So a debate dialect began between me and… some other guy. Started with the concept of antiwhitism, and escalated into racial stereotypes. This dialect is currently ongoing (hopefully). For now, I refer to myself as Anomalous Host, and the other guy as Arthur, until he wants his name changed.
Anomalous Host
“im so gonna get eaten for this, but i dont think there is antiwhitism since there isnt a white identity to be against. nor should there be a race based identity of any kind thus both anti and prowhitism are equally bad“
I’ll challenge you on that. And if I go too hard and hot on this, let me know and I’ll switch it over to the NSFW channel (wherever that is, ’cause I don’t see it). Somewhat hesitant to do this, because my debate (or dialect) style/skill has gotten me kicked off several platforms. But if it’s any consolation, half of those turned out to be anti-white platforms (thus I was kicked off for anti-white reasons).
Saying that you can’t be pro/anti-white is like saying you can’t be pro/anti-brown recluse. That’s not a dig on mexicans (unless you want it to be), that’s a dig on spiders. What race of the spider species? Brown Recluse spiders. Is there an identity here to be against? Sure there is. We can all agree brown recluses are more dangerous to humans than, oh say, Daddy Long Legs. There’s certainly enough of a distinction between the two to have a racial identity, if for no other reason that Brown Recluses are far more venomous than the Daddys, and can cause severe/permanent damage to human flesh (and thus can burn in hell). Certainly some valid reasons to be anti-Brown Recluse just for that alone, but I suppose there’s a balancing act with the circle of life and whatnot. There’s also behavioral differences, different levels of aggression, etc.
The point being, despite being the same species, there are genetic differences that make the racial distinctions more than on looks alone. Same applies to the human species, and thus to the white race, black race, jewish race, asian race, etc. The differences go beyond the surface level, there’s a genetic difference to consider, which also results in differences in general (even stereotypical) personality traits, physical traits, levels of intelligence and emotion, personalities, etc, that apply to different human races. Various books have covered this (ex: The Bell Curve).
There’s enough to like/dislike to be pro/anti whatever race.
An additional example to make the point, a black man you may have heard of: https://www.bitchute.com/video/gITB41Rtidc/
Arthur
im not positive that the spider comparison is sound. spiders are not sapient or sentient, nor are they communal species far as i know which humans are both and those differences are very important
the reason why in my opinion racial distinctions, even if there are any societally significant ones (not things like skin color or susceptibility to skin cancer or something) ought not come into play is because it necessarily creates negative stereotypes which cannot be climbed out of
its like a conspiratorial worldview. once you convinced yourself that everyone is out to get you, there is no disproving it
for instance, media said “WMDs in Iraq” and there turned out not to be any. say there is a mia culpa from the media and the national security establishment
the conspiratorial worldview then dictates that the reason they came out with that apology and took upon themselves the responsibility to ameliorate the situation is because it looks good but they are still evil
its still a lie which goes to promote their evil ends
the assumption of good faith on the other hand would drive you to forgiveness
lies can be proven, truthful intentions cannot
same with the racial stereotypes
you havent made such a point but im not sure how your position avoids antisemetic stereotypes of jews such as “they control the world” or something like that
this renders a negative judgement upon an individual through no fault of their own
which imho is bad
the video you linked falls into the same problem
its not possible to objectively look at a person and assess their character if you have already made a determination about his or her character by the color of the skin
“chinese people like chinese music, puerto rican people like puerto rican music”
implicit in this statement is that no chinese person can like non chinese music and dislike chinese music
which on its face not true
also, the problem there is that there is no white race beyond skin color and, lets call them medical differences
german culture is very very different to russian
or french or american
all of those countries are white supposedly
but the commonality is paper thin generally and nonexistent societally
therefore the question is, why create an identity for societal ends with no basis?
things you listed, namely: personality traits, physical traits, levels of intelligence and emotion, personalities are all individual traits which you can assess yourself without need to rely on predeterminations
if you do rely on those and you are wrong you do tangible damage to the relationship with another individual
Anomalous Host
“im not positive that the spider comparison is sound. spiders are not sapient or sentient, nor are they communal species far as i know which humans are both and those differences are very important“
That’s debatable, at least with regard to sentiency and being communal (depending on the race). I suppose I could’ve used apes as an analogy instead, or elephants, or chickens or crows/ravens. But I wanted to keep it simple for the sake of showcasing the example that a single species has genetic differences which make them distinct enough to differentiate themselves from those of different races of the same species. And I wanted to keep it simple enough to where sapiency, sentiency, and communal tendencies wouldn’t be a factor to consider per-se. Maybe I should’ve gone with plants instead to make the point. But anyway…
“the reason why in my opinion racial distinctions, even if there are any societally significant ones (not things like skin color or susceptibility to skin cancer or something) ought not come into play is because it necessarily creates negative stereotypes which cannot be climbed out of”
Ahah! And I counter that it ought to come into play because, otherwise, one wouldn’t be able to create positive stereotypes. The fact of the matter is there are positive and negative stereotypes that come packaged with any and every race.
