Brandis: "People do have a right to be bigots, you know."

[Geelong_Sicko]

Yeah. It becomes a genuine self-defeating paradox if you look at it that way. By pointing out racial or cultural significances you can actually accentuate those differences, leaving those with genuine race-hate tendencies ammunition to fire or food to feed the ignorant with.

Yet I don't want to live in an androgynous and anonymous monocultural world either. I like cultural diversity. I don't like the fatal human flaw of 'I'm better than you' that seeks to exploit divisions between cultures for its own thuggish ends.

There has to be a happy medium here somewhere.

 

[Lester Burnham]

Yeah. It becomes a genuine self-defeating paradox if you look at it that way. By pointing out racial or cultural significances you can actually accentuate those differences, leaving those with genuine race-hate tendencies ammunition to fire or food to feed the ignorant with.

Yet I don't want to live in an androgynous and anonymous monocultural world either. I like cultural diversity. I don't like the fatal human flaw of 'I'm better than you' that seeks to exploit divisions between cultures for its own thuggish ends.

There has to be a happy medium here somewhere.

I love cultural diversity too. I work with a bunch of people from all over the world; we have many interesting and humourous discussions. I take my kids down to Pakofest every year, and we enjoy the music, dancing and cuisine.

But the existence and celebration of cultures in no way supports arguments for 'anti-racism' views that are made on a basis of biological race. If race arguments have no reliable or useful biological basis then the best we can say is that 'race' is really about about culture. And once you arrive at that conclusion then you need to justify why aspects of culture are lionised and protected above others. It would be just as valid for Bogans or fishermen to be able to claim racial discrimination.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

And so the message becomes a simple 'don't hate'. Which is what us evil bleeding-heart lefties have been arguing for all along.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Yeah. It becomes a genuine self-defeating paradox if you look at it that way. By pointing out racial or cultural significances you can actually accentuate those differences, leaving those with genuine race-hate tendencies ammunition to fire or food to feed the ignorant with.

Yet I don't want to live in an androgynous and anonymous monocultural world either. I like cultural diversity. I don't like the fatal human flaw of 'I'm better than you' that seeks to exploit divisions between cultures for its own thuggish ends.

There has to be a happy medium here somewhere.

Human social values, or the social consciousness, has not evolved a pace with the social order or demands.

Thus we either need to find new areas for competition, so to externalise it, or one can only hope that we nurture values and perhaps that individuals who hold these values, that redefine social competition are more successful (in an evolutionary sense).

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Human social values, or the social consciousness, has not evolved a pace with the social order or demands.

Thus we either need to find new areas for competition, so to externalise it, or one can only hope that we nurture values and perhaps that individuals who hold these values, that redefine social competition are more successful (in an evolutionary sense).

Too right, D & M. Someone in another thread attacked the 'blank slate' human behavioural theory, but I believe its the truth. ALL our behaviour patterns, ideals and morals are modelled, adopted and adapted from those who surround us from birth. As children we are the sponges that soak up all that we see, hear and touch.

Parents say 'I hate slants. I hate muslims.' What's the child gonna think? What's the child gonna do?

The Racist Right feeds on ignorance. Education of a social/culturally inclusive sort starves that ignorance by feeding understanding to the population as it grows. As progressive values spread you would hope that backward-looking notions of cultural superiority and cultural exclusion become the weak, doomed to an absolute cultural isolation or even extinction.

 

[Lester Burnham]

And so the message becomes a simple 'don't hate'. Which is what us evil bleeding-heart lefties have been arguing for all along.

It's a great message, but there are plenty of haters on the left side of politics.

And also it does not explain why some aspects of culture are lionised and protected above others.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Too right, D & M. Someone in another thread attacked the 'blank slate' human behavioural theory, but I believe its the truth. ALL our behaviour patterns, ideals and morals are modelled, adopted and adapted from those who surround us from birth. As children we are the sponges that soak up all that we see, hear and touch.

Parents say 'I hate slants. I hate muslims.' What's the child gonna think? What's the child gonna do?

The Racist Right feeds on ignorance. Education of a social/culturally inclusive sort starves that ignorance by feeding understanding to the population as it grows. As progressive values spread you would hope that backward-looking notions of cultural superiority and cultural exclusion become the weak, doomed to an absolute cultural isolation or even extinction.

In fact, our survival as a species depends on it.

