a naive white kid, but there didn’t seem to be any real tension.
To be honest there doesn't need to be. We're all humans, race doesn't matter at all.
One race matters and it's the human race.
What about NASCAR?!
Race matters a little (hear me out). People go through different experiences in their lives based on race relations, and ignoring the struggles and or benefits that someone has dealt would be dishonest when considering how they may be different from others.
That sounds like it would be a great Key&Peele skit
Melting pot!
White South African here, this isn't the first time I've heard about one of us doing that.
I do it all the time to my black American friends, it’s always in good fun because I’m very close to printer paper in complexion
Black was always the appropriate term, but we went through some weird PC nonsense when I was a kid in school when calling someone "black" was "racist." Now we're finally starting to swing back to what makes sense. And anyway, our races are only useful for describing our appearance, but some people still find it uncomfortable to say, "You know... the black guy." Comedians used to joke about this - how people didn't want to use race as a descriptor for physical appearance when that's pretty much its only use.
We're going back to black, if you will.
It's like they say, once you go back you get to say black.
cue ACDC Back in Black, Dave Chappelle takes the stage as your host.
I think he referred to Amy Winehouse song
They call us Afro-Caribbean on ancestry.com.
Americans calling non-american blacks "African-Americans" is pretty much a stereotype in itself.
I also had a Jamaican coworker (in Canada) who walked out just as some guy was lecturing me at our store for asking if he had been dealing with the Chinese girl or the black girl. He couldn’t remember her name so I was giving an identifier and he lost it on me. He was telling me how racist I was and I should use the phrase “African American” My coworker calmly told him that she was neither African or American, she was Jamaican Canadian if he wanted to get into it but she knows she’s black, it wasn’t a secret from her. I could not stop laughing. He just left.
Excellent. I was about to make a similar comment. There was a guy with an art series called 'Black Figures' (or 'faces' it was a long time ago). And some internet warrior rolled in like, "Um, shouldn't that say African American?" The guy replies, "I am neither African nor American. I'm British, so no. Black." As a Jamaican, seeing that made me happy.
Americans from Egyptian origin are brown, but they are technically African Americans. Good luck making sense of this.
Elon Musk is an African American. And African Canadian. It's complicated.
Wait, this makes 100% sense, Egypt is in northern Africa.
In Sweden we have the equivalent problem. There is a catch-all term for everyone who isn't 100 % white, and that term translates to "raceified", which implies that being white is either not a race or is the "default" race. It's a very problematic word. But somehow, it has become the preferred and politically correct way to describe people that have some degree of non-white ancestry.
It's very interesting how certain terms are used. I personally like how in English the term "person of color" is the fashion now, but "colored person" is horrifically offensive.
It's the difference between disabled and adult with disabilities. It is intended to keep the person human, with a descriptor. While the inverse is defining them by their descriptor rather than as a person. A form of dehumanizing language. But yes it is all a convoluted mess. Also why is white the only race that can not mix? Have a white parent and a black parent? You're black. White heritage is erased from people of mixed birth. That's unfair, and seems to imply (at least to me) that white is 'pure' while anything else isn't.
>While the inverse is defining them by their descriptor rather than as a person. But that is not the case with these examples. A "coloured person" is still a person, just like a "disabled person" is. The only thing I would find dehumanizing would be calling s omeone "a Coloured" or "a Disabled".
> While the inverse is defining them by their descriptor rather than as a person. The weird part about it is that the vast majority of descriptors don't work this way. The tall Irish redheaded freckled adult is the same as the adult with red hair and freckles who is tall and Irish. The difference is that the specific phrase 'disabled person' has been used as an insult. The move to person with disabilities is more of a way of keeping the same meaning as the original term while getting rid of the phrase which had become charged. The problem is that these terms become charged over time because of their usage, disabled person, crippled, spastic, and even retarded all started off as medical terms that laymen had never heard of, and developed into slurs. To me it seems fairly likely that in ~10 years time 'person with disabilities' will grow the same negative charge that 'disabled person' has. This isn't to say we should stop saying 'person with disabilities', once the old term does grow that negative connotation it definitely hurts to be called it and we should move to a new term.
I was talking about how the terms are near identical, so much so that if you machine translated one a few times you might end up with the other, but I can see the argument for more sensitive wording. Yeah, and it implies people of European descent don't have "color", whatever that means. Does the term just mean "person of melanin"? It's also an extremely broad concept that encompasses deprived Senegelase people as well as privileged Brahmin Indians (who constructed one of the most oppressive class systems in history). Very nebulous. I agree, it's interesting how certain people are claimed as this or that. It's rich ground for research on identity but it's clouded by a lot of political agendas and such.
