Penner wrote:adwinistrator wrote:I mean, I suspect nothing less from political parties...
People are hungry, and politicians want power.
They also say things to get elected that don't necessarily match up with their true priorities.
And so we are in agreement....
I agree with your assessment of our statements...
Didn't mean to go sideways on the thread...
katarn wrote:I think much of the talk that gets people labelled racist is predicated on a misunderstanding, intentional or otherwise, of the person's actual position.
This is definitely something that happens, a lot of people who feel they are "fighting" this fight, are on the defensive and ready to leap on any statement that could be used as evidence by a racist person, as being racist in-and-of itself.
katarn wrote:If I argue that brown people do X more than white people as a share of the population, but say its because these people who do X are all poor, it isn't racist. It just means that most people doing X happen to be poor and are also brown. The same principle applies to sexism and any other overused shutdown -ism term.
This is a tricky road to navigate, as the specific point being made, as well as the generalization of the group the example is attributed to, can really get messed up with the language used. Intent and significance in attribution is something that usually gets said differently than it is heard.
A good counterargument for the other side of the discussion, is that there is good reason to address the origins of that cultural attribute, or statistical outlier. If your unwilling to engage in that discussion, but want to use this example to make your point, it's worth putting up a defensive rebuttal.
katarn wrote:If I say that Caroline who graduated high school is unqualified for a job, but Robert who got a Bachelor's is, it isn't sexist. There can be legitimate differences that happen to coincide with stigma.
As with any discussion involving groups of people, the anecdotal experience ends up being difficult to use effectively for either side of a debate. While it can be emotionally moving, it's just as easy to find an anecdotal experience that shows the opposite of your own.
This, to me, seems fairly inherent. Perhaps I'm stating the obvious, but I can never tell with the people I interact with...[/quote]
I think your entire point makes sense. I see it as a growing trend of the strength of the ad-hominem in today's atmosphere of political debate. I hope it becomes weaker and used less, but it seems to "win" in front of one's own side very easily, while convincing nobody outside of that group.