Human social institutions are too large and the demands of modern society to be cooperative too important, for racism, nationalism or ethnocentrism to be allowed to exist and thrive.

Modern telecommunications and the global interdependentness of economies, means that competition between "races", or ethnicity's is not just an outdated mode of thinking, so completely unnecessary because we do not live in an age of local tribal competition, but socially deleterious and deleterious to the species as a whole.

Our tribes are now cross cultural, cross racial, in many cases ignorant of national borders and completely codependent.

 

[Lester Burnham]

Human social values, or the social consciousness, has not evolved a pace with the social order or demands.

Thus we either need to find new areas for competition, so to externalise it, or one can only hope that we nurture values and perhaps that individuals who hold these values, that redefine social competition are more successful (in an evolutionary sense).

What do you mean by 'find new areas for competition' and 'redefine social competition'?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

It's a great message, but there are plenty of haters on the left side of politics.

And also it does not explain why some aspects of culture are lionised and protected above others.

Yeah, I can't deny that. And I don't know the whys of lionisation either, but I'll give one example I do know of. Muslims. Many people scratch their heads and wonder why the left stick up for Islamists - the fact is we don't. Radical Islam is the exact same thing as the Christian Right (in thought if not in actual deed) as far as I'm concerned - a minority seeking to impose its beliefs and values on the majority when those views are often detrimental to commonly-held human rights values.

We don't like people lumping extremist Islamists in with moderate Muslims and calling them all a death cult that needs to be eradicated, or similar such bullshit. As a social progressive I think this mindset, that of exclusion, should be opposed by all. It goes against every concept of fairness, this vilification of all Muslims for the actions of the few.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

What do you mean by 'find new areas for competition' and 'redefine social competition'?

Competition is a biological term, that refers to competition between individuals in a population, between populations or between species, for mates, resources and survival.

Racism is a product of ancestral human competition. Different tribes, or population groups identify an "other" by obvious visual phenotypes. It was an evolutionary product of an age when, populations competed at a local level for resources.

However since then, as populations have grown, developed and intermixed, determinants of success have changed, so has access to resources and mates. One key adaption, is that of modern social organisation, where the success of a population is dependent on cooperation and competition, in the primal sense is harmful.

Redefine social competition, is a reference to individuals that are better adapted to the new order of cooperation, finding new modes of social competition and those being successful and beneficial to the larger population group. Examples might be social altruism (see philanthropy), becoming a desirable characteristic in mates, as opposed to smashing on with darkies. The more these people and social values are promoted, the more they succeed (by passing on genetic and learned traits to progeny) and the more they redefine what human competition is. Also why it is probably a good thing, that latte sipping greenies are attractive to young females, because better resource management and ecological responsibility, may be key to human survival in the future.

 

[Lester Burnham]

Yeah, I can't deny that. And I don't know the whys of lionisation either, but I'll give one example I do know of. Muslims. Many people scratch their heads and wonder why the left stick up for Islamists - the fact is we don't. Radical Islam is the exact same thing as the Christian Right (in thought if not in actual deed) as far as I'm concerned - a minority seeking to impose its beliefs and values on the majority when those views are often detrimental to commonly-held human rights values.

We don't like people lumping extremist Islamists in with moderate Muslims and calling them all a death cult that needs to be eradicated, or similar such bullshit. As a social progressive I think this mindset, that of exclusion, should be opposed by all. It goes against every concept of fairness, this vilification of all Muslims for the actions of the few.

Agree with all that. The unilateral US support for Israel, the 'War on terror' and the huge campaign of drone strikes has marginalised many otherwise peaceful, moderate Muslims. But we should not be afraid of calling out extremist muslim views, or activity. Of course, the elephant in the room is that you may be threatened with death for what you say about their prophet.

But I don't think the most prominent 'racial' issues in this country concern Muslims.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Definitely not a 'racial' issue surrounding Islam. Definitely one of bigotry though.

 

[Lester Burnham]

Competition is a biological term, that refers to competition between individuals in a population, between populations or between species, for mates, resources and survival.

Racism is a product of ancestral human competition. Different tribes, or population groups identify an "other" by obvious visual phenotypes. It was an evolutionary product of an age when, populations competed at a local level for resources.

