Why are racists so afraid of being labled racist?

There are a great many differences in the races; physical and mental as well as skin color. You could say that people are color-coded for various talents and abilities. That is just the way Nature made them.
Your one-size-fits-all mentality is so wrong.

Dogs are all one species. Did you know that a DNA test can determine which breed the dog is or which breeds are in a mongrel? Each breed has its own special talents and abilities. These specialties are lost in the mixed breeds.

 

Actually, the people I have met whom are truly racist are absolutely up front about it.

Skinheads, Kk guys, white supremacists (I guess that's the same thing) are really vocoal about it.

I would say however that 90% of the time calling someone racist is factually untrue.

For instance if i say I think the fact that 70 something percent if blacks don't have a father growing up and that is a horrible thing, many MANY t there will claim racism.

It's slowly diluting the word to make it nothing

 

Well, mainstream science doesn't agree. Sorry.

Race is completely arbitrary. There are no traits that are specific to one race. The lines between populations are so blurred that there is no hard distinction between them...any opinion as to where one begins and another ends is completely arbitrary and subjective.

LOL, you could but you would be wrong.

Mainstream science does not seem to think so.

Dogs are also not natural. They were designed by people into the breeds they are today.

Human beings are not products of a design. They are the products of nature itself. For this reason, the dog breed analogy does not apply.

 

You said it. "mainstream" science. That is politically correct science which denies reality. Almost everything from "mainstream" is a lie. You need to find better sources for your information.
Yes, humans are a product of nature and therefore the races are very different from each other.
http://penetrate.blogspot.com/2009/09/biological-differences-between-races.html

How do you suppose anthropologists can tell what race those old bones belonged to? Why do you suppose that the different races are prescribed different medicines?

 

I don't think blacks are as stupid as the leftists do. They're figuring out why they have (*)(*)(*)(*) for schools. They're learning that if they want to work they've been backing the wrong party. They know that if they don't support killing unborn babies and defending pedophiles there is a problem.

The people who want blacks uneducated and unemployed are the racist. Always have been. Always will be. Their great fear is that Americans might figure out that the leftists strategy of divide and conquer is killing them, literally. It's becoming even more clear as we suffer under the most racist administration in 75 years.

 

Define racist. Define inferior.

 

As opposed to Fringe science.

So a minority gets to define reality now?

According to who? Explain to me why you think your sources should be considered more reliable despite being a tiny minority. What makes your sources special?

...you just can't seem to actually define how they are different. But you are sure they are different. Ok.

A blog as a source...lol

Give me examples of three traits that you believe are confined to a single race.

- - - Updated - - -

Someone who believes there are fundamental difference between people based on race.

 

I'm a little confused. Are you saying it's unacceptable to have a sense of national/ethnic pride? We'd be a pretty boring specie if everyone came from the same background or shared the same life experience.

 

More than a little apparently.

What does national pride have to do with race?

You can be a racist even if you hate your nation. Or even all nations in which your race is the majority. The two have nothing to do with each other. You can still be a racist whether or not you have pride in your nation.

I agree. This is one of the reasons racism is an inferior ideology. Evolution cannot occur if everyone is the same. Racist societies inevitably become stagnant.

 

I'd really like to put liberals through the brown eyes blue eyes experience.

I don't think they'd learn anything though.

 

You attributed the quality of being qualified for leadership based on nothing more than the fact that he's a minority - in this case - African-American (one of the very few people in American politics who can legitimately claim that label, IMO). Basing your decision on nothing more than ethnicity/race is racist. You placed a person's race above their qualifications, that's being a racist. This nation has a MUTLITUDE of minorities in leadership positions who have excelled in the positions they were elected to, appointed to and/or earned, so we already know that a minority can be a leader, so either your haven't learned anything from these past examples or you're a racist. I find it hard to accept that you haven't learned anything, since you seem to be a relatively intelligent person (based on your posts), so I find it a short to arrive at the conclusion that you are a pro-black racist.

 

BTW, ALL racists never see themselves as racist. Sometimes they don't even know they are racist.

Liberals ones as well.

 

No I didn't. You made the assumption that I did. But that is not what I actually said. I never even implied that being a specific race made him more or less qualified for the job. I merely expressed a personal preference.

My decision was never based on race.

I did? Quote please.

 

its true, that only whites can truly define the word racist. thats generalizing sure, want to be more specific then it would be germans. same tribe though.

 

It's usually because libs call anyone a racist if they disagree with them.

for ex: I oppose mass immigration, but do not consider that racist.

 

Here's what I said IN IT'S ENTIRETY INSTEAD OF TTAKING ONE LINE OUT OF CONTEXT

You said that you wanted to see what minority could do in leadership. The obvious minority being referred to is that of then Sen. Obama being black. Unless you were referring to some other minority, you were most certainly basing your decision on race and little else. I never said ANYTHING about his being more or less qualified, I stated that you assigned to him the quality of being capable of leadership based on the fact that he was a minority.

Now then, how about addressing the whole of what I said instead of taking one line out of context and trying to make it sound like I was saying something other than what I said...

 

Repeating it won't change anything. It's still wrong for the reasons I mentioned in post #239.

I did that already. You just don't like the answer.

 

I don't know why anyone would be afraid of that, and don't think anyone is. I think it's just made up hyperbole for the sake of creating a thread to call people racist.

The reason people aren't afraid, as you naively claim, is because it's overuse over the has half-decade has left the word completely meaningless.

Maybe a new one should be invented... and applied only when it fits.
Anyone who disagrees with Obama's spending, or executive actions can be called a "blackophobe".

In the mean time, call me whatever you want... it means nothing.


.

 

They don't want face the reality that they have a problem. Denial.

Because they realize that once someone places that (appropriate label upon them), what they do externally is decoded readily; they become far-less effective concerning the things they wish to propagate. It means other (decent) people are onto them.

Once they accept that label within themselves, it is a catalyst for change (whether willing or unwilling); either they become more or less degenerate as human beings. It's their own choice.

 

If someone calls me a homophobe I call them a heterophobe.

 

LOL, if someone were to call me either a racist or a homophobe (it hasn't happened yet, but I am still relatively young,) I would simply ask them which of my actions or utterances have given them that impression. If they came up with some legitimate cause, I would use the opportunity for introspection upon the matter.

 

It's not surprising that the same people who don't want to be racist also don't want to be called liberals. Same people.

 

That might have a lot to do with the explosion of public expressions of out and out bigotry that has come out of the far right and which is fanned enthusastically by right wing media, which knows its audence.

Humm.........what's different about the last six years.........?????????????????????

 

I suspect that this denial phenomenon reflects a statistically significant correlation between bigotry and the Dunning–Kruger effect.

 

racism is tied to lower intelligence and a lack of education which is tied to religiousness and tribalism, which is the essence of the right wing in this country