(01-31-2022 11:16 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-31-2022 11:05 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-31-2022 10:56 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-31-2022 10:54 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-31-2022 10:10 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  This is a conversation that has been had so many times on this board, it's just another rehash... Oof.

There are two issues here, and they are based on differences of opinion about the level/impact of historical and active racism today and how racist/racism is defined.

To the former, I would guess 93 and I believe there are more effects and active racism today than you do. To the latter, I would guess 93 and I believe something being based on race isn't inherently racist; that something is racist when it actively seeks to harm, disadvantage, etc. another based on their race.

I think the level of actual/active racism is much lower than it used to be (didn't you object to me making this observation before?). Maybe you could talk to some black people under 50 and let them tell you stories of how they were forced to use inferior bathrooms and not allowed to eat in certain restaurants. I would be interested in hearing those stories, as I think they don't exist.

I also think the institutional racism is about gone. I don't know of any schools or large businesses that have a policy of only hiring whites. I do know of a few businesses that only hire blacks. The racism codified in the law (separate but equal) is gone. Except, of course, for Affirmative Action. All anti-black racism today is individuals. Not so all anti-white racism.

the anti=racism movement has moved from correcting current policies to correcting for policies from long ago. For example, it has moved from enforcing equal access to, say restaurants, to trying to correct for access denied "Decades ago".

To your final sentence, I disagree. On its most basic level, AA is supposed to choose between two candidates for any position, other things being equal. If the white guy losses the job because he is white, how is that any different from the black guy in 1955 not getting the job because he is black? Isn't the white guy affected solely because of his race? That, my friend, is racism.

You mention the definition of racism. Here is mine:

Racism is the making of decisions about, or the forming of attitudes toward, any person or group of persons, based in whole or in part on their race.

Notice, there is no bias for/against any race in this definition.

I would like to hear your definition of racism and 93's. Can either of you give a definition that has no bias for/against any race?

AA makes decisions toward persons and groups based in part on their race. Racism.

I just discussed my discussion of racism.

Actually, you really didnt.

Great, lets take your articulation --- Again, lets say I decide to hire a white person, not because of any hate or hatred, but because I simply wish to have have a white person in the position.

From your brand new dance step shuffle formulation we have to take 'like or like better' as 'hate of some form', perhaps relatively speaking. By that same formulation any wish to have any race over another is the same as 'like or like better'.

Also... the bolded is unneccesary. I'm not on trial here and it should be OK to work out my ideas on a topic (like a definition of racism that I've never spent any time formulating) without an implication that I'm talking out both sides of my mouth in order to deceive.