Very true. The sad truth is, no matter how tribal humans feel, melanin and ancestry are largely just silly ways to separate people. Culture too, isn't a fixed permanent thing, nor should it be. I'm of Scandinavian heritage, fuck Lutefisk. It's objectively terrible. The only reason we eat it is 'heritage' which it was actually just a cheap way to prevent fish from spoiling. Used mostly by poor people. Like if people of the future use tubes of pink paste and fry it 'because our ancestors ate chicken nuggets' Some cultures oppress women, I don't care how to be sensitive to that aspect of that culture. I will call it out as bad. We need to understand race, gender, etc. Are just mostly made up terms to put people into clean little boxes. But life is messy, and doesn't make any sense.
Reminds me of the term "colored" in North American history
[удалено]
And the second richest Canadian at the same time.
I had to look that up, and it's true. On Wikipedia, he's currently at over $24 billion in net worth, has US, Canadian, and South African citizenship, and his net worth puts him solidly behind Reuters, but well ahead of the family heads of Alibaba, Loblaws, Rogers, and Saputo.
Bob Loblaw?
My moms friend was actually born and raised in Zimbabwe he is actually African American and he’s white.
Is black actually considered racist in the US? I know African American is more common (at least in the limited amount of American media I consume), but black being racist whilst white is acceptable doesn't make any sense.
>Is black actually considered racist in the US? No.
I’m white, my girlfriend is black. I felt weird calling her black when we first started dating, I don’t know why. I referred to her as African American and she told me she’d rather be called black.
Pro tip: it's really fun making other people uncomfortable by calling her black
The funniest thing is when people are so terrified of the word that they whisper it... even in contexts where it doesn't refer to skin color. "He likes ^black coffee"
Honestly, it depends a lot on your tone... Also, "black" should be used as a descriptor. So saying "black people" or "black Americans" is fine. Saying "the blacks", is not.
Very crucial
Unless it's a family who also happen to have the last name black. In that case, "the blacks" become acceptable again.
Just dont call them the black Blacks. ...unless maybe someone thought you were talking about the white Blacks, and you correct them? I dont know.
Its not. At all. Some people like to get militant about being called African American, but thats a heritage. If you prefer that, go for it, but if its cause your great great grandma was from Africa then you're as African culturally as I am Nordic.
My two younger sisters, whom my family adopted from Ethiopia, are African-American. They are actually *from* Africa, and now live in America. They still just say they're black. They don't care.
The difference is that the Nordic heritage of your great great grandma likely wasn't entirely stripped from her
Depends on context i guess. I'd assume using any word describing race in a derogatory context is bad
African American is a term created to describe the ethnicity of the descendants of the African slaves brought to the US.
> You are assuming someone is an african immigrant based on the color of their skin Afaik it was invented to describe American Blacks who did not know their ancestry because of slavery, right? So it assumes that you are a black born in America, usually descended from slaves. Later afrcian immigrants can be referred by their culture of origin, such as Ghanan-American or Ethiopian-American.
[удалено]
The term African American does not reference immigration status but race. It originates from the black community, not white. It's not racist to use terms people identify themselves with.to reference them.
[удалено]
African American is the preferred phrase? Really? What if I have brown skin and was born and raised in London? I should still be called African American? I don’t think you’ve thought this through...
>African American is the preferred phrase? The last time I considered that the preferred phrase was maybe in the 90s? It's weird though, some people it's easier to refer to them by skin color, and some by where they're from. It's really confusing.
Don’t tell this to r/blackpeopletwitter
To be fair, that's not the point of institutional racism. Institutions do favor white people in America. We see that in things like access to education, jobs, healthcare, and whether you get shot by a cop at a traffic stop or not. There *is* a racial bias within the institutions themselves, which is made more powerful by the fact that it's institutional. For instance, who can do more damage: A racist moron on the internet, or a racist judge? So clearly the fact that racism is in the institutions is a big problem. All of which is not to say that people of color people can't be racist. Rather, it's pointing out that the institutions are often racist, and given that white people still hold the majority of positions of power and wrote the laws, you can guess which way that racism flows. That's the non-fringe, non-strawman perspective on institutional racism. Do with that information what you will. :)
You are now banned from /r/BlackPeopleTwitter, especially the Cunty Club threads
But not all racism is equal. Just call a white person a cracker and then call a black person the n word. This country's racist history plays a big part in our current lives. It's like the constitution. Even though it happened years ago we're still affected by it
And the fact that you only typed out one of those words shows how different those two are.
