I'm Intrepid and I'm appearently a racist.....

I dunno...it seems like you relish blaming poor black Americans, as you gloss over the impact of whites who established and maintained the system for generations.

I think this statement can construed in many ways but, to me, the quantifier here is the word "seems"

Seem - To give the impression of being....

In essence you are being accused of giving the appearance of blaming poor black Americans............

Intrepid believes that the poster (TS) is inferring that (BH) is being racist.

Infer - to guess; speculate; surmise.

The inference is there but it points toward the appearance of being racist, not of being racist.

In short, this thread cannot be justified by the posted example.

Edited: Correcting error pointed out by BH - found in a following post within 2 of these

[edit on 12-2-2007 by Koka]

Originally posted by Koka
I am guilty only for that which I am directly responsible...

....which is exactly the point that many have been trying to make, but which has been rejected by others.

I hear you, Koka.

BUT, that post was taken ENTIRELY out of context. It was in another thread with a different subject. I said that because, though I conceded some points to the opposing arguments, NONE of my points were conceded in a similar manner.

But, like you said, intrepid probably wanted to get flames burning on here...

If you want to argue semantics Koka reread the title. See the word "appearanly"?

Defined by Merriam Webster as, and this is the context that I used it in:

"manifest to the senses or mind as real or true on the basis of evidence that may or may not be factually valid"

OK, can we let the topic continue now?

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by Koka
I am guilty only for that which I am directly responsible...

....which is exactly the point that many have been trying to make, but which has been rejected by others.

That is EXACTY the point jsobecky. We are, or should be, responsible for our own actions.

Originally posted by Koka
In short, this thread cannot be justified by the posted example.

If I had started the thread (because the post in question was directed at me) and had added a few other choice posts from several members here that made the inference more 'believable' would the thread meet your justification criteria?

Don't answer that.

The fact is, there are no rules against starting a thread about just any old thing a person might want to! This SEEMS like just another attempt to derail the subject of the thread with some nonsense about whether or not the thread can be "justified"! I can't freaking believe this!

If you don't like the thread or want to participate in the thread or think the thread cannot be "justified" get outta here! There are some people here who wish to discuss this, whether YOU approve or not!

Jesus!

Originally posted by intrepid
If you want to argue semantics Koka reread the title. See the word "appearanly"?

Defined by Merriam Webster as, and this is the context that I used it in:

"manifest to the senses or mind as real or true on the basis of evidence that may or may not be factually valid"

OK, can we let the topic continue now?

Then the title would have been better phrased

"I'm Intrepid and apparently I appear, to others, to be a racist"

This may have inspired debate rather than argument, but given our nature, you I and most other posters, know full well it is highly unlikely.

We could argue the semantics of sensationalist thread titles but that would also be considered off topic.

Originally posted by Koka
Then the title would have been better phrased...
< snip >

Now we're gonna argue over thread titles???

Nobody needs a quorum in order to post. BH said it very clearly.

Jesus.

[edit on 12-2-2007 by jsobecky]

It's real simple, intrepid.

If you want me gone from this thread, admit that you were wrong for using my post as you did and apologize for doing so. Once you do that, you won't see ANOTHER post from me here.

But of course, you won't do that. So prepare to read more of my posts...

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

If I had started the thread (because the post in question was directed at me) and had added a few other choice posts from several members here that made the inference more 'believable' would the thread meet your justification criteria?

Don't answer that.

As if I wouldn't.

Your other "choice posts" would have to be better examples than the one Intrepid chose.

You are correct to point out that I should have used your name as opposed to Intrepid's, it makes no difference to my break down, it still applies. I have now rephrased the post accordingly.

The fact is, there are no rules against starting a thread about just any old thing a person might want to! This SEEMS like just another attempt to derail the subject of the thread with some nonsense about whether or not the thread can be "justified"! I can't freaking believe this!

Its a point of view, and I argue not with whether the thread is justified, only that it is not justified based on the example given, you can see how things can be misconstrued if all the information is not given.

If you don't like the thread or want to participate in the thread or think the thread cannot be "justified" get outta here! There are some people here who wish to discuss this, whether YOU approve or not!

Oh, I like the thread, please don't be angry, I'm just trying to clarify at a semantic level......you have every right to ignore my posts I won't be offended.

