Why is racism so villified in the West?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

'Neo-liberal'. That's not liberal. …

And what's Liberal? As it used to be no welfare system for the workers, no unions, etc, then it became social liberalism, etc, etc, but all variants support capitalism as the economic model to use. Which is the one you espouse or are you something different?

Neo-liberalism is about fawning over Big business interests and fuck the ordinary person. Plenty of countries have low or no immigration and seem to manage it. …

Generally because they have a positive population growth.

A bit of common sense is in order. …

We agree.

Opening the floodgates lowers the general standard of living for everyone.
''Zero wage growth''. Exactly.

And how would you maintain these standards as your population falls due to a declining population growth and emigration of your brightest?

Liberal means 'free' i.e. free speech and freedom of the press etc. Are you seriously suggesting that a country can't have those things, as well as unions, decent wages, welfare, health care.....???

[Arising_uk]

… Liberal means 'free' i.e. free speech and freedom of the press etc. Are you seriously suggesting that a country can't have those things, as well as unions, decent wages, welfare, health care.....???

Well the original Liberals thought not or at least not provided by government and definitely not any unions.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

… Liberal means 'free' i.e. free speech and freedom of the press etc. Are you seriously suggesting that a country can't have those things, as well as unions, decent wages, welfare, health care.....???

Well the original Liberals thought not or at least not provided by government and definitely not any unions.

'Liberal' isn't a political persuasion. You might as well have a political party called 'broad minded'. 'Liberal' parties around the world are anything but. Just look at Australia.

[Greta]

… Liberal means 'free' i.e. free speech and freedom of the press etc. Are you seriously suggesting that a country can't have those things, as well as unions, decent wages, welfare, health care.....???

Well the original Liberals thought not or at least not provided by government and definitely not any unions.

'Liberal' isn't a political persuasion. You might as well have a political party called 'broad minded'. 'Liberal' parties around the world are anything but. Just look at Australia.

In Australia the Liberal Party began with the idea of liberating business from government control. Today the party has moved far to the right and its name is now a misnomer. A more accurate name would be the Conservative Party or, these days, the Fossil Fuel Party.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Well the original Liberals thought not or at least not provided by government and definitely not any unions.

'Liberal' isn't a political persuasion. You might as well have a political party called 'broad minded'. 'Liberal' parties around the world are anything but. Just look at Australia.

In Australia the Liberal Party began with the idea of liberating business from government control. Today the party has moved far to the right and its name is now a misnomer. A more accurate name would be the Conservative Party or, these days, the Fossil Fuel Party.

My sister in Australia would call it the Fascist party. She hates it with a passion.

[Arising_uk]

'Liberal' isn't a political persuasion. …

That's exactly what is was when it started, in fact it was a political philosophy and became a party.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

'Liberal' isn't a political persuasion. …

That's exactly what is was when it started, in fact it was a political philosophy and became a party.

It's not about money--it's a world view--an 'enlightened' mind-set if you like. The word has been hijacked and abused by politicians and other idiots alike.

[Veritas Aequitas]

The fundamental of racism i.e. tribalism [us versus them] used to have significant survival value and thus was adaptable and embedded in the base of the brain.
In those days humans were so barbaric and most are like 'animals' [beasts] and any group could be a threat to another [extermination]. This is why those with greater tribalistic [racists] impulses and wariness of the other tribe have greater chance of survival then.

As humans began to evolve, inhibitors are built to put brakes on these very primal and strong tribalistic impulses. Because the later inhibitors are relatively recent to the million or billion years old embedded tribalistic impulses, the tribalistic impulses are likely to dominate the human psyche. This is so obvious among humans at present with auto bias to the groups one belongs to and thus giving rise racism or in-groups.

It is the fact that the tribalistic impulse manifesting as racism has contributed to terrible evils and violence [genocides, etc.] by racists.
Based on empirical evidence and with a greater moral awareness in the West, the people are well aware racism is a very dangerous potential for terrible evils, thus need to be curbed.
This is Why is racism so vilified in the West.