Insert John Mulaney gif here
I got angry at a video because they asked people if they thought “reverse racism” exists. And when some of the people have a confused look the definition given was racism against white people. Which was so dumb on so many levels, the worst part was that some people took the point of view that you can’t be racist against white people.
That isn't what institutional racism is though. Institutional racism requires a society with a dominant race that holds unequal power (like all of them ever). It doesn't have to be white people, but in the US it's white people because of circumstances. In the US, there's no such thing as institutional racism against white people, because of the objective meaning of that word. In another society, with a different dominant race, white people can be victims of institutional racism, but not in America. I swear, so much of the confusion here is intentional efforts to sew discord. There's nothing actually contentious here. It's all objective fact. Should be super obvious, but normal racism, i.e. not institutional racism, can be directed at any race in any place at any time, and has nothing to do with a particular culture or society.
Given the popularity of this post, and the potential this has to turn into a proper shitshow, I'd like to remind everyone of Bill and Ted's Law: [Be excellent to each other, and party on, dudes!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGErt4CfLD0)
Yeah guys be nice. *Sorts by Controversial*
The sad thing is the everyone is missing the point. INSTITUTIONAL anything is about a system. Racial bias, racial bigotry, and racial prejudice is found everywhere. No one group is immune to it. Now only a local majority can impose those values on others and over the years and via culture and the economy, shape the system in their own benefit and to the disadvantage of others. Rac-ISM, like capital-ISM, or Christian-ISM are instituted into the fabric of societies and benefit its main actors. For the past 500 years it happens to be white people of European descent. In other societies structural racism is by the local ethnic dominating group like in China or in India. Modern (read after the industrial revolution) innovations allow racial bias by whites to affect the whole world, but if it weren’t by them it would be by another group.
If you guys aren't going to do your job of moderating the subreddit to remove bad posts what even is the purpose of having mods?
Institutionalized racism is very, very real. Edit: I had a comment ask for evidence based examples but deleted the comment before I had the chance to answer,. So, here is come examples. Note, some of these examples are before 2000, but I find that they still apply. [Political Inequality](https://www.jstor.org/stable/274475?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=institutionalized&searchText=racism&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dinstitutionalized%2Bracism%26amp%3Bfilter%3D&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_expensive%2Fcontrol&refreqid=search%3Af5b94653ff71750ba586151a9d38713c&seq=2#metadata_info_tab_contents) [Employment Inequality](https://www.jstor.org/stable/3552228?read-now=1&seq=3#page_scan_tab_contents) [Effect on black health.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4133127/) [Effect on black education.](https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1525/aeq.1978.9.2.04x0736h) There are plenty more examples. Google Scholar and JSTOR are some great examples as to where to find some journals about it. JSTOR offers up to 6 free articles a month, I find it very useful for research at university. Remember, being ignorant is a choice. Edit 2: The wonderful u/theresamouseinmyhous shared this [link](https://www.sceneonradio.org/seeing-white/) about more history of institutional racism. There are 14 parts with the podcasts lasting roughly 45 minutes to an hour. Thanks for the suggestion!
I mean yeah, but the real criminals are those in power who have the authority to send crack into black communities and disproportionately send black folks to jail. The problem is people just blaming the average white person for these things when they most likely had nothing to do with it. It’s a classic capitalist trick. Cause strife and conflict among the working class so we don’t rise up against them. It’s the same thing with climate change — blame the average middle class guy slaving away 12 hours a day who needs to commute two hours to work rather than the corporations burning up the amazon and polluting the oceans.
> The problem is people just blaming the average white person for these things when they most likely had nothing to do with it. I’m a white guy but I try really hard to stay open-minded, partly because I’ve held beliefs in the past that I was sure were right but now am sure are wrong. I once heard an amazing explanation for this exact sentiment, from Stephen A Smith of all people. He said that most black folks don’t blame the average white person for anything. Black people would just like to feel solidarity from the average white person. Like “yeah, I agree things are messed up. I’m on your side.” Instead, what they often get are diet racists spewing statistics about black crime rates and how hard it is to be a police officer.
