Is it your opinion that this is a good description of Locke, Mill, Smith, or Marx? Though I'm quite certain that you're right, that the authors of Déclaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen had no intention of paying taxes to the King of England!
Shooting at Wisconsin Sikh temple - hostages inside
- Thread starter diehard
- Start date
A few years ago, I had a long chat with a few buddies of mine over many beers. In the group were a black guy from a Canadian small town and a black guy who went to a mainly white private school. Though these guys have very different backgrounds and have both been fairly successful in life, they both said that the rest of us (being white) couldn't understand racism. We gave them the gears about that but by the end of the conversation it made sense to me that unless you have been a victim of frequent racism, you couldn't understand the effect it has even when the offenders didn't even think it was racism. It's sort of the same with many Muslims being offended by comments about terrorism and Jews about the Holocaust.
Simply put, the majority has little ability to even understand the effects of racism and often not even aware of the racial overtones of what they think are innocent actions or words.
Fuji, you have been on a recent campaign on blacks being more violent whether of Jamaican decent or African decent. You have been couching your language as educated and factual but it seems to me, even as a white guy, that you have some kind of reason for portraying blacks as you do and constantly discounting any evidence that conflicts with your view (then again you do that with every topic). Maybe you don't feel there's anything racist about it but if you examine your views, it is easy to see why blacks who have been the victims of racism in the West since the West began would see it differently and it might even influence they way that you interact with others (I doubt it though).
Simply put, the majority has little ability to even understand the effects of racism and often not even aware of the racial overtones of what they think are innocent actions or words.
Fuji, you have been on a recent campaign on blacks being more violent whether of Jamaican decent or African decent. You have been couching your language as educated and factual but it seems to me, even as a white guy, that you have some kind of reason for portraying blacks as you do and constantly discounting any evidence that conflicts with your view (then again you do that with every topic). Maybe you don't feel there's anything racist about it but if you examine your views, it is easy to see why blacks who have been the victims of racism in the West since the West began would see it differently and it might even influence they way that you interact with others (I doubt it though).
I've heard it from both. I hardly ever hear a 2nd or 3rd generation Chinese say that. Perhaps never.hmmmm details change....you claimed it was widely uttered by 1st gen immigrants..... now you add while living in china.
Writers and Philosophers (and yes they were rich, otherwise they wouldn't have had the time and education to write). China, India, and Japan had them thousands of years before. So did everyone else for that matter. Not all of them got written down and often their writings were destroyed by later conquerors like the Spanish.Is it your opinion that this is a good description of Locke, Mill, Smith, or Marx?
I wonder why you were in discussions with mainland Chinese in China about blacks when they likely have never met any?I've heard it from both. I hardly ever hear a 2nd or 3rd generation Chinese say that. Perhaps never.
Is it any better when people (like us of European descent and the 2nd and 3rd geners) hide racist view from the public but still hold them just as dear?
Which Chinese philosophers do you think were instrumental to the development of human rights and democracy in the 20th century?Writers and Philosophers (and yes they were rich, otherwise they wouldn't have had the time and education to write). China, India, and Japan had them thousands of years before. So did everyone else for that matter. Not all of them got written down and often their writings were destroyed by later conquerors like the Spanish.
It's YOU who have made this into a better/worse pissing contest. If you read back, my original point was just to explain why I think in 2012 whites in North America are more tolerant than others. They are nearer the primarily European cultural epicenter of the most recent, most dramatic gains in our comprehension of freedom, democracy, and human rights.
I don't dispute for one second that other cultures have done great things, and I mentioned myself, waaaaay up thread, that if you pick other times in history the Chinese would seem to be the enlightened ones, and the Europeans the savages. I am not sure what it is about your mindset that wants to turn every conversation into a "who is better" pissing contest.
Changing the playing field again.Which Chinese philosophers do you think were instrumental to the development of human rights and democracy in the 20th century?
...
Tolerance of other cultures suddenly becomes human rights and democracy because you are losing the battle.
I would also think there is a lot of room to discuss the impact of the philosophers you named to human rights (or the fact that they are far from the first to go over the same ground).
They watch American movies. There are also blacks in China, you'll see them from time to time in Shanghai or Beijing. China has extensive outreach into Africa, and as a result there are people from Africa who come to China to do business. In fact, the Chinese have done far more for the Africans than North Americans or Europeans ever have. We treated the Africans as a good opportunity to practice charity. They viewed Africa as a business/investment opportunity. Turns out the latter does more to raise the standard of living.I wonder why you were in discussions with mainland Chinese in China about blacks when they likely have never met any?
