Jump to content

Why is bigotry so terrible if it is supposedly only about power?


Edelgard for Smash
 Share

Recommended Posts

In b4 lock: If you subscribe to a humanistic theory of law and morality, that which empowers people to live free and happy and aspire to their highest potential is good. That which restrains them from so doing is evil. Bigotry is evil because it is anathema to the happiness and aspirations of the prejudiced group.

Edited by Shoblongoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

In b4 lock: If you subscribe to a humanistic theory of law and morality, that which empowers people to live free and happy and aspire to their highest potential is good. That which restrains them from so doing is evil. Bigotry is evil because it is anathema to the happiness and aspirations of the prejudiced group.

Except the academic definition of racism and sexism specifically mentions power.

So it is entirely antithetical to that humanistic worldview.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe that the definitions of "bigotry", "racism/sexism", and "prejudice" are identical, but they overlap. You'll often hear of institutional racism and institutional sexism when power is relevant - but the terms are often dropped for ease of conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Edelgard for Smash said:

Why is it so important to people whether someone is a racist or a sexist or not when morality takes a secondary role or no role at all?

How is equality possible with this outlook when whoever isn’t the oppressor is automatically the oppressed?

Stop begging the question. In other words, what makes you think morality "takes a secondary role or no role at all" (a role in what?), and that "whoever isn't the oppressor is automatically the oppressed" (whatever this means)? Your arguments don't support their conclusion in any part.

Edited by Rapier
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Edelgard for Smash said:

Except the academic definition of racism and sexism specifically mentions power.

So it is entirely antithetical to that humanistic worldview.

 

:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

 

15 minutes ago, Darros said:

I don't believe that the definitions of "bigotry", "racism/sexism", and "prejudice" are identical, but they overlap. You'll often hear of institutional racism and institutional sexism when power is relevant - but the terms are often dropped for ease of conversation.

^^^

This.

Institutional racism is about power.

Bigotry is just about being a dick to people for reasons that aren't steeped in who they are as an individual. But based on some personal prejudice against their sex or their race or their religion or their national origin....

i.e. hating black people is bigotry

Bigots becoming cops and than using the power of the badge-and-the-gun to shoot unarmed black teenagers while court after court declares that their actions are reasonable under the law is racism.  

Edited by Shoblongoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Darros said:

I don't believe that the definitions of "bigotry", "racism/sexism", and "prejudice" are identical, but they overlap. You'll often hear of institutional racism and institutional sexism when power is relevant - but the terms are often dropped for ease of conversation.

Ok then, why do people care about institutional racism or sexism if it is all about power?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Edelgard for Smash said:

Ok then, why do people care about institutional racism or sexism if it is all about power?

 

What the fuck kind of question is that?

Why WOULDN'T you care about institutional racism??? 

Edited by Shoblongoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Shoblongoo said:

What the fuck kind of question is that?

Why WOULDN'T you care about institutional racism??? 

Because institution racism is only who is in charge, not the actual immorality of the racism itself.

When people say that “so and so can’t be racist because....” they aren’t making a moral argument, all they are essentially implying is that their preferred group isn’t in charge and therefore it is bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...