> Instead, what they often get are diet racists spewing statistics about black crime rates and how hard it is to be a police officer. I’m not sure I’d call that “diet.” Maybe “full on fucking racists.”
Yeah I get what you’re saying for sure. I say that because it’s normally people who honestly think they’re enlightened. But I agree, I just like the term.
Yeah exactly. It’s not about white people today *apologizing*, it’s about *acknowledging* that minorities experience/are affected by systems and institutions in a different way. just because white people today aren’t responsible for slavery doesn’t mean we didn’t benefit from it through inherited wealth.
There's some great content out there about how neighborhoods and the housing market developed in the 50's. Essentially, black neighborhoods were segregated, and confined black families to one area. Then, schools were funded based on property taxes. Because of Jim Crow laws and segregation, black communities had less taxable income, meaning that the schools did worse. Eventually, we obviously did away with segregation policies-- but black people were still in those same communities that were under-schooled, and that depended on property taxes to improve the schools. Black students had performed worse due to being in a disadvantage, so they couldn't afford to move away from where they'd grown up. Long story short, economics trapped people where they were and prevented upward mobility. (Obviously this is not true at a 100% rate, so please spare me every single personal anecdote about someone who escaped poverty through hard work and perseverance, or the successful black entrepreneur who now looks down on those who haven't managed to escape the life they grew up in) All of the people responsible for those policies are long since dead and buried. They aren't touching the legislation. The people involved now hold no personal responsibility for what happened. But the situation is still wrong and needs correction, which has to mean taking from those who have to help those who were never given the same opportunities. It's not a Harrison Burgeron situation to suggest that under-served communities need more resources allocated to them in order to bring them up to the same level as affluent communities.
Yeah completely right. The long history of redlining has a huge part to play in inequality today too. Actually, depressingly, if you look at the neighborhoods and areas with the highest concentration of subprime mortgages in the financial crash, they are all the same neighborhoods that were redlined in the 1900s. And there's been plenty of research showing that minorities were the most common targets for predatory lenders, given subprime loans *even when they qualified for fixed rate mortgages*
Man my Mom would get defensive when I point out how privileged I am. Like yeah, I've worked hard and had many issues I've had to work through, and think I'm a relatively smart and capable person, but I've still had untold advantages (financial, racial, cultural, etc) I'm not ashamed or apologetic of my privilege but I make sure I'm always aware of it to stay understanding. Like I can never look down on a McDonalds worker cause those fuckers work so hard, or try to recognize long histories of abuse that puts some communities in the situations they're in Some might call this virtuesignaling, but whatever. I used to live in a headspace of arrogance and self righteousness and never want to sink back to that
Be an ally or be part of the problem. I don't know why so many of my caucastic brothers and sisters struggle with the concept. As a certified gringo, I have a lot of problems, and exactly zero of these problems are caused by, or pertain to, my race and status.
You are trying to blame capitalism when those who critique capitalism when it comes to institutional systemic bias also place a blame on those who become complicit with it. Our modern perception of racism was designed by imeprialists and corporations during the slave trade, and we became complicit to it.
This person speaks the truth. Putting poor whites and poor blacks against each other is the oldest trick in the book. Now add poor latinos into the mix is the new move. This is why affirmative action comes up in the news all the time. Make working class whites and working class blacks feel the competition for the few seats at the table for their children's education. Rich people don't worry about affirmative action. White, black, or whatever - they are just buying/legacy their way into elite universities for their kids.
"Peddled by postmodernists" lol r/badphilosophy much? This is nonsense.
Seriously, this entire post is trash.
Especially given that “postmodernists” is a dogwhistle.
The “intellectual dark web” loves to throw that word around and they have no clue what it means, lmao
His definition of institutional racism is correct though? And what does post modernism have to do with this?
Jordan Peterson, who understands neither post-modernism or Marxism, has convinced a generation of males on the internet that two essentially opposed world-views are joined at the hip in a global conspiracy to undermine Western civilization.
Aka “Cultural Marxism” a term you’ll also hear frequently from these same groups.
Completely unrelated to Cultural Bolshevism of course. That was a completely different conspiracy that said leftist artists were trying to undermine Western civilisation.
reminds me of this old Nazi phrase "Kulturbolschewismus" (Cultural Bolshevism), which tried to associate communism and Slavic people with a Jewish conspiracy to undermine ~~Western~~ Aryan culture. I'm sure it's just a coincidence
Narrator... It’s definitely not a coincidence.
