RE: What is it with Trump supporters not wanting to discuss policy without name calling
December 23, 2016 at 9:04 pm
(This post was last modified: December 23, 2016 at 9:05 pm by paulpablo.)
(December 23, 2016 at 8:21 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: Quick question - when a Black man was lynched in the 1950s by a white mob on the hearsay of whistling at a white woman, was it about believing one's race is superior?
When Blacks marched for Civil Rights, was the opposition purely operating on just a belief of racial superiority?
The problem with narrowly adhering to your definition is that it neatly handwaves away the deep emotions and violent actions in a neat little package. It's as shallow as explaining the Khmer Rouge was a case of anti-intellectualism.
That's the point I was making, that I think it would be reasonable to extend the definition of racism to preferential treatment of certain races. Or possibly just preferential thoughts of certain races.
But that does make it awkward to definitely say someone is a racist if there's no definitive answer to what racism is.
Are you ready for the fire? We are firemen. WE ARE FIREMEN! The heat doesn’t bother us. We live in the heat. We train in the heat. It tells us that we’re ready, we’re at home, we’re where we’re supposed to be. Flames don’t intimidate us. What do we do? We control the flame. We control them. We move the flames where we want to. And then we extinguish them.
Impersonation is treason.
