Quote:People don't choose to be inbred and low intellect.
There are lots of things that people do not get to choose about themselves that have nothing to do with race. Still, neither Muslim, inbred or retarded is a race.
Quote:This is why moses' bigotry towards muslims shouldn't be considered any different to calling all muslims 'sand negroes' in terms of being racist.
Sand negro is a race, but his reference to 100% of Muslims obviously excludes the possibility he was referring to racial subgroup of Muslims.
Quote:And indeed we see you further down offering 'being born sand negro' as the critical factor in why 'sand negro' is racist. Yet you continue to insist that they are different - with no logical or coherent justification.
As I explained, it is the critical difference that explains why Muslim is different from sand negro is terms of racism. I never said it was the sole criteria for racism.
Quote:I'm not talking about what you consider is or isn't racism in this case - I'm asking specifically about why you think calling moses' statement 'racist' - his outrageous, bigoted and offensive statement about muslims, cheapens the experience of victims of "real" racism.
Because people choose to be Muslims. They don't choose to be black. If you adopt a regressive creed like Islam, people are going to say disparaging things about you, just like if you decide to be a communist or Greens supporter or a Nazi. Sometimes they might even gets the facts wrong. Shock, horror. You suck that up.
Quote:Its one thing to say one bigoted statement is racist while another is not - its a whole other to claim that doing so somehow "cheapens" the victims of the "real" racism.
Perhaps if you understood why one is racism and the other is not, you might understand why your idiotic claims cheapen the experience of the victims of genuine racism.
Quote:Which is why I asked at the very beginning about what, if any, form of bigotry you would call moses' statement - if not racist. What I was trying to get at is whether or not you are suggesting moses' statement is any more 'acceptable' than "real" racism, or whether in fact you consider it hate speech that is just as dangerous as "real" racism.
Were you lying about whether you consider it racism to get me to comment on this?
Quote:It would have been a good discussion. Unfortunately you just huffed and puffed about me "negotiating down" or some such nonsense. Shame.
You started a thread called "what is racism". I stuck to the topic. Which you are entirely wrong about, BTW. It is hard enough to get you to follow your train of thought through to its logical conclusion without you changing the topic to how mean Moses is.
Quote:When "non-whites" and "kicked out" is used in the same sentence, I literally can't understand the mental contortions involved that allows someone to claim with a straight face a) it may not be racism and b) it may not be an assertion of racial superiority.
These are your mental contortions Gandalf. You seem to think it is plausible that someone might say pretty much the same thing, but define it a bit more rigorously, without the need for racial superiority as a motive. Do you really think the people who say these things are going to care about the subtle difference between white and those with British heritage? Both are racist, but your definition excludes both as being racist, despite your dedicated efforts to change the question when "white" is used because you know it is racist, despite failing your definition.
If someone suggested that all people of African ancestry from the last few centuries should be kicked out of England for the same reason (because that is their history, not because they are inferior), would you also insist that is not racist?
Forum
Pages: 
What is racism? (Read 93097 times)
