It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Racism or Bigotry, Which is it???

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2016 @ 11:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Hazardous1408



some donut chick on


Can someone explain this to me?


That's so racist dude


It should be some white dude donut cop on



edit on 1-6-2016 by Tehthehet because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Of course it is possible to be Black and be racist.

Racist is a state of mind, and is often projected further via speech, typing. etc.

Bigotry is the same, but usually includes a broader spectrum of groups one is biggotted against.

Oddly, those that identify as Christian, will often show these behaviors.

All of it is a mental illness.
edit on 2-6-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   


racism
Pronunciation: /ˈrāˌsizəm/
NOUN

1Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior:


Thats what racism is according to oxford dictionary.

there is no mention of authoritarianism in there.

If a person has issues with people using power over them, its not a racial issue, its a authoritarian issue..and that comes in many colors. Obviously the dominant race of a land will be in positions of power. go to china, chinese authoritarians. go to africa, african authoritarians, etc.

Progressives demanding black people cant be racist because of power dynamic blah blah are just a bunch of glue sniffing morons seeking out moral authority to be racist while not feeling like a complete twat.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 12:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX


racism
Pronunciation: /ˈrāˌsizəm/
NOUN

1Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior:


Thats what racism is according to oxford dictionary.

there is no mention of authoritarianism in there.

If a person has issues with people using power over them, its not a racial issue, its a authoritarian issue..and that comes in many colors. Obviously the dominant race of a land will be in positions of power. go to china, chinese authoritarians. go to africa, african authoritarians, etc.

Progressives demanding black people cant be racist because of power dynamic blah blah are just a bunch of glue sniffing morons seeking out moral authority to be racist while not feeling like a complete twat.


I actually said that Blacks could be racist, anyone can.

But in that case, just autoritarianism alone doesn't cut it. You ignore hundreds of years of history. Many of the aspects still continue.
edit on 2-6-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 12:20 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm




It was specific and I didn't know why you had to mention her profession


I don't know why I'm laughing so hard! I was super confused, but if I thought he had been talking about her profession it would have been way worse. Stupid donut mongers.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 12:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1

I don't know why I'm laughing so hard! I was super confused, but if I thought he had been talking about her profession it would have been way worse. Stupid donut mongers.


Well what did you think it meant???

I thought he meant he was talking to some chick who was selling donuts. I guess calling it her profession is overdoing it some. But someone who sells donuts means that is there profession still.

I just figured he threw that detail in for some context on the story. Maybe he hangs out at donut shops a lot or something. Could be a cop or something, ya know?? I didn't realize that donut was used anywhere else as something other than donut.

LOL


Now I'm wondering if the phrase "Is that donut taking a piss??" a valid expression somewhere but not for what it literally says???
edit on 2-6-2016 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra




All of it is a mental illness.


No, it's not. It's a survival mechanism that's deeply engrained. It's still wrong.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 12:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

Of course it is possible to be Black and be racist.


Well, it may seem obvious to you and I but some people actually think that and they reinforce that idea in some part using the specific meaning behind the term Racist or Racism.

I'm sure you've heard people say something like that before. If not out in the wild at least here on ATS. That's apparently the reasoning behind them saying it. I'm not saying I agree with that idea. But I don't disagree with defining Racism that way per se. Just as long as we are all defining it the same way. Otherwise it becomes very confusing with people using it meaning different but similar ways.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 12:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
Real simple examples,

If you hate Whitey just because he's White, but can't do anything about it, you're just a bigot.

But

If you hate Whitey just because he's White, and can f*ck with him and get away with it, then you're Racist.


And they can and do. So this is all moot.

It's an agenda to continue to label white people are the sole instigators of racism. To keep white guilt and blame, strong in the minds of such folk as the SJW. What about when a black cop abuses a black citizen unjustly. We'll next consider that racist, as he's in a position of power over a subject he deems inferior.


edit on 2-6-2016 by Parafitt because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 12:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Parafitt

Ok. But if it's a continued agenda then it's not a moot point is it???

It's also something that not everyone understands, uses or defines the same way. To most people I think Racism is just "not liking people of specific races for some arbitrary personal reasons. But the way some people use and understand the term Racism that would not apply and would just be called Bigotry.

However, "Not liking people of specific races for some arbitrary personal reasons and having the power and/or status to make their lives more difficult without them being able to defend against it" is what Racism means.

