One can be taught racist ideology from an early age just like one can be taught religious ideology from an early age. It is according to your nature whether you accept or reject those ideologies. Generally speaking conservatives are more likely to be racist because they have an increased fear and mistrust of the ''other'' and tend to dwell on their negative attributes, behaviors related to the urge to categorize and survival instinct.
Even you should be able to comprehend that you have utterly FAILED to provide any shred of credible substantiation for your bogus allegation. That you are continuing to fail in this regard only reflects negatively upon your own lack of comprehension.
I think culture is more important than nature here. Conservatives have a cultural tradition that leans more towards bigotry. This is not a natural instinct any more than someone is more naturally inclined to a Christian or Muslim. If you were born in to a certain religious household you are going to identify with that religion because you have been indoctrinated. A person born in to a racist household taught to be racist will be a racist. Once they get older and learn to think for themselves they can break out of that way of thinking but your upbringing has a very strong impact on the way you think. Some racists developed their racist ideas as adults. I don't think they are naturally inclined to think that way though I've seen studies showing that there is a difference in the brains of conservatives and liberals (I don't know if that is genetic and I'm skeptical of the claim). I think that external influences can cause someone to think a certain way. You can start out racist and become an egalitarian or be an egalitarian and turn in to a racist. The big issue is regardless of the cause it is a choice to be racist.
Yes, because if a white person treats you differently because of the color of your skin, you should hate white people. Brilliant.
We have little to argue about but I will anyway. I think our personality/opinions are a mix culture/environment and our nature or disposition. A person born to racist culture may remain racist if she does not question authority and believes in the wisdom of her group. A person born to atheism may feel she needs to find god. Those are extreme examples but dial it back to where we live and you can understand that our choices are a combination of nature and nurture. Sometimes the balance tips towards one or the other depending on strength of input.
So far, you have given the definite impression that you feel like you are under attack. Will you be okay?
I agree. I think that neuroticism plays a factor in how someone thinks. Someone could be extremely racist because they are more naturally inclined towards paranoia and anger due to genetic factors (pathological bias which some consider to be a mental illness). So it is a combination of nature and nurture. But it is also a personal choice. If you grew up in a culture where everyone was racist and you were not exposed to ideas about equality and tolerance it would be very hard to turn from your racist ways. But if you grow up in the modern world where racism is increasingly becoming socially unacceptable there is no excuse for remaining racist even if you were raised in a racist household.
I think progressives tend to be more racist because they seem to have lower expectations of what minorities can do for themselves. It never occurs to them to be afraid of their 'obvious' inferiors. Instead they try to exploit the politically. Conservatives are not racist per se, They simply want people to live up to their potential instead of looking to the gov't for a handout.
Is that why all the racist organizations are full of right-wingers? I can back my opinion up with science and you can back your opinion up with substance free right-winger talking points.
EXCEPTION: the Democratic party. The single largest racist organization in the US. Who backed slavery, segregation, and Jim Crow laws? Who decided that minorities couldn't deal with head to head competition and created affirmative action and tokenism? This is not substance free, this is the historic track record of the Democratic party. The idea is to keep minorities in their place by lowering their expectations of themselves.
I had a dark-skinned woman as an ESL teacher in Australia, who complained in class that she could never land a job in the United States because of her odd minority accent that she could not drop. There may be an invisible color bar in America, which prevents blacks from getting employed. But I have no sympathy for her because she was the worst racist I have ever come across, repeating white nationalist talking points in class. The amount of melanin does not correspond well with the degree of racism a person exhibits.
More trite right-wing talking points. Either you are ignorant of history or you think I am but you should really read up on the Southern strategy, that's when the racists ran to the Republicans with open arms and haven't looked back. Ignoring institutional racism is ignoring a large part of US history. Assigning a malevolent conspiracy to the development of a social safety net is also ahistorical. You continue to be substance free.
Soon taxpayers will tire of funding this horseshit: “The head of Western Connecticut State University’s psychology department shared his own qualms about being white on Tuesday, claiming that ‘whiteness needs to go away.’ Daniel Barrett… goes on to muse about his personal tumultuous relationship with his identity… [and] proclaims that he is ‘blinded’ by his own ‘whiteness.’” I’d ask “why is the left such a cesspit of racism,” but I know the answer: because they’re a cesspit of identity politics.
Cherry picking quotes without context from a opinion piece you obviously did not read and painting the ''left'' with it is about as honest as me quoting Alex Jones and painting him as representative of the ''right''. I'd say ''why is the right such a cesspit of racism and paranoia'' Here is what he said: ''I am referring to the concept of the white race, not to individuals who now or at any time in the future identify themselves as “white.” In other words, I would welcome a world in which “whiteness” doesn’t matter, only humanity does.'' Apparently you disagree with that.
It was an opinion piece on an independent web site. He wasn't being paid buy the university. Because you don't like his opinion, he should be what, fired or prevented from speaking publicly? You didn't address my comments. You don't think it's dishonest to use an extreme example to represent an entire philosophy? And you do disagree with his thesis that we should be judged by our humanity rather than our skin color. How humane of you and a little race obsessed.
Where do you come up with this horseshit? Unlike others, I do not attempt to criminalize speech I disagree with. Can you really see no daylight between: i) I don't want to fund it and ii) I want to criminalize it? He identifies himself as: Daniel W. Barrett, Ph.D., is a social psychologist at Western Connecticut State University and then instantly launches into racist hatred, starting off with the claim that he is "white" and the inference that he owes his "race" loyalty, with the article's hook that he is a traitor to his "white" race because of all their "sins". Which he lists as - Exploitation of others, - Destruction of the environment, - Total demolition of value - truth, integrity, honesty, defense of the common good, commonsense, love broadly construed, recognition of the inherent humanity of others, And then he finishes his worthless pile of crap with a lot of gazing at his belly button and more racialism. The money we waste putting students in his classroom so he can crap all over them with his navel gazing. What a waste, and it's time to let these clowns support themselves.
