Does anyone actually buy into the "everyone is racist" campaign?

[Jester Joe]

Nope. I do think there are people that are racist who think they're not, and I do think there are people who are quick to blame racism.

[Elegiac]

What's wrong with being capitalistic, owning guns and/or being skeptical of further European integration?

1) There is nothing wrong with being 'capitalistic', as long as you acknowledge that markets are incapable of self-regulation and inequality is not in fact desirable.

2) There is nothing wrong with owning guns as long as you practice correct procedure such as owning a gun safe, not leaving them loaded, et cetera.

3) Every country in the EU benefits massively from union - in a globalized world it is not only beneficial but necessary to remain politically and economically relevant.

[aviger]

I don't consider myself a racist, because i have no problem with someones "Race" ever, i.e hating blacks for their color.
I think most people are more "culturist" (yes i made that word up). For example some people just instantly hate anyone with a lot of tatoo's, black, white, chinese doesn't matter. It's the culture they don't like.
People who can't stand rap culture aren't racists right? most rappers are black but I don't dislike them because of color, but because of stupidity :P

[Nakura Chambers]

1) There is nothing wrong with being 'capitalistic', as long as you acknowledge that markets are incapable of self-regulation and inequality is not in fact desirable.

2) There is nothing wrong with owning guns as long as you practice correct procedure such as owning a gun safe, not leaving them loaded, et cetera.

3) Every country in the EU benefits massively from union - in a globalized world it is not only beneficial but necessary to remain politically and economically relevant.

Thanks for elaborating, I just found it weird that those things were lumped together with "racism" and "sexism," which seemed a bit out of place to me. I'm sure plenty of people would disagree with your third point, however. There is a lot to the European Union, some of which is good and some of which is bad, to ignore or downplay the negative aspects of the union could be dangerous. Most eurosceptic parties, like UKIP, support many of the European treaties on things like trade, but oppose giving Brussels greater political power over their nation's internal affairs.

[Deleted]

I feel i would comment on this thread if it weren't for the fact the OP has come off as bit of racist.

*walks away quietly*

[Elegiac]

Thanks for elaborating, I just found it weird that those things were lumped together with "racism" and "sexism," which seemed a bit out of place to me. I'm sure plenty of people would disagree with your third point, however. There is a lot to the European Union, some of which is good and some of which is bad, to ignore or downplay the negative aspects of the union could be dangerous. Most eurosceptic parties, like UKIP, support many of the European treaties on things like trade, but oppose giving Brussels greater political power over their nation's internal affairs.

No, UKIP is lumped in with racists and sexists because they happen to be both - it's incidental to their euroscepticism.

And parties which support as such are, quite frankly, stupid.

[icausewipes]

If it did not work politicians would not use it.

[Nakura Chambers]

No, UKIP is lumped in with racists and sexists because they happen to be both - it's incidental to their euroscepticism.

And parties which support as such are, quite frankly, stupid.

What proof do you have that UKIP are racist and sexist?

[Arlon]

It is also an evolutionary survival trait.

That said, I tend to give people a chance. I came from a country that did not have a lot of black people in it; I saw one getting on a Bus, when I was 5.

When I moved to the US, I had more exposure, and our upstairs neighbor was black, who had a black daughter. Who I became really close friends with. (I was 8 then).

I learned that black people are just like white people, and never really understood the whole racism against black people thing.

Education and familiarity tends to overpower bigotry.

That's not really what that argument boils down to. Going by Endus, it's practically impossible to implement social policies without being a bigot. It's also wrong to act on statistical data when addressing said policies. Hell, affirmative action is bigotry. I don't see why this is a good thing. It's also not the definition of bigotry that i keep finding when googling.

[Hyve]

Because as a White Male I can't help but flaunt my privilege over the lesser races, right?

People perceive personal preferences (Holy P's Batman!) as discrimination.

[Deleted]

What proof do you have that UKIP are racist and sexist?

The fact that they are full of politicians that were forced out of the conservatives for being too extreme.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Inde...ions_from_UKIP

They are racist, sexist and homophobic.

[Hyve]

They are racist, sexist and homophobic.

Stop responding to him, you're giving him the power he needs to unleash; MEGA TROLL! I don't want to battle that right now ;(

[the game]

We're born selfish. Being racist isn't a far stretch from that.

[Saxtorph]

Well a lot of people blatantly are racist, sexist, capitalist, ignoring openborder policy treaties they signed or crazy gunnuts denying facts.

I've said and tought racist/sexist/ ...-ist things aswel, I'm not trying to justify it, I call it what it is and I'm honest about it, everybody makes mistakes.
Does that make me a women/homophobic/immigrant-hater? Well, no, saying something racist does not necessarily make you racist, it just means that you where thinking illogical for a moment.

Being honest and standing open for argument is the key that racists, sexists and homophobes don't have.

Also, those poll answers are very limited and push a standpoint.

- - - Updated - - -



This sums up better what I was trying to say xd

Blatantly capitalist? LOL. Your stupid is showing.

[Endus]

By that definition pretty much everyone is a bigot.

First, that really isn't true. And second; bigotry is more widespread than some people think. It isn't "almost over", with a few people tucked away in mountain enclaves who still express bigotry. It's a lot of people. But not "pretty much everyone", either.