All I'm trying to do is point out the reasoning why some people use it differently so that when they do other will understand it. Because otherwise it just sounds completely crazy. But it's because there are slightly different definitions for the word depending upon who you're talking to.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 01:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: reldra




All of it is a mental illness.


No, it's not. It's a survival mechanism that's deeply engrained. It's still wrong.


Bigotry is a survival mechanism? I seem to have lost it.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 01:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: reldra


DP
edit on 2-6-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 01:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: reldra

Of course it is possible to be Black and be racist.


Well, it may seem obvious to you and I but some people actually think that and they reinforce that idea in some part using the specific meaning behind the term Racist or Racism.

I'm sure you've heard people say something like that before. If not out in the wild at least here on ATS. That's apparently the reasoning behind them saying it. I'm not saying I agree with that idea. But I don't disagree with defining Racism that way per se. Just as long as we are all defining it the same way. Otherwise it becomes very confusing with people using it meaning different but similar ways.


Racism would be speech or writing or thought that is against one or more races for reasons that are not logical. Bigotry would be similar, but inclue groups of people, like Lesbians or poor people or Christians.

This is fairly cut and dry, but those with feelings of superiority (or inferiority sometimes , to try to make themselves feel better), will tell me I am 1) wrong 2) an SJW 3) a 3rd wave feminist (not even sure what that is 4) Just wrong again.

I just laugh, as I know what is right and human. Further, in regard to all the biggoted/racist things I see on this site...I know where I am going when I die. For some others, they should be worried. Very, very worried.
edit on 2-6-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 01:40 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Yes makes sense



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 01:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

Racism would be speech or writing or thought that is against one or more races for reasons that are not logical. Bigotry would be similar, but inclue groups of people, like Lesbians or poor people or Christians.


You're right and I agree with what it is you're saying. Bigotry includes more than just racial bigotry sometimes. But it doesn't have to always be the case.

Also how you define Racism above is the normal way most people define racism. However, these Academics I keep talking about would slightly disagree with that definition. They would say that for any speech or writing or whatever to be considered Racist it would have to come from someone with power or status above those who they are speaking or writing about.

In other words, if someone of a lower status or with less social power says or writes something against a race of people with a higher status or more social power than them it's Racial Bigotry but not the same as Racism.

I know it sounds strange but it's because of this idea that they(academics/intellectuals) also say and believe statements like "Only White People can Be Racist." are accurate. It's because they define Racism as only being possible if it's coming from those with a perceived superior position. Anyone doing the same but from a non superior position they would say can't be racist even if they're a racial bigot.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 01:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Parafitt

originally posted by: mOjOm
Real simple examples,

If you hate Whitey just because he's White, but can't do anything about it, you're just a bigot.

But

If you hate Whitey just because he's White, and can f*ck with him and get away with it, then you're Racist.


And they can and do. So this is all moot.

It's an agenda to continue to label white people are the sole instigators of racism. To keep white guilt and blame, strong in the minds of such folk as the SJW. What about when a black cop abuses a black citizen unjustly. We'll next consider that racist, as he's in a position of power over a subject he deems inferior.


It is not an agenda. It is esecially not an agenda for the made up SJW term, Social Justice Warrior.

I had not heard of the term until a conservative made it up.

It is not an agenda to cause 'white guilt'. I am white, why would I want to feel guilty? When a Black cop abuses a black citizen, that is a bad thing. How could anyone not think that is a bad thing?

Some have called the pesonality of a person who feels for many injustices and made it a bad thing, a dergatory term. That is really unproductive. I am thinking that the people that use the tem that way are lazy. They can't fight, or even argue against injustices, so they try to make people feel bad who do.

It's ok, Parafitt, you didn't make me feel bad, though you tried. You can't twist it either, no matter how hard you try to.

Ok, so I am a SJW. I kind of like that. It is better than SJA (Social jackass).


edit on 2-6-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 02:01 AM
link   
Don't hate, appropriate.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 02:32 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

It strikes me that a racist must also be a bigot whereas a bigot doesn't have to be a racist.*





* thought of the day brought by the letters R and B.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 04:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Parafitt

Ok. But if it's a continued agenda then it's not a moot point is it???