But you're right that the average Chinese wouldn't have had much dealing with someone who is black, so their experience of black people primarily comes from watching American television and American movies. Chinese immigrants here in Canada on the other hand obviously do encounter black people, perhaps not in their personal lives, and seem to me to be just as racist.
Actually, no, it's you who changed the playing field. That was the original playing field.Changing the playing field again.
For reference, the post on this thread that spawned this whole side discussion. AKA, the playing field.The idea of racial and religious equality is a relatively new idea that seems to have been embraced first and most pervasively by white cultural groups, starting with France, Britain, and the various colonies. There were certainly thinkers here and there elsewhere who discussed the concept, but white Europeans were the first to put it into practice as a core value and social organizational principle.
It has not yet permeated most other cultural groups and as this racist shooting shows is obviously not yet accepted by a few whites as well. Many minorities talk about it for selfish purposes, to the extent that they benefit, but do not practice the idea themselves.
It's a learning curve that human civilization is on as we collectively throw off the limiting binds of savagery which relatively recently every culture suffered from.
The success of European culture in rising to global dominance is at least in part the result of a fundamental, and really quite brave and new, belief that the other guy should share in the gains too.
Are you freakin' kidding me? You are basing your argument on what Chinese watch on TV? Get real.They watch American movies....
As Frank said, you set the parameters to include only the recent past and cut out all of the thousands of years of Eastern philosophy before us Europeans crawled out of the dirt.Which Chinese philosophers do you think were instrumental to the development of human rights and democracy in the 20th century?
...
No, I am not basing my argument on that. That was simply me answering your question as to what experience Chinese in China would have with blacks. My argument is in no way based on that.Are you freakin' kidding me? You are basing your argument on what Chinese watch on TV? Get real.
That's because the topic is why are white Europeans *today* more tolerant. The answer is that in recent history, the development of human rights and democracy, the whole enlightenment, started in Europe, and permeates European culture more deeply than it does others. If we were having the conversation YOU want to have, about which race/culture is better, over all history, I'd probably pick the Chinese.As Frank said, you set the parameters to include only the recent past and cut out all of the thousands of years of Eastern philosophy before us Europeans crawled out of the dirt.
And I said they're not, just more socialized to talk about it except in safe company (or online)That's because the topic is why are white Europeans *today* more tolerant....
(And the fact that you base your argument on what is on TV is China is a joke).
So, which non-European countries do you think offer the same sorts of guarantees of rights and freedoms as Canada, the US, and Britain? Or even troubled France?And I said they're not, just more socialized to talk about it except in safe company (or online)
Japan, perhaps, but they're sort of running an American installed system there now.
And I said they're not, just more socialized to talk about it except in safe company (or online)
(And the fact that you base your argument on what is on TV is China is a joke).
Looking at this discussion as a legal case, I would put the discussions in the lounge down as my first piece of evidence where you can see what the mainly white population really feels when they don't have to worry about what people will think.
Maybe you can come up with some more 'evidence' based on what people saw on TV once.
Legal guarantees don't promote tolerance, merely make people be more careful what they say to whom. As was mentioned before, we wouldn't need them if Western culture really respected differences and all of the mentioned countries have significant problems with racism. Maybe it doesn't affect you but it does affect others.So, which non-European countries do you think offer the same sorts of guarantees of rights and freedoms as Canada, the US, and Britain? Or even troubled France?
Japan, perhaps, but they're sort of running an American installed system there now.
The only thing that promotes tolerance is having people actually get to know each other.
So you couldn't name any.Legal guarantees don't promote tolerance, merely make people be more careful what they say to whom. As was mentioned before, we wouldn't need them if Western culture really respected differences and all of the mentioned countries have significant problems with racism. Maybe it doesn't affect you but it does affect others.
The only thing that promotes tolerance is having people actually get to know each other.
So which non-European nation do you think does a better job of promoting tolerance than Canada, the US, Australia, or Britain?Legal guarantees don't promote tolerance, merely make people be more careful what they say to whom. As was mentioned before, we wouldn't need them if Western culture really respected differences and all of the mentioned countries have significant problems with racism. Maybe it doesn't affect you but it does affect others.
The only thing that promotes tolerance is having people actually get to know each other.
This time, definiately not Japan! Maybe China. All my friends from Tibet and Xinjiang tell me how grateful they are to live in a country that has such deep and fundamental respect for the culture of others.
I don't dispute that Western governments do a better job of protecting individual rights.
What you seem to miss is that does not mean Western individuals are more tolerant than others.
What you seem to miss is that does not mean Western individuals are more tolerant than others.