There is no single answer to the question posed.

You can ignore the terminology that has been used, but I ask that people think long and hard when posting. I have seen few threads that have not been derailed due to the semantics, if you want to avoid them get it right to begin with.


[edit on 12-2-2007 by Koka]

Why do members insist on mocking others? Or laughing in their face when they attempt to make a valid point? As members have said, time and time again, the efforts of very few to derail this thread are blatant. In a last ditch effort, I ask that "we" ignore these blatant attempts to derail a valid thread, and further the discussion without them. Even though I am attempting to push this thread back on track, this post in itself is completely off-topic. I hesitate to even post it, but I think it is necessary.

Put our differences aside and tackle the message itself.

I agree with riley, even if it is corny. We do need to stand together.

At the end of the day, we are all one in the same. If you don't this truth, deal with it somewhere else.

Originally posted by chissler
In a last ditch effort, I ask that "we" ignore these blatant attempts to derail a valid thread, and further the discussion without them.

I second that! (Thank you, chiss!) And with that...

There are a few things I'd like to make clear about my position as regards what I believe to be the initial intent of this thread.

1. If I voice agreement with a point someone has made, that doesn't mean I agree with that person in toto. I can agree on SOMETHING with just about everyone on this board. Even if I think they're a jerk. And if I agree on a point, that doesn't mean I support their overall position or that I love them or anything.

2. I don't mean to imply that every black person here thinks every white person is a racist because of skin color. That's pretty ridiculous. So there's really no need for all the defensiveness going on. It is my opinion, though that there are some black people who see most whites as racist pigs, because they're white. That's not to discount the FACT that there are some whites who see most blacks as filthy scum. But in my world? We already know that. That's what most people mean when they say "racism". White people hating on blacks. This thread attempts to shine a light on what is sometimes called "reverse racism" of a sort. The kind where white people get judged because they're white.

And, as can be expected, it's not received very well. We can talk about racism against blacks all day and while it may be uncomfortable, we can talk about it. But bring up racism against whites and you have a knock-down drag-out catfight on your hands. Why racism against whites such a taboo subject? Someone want to start a thread?

3. Agreeing with chissler and riley, not only is it important that we all stand together, it's important that we ALL look forward instead of backward. Myself and Intrepid and others are drawing on our sometimes-long-ago experiences to make the point that being thought of as racist sucks. Well duh! It hurts no matter who you are. And the post he used (and there are others like it) are just a fact of life. We may be sick of it but I'm sick of Bush supporters too. And there's nothing I can do about them.

And black people, too. As long as you look backward and decide that you're not going to let go of the past until it's made right, you're going to be imprisoned by it.

4. Part of the reason I want it to be known that I have been called a racist is to bring it to the attention to those who don't 'believe' in black-on-white racism. I don't think the black community (whatever that is) can expect racism to go away if (I said IF) they choose to practice it. And BOTH races practice it! Speaking for myself, I would like an acknowledgment from blacks that they see this and agree that it's as wrong as white-on-black racism.

5. Language such as "Stop whining" and "What is your problem? Are you high?" does absolutely NO GOOD to come to a place where we can talk to each other. Smart ass remarks and juvenile comments not only don't help, they increase the divide.

6. Most of us have been victims of something racial and most of us have (knowingly or not) said something that someone found offensive racially. We truly are in the same boat as far as that goes.

7. Whan someone complains, they deserve to - at the very least - be listened to.

I think that's all I want to say... for now, anyway...

I've read the latest comments and I agree with HH. I think that OP and the rest supportive of him are protesting too much. I mean is he and others walking around thinking that every "person of color" perceives that they are racist?

If he does (and they do), that only means that he (and they) is (are) overly paranoid.

Furthermore, he is spending too much energy and time worrying about what others (namely people of color) are thinking of him. In the scheme of things, who cares if someone thinks that he's racist? What is to be gained if he finds out whether someone does?

Personally, I think that this has to come down to identity politics and acknowledgement. Instead of all this work of trying to "eliminate" the spectrum of color from the consciousness of people, there needs to be work on reclaiming white as a "color". The difference here is that people of color have always been conscious of their heritage and their color. But whiteness has always been "invisible" due to the constant validation that comes about from society.