Yes it is, the idea of it being a White only issue, is. There is no factual basis for that. The agenda itself is certainly not a moot point. But until enough people realise it, it will simply continue. This sort of emphasises it continuing, saying it's one thing differently to what it really is. As if to create doubt in the minds of people who would otherwise disagree.

but sure, this specific aspect of it, is. It's false.


It's also something that not everyone understands, uses or defines the same way. To most people I think Racism is just "not liking people of specific races for some arbitrary personal reasons. But the way some people use and understand the term Racism that would not apply and would just be called Bigotry.


Racism is a catch word these days. Used to ensnare everyone that you disagree with on specific topics. I am not a fan of islam. That does not make me a racist. Unless I somehow now have proposed a dislike of people from western nations, to asian nations, to middle eastern. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with an ideology, yet the term racist is thrown around to shut people up.

That's how I see this. Racism to me is an ignorant belief that somehow one race is better than another, when in reality, anyone brought up in a certain culture, is just as like to be good or bad as anyone else in that certain culture. Race, therefore, has no basis in it. The individual is the cause of any problems, or greatness.

People who go out of their way to redefine it, have an agenda.


However, "Not liking people of specific races for some arbitrary personal reasons and having the power and/or status to make their lives more difficult without them being able to defend against it" is what Racism means.

All I'm trying to do is point out the reasoning why some people use it differently so that when they do other will understand it. Because otherwise it just sounds completely crazy. But it's because there are slightly different definitions for the word depending upon who you're talking to.


No, I disagree. Everyone can make anyone's life difficult based on ignorance. Are christians racist because they are numerous and the gay community lesser in number? No. they are just arrogant and ignorant.

Racism, is based on race. Not purely an ignorant mind set, but the belief that one race is inherently more worthy than another. When the first fleet came to Australia, it was by men and women who built ships, created weapons, built infrastructure, and developed the knowledge to traverse the oceans.

They encountered a people who lived in grass huts, ate bugs and didn't do much for 60 thousand years.

We now know that they had no need to. No desire to. their life was sufficient to be stable and vibrant in it's own right. But back then, the 'savages' were nothing more than animals. same with every where people with a semblance of technology moved.

We now see the merit and worth of those tribal, nomadic people. And it is no less equal to anyone elses. Racism was born from arrogant ignorance.

Not how many people were there to oppress them. that is, as stated, authoritarianism. And it was used, by the way, over anyone not of a certain class or culture. Not just a race.

Today, racism is rampant, on all sides. And I deny it is anything to do with who has the more power. It is down to who has the more arrogant, ignorant hate for people different to them.

edit on 2-6-2016 by Parafitt because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 05:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
It is not an agenda to cause 'white guilt'.


It certainly is. A lot of SJW's are white. Indoctrinated into hating themselves, for things they are told they are responsible for. It most certainly is an agenda.


I am white, why would I want to feel guilty? When a Black cop abuses a black citizen, that is a bad thing. How could anyone not think that is a bad thing?


Exactly. But there is no call of racism. And the premise of the OP is racism is a power issue, not a race issue.

It is never used against anyone but white people however. Apparently, we are the evil masters, who oppress all and sundry, and therefore, we take all the blame. Some of us, disagree with it, and need to point this out, however.


Some have called the pesonality of a person who feels for many injustices and made it a bad thing, a dergatory term. That is really unproductive. I am thinking that the people that use the tem that way are lazy. They can't fight, or even argue against injustices, so they try to make people feel bad who do.

It's ok, Parafitt, you didn't make me feel bad, though you tried. You can't twist it either, no matter how hard you try to.


Lmao I never intended that. It is not part of my duty to make you feel bad. Just hope that you can see things as they are. Racism is an all encompassing problem. The OP put forward that it's mostly a white problem, because we oppress everyone. That is not the case. The first people to enslave black people, were black people. They also enslaved white people. Times have changed, we now see the world differently. And to ignore that everyone can be a victim of racism, is the same sort of ignorance that once permeated the modern world that developed technology to travel across oceans. Ignorance is the major issue. Not simply the colour of someone's skin.


Ok, so I am a SJW. I kind of like that. It is better than SJA (Social jackass).


Good thing I disassociate myself from all of those things. Social Justice is a joke, in this world as it is right now. Society is at odds with the agenda to render everyone a reliant slave to any given government.

but I get that you were trying to make me feel bad
I don't let it affect me like that. I'm standing up to it, but with an expression of opinion and fact, not personal attacks. That breeds more ignorance, nothing more.




top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join