Calling Someond A Racist

Galaxy

I think Lawrence Fox has managed to destroy his own career, his behaviour is quite erratic.

Agreed. He comes across as very unpleasant.

There are 2 things that are truths:

1. Only white people are racist.

2. People of color can never be considered racist because all white people are racist and they started it.

Makes sense, right?
I can’t tell if you are being snarky or not, but it is fair to say that only white people can be racist, if racism is defined as the systemic disadvantage of a group in society based on race. As power is held (in general) by white people, they are the only ones who can be racist.

People of colour can discriminate, or hold prejudices and even hatred based on race, which is as bad as if it happens the other way round, but actual racism is white on other ‘races’ because of that systemic power.

All humans can be guilty of differentiating and holding prejudices based on colour, ‘race’, religion, class, whatever (even Yorkshire/Lancashire or England/ Scotland, despite the ‘race’ or nationality being the same) and if that happens it as also horrible, but that’s not the same as being racist.

growstuff

There is a difference between calling somebody a paedophile and calling somebody a racist. Being a paedophile is illegal. Being a racist isn't illegal, apart from certain specific circumstances. People are free to express racist views, but they can expect people to react to them. Being called a paedophile when you're not is defamation of character.

There have been many instances some on this forum, of people in the public eye being referred to as paedophiles - Prince Andrew for instance.

Regardless of guilt or not - sexual activity with teenagers isn’t paedophilia. A paedophile is someone sexually attracted to children, often infants. In my opinion the overuse of the word paedophile detracts from the abuse so many children suffer at the hands of real paedophiles.

Doodledog

Galaxy

I think Lawrence Fox has managed to destroy his own career, his behaviour is quite erratic.

Agreed. He comes across as very unpleasant.

There are 2 things that are truths:

1. Only white people are racist.

2. People of color can never be considered racist because all white people are racist and they started it.

Makes sense, right?
I can’t tell if you are being snarky or not, but it is fair to say that only white people can be racist, if racism is defined as the systemic disadvantage of a group in society based on race. As power is held (in general) by white people, they are the only ones who can be racist.

People of colour can discriminate, or hold prejudices and even hatred based on race, which is as bad as if it happens the other way round, but actual racism is white on other ‘races’ because of that systemic power.

All humans can be guilty of differentiating and holding prejudices based on colour, ‘race’, religion, class, whatever (even Yorkshire/Lancashire or England/ Scotland, despite the ‘race’ or nationality being the same) and if that happens it as also horrible, but that’s not the same as being racist.

So Idi Amin was just prejudiced rather than racist by that reasoning?

I think that using terms like 'paedophile' in ways that are technically inaccurate is akin to calling people narcissists or that they are 'obsessed' with something or have OCD. When what used to be medical/psychiatric terms get absorbed into general vocabulary it does dilute the meaning, but they are also shorthand for behaviour that we all recognise.

It can be very annoying - a real obsession is not remotely the same as someone holding a belief and not being dissuaded from it, for instance, and OCD is a debilitating condition that ruins lives. But when describing the need to have things lined up perfectly, or to go home and check that the oven is off every time someone leaves the house, it is easier for all concerned to use the term 'OCD' rather than explain it at length.

'Racism' does, technically, mean the system which allows people to be treated differently because of their 'race', but saying that an act of discrimination or prejudice is racist is widely understood, and most people would use it that way. Even terms such as 'discrimination' and 'prejudice' are often used interchangeably, although they mean very different things. In general conversation, however, the meaning of what is being said is clear, which is usually the important thing.

I did point out that LF expresses some loony views that I do not like. However, my attention was caught by the article written by Douglas Murray. I am interested in the way the accusation of “racist” is flung around in a hurtful way with no idea of how the accusation is perceived. We have the perfect example on this thread with the nasty accusation by LyleLyle.Someone expresses an opinion only to get insulted by that senseless post. This person has provided a clear illustration of what Douglas Murray was alleging.

Anniel

Some posters have form for such daft remarks and are best ignored.

Of course maddie isn’t racist - that’s absurd.

Ignore it maddyone, such posts are par for the course from that poster.

Galaxy

I have some time for Douglas Murray although dont agree with him on lots of things. I think there probably is a discussion to be had, although I think facist and nazi are thrown around with much more wild abandon than racist.
I also think there is no consistency, some famous people get away with incredible racism, homophobia, misogyny whatever and it seems to have no impact on their career.

Yeah, Donald Trump for one😲

I wouldn't call someone a racist

I would explain what racism is and see if they have the ability to self reflect on their own behaviour.

If they can self reflect they will likely change their views quietly over time (I do believe many people are influenced by family or peer groups or media and have the capacity to unlearn such behaviour).

