what is racism

all this talk of racism, thinly veiled or not

but what is racism?

what is defined as racism

for example

I need to employ a joiner

I interview two men (now don't call me sexist)
1 white
1 black

if I pick the white one because he has a better cv, interview manner etc, I am leaving myself open to be called a racist. that's the way of the world today

I interview two black joiners
1 born in England
1 born in - say Nigeria

The one born in England speaks beautifully with a nice rich Yorkshire accent
The Nigerian I struggle to understand his English

The Nigerian in the interview is slightly better qualified
I pick the English born man, because I cannot be bothered trying to understand the Nigerian

Does this make me a racist ?
I picked an Englishman before a Nigerian ?

or simply lazy ??

[JLP]

I don't think either of those cases would be regarded as racist. In the first instance you have employed the most suitable candidate based on qualifications. In the second instance, on could say the same because of the language issue by saying the language barrier could be a safety problem.

A racist statement would be all Pakistani men are sexual predators or all Mexicans are drug dealing criminals. Even saying all white men are racists is indeed racist as it puts a label on a group of people based on skin colour or nationally.

A racist statement would be all Pakistani men are sexual predators or all Mexicans are drug dealing criminals.

That is a given; but it is NOT racist to state the truth about a group of Pakistani men (as I did with the Rotherham lot, for example) who have been found guilty of being sexual predators: that is the MASSIVE difference - to state that all of one ethic group is this or that is a ridiculous statement (and very ignorant); but to state that individuals who happen to be in a certain ethnic group are this or that when they have been proven to be so is simply a fact.

You can't simplify something as complex as racism. But you have to start with a correct definition of Race. Many people have slightly different definitions. For example JLP said Pakistani men. Pakistani in its strictest sense is not a race, it's a nationality. Similarly, Mexican is as a nationality. There are many other people in the world classed as the same race but from different countries.

It's a pedantic argument but it does cloud the issue quite often. We have major variables when defining human beings outside of the obvious one, that they are all human beings.

There is nationality, then religion, then race. Of course, this gets even more complex when you have mixes of nationality, race and religion. But to often, these things get confused. Am I the same race as a white Frenchman?

Once you have agreed the definition, you have to then look at what discrimination actually means. This can take the form of both positive and negative discrimination. You can favour someone more because of their race (quite common and often non-deliberate) or you could treat them less favourably because of their race (overt discrimination and more commonly despised). It is essentially treating someone differently because of the race.

Sometimes, very rarely, it is legal and permissible to discriminate on the basis of race. A good example is when casting actors in a production. Certain parts firmly require someone of a certain race and on that basis you can apply to have that job excluded from certain aspects of the race discrimination act.

What is more difficult, and Spooks examples highlight this, is making a decision as to what can be considered important when looking at, say, employment. For example, how neccessary is it for someone to speak English with an easily understandable accent when they are a carpenter. It will be very debatable. Or alternatively, when recruiting someone to advise on the problems affecting young black males in society, how important is it that this be a young black male?

What we do see on this board, very frequently, is the issue of race discrimination being used as a trump card, to discount an argument. Is it illegal to discriminate against someone from a country? They are no explicit laws as such.

What we do see on this board, very frequently, is the issue of race discrimination being used as a trump card, to discount an argument. Is it illegal to discriminate against someone from a country? They are no explicit laws as such.

Your whole post was rather good, but I have zoomed in on your last paragraph as it relates to how I am feeling about this site recently. Talking of 'trump' cards being played, I really have had enough with the way in which a couple of individuals on here play the race card - and, in my case, actually accuse me of being a racist (which is one of the most offensive insults, I feel) - just because they can or just because they interpret something as racist (without any solid evidence of course). It is incredibly lazy and unfair to accuse people of being racist just because one disagrees with them and it does absolutely nothing to tackle the real forms of racism out there in the world...

...but what it can do is silence the opposition; as we all know, to be accused of being a racist is something none of us want and so it makes us fearful of even giving our fucking opinion about such things.

In my own case, being accused of being a racist on here very recently has only made me more determined to speak my mind and highlight the hypocrisy and bullshit on this site. I would ask that those who have made these claims quote ANY of my posts from my time on Queenonline and point out any racism (not just what certain individuals with certain obsessions about racism interpret to be racism): I would be more than willing to defend anything I have said...