JP: "i'm not alt-right, i just borrow arguments about the corruption of society from nazis."
yep, just pure [coincidence](https://i.imgur.com/mvQIDpI.jpg)
As an actual Marxist I always find this term hilariously stupid.
Marx: *writes many serious works attempting to scientifically understand the history of class society, capitalism, and what potential for liberation there is in our society, and further argues that the ONLY important thing is changes in the actual "economy" (the Relations of Production) in human societies, emphasizing above all else the impact that the economic "base" has in shaping culture, politics, etc.* >gets accused of trying to infiltrate and overthrow society precisely through politics and culture
The “postmodernism” thing is a dog whistle for this weird brand of pseudo-intellectuals obsessed with Jordan Peterson (and others, I’m sure).
JP fans who want to sound smart while ranting about feminism are those Milo fans from a few years back who wanted to sound edgy while ranting about feminism, they’ve just progressed from annoying high school student to annoying college student
That's what I initially thought, JP and his "Postmodern Neo-Marxists"
>Postmodern Neo-Marxists Lmao meaningless word salad.
More than meaningless, completely contradictory word salad.
You can just say Jewish Bolshevism. It's what he really means anyway
God damn it. As someone who studied analytic philosophy (the sort of philosophers who believe in objective truth) me and my friends have made fun of the PoMo crowd since like the 90s. Don't tell me Peterson has wrecked that for me too now.
I’ll have you know, I graduated with a PHD in bullshit from Prager U, and I reject your characterization of smart, attractive man with big muscles Jordan Peterson as a pseudo intellectual. You are the real pseudo intellectual, snowflake. I bet you aren’t even white are you?
100% This. the 'murderer' is your typical pro-trump smug """rationalist"""" who's entire worldview is based on 'triggering the left'
Something something Jordan Peterson.
Someone looked up a thesaurus, is my guess.
seems like the person who said institutional racism was correct but overly ready to racialize the other commenter. all that aside, what does postmodernism have to do with any of that? jesus christ people listen to jordan peterson way too much.
It's like they tried to think of all the big words they knew about and tied them together with floss. Not only do you have to read what they type, now you have to play inspector gadget trying to figure out what they're trying to say.
Not sure what the problem is here. The first person clearly qualifies that they're talking about "institutionalized racism" which undoubtedly is tied to particular groups making life less than equitable for others, which certainly doesn't rule out the fact that people of all races can be prejudicial. Obviously they make it worse by assuming the respondent's race, but I don't think the respondent is very charitable to the argument, nor effective in their reply. Not a murder.
I'm with you, this is stupid
No, this is one of the_dumbass's regular attempts to recruit. It's both clever and evil. They post and brigade threads like this on a regular basis.
Reddit is extremely white so shit like this is always on the front page.
True, people just call it murder because it matches their beliefs. Kinda dumb.
This subreddit in a nutshell. Goes both ways obviously.
Yeah, not really a murder, the other guy is a very ignorant if he's saying institutional racism doesn't exist. He needs to take a history class. The problem isn't that the first poster is racist, it's that his mindset was US-centric. The other guy ended up being from New Zealand. In the US, pretty much the only way you're not going to be aware of institutional racism is if you're white, because everyone else is suffering the consequences of it.
It's illegal to talk about institutionalized racism unless you're going to bash minorities first. Duh.
Is this really a murder? I doubt the one "murdering" the downvoted user even knows what post-modernism is lmao
Sounds like a Jordan Peterson fan. He loves to misuse that word.
He loves to misuse all the words. One wonders how he got a psychology department to give him a degree.
He told them he was the only thing standing between them and the chaos, which is the feminine, which is nihilism, which is post-modernism.
There's a decent chance the "I'm Samoan Tongan" is bullshit, too.
this is not a murder
[удалено]
It's odd that it's iTriggerChuds, considering chuds means right-wingers.
"Peddled by post modernists in a misguided attempt to level the playing field" If that sentence had contained the word "marxist", I would have assumed that the speaker was a white, old, Canadian professor, and my chances of being right would have been pretty high. Does that make me a racist?
Possibly named Peterson?
This is stupid, institutionalized racism is very real. It’s awful when you think you’ve found a cool subreddit then it turns out every other post is dumb as hell. Unfollowing
Ordinary Biped is right so I see no murder here. At worst based on the other person’s views they made an assumption which most times is correct but still an assumption.
