New York Times stands by 'racist tweets' reporter

[villain]

I think it could have been expressed better, but yes, I get what he was trying to say. The actual period of White European dominance has been relatively brief (my initial point/correction). But I think it's definitely fair to say that it has had a global impact that is unparalleled in human history, and that the imposition of race-based hierarchical categories on societies previously organized along more traditional hierarchical lines has been and continues to be one of the major pernicious consequences of that impact. No argument from me there. I understand racism primarily as a product of modernity, as shaped by the dominance of white Europeans.

Great post which I thoroughly agree with.

 

[NinjaFletch]

I'm always open to reading more on this topic, but what is it that you're trying to say? Europeans weren't largely white in the 1400's?
As far as I know Europeans invented the concept of race to begin with as part of distinguishing themselves.

Well two things really, firstly that 'European' is essentially a meaningless term until quite late and that without that you can't have a characteristically 'European' colonialism. The south of Spain, for example, looked very different from, say, the north of Italy.

Up until then most of the endeavours we'd recognise as being colonial in character were by white Europeans on white Europeans. Even then, most colonial endeavours in the middle ages involve a displacement of a local elite with a foreign elite who eventually (if not immediately) lost ties with what we would consider the 'core' and then assimilate in to the local culture in the 'periphery'.

I'm not aware of any racial justification for colonialism in the high middle ages (you might get it later, but I'm not that familiar with it). You'd be far more likely to put it in religious terms e.g. the Angevins attempted to justify the conquest of Ireland by arguing that the Irish were pagans who needed bringing in to the Christian flock. Although you can easily see how that can be transformed in to racial justification, even the crusades were preached on the basis of religion and not race (Joshua Prawer and Ronnie Ellenblum are probably the two biggest names in the crusades as proto-colonialism, but I have to admit there is a lot of more recent scholarship on this that I haven't caught up with) which could just as easily be diverted against the white Cathar heretics in the south of France during the Albigensian Crusade or Lithuanian pagans in the Baltic ones as it could against Muslims in the Holy Land.

There's indisputably colonialism going on in the middle ages, but it doesn't look like the sort of colonialism you're talking about or easily fit the models we see in the early modern period.

 

[soap]

Perhaps white males deserve to be the punching bag for a while because they've had it so good for so long as the expense of everyone else.

Good luck convincing any white people who don't hate themselves of that.

Having said that, given we (hunans) are tribal creatures, who’s to say any other demographic wouldn’t have done the same if they were the dominant, powerful ones? We suck.

It's something that you concede this at least, I guess. It doesn't even need to be a hypothetical though. We know that's exactly what would have happened. You can look at pretty much any corner of the earth and find evidence of tribes treating other tribes with extreme brutality. In fact I believe the etymology of "Slav" is derived from "slave" because Turks took lots of Eastern Europeans as slaves way back when.

There's really no need to be so down on yourself like that my man, I know it comes from a place of compassion but when it's to this extent, it ain't good for the soul.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Good luck convincing any white people who don't hate themselves of that.

People actually hating themselves for things their forefathers did are a bit over the top though don't you think? You can hate that it happened and strive to not let it happen again, but self hatred is neither fair nor helpful if you ask me.

 

[SteveTheRed]

This is all great in principle, and no you shouldn't walk around with guilt for things that happened in history.

But conversely, what things do you do today that actively help stop racism?

I honestly don't know. I'm not actively doing anything I just don't judge people on colour or race, treat people equally but on their actions?

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

I understand racism primarily as a product of modernity, as shaped to a large degree by the dominance of white Europeans.

Racism is just another form of discrimination. It has become more popular due to globalization, but has existed in some form or other forever. Caste system in India, Tribal hierarchy in Africa, Chinese vs Malays in South East Asia, it has existed in form and manner even before the white european impact you mention above.

 

[Minimalist]

I can't believe they bought that "she was only being racist in response to other racists on twitter" excuse.


She a racist, sexist, ageist piece of human garbage.

She sounds like a real piece of work from everything else I've read but that clip tells me nothing.

 

[villain]

I honestly don't know. I'm not actively doing anything I just don't judge people on colour or race, treat people equally but on their actions?

So, how do you expect racism to end?
It's great to challenge people when they're racist to white people, but do you challenge white people when they're racist to PoC like friends/family members for example?

