Media Bias

[Cunt]

I did hear Ibram X Kendi (what was his real name?) answer simple questions.

They asked him 'what is racism'. His definition was enlightening. He's a fucking idiot. Feel free to look it up, but basically, he stammered out 'it's when racists are racisming and its racist'.

He's quite clear on the matter:

...

So let’s set some definitions. What is racism? Racism is a marriage of racist policies and racist ideas that produces and normalizes racial inequities. Okay, so what are racist policies and ideas? We have to define them separately to understand why they are married and why they interact so well together. In fact, let’s take one step back and consider the definition of another important phrase: racial inequity.

Racial inequity is when two or more racial groups are not standing on approximately equal footing. Here’s an example of racial inequity: 71 percent of White families lived in owner-occupied homes in 2014, compared to 45 percent of Latinx families and 41 percent of Black families. Racial equity is when two or more racial groups are standing on a relatively equal footing. An example of racial equity would be if there were relatively equitable percentages of all three racial groups living in owner-occupied homes in the forties, seventies, or, better, nineties.

A racist policy is any measure that produces or sustains racial inequity between racial groups. An antiracist policy is any measure that produces or sustains racial equity between racial groups. By policy, I mean written and unwritten laws, rules, procedures, processes, regulations, and guidelines that govern people. There is no such thing as a nonracist or race-neutral policy. Every policy in every institution in every community in every nation is producing or sustaining either racial inequity or equity between racial groups.

Racist policies have been described by other terms: “institutional racism,” “structural racism,” and “systemic racism,” for instance. But those are vaguer terms than “racist policy.” When I use them I find myself having to immediately explain what they mean. “Racist policy” is more tangible and exacting, and more likely to be immediately understood by people, including its victims, who may not have the benefit of extensive fluency in racial terms. “Racist policy” says exactly what the problem is and where the problem is. “Institutional racism” and “structural racism” and “systemic racism” are redundant. Racism itself is institutional, structural, and systemic.

“Racist policy” also cuts to the core of racism better than “racial discrimination,” another common phrase. “Racial discrimination” is an immediate and visible manifestation of an underlying racial policy. When someone discriminates against a person in a racial group, they are carrying out a policy or taking advantage of the lack of a protective policy. We all have the power to discriminate. Only an exclusive few have the power to make policy. Focusing on “racial discrimination” takes our eyes off the central agents of racism: racist policy and racist policymakers, or what I call racist power.

...


Ibram X. Kendi, How To Be an Antiracist. Penguin, 2019 (Amazon link)

He said racism is racist.

He should be able to define a word without using the word, but that's basic.

At the core, you seem to not acknowledge the conflict between equity and equality.

Which do you prefer? I prefer equality (brutish, but still less brutish than equity)

[Brian Peacock]

You can read his own words above. Have a think about it.

[Cunt]

You can read his own words above. Have a think about it.

I did. He sounds like an idiot, spouting racism.

I asked you a tough question. No problem if you don't answer. I know your position can't be bold, what with your country prosecuting folks for wrongthink.

[Brian Peacock]

Kendi is quite clear about his definition of racism, and your changing the subject doesn't cut it I'm afraid.

[macdoc]

So Brian there is at this moment in time only one human race so what the fuck are you on about???

Last time I checked Denisovans and Neanderthals were extinct.....don't feed the meme.

Try bigotry ...far more accurate.

[Brian Peacock]

So Brian there is at this moment in time only one human race so what the fuck are you on about???

Last time I checked Denisovans and Neanderthals were extinct.....don't feed the meme.

Try bigotry ...far more accurate.

Keep your hair on. Talking about racism is as legitimate and relevant a concern as talling about sexism or ageism or ableism or classism any other form of bigotry. 'Racism' is just what we call race-based bigotry. The distinctions between people may be slight, arbitrary, or non-existent, but acknowledging the existence of racism in society should not be confused for an endorsement of the race distinctions of racists.

[aufbahrung]

Where do you stand on fatism though? That's the big question today?

[Joe]

Probably on his scale, pondering the futility of linear thought.

[Brian Peacock]

[Seabass]

Nice to see that you can justify government censorship by simply claiming that it isn't censorship. Well done, you.

It's amazing what you can accomplish if you are simply willing to out-stupid everyone else.

[Cunt]

Nice to see that you can justify government censorship by simply claiming that it isn't censorship. Well done, you.

It's amazing what you can accomplish if you are simply willing to out-stupid everyone else.

Great job out-stupiding everyone else! You sound as smart as an antefa provocateur.

Now, is removing creationism from school curriculums 'censorship'?

[JimC]

Nice to see that you can justify government censorship by simply claiming that it isn't censorship. Well done, you.

It's amazing what you can accomplish if you are simply willing to out-stupid everyone else.

Great job out-stupiding everyone else! You sound as smart as an antefa provocateur.

Now, is removing creationism from school curriculums 'censorship'?

Creationism has absolutely zero evidence in its favour.

The existence of actual racism is obvious and evident, with plenty examples of person-to-person racially based aggression.

As well, any examination of straightforward statistics will show clear inequalities between racial groups in a variety of measures, and measurable disadvantage for black people in the US (with plenty of other examples around the world). This is an evidence-based starting point for describing systemic racism. Beyond that, the political dimensions can get murky.

[Cunt]

Inequality eh?

I refer you to my question upthread about the conflict between equality and equity. Which do you prefer?

I mean, if you even acknowledge the choice...

[JimC]

Inequality eh?

I refer you to my question upthread about the conflict between equality and equity. Which do you prefer?

I mean, if you even acknowledge the choice...

Again with the stupid trolling in your last sentence. You need to get rid of remarks like that if you want to stay here, simple as that...

As for your distinction, you are confusing a simple description of clear statistical inequality between groups (and such inequalities are by no means only racially based) with the ethical concerns of how people or groups are treated, which is all that can be drawn from your vague allusion to "equity".

[Hermit]

Eek. Not another lap around the topic of racism. The word "racism" defines itself because there is but one human race. People who discriminate between ethnicities as if homo sapiens is made up of more than one race are racists. The discrimination is in the word.