Little Devil Inside still confirmed for Linux despite PlayStation exclusivity

Quoting: DrMcCoyRacism requires social power to codify prejudices into laws and social rules. This is 101 stuff, please read up on the basics.

I disagree. How low and powerless you are, you can still be racist. (In fact, it seems to happen more often for people not feeling much proud of anything else than their colour.) You racism doesn't need to be "successful" for you qualifying as racist.

Quoting: EikeI disagree

ok boomer

Quoting: DrMcCoy

Quoting: EikeI disagree

ok boomer

Your "argument" has not been convincing.

Let's start here:
"Racism is the belief that groups of humans possess different behavioral traits corresponding to physical appearance and can be divided based on the superiority of one race over another." See, no social power needed to do so.

Quoting: EikeYour "argument" has not been convincing.

It wasn't an argument. It was a dismissal.

Quoting: DrMcCoy

Quoting: EikeYour "argument" has not been convincing.

It wasn't an argument. It was a dismissal.

So what millions of powerless white supremacists are doing is not racism because they are powerless?
Absolution to them, I hear you?

White supremacists aren't powerless, they have structural power in society. All of "western society" is build to serve white people, so even the ones personally powerless are still empowered in day to day life. See all the white people being able to brandish guns unmolested in public in the US, while black people are shot just for holding their wallet in hand.

Please, do some research first.

I can recommend a few books, in German even:

• Noah Sow, "Deutschland Schwarz Weiß"


• Alice Hasters, "Was weiße Menschen nicht über Rassismus hören wollen: aber wissen sollten"


• Reni Eddo-Lodge, "Warum ich nicht länger mit Weißen über Hautfarbe spreche" (To be fair, that one is a translation. The original title is "Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race")

Quoting: DrMcCoyWhite supremacists aren't powerless, they have structural power in society.

... and if they wouldn't, thinking the very same wouldn't be racism?
Sorry, this is nonsense.
Racism is a way of thinking and while it's obviously more dangerous with power, the thinking stays the same without, and deserves the very same name.

And no, I'm not getting some books to find something to prove your point. If you find anything that says that racism is not racism without power, feel invited to cite it.

PS: "ok boomer" is by far not the quality of messages I'm used to from you.


Last edited by Eike on 4 July 2020 at 8:19 pm UTC

There's no point arguing against an uninformed position. Hence the dismissal.

Quoting: GuestI really should stay away from such hot topics, but....

I'm happy when there's someone able to actually discuss stuff. The worst about DrMcCoy here was his attitude about his favorite definition, like "I'm right, everybody seeing it differently is wrong and has to inform themselves, ok boomer, I'm out (but I'm still right)". (And yes, I'm still surprised and disappointed to read something like that from him.)

Quoting: Guestanyway, racism from a dictionary definition description can be tweaked, but unfortunately it's actually devoid of meaning without the social context to give it power. Race itself is a social construct, with no basis in science or fact itself, and so racism becomes something only with definition of society giving it power.

Without backing power therefore, I would argue that prejudice is a better word than racism. Anyone can be prejudiced based on differences in the amount of melanin in one's skin, and there can be historical good and bad reasons behind that no doubt, but no you can't really be racist if you've no power to enforce that prejudice on others.

Basically, any discussion about who is racist or not has to include and factor in the power and hierarchy dynamics of social groups.

That way of defining racism would lead to absurd consequences: If the racist side would lose its power, they would suddenly stop being racist, despite feeling the same way based on the same construct.

In my opinion, we should differentiate between say racist persons, racist ideas and a racist system. The latter obviously cannot be in place without power, but the racist person with racist ideas stays the same no matter if gaining, losing or never having any powers. They can be racist alone on an island.

It seems to me some people are trying to put too much into a single word, which just needs some more words. (I met the same with the word "peace", which according to some doesn't mean the absence of war, or violence, but seemingly free cake to everybody as well.)


Last edited by Eike on 5 July 2020 at 3:36 pm UTC

Quoting: GuestRacism obviously has overtones of unwanted, unacceptable behaviour. As a thought exercise however: if someone has prejudicial thinking, but does not carry out discrimination, are they racist?

Yes. Racism is a way of thinking (which often leads to a way of acting, of course).

Quoting: GuestOn the flip side, if someone carries out discrimination but are not consciously aware of it, are they racist?

(Discrimination base on colour and stuff you mean, I guess.) Yes, I think so, and yes, that might mean that many people are racist which would strongly and in good conscience deny it. (I'm not talking about those "I'm not a racist, but..." people here!)

Quoting: GuestAnd then, let's go a step further. If someone is discriminating against another based upon ethnic or racial grounds, what if it's because they've been oppressed are are looking to restore some balance? I mean, if some has been a slave because of the colour of their skin, and then chooses to stay away from others resembling their oppressors, are they then being racist?

That's a tough question I don't have clear answer for. What would be yours?
But, adressing the elephant in the room: People of colour can be racists, too.

Quoting: GuestIt's not quite so simple to resolve such things in any kind of short terms. This makes heavy reading and discussion on the matter quite critical, and why, in my view, one cannot simply divorce racism from power.

I don't say it's simple, I'm saying mixing everything into a single term is often not the answer, and in this case, it isn't either. Why not talk about racist people (people thinking their group would be superior based on their idea of a "race") and a racist system (many racist people oppressing other people they consider being of another "race")? It avoids the problems with mixing all into one term, like giving different terms to two people thinking exactly the same (racist) thing of one another.

Cramming too much in a word makes conversation harder, not easier.


Last edited by Eike on 5 July 2020 at 4:20 pm UTC