Vilification of racism and legally banning racist elements are merely addressing the symptoms.
What is needed is for humanity to understand root causes, i.e. the evolutionary processes from tribalism to racism plus the neural mechanics involved in the brain.
This is one area which the majority are not looking into either due to ignorance or whatever the reasons.

[gaffo]

This is maybe a controversial topic, but it is a philosophy forum, so I hope we can discuss this reasonably.

There isn't a clear unambiguous definition of racism, but for the same of the argument, let me define it as a preference, that is, you prefer some people based on their race.

Now, if you have a sexual or age preference or whatever, usually nobody cares. You can say "I would only date men" or "I prefer to hang out with young people" and you'll be fine. But if you say "I would prefer to live in a white neighborhood" you're suddenly a racist and, by consequence, an evil person and your (political) career is over, you can lose your job and get physically attacked by violent groups...

So how did this come to be? When did racism/racist become this "gotcha" term that is used for regular witch hunts ("Is person X really a racist?" "Oh, I'm sure he is, let's get him!").
My theory is that it's mostly a consequence of the horrible historical events that used some kind of racism as justification for mistreatment or violence against various groups. So as soon as someone mentions race based discrimination, there are explicit or implicit associations with the KKK or the holocaust or whatever. And at the same, it seems there's a push for the idea that racial diversity is a good thing, so anything that goes against that is bad.

If we agree that mistreatment and violence are bad and discard them completely, can there still be room for peaceful voluntary racial segregation as an acceptable form of discrimination?

i offer no answers.

not racist.

racism is tribalism

find black women in general are built better than "others" so like their build.

i'm not black.

so does that make a racist?

[SpheresOfBalance]

And at the same, it seems there's a push for the idea that racial diversity is a good thing, so anything that goes against that is bad.

To go against it is to de-evolve, to become more ignorant than one already is. To understand it is to understand this planet and her inhabitants, and be enlightened. It's true that one can either choose ignorance or knowledge, understand that this is a philosophy forum, which is dedicated to the love of wisdom, so listen up! Leave the, so called, safety of your ignorance behind, open your mind to the much much bigger arena, understand the universe, and your place in it, from it's beginning to the end of your consciousness, all that is real, indifferent to any individuals programmed bias!

[vegetariantaxidermy]

And at the same, it seems there's a push for the idea that racial diversity is a good thing, so anything that goes against that is bad.

To go against it is to de-evolve, to become more ignorant than one already is. To understand it is to understand this planet and her inhabitants, and be enlightened. It's true that one can either choose ignorance or knowledge, understand that this is a philosophy forum, which is dedicated to the love of wisdom, so listen up! Leave the, so called, safety of your ignorance behind, open your mind to the much much bigger arena, understand the universe, and your place in it, from it's beginning to the end of your consciousness, all that is real, indifferent to any individuals programmed bias!

Not terribly scientific SOB. More 'touchy-feely jibberjabber'.

[SpheresOfBalance]

And at the same, it seems there's a push for the idea that racial diversity is a good thing, so anything that goes against that is bad.

To go against it is to de-evolve, to become more ignorant than one already is. To understand it is to understand this planet and her inhabitants, and be enlightened. It's true that one can either choose ignorance or knowledge, understand that this is a philosophy forum, which is dedicated to the love of wisdom, so listen up! Leave the, so called, safety of your ignorance behind, open your mind to the much much bigger arena, understand the universe, and your place in it, from it's beginning to the end of your consciousness, all that is real, indifferent to any individuals programmed bias!

Not terribly scientific SOB. More 'touchy-feely jibberjabber'.

I'm sorry that it's above your head! To me it's elementary. And so "veggie," it surely seems to apply, in this particular case!