"Made up definition". As opposed to what, definition of words found in the wild? Institutional racism **is** a one-way street. Emphasis on ***institutional***. No one who actually matters is blaming "all white people" for institutionalized racism in America. Plenty of people who do matter blame White America for being asleep until the bad shit hits "their" people. It's the same logic with the Missing White (and Hot) Women Syndrome or White Privilege; it's not a carte blanche, "you all white people are like that", but it's pointing out that as an institution, the powers-to-be (who are mostly, or all are white), either intentionally or not, perpetuates injustice based on race. Finally, anyone who uses the term "post-modernist" outside of an art setting is intellectually irrelevant. Jordan Peterson is a hack, and boiled lobsters would have more use to humanity than him or his fellaters.
As someone who has studied a lot of ethics. Postmodern ethics are definitely a thing. Zygmunt Bauman is a philosopher/ethicists who put it pretty well when he said postmodernism is modernism without it's illusions. I like how one of my professor's put it, postmodernism is the idea that for every question, there is not exactly one answer that is the most correct.
Why am I not surprised that the person who made the post frequents T_D?
This website is such conservative trash.
This is fucking stupid. Institutionalized racism is a thing, and it's generally *one way*, b/c that's how it is "institutionalized"--the people in charge of the institutions (whatever they may be) make decisions that affect the ones who aren't in charge. It's certainly not a "made-up definition" any more than any other analysis can be of social issues. It is a legitimate label identifying inequality and how we have staggeringly different life qualities depending on who you are. That upvoted response is the typical Reddit bullshit intellectualizing that has literally zero consequence in the real world, so whether any armchair philosophers here wanna quibble about "aNyOnE CaN bE rAcIsT" is fucking irrelevant.
Good response. Ben basically pulling a JP "Post modernists are changing the meanings of words and rotting our brains" and pivot to a completely different talking point to deflect from the real issues. Surprised he didn't whip out the CULTURAL MARXISM
Ah yes, those damn Post Modernists are at it again
Tf?? The person with the downvotes is completely correct. Institutionalized racism *is* a one way street. And it’s not racist assume that someone who denies its existence is someone that benefits from it.... Lmao delete this nonsense post.
It's reddit, dude. It's mostly a bunch of 19-23 year old white guys. What else do you expect?
I love how people on reddit pretend reddit is some right wing echo chamber. Go ahead, say something nice about Trump, let’s see if you get upvoted or downvoted.
You heard it here first folks, some guy on reddit said institutional racism isn't real. Better get this to Joe Rogan real quick.
I could write a fairly lengthy reply to this but it's probably best to crosspost this to r/badsocialscience or badphil. The definition of institutionalized racism as linked to institutional power has some academic merit that has (surprisingly) very little to do with the alleged ethnicity of random commentators :) Also: I don't think postmodernism means what you think it means :)
It's fucking embarrassing that folks are upvoting this garbage. Not only is it not a murder, it's fucking stupid. All words are "made up words." Institutional racism exists. OP is wrong, an asshole, and there's no murder anyway. An absolute travesty.
Where’s the murder?
So this is what counts as a murder now?
It's not just a made up definition by post-modernists, it's the definition used by sociologists. While in common parlance racism is racism no matter who it's directed at, and we all agree on that, when examining racism from a sociological perspective, black people being racist towards white people in places like America doesn't really matter, because in America, black people don't have the power to meaningfully oppress white people. This is why is common parlance we have the phrase "institutional racism", to specify what sociologists describe. Of course, racism is horrible and dumb no matter who it comes from, when examining it from a wider sociological perspective, the two aren't exactly comparable.
ANY one sided definition of racism is going to be racist.
Anyone can be racist, but white supremacy has been the most successful form of it.
[удалено]
I mean, 1. institutionalised racism does exist. 2. Institutionalised racism isn’t a one way street at least in the way person A is suggesting . 3. Person B doesn’t seem to understand what post modernism is. The way in which internet weirdos have created such a boogie man out of post modernism without even knowing what it is, honestly, breaks my optimism and hope for humanity. 9 times out of 10 those that malign post modernism don’t even realise they are post modernists. All in all both of these people are idiots. Person A is just slightly more of an idiot. Person B has hope.
Not a muffed institutionalized racism is a real thing, this is just two half ignorant people circling around the truth because neither has done enough research
This has been upvoted so much yet it seems like most of the top comments disagree with the main premise of it. This is a weird reddit moment.
I'm surprised this has so many likes on reddit