“its like a conspiratorial worldview. once you convinced yourself that everyone is out to get you, there is no disproving it
for instance, media said “WMDs in Iraq” and”
Whoah there. I’m not going to go into those cans of worms. Not unless you’re going in the direction of, “but being pro/anti any race/color is a needless and harmful social construct created by conspiratorial views,” or something like that. I’d rather keep this discussion focused on the main topic. Deviating in this way is opening up a big can of worms, each deserving their own long-winded discussion.
“im not sure how your position avoids antisemetic stereotypes of jews such as “they control the world” or something like that”
Another topic I’d like to avoid for the same reason. But if you want to push it…
“the assumption of good faith on the other hand would drive you to forgiveness
lies can be proven, truthful intentions cannot
same with the racial stereotypes”
If I’m understanding correctly, your position is that racial stereotypes (or at least bad ones) should be avoided because they are assumptions made on bad faith; and thus because of the harm this can cause, there thus shouldn’t be a race-based identity to be for or against.
That’s a rather emotional foundation to be basing such a position on, and an assumptive one at that. “Faith” is a good word for it too. Faith meaning believing in something for which there is (currently) no definitive/conclusive proof.
The fault in that position is you can have good faith about someone all you want, and have a positive outlook and a forgiveness-driven spirit. But if you have faith in their truthful intentions, but they’re lying to you regardless, that makes you naive. And being naive hardly makes one’s position correct. Like the good-faith naive position that CNN is always telling the truth; or that negative racial stereotypes are never correct.
“its not possible to objectively look at a person and assess their character if you have already made a determination about his or her character by the color of the skin”
I’ll do one better. It’s not possible to objectively look at a person and assess a person’s character ever. Regardless of their skin color. But their skin color can give you an expectation that may or may not be met. There’s a big difference between determining the general characteristics an entire race as a whole based on the average, and judging a specific individual of that race. A responsible individual would know that and take that into account.
“”chinese people like chinese music, puerto rican people like puerto rican music”
implicit in this statement is that no chinese person can like non chinese music and dislike chinese music
which on its face not true”
Implicit in your statement is that chinese people in general don’t like chinese music. If you disagree with that take on your above statement, then I don’t see what the problem is here.
“also, the problem there is that there is no white race beyond skin color and, lets call them medical differences
german culture is very very different to russian
or french or american
all of those countries are white supposedly
but the commonality is paper thin generally and nonexistent societally”
The creation and maintenance of a culture isn’t something that can be used to critique the existince of race-based identity. People of the same race are more than capable of having different cultures, let alone those of different races. What you’re identifying here is evidence of community differences. Each race can have different communities (in spite of some who wish to nationalize or even globalize everything; or even more radically, in spite of ethnostates). What should be determined is what distinctions exist among those communities, in this case of the same race, that would lead one to conclude that commonality is a negligible factor.
I must admit my knowledge of this area isn’t grand enough to make a solid claim. But I do believe one can observe all-white communities and their cultures (for however long those are around), and compare them to communities of a different race and noting their cultures, and note a large enough distinction that would make the commonalities the same race shares all that more apparent. Otherwise there wouldn’t be such fascination tourists have when visiting other countries (primarily composed of a different race), to note how fascinating and distinct their customs are compared to their own.
It’s like Jason Kohne says, “It’s not about the similarities that make us the same, it’s the differences that make us different.”
“therefore the question is, why create an identity for societal ends with no basis?
things you listed, namely: personality traits, physical traits, levels of intelligence and emotion, personalities are all individual traits which you can assess yourself without need to rely on predeterminations
if you do rely on those and you are wrong you do tangible damage to the relationship with another individual”
Predeterminations give one an expectation of what those above listed traits and whatnot should be. To say determinations are always bad is unrealistic and harmful. To say they’re never bad would lead to that damage you speak of in various cases. To say they’re always bad leads to situations damaging to everyone because of political correctness. Like what we have today regarding police dismantling programs and removing records of crime stats just because we don’t want to damage relationships with those commiting crimes.
Arthur
It’s New Year celebration time over here so I don’t think I’ll be able to have a full blown chat about it at the time (and the reason why i didn’t respond prior is because preparations) but I would argue that any and all serious stereotypes created based on immutable characteristics are negative in effect even if they are positive in spirit. Asians are good at math despite being positive in spirit create an expectation which is failed by a lot of people and the power of first impressions is such that experiences of this kind colour the idea you have of the individual will be soured immidiately
Being pro or antiwhite falls entirely under the umbrella of being pro racial stereotypes and being pro treating individuals based on their immutable traits. I’m not sure how that’s a deviation on my end
Faith is the word here because there cannot logically exist proof to the contrary to evidence less or apriori worldview. Good faith with the CNN example is to take their reporting case by case. Yes CNN has a massive bias but it doesn’t mean you disbelieve your lying eyes when CNN makes a simple and verified fact claim
Even though it’s impossible to be objective in judging a person’s character, deliberately muddying the water on the subject is the opposite of helpful. Unless you can tell me how that expectation is more useful than it is harmful. And also make a moral argument as to the validity of making a judgement about someone based on something they have no agency in.