I agree with the above. Questions like this need to explained by reference to the success of genes. In the ancestral environment where mankind evolved there was fairly high degree of kinship with the members of your tribe. So discrimination by race, or even going to war, would enhance the chances of genes similar to your own being proliferated. Going to war also had a genetic pay off in that extra-tribal women might be raped or abducted.

However since then, as populations have grown, developed and intermixed, determinants of success have changed, so has access to resources and mates. One key adaption, is that of modern social organisation, where the success of a population is dependent on cooperation and competition, in the primal sense is harmful.

Yes, we have inherited the tribal, warlike mindset that is no longer genetically advantageous.

Redefine social competition, is a reference to individuals that are better adapted to the new order of cooperation, finding new modes of social competition and those being successful and beneficial to the larger population group. Examples might be social altruism (see philanthropy), becoming a desirable characteristic in mates, as opposed to smashing on with darkies. The more these people and social values are promoted, the more they succeed (by passing on genetic and learned traits to progeny) and the more they redefine what human competition is. Also why it is probably a good thing, that latte sipping greenies are attractive to young females, because better resource management and ecological responsibility, may be key to human survival in the future.

I don't think recent social trends will over-ride human nature as evolved over many thousands of years. Males and females are still going to be drawn to genetic 'fitness' when choosing a mate eg many chicks will go for the high status male over the latte sipping greenie hipster. We still are attracted to gathering in tribes, whether it be country, political persuasion (including greenies) or football teams.

The rest of your argument seems to be arse about. You think that better resource management and ecological responsibility may be key to human survival. But there needs to be a genetic mechanism for it to occur. Evolution does not do wishful thinking.
.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

I don't think recent social trends will over-ride human nature as evolved over many thousands of years. Males and females are still going to be drawn to genetic 'fitness' when choosing a mate eg many chicks will go for the high status male over the latte sipping greenie hipster. We still are attracted to gathering in tribes, whether it be country, political persuasion (including greenies) or football teams.

The rest of your argument seems to be arse about. You think that better resource management and ecological responsibility may be key to human survival. But there needs to be a genetic mechanism for it to occur. Evolution does not do wishful thinking.
.

This is an outdated view of evolution. It isn't a continuous variable, as in, there isn't a linear trend of change over time. It can happen rapidly, likewise we aren't creating pressures in which new phenotypes mutate as a response, that isn't how evolution or mutation works, what we would be doing is creating environmental pressures that select for preexisting phenotypes or learned behaviors.

My argument isn't arse about, you are just viewing social and physical evolution through the wrong lens, or misunderstanding my argument.

 

[medusala]

Our tribes are now cross cultural, cross racial, in many cases ignorant of national borders and completely codependent.

You been to Africa or Asia lately?

Education of a social/culturally inclusive sort starves that ignorance by feeding understanding to the population as it grows.

The ignorance is on behalf of those who think you can have mass immigration of different cultures successfully. This sort of delusional thinking has seen the far right rise in Europe. People don't want to vote for them, however they have no outlet for their anger over mass immigration.

Bigotry against Islam isn't the problem. Islam is. How can one be pro gay, pro womens rights, pro democracy and then defend Islam?

It is absurd to compare Christian fundies with Islamic extremists. Poles apart. Just as its absurd to label people who believe literally in the Koran as "moderate". They are nothing of the sort. They are extreme by any definition.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

You been to Africa or Asia lately?

Yes, even Japan which is probably one of the last great monocultures, has a population largely descended from ethnic Koreans and not the older inhabitants of the archipelago. Not a popular opinion there though.

Despite the lack of racial diversity and the cultural homogeneity it is still a very westernised country. Europe, parts of south east Asia, SK, Oceania, South and North America and a number of African nations, are multi cultural and muli ethnic and becoming increasingly moreso. In fact even Iran before US/UK interference was highly religiously and socially diverse.

As for tribes, this isn't only along national lines. They may be cultural, ethnic, or ideological. Cooperation, commerce and convergence of interest or ideology has definitely become a supra national phenomena for citizens, identity is no longer a local phenomena. Racism, is redundant and counter productive as a trait, when it comes to wider success of a population group.

 

[medusala]

Yes, even Japan which is probably one of the last great monocultures, has a population largely descended from ethnic Koreans and not the older inhabitants of the archipelago. Not a popular opinion there though.
.

Isnt the notion of "aboriginals" recognised in Japan even if they are treated badly?

.

