The Democrats’ Diversity Problem

[xj0hnx]

There is no such thing as the "race card." It's a made up term created by the privileged group to imply that racial minorities have an advantage (i.e., the "race card" that provides special benefits) that simply does not exist.

Yes, there is, and it's played by progressives anytime they have no argument of real substance.

The same goes for "reverse racism" for that matter, it is impossible for a minority group to be "racist" since the requirement of being racist is belonging to a dominant group. Since people of color are the minority, they cannot be racist. They CAN be prejudiced or discriminatory, but that isn't the same concept.

More fail of an epic scale. As earlier pointed out it has nothing whatsoever to do with "belonging to the dominant group", that's absurd, it's pure and simple hate, or discrimination based on nothing more than someone's race, and it's done by ALL races.

 

[Amused]

Liberals are not a race.

As I said in my post, my view is that minority groups can have prejudice or discrimination towards others, but that is not the same concept as racism.

WTF???

Seriously???

 

[Carmen813]

WTF???

Seriously???

Seriously.

 

[Amused]

Seriously.

Racial bigotry is the same no matter what race harbors it.

Stop trying to defend the racial bigotry of minorities with this bullshit. It's counterproductive.

 

[thraashman]

Liberals are not a race.

As I said in my post, my view is that minority groups can have prejudice or discrimination towards others, but that is not the same concept as racism.

I was referencing PJabber's ardent dislike of liberals as if it were a racist view as a joke. It was a mild reference to a thread from last week where someone attacked me as prejudice when I had a problem with conservatives in an immigration thread because one said to kill them all and the other called them "wetbacks". For the record, I do not feel that disagreeing with a political stance to be similar to racism. Though I personally do consider social conservatism to require one to be racist in order to support it. Fiscal conservatism I think I think just requires ignorance of reality to be supported.

 

[theeedude]

True diversity is achieved when minority candidates can run and win in districts not hand drawn to get a particular minority group elected.

Says who?

 

[xj0hnx]

Fiscal conservatism I think I think just requires ignorance of reality to be supported.

That's just about the stupidest thing I have ever read on here.

 

[Amused]

Says who?

When people are willing to vote in someone of another race, that IS true diversity. Getting people to vote in the same race isn't diversity.

 

[thraashman]

That's just about the stupidest thing I have ever read on here.

What? Fiscal conservatism sounds like a great idea until when someone tries to put it in practice and we all have seen it doesn't work. Hell, the current economic collapse was because of an attempt at fiscal conservatism from republican policies.

 

[Carmen813]

Racial bigotry is the same no matter what race harbors it.

Stop trying to defend the racial bigotry of minorities with this bullshit. It's counterproductive.

I don't believe I have defended anyone's bigotry, whether they belong to a dominant group or not. I invite you to find where where I stated that discrimination from minority groups toward majority groups is acceptable.

I am trying to extend this discussion to a higher level understanding of racism from a psychological/sociological perspective. From this perspective, it does MATTER what race harbors racial bigotry, because if that race is the power group than they can use that power to discriminate against others through institutionalized means (laws, ect).

XJohnX,
The "race card" is what members of a dominant group attribute to minority groups when they try and discuss the impact that race has had on their lives. It implies that somehow belonging to a minority, non-dominant group, grants a privilege that the dominant group enjoys. Such a card doesn't exist, because it's doubtful anyone in the dominant group would ever trade in all the advantages they receive as a member of that group for the opportunity to use the "race card." Such a card doesn't exist, it never existed, and accusations of playing the "race card" typically come up to silence individuals whose opinions majority groups disagree with.

The same is true of "reverse racism."

 

[PJABBER]

Can you be racist against liberals as a race? I disagree with Carmen813's assessment of racism. I view racism as possible with any race and the idea of "reverse racism" is entirely false, it's racism and there is no reverse. I do actually however believe that racism is in actuality necessary to end racism. Basically, I believe that to consider a person's race for any reason (maybe medical because some things do affect by race) is racist. But I think we have to consider race in order to end racism. Certain groups and races within this country have been historically kept down so much that it is near impossible for the community to be fixed from within. So things like affirmative action are needed to improve the opportunities to allow for true equality to occur and allow for an end to racism.

I try my best not to judge based on race, but there will always be things I associate with certain races I'm sure. Like flat-brimmed ball caps with a shiny sticker and low hanging jeans that make the person look stupid when walking is something I associate with black people. Which is funny because I've seen other races dressed like that, but I associate the look with black people. And while I try not to judge people on that basis, I will never be able to take a person dressed like that seriously. Does that make me racist, probably. I try not to allow my unfortunate biases affect my decisions though.