That's not really what that argument boils down to. Going by Endus, it's practically impossible to implement social policies without being a bigot. It's also wrong to act on statistical data when addressing said policies. Hell, affirmative action is bigotry. I don't see why this is a good thing. It's also not the definition of bigotry that i keep finding when googling.

You're not grasping the definition.

Bigotry isn't recognizing race, or working to correct inequity. Affirmative action, by definition, is not bigotry.

It's thinking less of someone, based on a superficial characteristic. For instance, recognizing that women have, on average, lower upper body strength than men, that isn't sexist. Barring women from being firefighters based on that, however, is. And in a great many cases, the "statistical data" people cite as if the superficial characteristic were the causative factor, ignoring the very obvious socioeconomic factors at play in that same data set, which usually have been confirmed as causative factors; socioeconomics explains almost the entirety of ethnic discrepancies in terms of crime rate, in the US, for instance; when you control for those factors, the racial distinctions more or less disappear.

- - - Updated - - -

The fact that they are full of politicians that were forced out of the conservatives for being too extreme.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Inde...ions_from_UKIP

They are racist, sexist and homophobic.

To be fair, describing the party that way may be inaccurate. Even if the descriptor does largely apply to their representatives and many of their members. A "not racist, but #1 with racists" kind of thing.

[Nakura Chambers]

The fact that they are full of politicians that were forced out of the conservatives for being too extreme.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Inde...ions_from_UKIP

They are racist, sexist and homophobic.

Let's look at the list on the Wikipedia page you linked to:
Douglas Carswell - No evidence of him being a "racist."

Richard Barnes - Is openly gay. Yes, very "racist" of him.

Roger Helmer - This is the only real "asshole" I see on the list. He claims to have "relaxed his formerly held views on homosexuality," but who knows what he really thinks. Just because he was homophobic in the past and might secretly still be homophobic, that doesn't mean the party or Nigel Farage are "bigoted."

[Theinquisition]

There's more than "a few racists" left around.

Racism isn't always overt. And, in a time when we recognize that "being racist" is a "bad thing", being labelled as a racist feels like an attack, making people get defensive and antagonistic rather than self-reflective. Those called out as racists frantically try and provide the reasoning behind their beliefs, without realizing that their reasoning is completely irrelevant.

By providing their argument, they're just explaining why, and how, they're racist. Not that they somehow aren't racist.

And it isn't just racism. This ties into bigotry towards the gender spectrum, sexuality, religion, ethnicity, everything.

It's pretty darned simple. If you feel, consciously or subconsciously, that one of the aspects of these factors is "better" than another, whether it's that one aspect is "best" or another is "worst", you're a bigot. It doesn't matter if you think being transgender is "sick", or that Muslims are "dangerous", or blacks are "violent", or women are "bad at math". It's all bigotry. And providing your justification behind that stance does not make it not bigotry. It's just you explaining why you're a bigot. Which is not, in any way, a defense. It's a description of exactly where you went wrong, which is why you'll never convince anyone.

This is racist.

[Arlon]

You're not grasping the definition.

Bigotry isn't recognizing race, or working to correct inequity. Affirmative action, by definition, is not bigotry.

It's thinking less of someone, based on a superficial characteristic. For instance, recognizing that women have, on average, lower upper body strength than men, that isn't sexist. Barring women from being firefighters based on that, however, is. And in a great many cases, the "statistical data" people cite as if the superficial characteristic were the causative factor, ignoring the very obvious socioeconomic factors at play in that same data set, which usually have been confirmed as causative factors; socioeconomics explains almost the entirety of ethnic discrepancies in terms of crime rate, in the US, for instance; when you control for those factors, the racial distinctions more or less disappear.

"If you feel, consciously or subconsciously, that one of the aspects of these factors is "better" than another, whether it's that one aspect is "best" or another is "worst", you're a bigot."

Affirmative action operates on the notion that blacks are worse off than the others. That's already thinking "less of them". You didn't specify clearly what you meant in the first post.

[Endus]

This just sounds so racist to me. Idk man it seems like the more people get on your level of caring about racism where they make it such a big part of their life to the point where you will actually ignore the definition of racism to say affirmative action isnt racist. Idk you guys seem like the most bigoted people to me.

Recognizing racism for what it is, is in no way racist.

And no, affirmative action is objectively not racist. Again, all you're doing is demonstrating that you don't actually understand what the word means.

"If you feel, consciously or subconsciously, that one of the aspects of these factors is "better" than another, whether it's that one aspect is "best" or another is "worst", you're a bigot."

Affirmative action operates on the notion that blacks are worse off than the others. That's already thinking "less of them".

That's just factually untrue. Their lower average socioeconomic status is an injury that was done to them, as a group. Through hundreds of years of enslavement and oppression. Recognizing that injury is not thinking less of them, as a people, any more than having a broken leg makes you less valuable a person. It just means you need the bone to be set, and a cast put on to protect it while it heals.

And that's what affirmative action is.

[Deleted]

Let's look at the list on the Wikipedia page you linked to:
Douglas Carswell - No evidence of him being a "racist."

Richard Barnes - Is openly gay. Yes, very "racist" of him.

Roger Helmer - This is the only real "asshole" I see on the list. He claims to have "relaxed his formerly held views on homosexuality," but who knows what he really thinks. Just because he was homophobic in the past and might secretly still be homophobic, that doesn't mean the party or Nigel Farage are "bigoted."

It is almost as if you skipped the other part.