Are you a racist?

I’m not racist, but I’m not blind, either. I’ve seen people of different races beat stereotypes, for better or worse, so everyone gets a fair shot in my assessment. Sometimes, culture plays a big role in personality and trait development/expression. I don’t think there are many people that are immune from brainwashing; or really self aware people. Environment plays a big role in this and the difference can be very great even between generations of the same race.

Your welcome, WendyDarling.
There is so much wisdom in Gibran’s words too.
I think that all parents need to ponder his words, or ought to anyway.

Unfortunately, your quote is wrong. Your children are your children. It reminds me of religion, like how Christians say your father is not your father but God is. These religious compulsions, for a better or perfect world, have vested interests in separating parent from child and child from parent. It’s a form of surrogacy. A third-party intervenes and interferes with a parent and his or her own child.

People like to believe that they are separate from and ‘unique’, different than their roots. But there is no separation. There is continuation. Therefore, your race, your bloodlines, follow you, whether you acknowledge them or not. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Uniqueness is extraordinary. How are you unique, exactly? Isn’t uniqueness what every modern “snowflake” is led to believe about him or herself?

Because everybody has different values.

Equality is ignorance, tunnel vision, blind spots, narcissism, arrogance. Anti-racists, you obviously, deny your race, your heritage, your history. You ignore the sacrifices of your ancestors. You defile their graves and memories. Your race is your foundation, that you have betrayed and overturn, or perhaps pretend it doesn’t exist. It’s like denying the ground you walk on.

It’s not a matter of certainty but of higher probability.

An intelligent person perceives and understands tiny differences between people that others do not. Hence an intelligent person can distinguish races apart, ethnic groups, and even particular bloodlines and lineages. Just as a common person ought to be able to tell dog breeds apart, and whether a dog is a mutt or pure-bred. A less intelligent sees the world and humanity as “we are all one”, unable to spot differences. And then there are those who spot the differences, but lie about it, because they are afraid of backlash of being called “Racist!” You don’t want to get in trouble.

You see the real, true, discrete differences between everybody, but you’re afraid to speak about them, call them out, and expose them. Because you would face retaliation for doing so.

Imagine if dogs and their differently bred lineages could speak.

Wouldn’t the mixed-mutt speak positively about “mixing”, about “we are all one”, and speak negatively against pure-breeds? Wouldn’t the mixed-mutt call himself “progressive” and “the future”?

But which dogs are taken to the competitions and award shows? It’s the pure-breeds that prance around, face scrutiny, judgment, and win awards based on their health. It’s not the mutts.

Now apply this to humanity.

Raaaaaaaaacissst!!! There’s a racist over here!!

Just kidding…

That doesn’t mean that race doesn’t exist, or that race shouldn’t exist. The exceptions reinforce the rule. To “beat the stereotype” already admits to what you were trying not to admit.

I’m just saying we all believe in race, at least physically.
Where we differ is some people don’t believe it can determine neurology, and some people know it can.

The point to the whole socialist “anti-racist” campaign is to eliminate all differences so that all can be ruled under the same command. The truth concerning races is intentionally ignored and hidden for sake of that goal.

How do exceptions reinforce the rule?

Because in trying to “break stereotypes” people admit to consciously doing things against their nature in order to “prove others wrong”.

That means it’s dishonest and can’t actually prove what they want it to prove because the premise is flawed.

But some people do not do it consciously but are simply a product of their cultural upbringing. I mean, they themselves may not even be aware of existing stereotypes. For example, there is a video on YouTube of a mixed race (black) young man who grew up in Japan and was interviewed by another Japanese guy. And he acted and thought just like a Japanese person. I don’t know about his intellectual abilities, but to me, his personality and mode of thinking, in large part, has been influenced by Japanese culture.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=1KMO02xxX1g

I bet there are many that live nowadays what would indeed save the other child, in the hope of attaining the universal favour of the Other.

The real question is: is it racist to blame the truck driver? Or is it just racist that I assume I can ask this question? Is inferring from the news racist?
whoa, good question.
Yes, it probably is.

I just want mention, that in the Bible their is a strong emphasis on the one earth on which People live. This was acknowledged by astronoms who are on search for life in space. The message in the Bible might be: the difference to human beings must first be encountered within the one earth, before it is acknowledged for life in space. I am not sure if the concept of a race does promote this. Perhaps their is a fundamental difference between humans and proletarian. The socialist have their own concept of race, underlined last by Sloterdijk.

I am not so sure of this but I don’t think that in biblical times there was thought of other galaxies or other worlds - were there?
As I said, I am not so sure so the jury is still out. But that would be interesting to delve into.

I am reading the bible as a text which reveals relevance in all times. I’m not sure about the modification of the literal sense of it is necessary. But it could be obtained through philosophy. As a Proposition with this Interpretation: Before men could reach other conscious People in space, they must solve the Problem of living together on the one earth, which is singular.

Yes, that would be a real test… than saving your own child. :icon-rolleyes:

If you want to know if it is a racist decision or not then you have to remove all factors besides race as much as possible. Making the child a family member introduces another factor into the decision - allegiance to family.

No need to roll your eyes. This is Design of Experiments 101.

I know!

…but I like rolling my eyes. :icon-rolleyes: Phyllo telling Mags what to do :icon-rolleyes: (mumble mumble mumble)

Okay. Now I’m confused. The rolling eyes seemed to be saying that my analysis was not correct - that removing the added detail that the child is a family member is not the better approach.

So what are you saying?

…that Urwrongx1000’s scenario was flawed, as who Who WHO would save someone else’s child over their own, so not an indicator for racism, but for stupidity :laughing:

Okay, that clarifies it.