If they can't self reflect on their own behaviour, calling them racist would only make them angry enough to defend their stance more. Having no ability at all to understand the harm they cause others may make them more vocal in defending their beliefs.

The can't self reflect outcome may happen either way but I think we have more chance by offending and angering people as little as possible

Some on here have said that the use of the racist tag is overused and I agree.

I was absolutely staggered and struck dumb when a Care Home owner (Indian) told me my 92 year old Mum was racist.

My Mum used to open our house to kids (most of them black) from inner cities who had never seen the sea or the countryside. Who used to give us money to take to school for the Sunny Smiles catalogues of mainly black kids. Who I never, ever heard anything racist from in her entire life. I never told her this of course, but it was running through my mind. Had the owner got my Mum muddled up with someone else?

I asked her why she thought that and she said my Mum had described one of the careworkers as “foreign”. That apparently made her a racist.

My Mum had not long been diagnosed with dementia, could not remember people’s names so used to do her best to describe them, ie “the red haired one”, “ the big one”, “the foreign one” (who happened to be Filipino).

I wonder if people like LF should not voice racist views or do racist actions if they are worried about being called racists. If they were squeaky clean no one would be able to accuse them of being racists
People can hold abhorrent views but if they keep them private and behave in non racist ways then v

Sorry, if people don't behave in a racist way no one will know

So Idi Amin was just prejudiced rather than racist by that reasoning?

Tbh, I think Idi Amin was insane, regardless of racism or anything else. But he did create a system by which people were persecuted because of their race, so he was racist as well as his other crimes.

To just point out that the "legal route" to defending one's self against defamation is not quite as simple as that. Defamation law is about INTENT not about whether or not the statement is true. The statement has to be made with intent to defame. Its also a civil not a criminal matter and anyone who wants to bring such a case needs Elton John type deep pockets. I know this because somewone threatened DH and I with a court case for defamation and we took legal advice.

My name (Karen) is often used these days to call someone (usually white middle aged woman) a racist. There are loads of examples of this happening online. Karens are known as someone who calls the police on a black person to get the arrested. Of course their name isn’t really Karen and I am often told not to take it personally as it is just a term, but I find it very upsetting as I really do not like racism.

I disagree.

It's a term now used against any woman that people disagree with it, often nothing to do with racism. Its misogyny of the 'progressive' kind.

I think it is better to say that an action or words are racist rather than a person is a racist or a person is not a racist. Because those if us who are white people are all capable of doing or saying things that are racist. How could we not be given our history and culture. But also we are capable of changing. I think attitudes in this country have changed a great deal over my lifetime. Racism doesn't help any of us, black or white, or any of the grandchildren whose future we care about. Most people are not bad people.

VioletSky

I wouldn't call someone a racist

I would explain what racism is and see if they have the ability to self reflect on their own behaviour.

If they can self reflect they will likely change their views quietly over time (I do believe many people are influenced by family or peer groups or media and have the capacity to unlearn such behaviour).

If they can't self reflect on their own behaviour, calling them racist would only make them angry enough to defend their stance more. Having no ability at all to understand the harm they cause others may make them more vocal in defending their beliefs.

The can't self reflect outcome may happen either way but I think we have more chance by offending and angering people as little as possible

If you did that round my way you’d get a punch in the chops.

The 'Karen' thing is horrible. It is a(nother) way of trying to silence women of a certain age, and goes hand in hand with 'be kind' and 'Boomer'. I don't think it is only used to suggest racism, but so that anything that middle aged women say can be belittled.

I feel for people who have it as a name, and wish you could all reclaim it as the perfectly respectable name it is.

kazziecookie

My name (Karen) is often used these days to call someone (usually white middle aged woman) a racist. There are loads of examples of this happening online. Karens are known as someone who calls the police on a black person to get the arrested. Of course their name isn’t really Karen and I am often told not to take it personally as it is just a term, but I find it very upsetting as I really do not like racism.

Yeah, it’s not a great time to be called Karen, as it's used to mean white middle class entitled and middle aged woman.
Unfair and an insult to all named Karen, which is a nice name anyway.

If you did that round my way you’d get a punch in the chops.

I agree. Anyone taking it on themselves to 'see if I had the ability to self-reflect on my own behaviour' wouldn't be met with a very positive reaction . How condescending.

'racist' is often weaponized and the quicker we realise that then the easier it is to discount and ignore.

The trouble is that the label Racist is being thrown about willy nilly by anyone who does not get what they want.
I don’t agree with you, well if my skin colour is different from yours I must be racist. If i dont like you and your skin colour is different from mine it must be because I am racist.
Someone was called racist because they only dated men from their own ethnicity. It is becoming ridiculous.