What’s the need for racial identities if cultural ones are more granular, more specific, more different and most importantly mailable? It’s the differences which make us different indeed, tautologies are indeed true. The problem is that race is in no way sufficient to explain differences you may run into in the world. A black guy in Texas suburbs is more closer to you than my white neighbour half the world away
Anomalous Host
I would argue that any and all serious stereotypes created based on immutable characteristics are negative in effect even if they are positive in spirit.
That’s entirely dependent upon individuals on a case-by-case basis. Not entirely sure I’d call them immutable, at least in terms of mental capabilities and personality, though that’s dependent upon the age. But I will say there are stereotypes that are taken (somewhat) seriously, and those that aren’t.
Stereotypes are a typical mechanism every race and culture has. Some would call it a self-defense mechanism to address “culture shock,” so one can be prepared for encountering the other culture/race, or to just be xenophobic to the point of completely avoiding the other culture/race. For example, indian tribes in the Americas (North and South, plus some islands around those continents) would’ve likely had that stereotype against Catholic/Christian zealots, and/or the race that brought about missionaries, conquistadors, pilgrims, etc and vice versa. Considering the devastation that was wrought upon them coming into contact with one another, them avoiding one another due to xenophobia would likely have resulted in an altogether better outcome, in spite of some positives that were to be had from them meeting with each other (being converted to the ways of the other, establishing peaceful relations, sharing of customs and technology, protection from those of the other tribe/race/culture, etc).
So while you call stereotypes as something negative, I call it something natural within every race of every species that trends towards segregation, which has more pros than what is found among intermixing. Because a culture clash is inevitable if doing the latter, as there are plenty of examples today, and in the past couple centuries. Doesn’t mean there can’t be friendships and intermixed groups and whatnot, just that those shouldn’t be frequent, and only carried out by responsible parties. Because there’s a lot of irresponsible people out there from all races.
Yes CNN has a massive bias but it doesn’t mean you disbelieve your lying eyes when CNN makes a simple and verified fact claim
I defer to N.A.X.A.L.T.
“Unless you can tell me how that expectation is more useful than it is harmful. And also make a moral argument as to the validity of making a judgement about someone based on something they have no agency in.”
For starters, police investigations. If a particular neighborhood is more crime-ridden than others because of the type of black people that live there (don’t act like this isn’t a thing), and someone gets mugged there but they don’t recall where exactly they were at when this happened, should the police not take that into account and start anywhere else in town but there? Better yet, should one not take into account that this part of town is composed of blacks who follow the stereotypical convention of being thugs who harm/rob people, and pass through there regularly not expecting anything bad to happen? Sure would’ve been useful to have certain expectations about the people occupying that place, in spite of it being politically incorrect (and in spite of how harmful it may be to stereotype them in this way) to avoid those situations.
The only way you can convince me that stereotypes should be avoided is by showcasing statistics demonstrating how much of a fallacy they are (ie they aren’t located in or near the middle of the NAXALT curve). And I’ve already (and repeatedly) showcased why stereotypes are necessary. You can claim they’re harmful all you want, but it’s been demonstrated that flat out ignoring them (or shaming people from using them) is harmful in of itself, and probably more-so.
Arthur
Police investigations deal with generalities yes, but I need to see a lot of evidence to conclude of predisposition to crime in blacks. Not socioeconomic factors or self selection of violent people to live in places
Implicit in your statement is that chinese people in general don’t like chinese music. If you disagree with that take on your above statement, then I don’t see what the problem is here.
Your reading is incorrect. The negative of “all roses are red” isn’t “all roses aren’t red” it’s “not all roses are red” meaning some are red and some aren’t red. Same with the Chinese music
Anomalous Host
Oh really? Then what’s the opposite of “some are red and some aren’t red?”
Arthur
Either all are or none are
Anomalous Host
Well, yeah, but doesn’t that make it two statements at this point? Not entirely sure that’s an opposite.
“All roses are red.”
!=
“Some roses are red.”
=
“All roses are not red.”
=
“A rose is red.”
!=
“No roses are red.”
Anomalous Host
One last thing I’ll add on here. There are a few different ways to view stereotypes, including prowhite and antiwhite. You tend view them as either positive or harmful (the former eventually leading to the latter). I tend to view them as either accurate or inaccurate. The predicament is that, harmful or not, they tend to be accurate for some and inaccurate for others. If they are accurate often enough to fall in this middle of the NAXALT curve, then it being harmful or positive isn’t going to be all that relevant. All that matters is if one will judge every individual of that race by that stereotype without consideration of those on the far outer edges of that curve. It’s not that stereotypes should be removed or ignored, it’s that we need more responsible and intelligent people, and less irresponsible dumbasses.
To be continued…?
The Anomalous Host 