Carmen is right though that we are not at a point where we can completely overcome race in this society.

A good post and it does reflect a thoughtful view of what is reality for many people.

A quick point - a "liberal" is not a race, which is a biological happenstance, but an outlook on life and all that implies. The definition, unfortunately, has skewed from the word representing a person who seeks and advocates for liberty to one who believes that government control and intercession is the only solution to man's condition.

As a classical liberal I detest the "progressive" so-called "liberal" that seeks to collectivize society beyond any reasonable and necessary purpose. I prefer to reserve my hate for the extreme manifestations of this collectivizing and authoritarian impulse, ie the communism of the Soviets.

For quite some time I lived in Asia where I was often the first and only tall Caucasian that most in the local population had encountered in real life. When I lived in large cities I could be but a passing stranger, a curiosity but not more than that. When I was in a smaller place I stood out much more and could not be so easily ignored. Some were hostile, xenophobia is strong in many places, but the more I was around the easier it was for me to be accepted.

I thus believe that a mixed or blended society, even one stratified by skin shade as in Brazil, works best as a means of overcoming an evolutionary survival derived natural caution of someone, anyone different.

The more privilege or deprivation the society offers based on race the stronger the incidence of racism and race resentment. Make it a level playing field, no more and no less, and the society has a great chance to move past the worst manifestations of prejudice. The rest pretty much takes care of itself based on opportunities for regular contact and interaction.

A style of dress chosen deliberately to manifest a challenge and to offend is generally going to reflect a tendency to act out. It may be an interest in gaining acceptance by a stratified teen group when such a thing matters or it could be a means of identifying membership in a gang or other criminal population.

The baggy pants hanging down below your butt "fashion" came from the "fashion" that in many prisons belts are not allowed and the issued clothing is not necessarily the proper size. Thus, if you were a convict, you got used to that look and to identify yourself to other convicts once you got out you kept the look. Or maybe you were inviting homosexual rape for old times sake.

Others copied it and now you have loads of non-convicts, and those who want to pose as convicts, running around looking particularly stupid. As all fashion is temporary, this one will pass as well. I am waiting for Sheriff Joe Arpaio's trendy look to catch on next.

 

[Carmen813]

When people are willing to vote in someone of another race, that IS true diversity. Getting people to vote in the same race isn't diversity.

The catch 22 is that our country wasn't at a place where that could happen, so those minority groups obtained no power, which is why districts were split the way they were in the first place. Better to have some political voice than none at all.

The question is do you believe we could overcome this deficit today? In some ways we are closer, but I don't believe we are there yet.

With regards to what I've said about racism, people automatically assume racism only exists when individuals perform "overt" public acts of racism. In reality, microaggressions are much more psychologically damaging to minority groups. These are statements or actions like "I don't see color." As I said earlier, it's basically ignoring a big part of a person's identity. Think if it as "death by a thousand cuts."

 

[Amused]

I don't believe I have defended anyone's bigotry, whether they belong to a dominant group or not. I invite you to find where where I stated that discrimination from minority groups toward majority groups is acceptable.

I am trying to extend this discussion to a higher level understanding of racism from a psychological/sociological perspective. From this perspective, it does MATTER what race harbors racial bigotry, because if that race is the power group than they can use that power to discriminate against others through institutionalized means (laws, ect).

XJohnX,
The "race card" is what members of a dominant group attribute to minority groups when they try and discuss the impact that race has had on their lives. It implies that somehow belonging to a minority, non-dominant group, grants a privilege that the dominant group enjoys. Such a card doesn't exist, because it's doubtful anyone in the dominant group would ever trade in all the advantages they receive as a member of that group for the opportunity to use the "race card." Such a card doesn't exist, it never existed, and accusations of playing the "race card" typically come up to silence individuals whose opinions majority groups disagree with.

The same is true of "reverse racism."

Bullshit. Racism is racism. The power to USE your racism to harm others is irrelevant. Power just institutionalizes racism. But racism is racism, no matter what race you are.

 

[theeedude]

When people are willing to vote in someone of another race, that IS true diversity. Getting people to vote in the same race isn't diversity.

Ah OK, so Democrats, who got a black president elected by a majority of all Americans, have a diversity problem?

 

[PJABBER]

While I stopped scanning about here and don't generally bother to reply to Pjabber's deluge of propaganda posts, it is the "Democratic Party".

Yes, and the use of the alternative term "Democrat Party" is considered pejorative by many of the old-timey members.