...but, alas, this never happens in a situation like this: the accusers accuse and walk away and the accused has the dirty word hanging over his head. Not on.

Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.

Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.

When the accusations have no substance and one has been revealed to be nothing but a race card thrower and liar, one frequently resorts to immaturity. It is all you have.

Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.

When the accusations have no substance and one has been revealed to be nothing but a race card thrower and liar, one frequently resorts to immaturity. It is all you have.

I thought wrongly accusing people of racism was all I have? Do I have two things now? Yay, two things!

Spoiler! :

Evidence

I wonder how many others you will wrongly accuse of racism on this board (and in your life)? Oh well, I suppose it is all you have. So sad.

No word of a lie here, Elessar, I used to read your posts and think what a nice chap you sounded. I did not agree with everything you said (clearly), but I respected the fact that you seemed to stand up for what you believed in (which I think is an admirable trait); but now I have come to the conclusion that you are out to wind up certain posters on here just because you interpret racism in their posts when it is not there. I didn't think you were the sort who would sink this low - and I actually truly mean that.

You make light of this as much as you wish, but making such accusations (I mean there are not many nastier than the one of racism) does nothing to furnish your arguments and - I think - does you no justice at all, as you are clearly a young man of intelligence and some wisdom.

I say all the above without any hint of nastiness, etc. I am just being honest.

.

The quickest and easiest way to stop being accused of racism is to stop this pretence that the only thing wrong with what you're saying is that it's 'not politically correct'. Political correctness annoys me too. What we're dealing with isn't it.

...but, alas, this never happens in a situation like this: the accusers accuse and walk away and the accused has the dirty word hanging over his head. Not on.

Luckily, some of us don't take things at face value, and are more than capable of making our own minds up about people- plus, with plenty of life experience, some of us understand the concept of context, which makes all the difference, and helps us to understand what was actually meant, rather than what was read into it.

Context.

The context is a nation with a rapidly growing number of hate crimes against minorities, and a world in which there is an ongoing humanitarian crisis relating to people (who would be a minority in the UK) fleeing their homes, literally fearing for their lives.

The context is a white male anouncing his opinion that anyone who wants to enter this country should share his own set of morals (which, incidentally, his fellow citizens do not all share), and if they don't, they can "fuck off".

These morals, he says, are tolerance towards all sexualities, genders and races. The context of those morals are that this country only legalised gay marriage in 2014, still has a gender pay gap of 18%, and has seen a rise in racially-motivated hate crimes of 41% in the last 12 months.

So in a nation with ongoing problems of homophobia, sexism and racism, this white male wants people who are fleeing war-torn nations for their lives to adopt his own particular set of morals, which his country doesn't share, and if they don't, he would like them to "fuck off". To put their own morals into context, many will have held them since birth, and due to their upbringing and education and through no fault of their own, they may be quite firmly held. Until recently they had no intention of ever leaving their homes, but now they have no choice. And not only do they need to keep this white male happy to avoid being told to "fuck off", but there are hundreds of thousands of other white men (and women, and men and women of other ethnicities), all with their own expectations and conditions that they expect these people to adhere to.

So there's the context.

People fleeing their war-torn homes, being told to "fuck off" because they cannot live up to an ideal that many of the current inhabitants of this country can't live up to, and which even the law itself didn't support until 3 years ago.

How important is THEIR 'life experience' in this context? And what's more important right now: Standing up for them, or standing up against 'political correctness'?

Personally, I dislike a lot of Islamic culture, and find the burkha distasteful and offensive, I find their beliefs laughable and I find their attitude towards Western values concerning. And I would rather have thousands of them here, annoying me, than have them in their home countries, being killed. Because my morals, as dearly as I hold them, fall into complete irrelevance when people are dying overseas. And the same goes for my safety. The chances of being killed by a terrorist in the UK is roughly 1-in-9.3million. I would happily see my own chances go up to 1-in-1million if it saves thousands of others from certain death.

And I don't think anyone can disagree with any of what I've said unless they believe that their life is more important than thousands of others. And if that's not because of their race, then fine, they're not racist. But they're still selfish monsters, and in my opinion that's just as bad.

I give up- I'm done.

.