 

[2cents]

Racism is just another form of discrimination. It has become more popular due to globalization, but has existed in some form or other forever. Caste system in India, Tribal hierarchy in Africa, Chinese vs Malays in South East Asia, it has existed in form and manner even before the white european impact you mention above.

Yes, obviously humans throughout history have constructed an infinite number of bases on which to discriminate against each other, and in many cases these forms of discrimination have become institutionalized (though none on a global level it seems to me); however my (limited) knowledge of the examples you give is that they are different phenomena - in origins/conception, and in the manner in which they play out in society - to the type of genetic, (pseudo-)scientific malarkey which the dominance of European military and economic power, and by extension the hegemony of European forms of knowledge, has gifted the rest of the world.

I would also add that many scholars of the caste system in colonial India argue that one of the effects of British rule was to formalize and strengthen caste divisions (through stuff like ethnographic surveys and census enumeration), leaving behind a much more rigid system than what existed in pre-British times. I believe this certainly to be the case when it comes to religious identities in India (whether communal, i.e. Hindu-Muslim, or sectarian, i.e. Sunni-Shi'a). I'd imagine the same can be applied to tribalism in Africa, and other non-racial traditional hierarchies.

 

[Raoul]

As a white male, I was speaking for white males. We suck.

Having said that, given we (hunans) are tribal creatures, who’s to say any other demographic wouldn’t have done the same if they were the dominant, powerful ones? We suck.

Not sure I follow. What does the pigment you happened to involuntarily receive at birth have to do with the actions of various individuals hundreds of years ago who you never met ?

 

[SteveTheRed]

So, how do you expect racism to end?
It's great to challenge people when they're racist to white people, but do you challenge white people when they're racist to PoC like friends/family members for example?

Yes of course, luckily my friends and family don't have those views. Half my family are Romani travellers so they've dealt with be ostracised all there lives and are some of the most welcoming people I know.

 

[villain]

Yes of course, luckily my friends and family don't have those views. Half my family are Romani travellers so they've dealt with be ostracised all there lives and are some of the most welcoming people I know.

Which is great, but surely you can see my point?
You shouldn't have to suffer guilt from things that had no connection to in the past, but minorities still suffer from the effects of those incidents and are powerless to stop the cycle from continuing. Treating people equally is great, but that's just being a decent human being.

 

[Red Defence]

Ms Jeong wrote in one tweet from July 2014: "Oh man it's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men."

So she’s racist, sexist and ageist but the worst of all is that she sounds like a thoroughly unpleasant person.

 

[Raoul]

So she’s racist, sexist and ageist but the worst of all is that she sounds like a thoroughly unpleasant person.

Even worse she's impugning a legitimate issue that merits a more serious debate.

 

[Red Defence]

Even worse she's impugning a legitimate issue that merits a more serious debate.

That’s because she’s thoroughly unpleasant.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

The argument goes that in attempting to save their empire from the domination of the Europeans, the Ottomans attempted to reform along European lines, and in doing so came to adopt many of the same paternalising attitudes with respect to their subjects; they developed a civilizing mission, a kind of Ottoman ‘white man’s burden’ (though without the explicit racial undertones) especially with regard to the nomadic tribes of Libya and the Syrian deserts, and the Yemeni mountain-folk, despite the fact that these were also Muslim. The reason we don’t really associate the Ottomans with European colonialism is because this was only a brief period in their history confined to a few peripheral regions while the empire was already under the European thumb; and because research into it has only recently started. If you’re interested here’s a good article on this topic, you might need an academia.edu account to access it though -

"They Live in a State of Nomadism and Savagery": The Late Ottoman Empire and the Post-Colonial Debate”

Let's be honest it doesn't fit the narrative people want from their history these days.

The Ottoman Empire was an Asian one with an Uzbec foundation. It conquered lands by force of arms and held territory and control of people following conquest to asset strip and control trade, slaves being a large portion of that trade and demanding tribute from vassal states. Deriving their sense of superiority from their religion which was, of course, the correct one and so spreading it by force was obviously justified.

It also had for a time a stranglehold on the trade routes to/from the far east which was a very lucrative business.

So clearly nothing like European colonialism at all.

It also continued into the modern age which makes it problematic in the context of starting history at the point you want to start it in order to claim a particular grievance needs addressing.