NationStates

Mucius Scaevola wrote:

Scomagia wrote:You. Nail. Head.

Anyone can be racist. However, Minority groups can't, by definition, discriminate against a Majority group. They can be prejudiced, of course, but in practical terms discrimination by a Minority group is impossible.

So, what you are saying is that racism is a mixture of discrimination and prejudice?

I definitely agree that minorities cannot discriminate against a majority.

Then you've not heard of apartheid?

BTW, the whites were the minority back there.

Urran wrote:

Scomagia wrote:That's a lie. Everyone sees color.

It's just an expression....

It's a stupid expression.

Principality of Zundrbar wrote:"There are no non-whites in power in any country"
I guess the whites in Zimbabwe must be the ruling party, that's why their land was just confiscated. I guess Obama isn't "our first black president" either, rather he's the 44th white one, eh?

Racism goes both ways. Racism is never good, whether it's white on black, black on white, etc.

Thank you for being smart!

Napkiraly wrote:

Scomagia wrote:That's a lie. Everyone sees color.

Well, not colour blind people.

Color blind, and blind people can still be racist.

New Lavan wrote:

Mucius Scaevola wrote:So, what you are saying is that racism is a mixture of discrimination and prejudice?

I definitely agree that minorities cannot discriminate against a majority.

Then you've not heard of apartheid?

BTW, the whites were the minority back there.

Whites were the Majority there. They held the power over society and its institutions.

New Lavan wrote:

Mucius Scaevola wrote:So, what you are saying is that racism is a mixture of discrimination and prejudice?

I definitely agree that minorities cannot discriminate against a majority.

Then you've not heard of apartheid?

BTW, the whites were the minority back there.

He means institutional minority. Whites were in power and thus not a minority.

Napkiraly wrote:

Scomagia wrote:That's a lie. Everyone sees color.

Well, not colour blind people.

We're already splitting enough hairs in this thread as it is.

Scomagia wrote:

New Lavan wrote:Then you've not heard of apartheid?

BTW, the whites were the minority back there.

Whites were the Majority there. They held the power over society and its institutions.

Ah.

I was talking about numerical minority.

Mucius Scaevola wrote:

Scomagia wrote:That's a lie. Everyone sees color.

Exactly, everyone as a baby learns to distinguish between races. Later on you can become less racist, but as a child you are curious and see differences.

Young children don't necessarily attach more significance to skin color or "race" than they do to things like hair color, height, or facial hair. They see the physical variations, but the social significance is something they are taught by adults.

Romalae wrote:

Napkiraly wrote:Well, not colour blind people.

We're already splitting enough hairs in this thread as it is.

I'm just saying, technically speaking there are people who cannot see colour.

Minorities, in fact, CAN discriminate against majorities, just not in the same ways. Majorities can put laws in place to crush a minority group and take away their rights. However, a minority group can discriminate in other more annoying, and sometimes deadly ways. They can purposely give you crappy service, make rude remarks, refuse to wait on you or be waited on by you at stores or eateries, or go of their way to make you late for something. And guns don't know the difference between black, white, purple, or pink polka dots.

Everyone from Western Europe is laughing their ass off about how complicated race is in America.

Wallenburg wrote:Everyone from Western Europe is laughing their ass off about how complicated race is in America.

Cos the UK never has race issues.

Wallenburg wrote:Everyone from Western Europe is laughing their ass off about how complicated race is in America.

Yes, because Europe has never had any complicated issues related to race.

Scomagia wrote:

Urran wrote:
It's just an expression....

It's a stupid expression.

Eh, I got it from my professor so you're probably right.

I'm talking relative to us. It's been 150 years since slavery was made illegal and we still are stumbling around.

Affirmative Action. Boom.
Which hurts Asians worse.
So unintended double racism, to boot.

Wallenburg wrote:I'm talking relative to us. It's been 150 years since slavery was made illegal and we still are stumbling around.

So is Europe. Europe has quite a number of race issues.

Romalae wrote:

Wallenburg wrote:Everyone from Western Europe is laughing their ass off about how complicated race is in America.

Yes, because Europe has never had any complicated issues related to race.

Will just forget the whole of history that had to do with Adolf Hitler

Thermodolia wrote:

Romalae wrote:Yes, because Europe has never had any complicated issues related to race.

Will just forget the whole of history that had to do with Adolf Hitler

And all the race riots in the UK.

Coffee Cakes wrote:Affirmative Action. Boom.
Which hurts Asians worse.
So unintended double racism, to boot.

If you're talking about the United States, none of this is true.

Napkiraly wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:Will just forget the whole of history that had to do with Adolf Hitler

And all the race riots in the UK.

You guys have no idea what "relative" means, do you? The American case is the most prolonged case of racial tension in the modern world. If anyone can back up a counterargument to that, please do so. But don't go looking for a fight, don't spend the next hour researching the history of racism. And you finally fulfilled the prediction of Godwin's Law.

Coffee Cakes wrote:Affirmative Action. Boom.
Which hurts Asians worse.
So unintended double racism, to boot.

Too true. Some "anti-racist" measures just don't work out, and end up being racist in its own right.

Wallenburg wrote:

Napkiraly wrote:And all the race riots in the UK.

You guys have no idea what "relative" means, do you? The American case is the most prolonged case of racial tension in the modern world. If anyone can back up a counterargument to that, please do so. But don't go looking for a fight, don't spend the next hour researching the history of racism. And you finally fulfilled the prediction of Godwin's Law.

Spain

Wallenburg wrote:

Napkiraly wrote:And all the race riots in the UK.

You guys have no idea what "relative" means, do you? The American case is the most prolonged case of racial tension in the modern world. If anyone can back up a counterargument to that, please do so. But don't go looking for a fight, don't spend the next hour researching the history of racism. And you finally fulfilled the prediction of Godwin's Law.

Apparently you're unfamiliar with the history of Latin America.

Urran wrote:Thats a blanket statement and totally untrue. I've been treated differently on the job because I was the only white employee of a dollar store in a majority black town. Isn't it racism when a black customer calls me a cracker and refuses to let me check her out based on skin color alone?

A majority Black town is no place for a White person, I think you'd have found more enjoyment if you moved to at the very least- a majority Asian town. Then at least you'd have access to good egg rolls and Chinese, Korean, Thai, etc. cuisine which is often quite good, Asians in the US tend to be richer and thus will have better schools and less crime than Black or Hispanic neighborhoods.

There is a good reason why most Whites in the US make sure to move away if too many Blacks move in nearby, because majority Black has long been correlated with lower property values and increased crime. If you stay where you're an extreme minority, you'll just be cut off from your people and be left to rot on the vine. You really ought to consider partaking in White flight.