[Spazzola]

The fundamental of racism i.e. tribalism [us versus them] used to have significant survival value and thus was adaptable and embedded in the base of the brain.
In those days humans were so barbaric and most are like 'animals' [beasts] and any group could be a threat to another [extermination]. This is why those with greater tribalistic [racists] impulses and wariness of the other tribe have greater chance of survival then.

As humans began to evolve, inhibitors are built to put brakes on these very primal and strong tribalistic impulses. Because the later inhibitors are relatively recent to the million or billion years old embedded tribalistic impulses, the tribalistic impulses are likely to dominate the human psyche. This is so obvious among humans at present with auto bias to the groups one belongs to and thus giving rise racism or in-groups.

It is the fact that the tribalistic impulse manifesting as racism has contributed to terrible evils and violence [genocides, etc.] by racists.
Based on empirical evidence and with a greater moral awareness in the West, the people are well aware racism is a very dangerous potential for terrible evils, thus need to be curbed.
This is Why is racism so vilified in the West.

Vilification of racism and legally banning racist elements are merely addressing the symptoms.
What is needed is for humanity to understand root causes, i.e. the evolutionary processes from tribalism to racism plus the neural mechanics involved in the brain.
This is one area which the majority are not looking into either due to ignorance or whatever the reasons.

Is the survival of distinct "tribes" a bad thing? Doesn't this ultimately contradict one popular anti-racist idea of diversity? If we open all borders and mix all "tribes" there won't be any diversity left. No doubt neo-liberal capitalism would thrive in such a world, but is that really all people want? Does the survival of one's own people have no value at all?

i offer no answers.

not racist.

racism is tribalism

find black women in general are built better than "others" so like their build.

i'm not black.

so does that make a racist?

Yes. Discrimination based on race is racism. Some want to redefine racism to mean "discrimination that I don't agree with", but then that leads to a situation where we can't even use a common objective language anymore and the side with more power wins the argument by bullying the other side into submission.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Is the survival of distinct "tribes" a bad thing?
Doesn't this ultimately contradict one popular anti-racist idea of diversity? If we open all borders and mix all "tribes" there won't be any diversity left. No doubt neo-liberal capitalism would thrive in such a world, but is that really all people want? Does the survival of one's own people have no value at all?

Diversity as we can observed in nature is also critical for survival of any species.
If all in the species of any living things has the same qualities, then they are vulnerable to be wiped off if [extinct] there is an epidemic of bateria, or virus or other global threats.
Thus there is some advantage to having distinct 'tribes' of human beings.

In that sense then it would not be advantage to have a strategy on too many intermarriage with the view that someday there will only be one race [tribe] i.e. a generic human race.

Open borders is a political issue and it has to be managed to the current and specific circumstances.
In the present political circumstances I believe open borders is not an effective strategy because there are too many variables and constraints to deal with.

We need not have to have open borders to promote diversity.
Different people of different races can live together within one nation or in separate national borders. In general the majority of people will prefer to marry a partner of the same race [birds of feather] thus preserving diversity.

What humanity need to be caution is to ensure inherent tribal [us versus them] racist tendencies do not rear its ugly head that will result in genocides and racist driven killings. This is the moral challenge that humans need to cultivate and develop so that people of different races can live together in harmony.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Is the survival of distinct "tribes" a bad thing?
Nope! And neither is their intact inclusion.

Doesn't this ultimately contradict one popular anti-racist idea of diversity?
Nope, not with unaltered inclusion.

If we open all borders and mix all "tribes" there won't be any diversity left.
Not at all, we'll just be one people, while the illusion that we are not shall fade.

No doubt neo-liberal capitalism would thrive in such a world, but is that really all people want?
FUCK capitalism! The current structure of civilization is foul, and in desperate need of reformation.

Does the survival of one's own people have no value at all?
We are all one people, and we shall be unstoppable, in terms of intellect, art and the like, once we come together and acknowledge it.

SOB in Blue.