Which is why I expect I will continue to use that term to offend the sensitive ones in our midst.

:awe:

 

[Amused]

Ah OK, so Democrats, who got a black president elected by a majority of all Americans, have a diversity problem?

What is it called when you try to use one example to try and discredit a statistical average?

 

[PJABBER]

Says who?

Why, I do!

 

[fskimospy]

Ahahahaha. The post lamenting Democrats' diversity problem trumpets Republican increases from 6 to 13 vs 75 for the Democrats. Truly, in only having a 600% advantage in this respect, the Democrats have a big diversity problem.

This article is so hilariously clueless that they actually bought their own bullshit from years past. The median voter theorem explains this perfectly without the author trying to twist himself in knots to concoct a tale about how the race baiting GOP is suddenly a bastion of minority representation due to how the mean old Democrats block up and coming minorities. GOP candidates are trying to appeal to minorities and more liberal minded voters because the conservative base is locked up, so minority candidates for statewide office make more sense. Democrats are trying to appeal to more conservative voters (and yes, the racists generally are more conservative), so minority candidates make less sense.

Clearly this newfound diversity is carrying over to voters too. Hispanics love the GOP so much in fact that while 67% voted for Obama in 2008, a very Democratic year, only a meager 66% of them voted for Democrats in a very Republican year.

 

[fskimospy]

What is it called when you try to use one example to try and discredit a statistical average?

Exactly what statistical average are you referring to? Remember, as we've shown in the past statistics are not your strong suit.

 

[1prophet]

Liberals are not a race.

As I said in my post, my view is that minority groups can have prejudice or discrimination towards others, but that is not the same concept as racism.

Were the minority white people in South Africa racists against the black majority during the Apartheid era?

 

[PJABBER]

I am trying to extend this discussion to a higher level understanding of racism from a psychological/sociological perspective. From this perspective, it does MATTER what race harbors racial bigotry, because if that race is the power group than they can use that power to discriminate against others through institutionalized means (laws, ect).

Soon you will graduate from college and be removed from the institutionalized bullshit of your leftist sociology professors and your leftist political science professors and your leftist anthropology professors and your leftist literature professors. And you will find that their definitions are just a means to keep racism and class warfare going.

In the meantime, do what most free thinkers do - spew the bullshit back at them until they think your shit doesn't stink and then use that diploma summa cum laude they will give you in return to get a real job.

Upon graduation you should finally be able to hold your head up high as you will no longer be required to regurgitate pablum on demand. I hope you don't swallow too much in the meantime, though. It has been known to be fatal to your mental health.

 

[fskimospy]

Clearly PJABBER is a bastion of free thinking. It's quite clear as seen by the links that he posts from such wonderful and free thinking sources.

Free yourself from the tyranny of people and professors who 'know things'! Get out in the real world and start cutting and pasting articles from ultra right opinion makers like a REAL AMERICAN.

 

[xj0hnx]

What? Fiscal conservatism sounds like a great idea until when someone tries to put it in practice and we all have seen it doesn't work. Hell, the current economic collapse was because of an attempt at fiscal conservatism from republican policies.

So it isn't "fiscal conservatism", it's a political party you don't like implementation of it. Saying that being fiscally conservative doesn't work in reality is simply moronic, fiscal irresponsibility, and spending with no regard is what doesn't work in reality.

 

[Carmen813]

Soon you will graduate from college and be removed from the institutionalized bullshit of your leftist sociology professors and your leftist political science professors and your leftist anthropology professors and your leftist literature professors. And you will find that their definitions are just a means to keep racism and class warfare going.

In the meantime, do what most free thinkers do - spew the bullshit back at them until they think your shit doesn't stink and then use that diploma summa cum laude they will give you in return to get a real job.

Upon graduation you should finally be able to hold your head up high as you will no longer be required to regurgitate pablum on demand. I hope you don't swallow too much in the meantime, though. It has been known to be fatal to your mental health.

Really didn't take very long for you to give up trying to have a real discussion, did it? Anyone interested in carrying on this conversation with me further, feel free to PM. This was an entertaining diversion for lunch.

PJABBER, here is your award for the day:

 

[Carmen813]

Were the minority white people in South Africa racists against the black majority during the Apartheid era?

See now this is the type of question I like!
:thumbsup:

However, I'm not talking about pure numbers when I use the terms minority and dominant. There were certainly more slaves than slave owners. Shoot me a PM.

Amused,
My position is that racism without power is simply hatred. Easily ignored, and of relatively minimal impact. See first quote in sig. PM me, I'm enjoying our discussion.