Despite the lack of racial diversity and the cultural homogeneity it is still a very westernised country. Europe, parts of south east Asia, SK, Oceania, South and North America and a number of African nations, are multi cultural and muli ethnic and becoming increasingly moreso. .

Spent a bit of time working in Asia. couldn't get over how much they hated each other. Anyone who thinks Australians are comparatively racist should travel there to see how utterly wrong they are.

.

Racism, is redundant and counter productive as a trait, when it comes to wider success of a population group.

How can you argue that? We know that immigration (let's use that as a proxy) does little at the very best for economic growth. It is not hard in many cases to argue that a homogenous population has helped rather than hindered success. Letting in vast numbers of poor people from Asia and Africa is very counter productive to the success of the wider population. Do you think this is not true? Or am I misstating your argument?

 

[DivideandMultiply]

.

How can you argue that? We know that immigration (let's use that as a proxy) does little at the very best for economic growth. It is not hard in many cases to argue that a homogenous population has helped rather than hindered success. Letting in vast numbers of poor people from Asia and Africa is very counter productive to the success of the wider population. Do you think this is not true? Or am I misstating your argument?

But allowing skilled migration can be beneficial. Immigration policy has little to do with racism.

 

[medusala]

Immigration policy has little to do with racism.

I agree. However, if you point out the bleeding obvious ie mass immigration has no economic benefit and that it cause social problems ie its bad for transport, education, crime etc then people will quickly squeal racism. See the numpties on illegal immigration thread.

There are arguments as to why people choose racism. See Pakistani and Bengali communities in UK. Extraordinarily high % marry in their own community (cousins are common). Far more so than the general population. However the common explanation for that is with respect to dowries, land holdings, immigration etc. Honour killings to enforce this are rather common.

Whilst no doubt it is racist to them it is rational.

Notions of racism are all very arbitrary.

 

[Floor Pie]

Bigotry against Islam isn't the problem. Islam is. How can one be pro gay, pro womens rights, pro democracy and then defend Islam?

Why have you singled out Islam?
Isn't the exact same statement valid for most archaic religions?

 

[greennick]

Too right, D & M. Someone in another thread attacked the 'blank slate' human behavioural theory, but I believe its the truth. ALL our behaviour patterns, ideals and morals are modelled, adopted and adapted from those who surround us from birth. As children we are the sponges that soak up all that we see, hear and touch.

Parents say 'I hate slants. I hate muslims.' What's the child gonna think? What's the child gonna do?

The Racist Right feeds on ignorance. Education of a social/culturally inclusive sort starves that ignorance by feeding understanding to the population as it grows. As progressive values spread you would hope that backward-looking notions of cultural superiority and cultural exclusion become the weak, doomed to an absolute cultural isolation or even extinction.

What does the racist left feed on?

 

[greennick]

Yes, even Japan which is probably one of the last great monocultures, has a population largely descended from ethnic Koreans and not the older inhabitants of the archipelago. Not a popular opinion there though.

Despite the lack of racial diversity and the cultural homogeneity it is still a very westernised country. Europe, parts of south east Asia, SK, Oceania, South and North America and a number of African nations, are multi cultural and muli ethnic and becoming increasingly moreso. In fact even Iran before US/UK interference was highly religiously and socially diverse.

Japan is interesting. Most of the younger ones love westerners. Most WW2 spec Japanese can't stand westerners. I lived there for a while and subjected to some seriously racist remarks by some of the older population. However, they were usually short and sweet and it was water off a duck's back compared to the tirades of abuse some people here are subjected to on our buses, trams and streets.

 

[medusala]

Why have you singled out Islam?
Isn't the exact same statement valid for most archaic religions?

Hardly. Honour killings, death sentences for apostasy, terrorism, sharia law etc etc etc.

You really want to compare that to Buddhism?

It is entirely rational to be intolerant of a religion such as that. Intolerance = bigotry.

 

[mottrain]

Hardly. Honour killings, death sentences for apostasy, terrorism, sharia law etc etc etc.

You really want to compare that to Buddhism?

It is entirely rational to be intolerant of a religion such as that. Intolerance = bigotry.

Isn't Islam all for gays and pedophilia as well based on the action of the prophet and again their allowance to have bachar bazi or however you actually spell it.

 

[medusala]

Well the ones who turn up in Knightsbridge every year allegedly have a raving penchant for rent boys.