- 15 Aug 2017 21:19
#14833596
This is counter-intuitive but I believe I can explain it well.
In the past in western countries, over 98% of the population were white people. I am going to use the term "racial absolutist" here instead of racist because the term racist today doesn't mean exactly what it meant in the past. To be a white supremacist (which I will define as being a racial absolutist, one who believes that being white guarantees things about someone's character) when 98% of the population of your country was white was actually to say that you believed everyone in your country was inherently good. Insofar as this was clearly not true (some people of other races were also good, and the existence of white criminals and so-on clearly evidenced that some whites were bad) the extant bad members of the population had their malice attributed to the behaviors of uniquely corrupt groups, usually Jews in the most recent era in Europe.
Today in western countries, the population is very mixed. To believe that all races, genders and other kinds of identities are completely equal with each other is really to say that you believe that everyone in your country is inherently good. Insofar as this is clearly not true, the extant bad members of the population have their flaws attributed to the behaviors of uniquely corrupt groups, modernly those are the conservatives in the liberal mindset.
In both instances, people are choosing to believe (contrary to immediately observable evidence) that everyone in their society is inherently good and when evidence to the contrary is presented, they blame people who follow an allegedly corrupt philosophy. Previously it was Judaism, today it is anything associated with western conservatism. The truth is that individual people are just individuals and some of them are bad entirely on their own, not due to the actions of anyone else. This is an uncomfortable position for people to take because it could lead to confrontation; much easier to blame any problems upon vaguely alleged saboteurs.
I believe that one reason this mistake is so easy to make is because people increasingly equate things like technical intelligence with being a "good" person, even though someone's job and their skill at it may say nothing at all about the strength of their character. As such, a statement such as "Asians are better at math than blacks" is taken as a statement that blacks are bad people, which is not necessarily true.
In the past in western countries, over 98% of the population were white people. I am going to use the term "racial absolutist" here instead of racist because the term racist today doesn't mean exactly what it meant in the past. To be a white supremacist (which I will define as being a racial absolutist, one who believes that being white guarantees things about someone's character) when 98% of the population of your country was white was actually to say that you believed everyone in your country was inherently good. Insofar as this was clearly not true (some people of other races were also good, and the existence of white criminals and so-on clearly evidenced that some whites were bad) the extant bad members of the population had their malice attributed to the behaviors of uniquely corrupt groups, usually Jews in the most recent era in Europe.
Today in western countries, the population is very mixed. To believe that all races, genders and other kinds of identities are completely equal with each other is really to say that you believe that everyone in your country is inherently good. Insofar as this is clearly not true, the extant bad members of the population have their flaws attributed to the behaviors of uniquely corrupt groups, modernly those are the conservatives in the liberal mindset.
In both instances, people are choosing to believe (contrary to immediately observable evidence) that everyone in their society is inherently good and when evidence to the contrary is presented, they blame people who follow an allegedly corrupt philosophy. Previously it was Judaism, today it is anything associated with western conservatism. The truth is that individual people are just individuals and some of them are bad entirely on their own, not due to the actions of anyone else. This is an uncomfortable position for people to take because it could lead to confrontation; much easier to blame any problems upon vaguely alleged saboteurs.
I believe that one reason this mistake is so easy to make is because people increasingly equate things like technical intelligence with being a "good" person, even though someone's job and their skill at it may say nothing at all about the strength of their character. As such, a statement such as "Asians are better at math than blacks" is taken as a statement that blacks are bad people, which is not necessarily true.
Orb Team Re-Assemble!