Instead of pointing the finger at everyone who mentions a "color" as being racist (which happens with more frequency than the old stereotype of people of color "screaming about race"), more work should be done on the dominant culture finding an identity and bringing a "hyper-visibility" back to whiteness.

But as long as this "color-blind", one human race thing continues as a form of propaganda, you will continue to get these blatant paranoiaic threads in which one white person fears all people of color are calling him/her racist.

I would suggest people see "A Passage to India". It's a very instructive movie which discusses the phenomenon of a woman stirring up a similar hornet's nest against an Indian man on false accusations just because she felt faint in a cave.


[edit on 12-2-2007 by ceci2006]

Originally posted by ceci2006
I've read the latest comments and I agree with HH. I think that OP and the rest supportive of him are protesting too much. I mean is he and others walking around thinking that every "person of color" thinks that they are racist?

Nice try ceci, go back to the first page, I said "a small minority of minorities". This is what I addressed. I have NO idea where you came up with 'every "person of colour"'. That's the broad brush I was talking about that helps No one.

Well, you're certainly not helping with this thread no matter how many people you accuse of "thinking that you are racist".

You need to own up to what you did on this thread and acknowledge that you knowingly started a witch hunt on people of color. I've read this thread from the beginning, and you cannot tell me that some of the comments on this thread were used to paint people of color in a narrow brush thinking that they all "thought that white people were racist".

How could you blatantly ignore that some posters said some horrible things about people of color? How could you live with yourself?

Well forget it. You can live with yourself. And that's the problem.

Yes, nice try, intrepid. But own up to what you did and try to make restitution instead of hiding behind that "all human race" tripe that circulates around conservative, rightist and libertarian circles. Their propaganda has most seemingly destroyed race-relations in this country because their use of a "color-blind" approach that ignores injustice currently and in the past.

This has been studied and documented. It has a theoretical basis.

That type of thinking is rather dangerous because it allows a system of power to continue to stay in tact due to its messages and its actions. That's the problem.


[edit on 12-2-2007 by ceci2006]

Originally posted by ceci2006
walking around thinking that every "person of color" thinks that they are racist?

He said nothing of the sort. He didn't mention "people of color" except for ONE black person in his personal experience. Why are you emotionalizing this to accuse him of thinking that EVERY person of color thinking that he's a racist? Is this thread not emotional enough for you?

Furthermore, he is spending too much energy and time worrying about what others (namely people of color) are thinking of him.

Intrepid's a big boy. I think he can decide where he should spend his time and energy.

In the scheme of things, who cares if someone thinks that he's racist?

Maybe he does. Is that ok with you?

Instead of all this work of trying to "eliminate" the spectrum of color from the consciousness of people,

Are you in the right thread?

there needs to be work on reclaiming white as a "color"... more work should be done on the dominant culture finding an identity and bringing a "hyper-visibility" back to whiteness.

Oh, tell us more... What do we need to do to feel more fulfilled as white people?

(Isn't that that "paternalistic racism" thing you were talking about?)

one white person fears all people of color are calling him racist.

It's not just one white person and it's not ALL people of color. You're over-dramatizing.

OK ceci, we finally got this thread back on track AGAIN, if you want to discuss this take it to u2u or file a Complaint and let this topic continue.

You know, BH, I don't care. If the OP truly felt "egalitarian", he would have put his foot down and stopped some of the comments made in this thread. And don't think that you were immune.

And no, I'm not using paternalism here. That's your game in town, not mine.

Originally posted by intrepid
OK ceci, we finally got this thread back on track AGAIN, if you want to discuss this take it to u2u or file a Complaint and let this topic continue.

Yes it is. And you are still attacking my comments instead of having a substantive answer for them.

Face it. The thread is about you. You started this witch hunt and refuse to answer for it.

That is as much the subject as the rest.

I said my peace. And I have no agenda. I am saying what I think. And I don't need you to tell me that I'm being "disruptive". So stop with the law and order nonsense.

Allow me to speak without you deriding me every other second and dismissing my comments.

Speaking of the "complaint button", why go there when nothing gets done?



[edit on 12-2-2007 by ceci2006]

Ignoring is tougher than I first anticipated.

I've edited my post, and apologize for this small note to provide clarity. If "we" can remain on topic, those who can not will fade into the darkness.

[edit on 12-2-2007 by chissler]