Race is the myth. Believing the myth is racism. I think this is what I am hearing. It completely defines how I have felt about this since I was a kid but have not been able to articulate it. Thank you Dr. Mason and FAIR for a great conversation!
Let me add another point of view, which we all add to in helping to see more clearly through this "glass darkly." I use the word "Race-ism" to mean the belief in race. An -ism like a religion. Dr.Sheena Mason is the first person I've come across to address and associate racism with belief in a way that practically communicates the idea in our current cultural context. I think people underestimate the power of belief, or maybe just not knowing (thoughfully examining) the Purpose of Belief. Race-ism as the belief in race. Belief in race meaning accepting race as true. Race-ist being thoughts, words, and actions stemming from race-ism. And how those things make up who we are. Those things being, our beliefs, our thoughts, our words and our actions. Regardless of the labels assigned to them, those things serve to define us. It's important to not be subject to the definitions of other men. If they didn't design you don't let them define you.
This is so good! Mason's philosophy is a great addition to the more overarching skeptical tradition. I worry that the US framework of "race(ism)" might be spreading via English-speaking social media, where the US culture dominates, making these sorts of voices very important.
I am excited about Dr. Mason’s theory. It’s innovative and brilliant, and she articulates it well. Thank you for producing this podcast episode. I will definitely buy her book!
What a beautiful discussion. I can’t help sharing my notes/reflections as I listen … I loved the clarity about the unique problem for Americans racialized as black who have taken on “Black Pride” as a reaction and defense against oppression/stigmatization. Unfortunately, taking on such an identity always carries the mark of the reactivity and pain that produced it, and risks becoming a straitjacket made of that pain. 1:20:58 “Message appropriately so you keep the door open for as many people as possible.” ABSOLUTELY. This is a difficult skill to develop! 1:23:00 “Race IS the hierarchy. Racism is belief in the hierarchy and the act of racialization.” This is exceptionally clear. WHERE does the hierarchy exist? Does it exist inside YOU-do you think you are inferior/superior-or does it exist outside? If it no longer exists in you, what happens outside, how does it look different to you? We will not know until we undo the hierarchy inside. 1:31:29. “If we can get to a place of being more motivated by love … “ That’s it! It really is that, as shocking as that is. Finally, one of the astonishing things I see going here is the gradual development of an American ethnicity. Not a “White” ethnicity, not a hyphenated identity, but a trans-racial ethnicity that all American-born-and-bread people partake of. I live in Germany right now. We Americans of whatever color are DIFFERENT. Of course our human sameness is most obvious and important, but there is an ethnic difference that comes across in myriad ways that include language, facial expression, movement patterns, ways of thinking and acting-many many many things. Maybe one day we will be able to see it as it is without the blinder of race. Forward, onward! 😊
I find it somewhat funny to witness how counter intuitive racelessness is for American audience, as many societies just don't have that specific constract. Where I grew up there is much tribalism - national, ethnic and religious. I was also very aware to genetics and to differences between populations. But untill I began watching American media, I never asked my self what my or others' race was.
Agree. America was making progress in terms of working towards a society where race wasn’t focused on but the last 4-5 years it has devolved to a state that has me shaking my head. It doesn’t help having hordes of ‘professors’ out there obsessing and talking about race constantly
1:08:20 I appreciated the discussion about the comparison of race and sex/gender/nonbinary. I also think this comparison doesn’t work … here are my thoughts as of today: 1. Sex, unlike race, is neither merely a social construction, nor is it any problem in itself. 2. The problem is what we (currently) call sexism-placing barriers in front of people because of their sex, placing false expectations, treating people unfairly, all of the behaviors we talk about that are similar to racism. 3. BUT, if we want a true sexuality parallel with race/racism, then a better choice is gender/genderism. 4. Genderism is a better term than sexism, because it highlights the unnecessary, socially-constructed nature of the bias. And similarly, it can be undone by Dr. Mason’s gorgeous Racelessness logic. 5. Like race, gender doesn’t actually exist. So if we want to get rid of genderism (which is to “genderize” humans in the same way we “racialize” them), then what we need to do is get rid of gender. As with following race to its root in racism, we can follow gender to its root in genderism. The problem is the making of “gender” through the concretization of sex roles, by genderism. THIS is what people find stultifying. Right now there is vast confusion about this, both in the terms we use and the solutions we seek. The conceptual confusion has provided fertile ground for the growth of an extraordinary number of new and (in my view), unhelpful constructs, including “cisgender” and “cisheteronormativity”. These terms function similarly to Whiteness/white supremacy in the Race narrative. In that narrative, the category of Black, rather than being a helpful reconstruction of the negative race-construct of Black used to justify slavery, actually has the effect of reifying the category of both Black and White. In the American context, rather than movement towards an ethnic concept of “American” that unites us, we strengthen the racialized categories that divide us. Similar to the strategy of “Black Pride”, the construct of “Nonbinary/Queer” reconstructs formerly rejected aspects of sexuality and attempts to subvert or reverse the normative hierarchy. In doing so, **it remains steadfast within the game of gender**, in exactly the same way as “Black Pride” stays within the game of race. Race IS racism, as Dr. Mason eloquently clarifies. Gender IS genderism. Which is sexism. No difference. You can’t get rid of the stultifying effects of “Cisheteronormativity” with “Nonbinary” because by inventing and reifying this new category, you simultaneously reify the normative category on which it is based. As with dropping race to end racism, the solution is to drop the fixation on gender to end sexism. If we deflate gender, then people can be exactly who they are no matter their sex. Isn’t this what we want?
Mason's intent and research are impressive! No wonder it's all very tricky. First off, any word in any language is a social construct. A child raised by a pack of wolves, for instance, will not have any social constructs, because such child has no language, other than some sounds which wolves make. Most human beings raised among other human beings, communicating what we observe, think, feel learn and teach--all require word construction and, as Mellisa notes, it comes with the act of division and sub-division into memorable categories and patterns. When, however, we use any word/term to camouflage irrational belief, fear, envy, hate and to justify bigotry violence, even genocidal rage--that's pathological, idiotic and potentially tragic. That's why German Schools Racial Theory 101, "Aryan-Semitic" (ASRT), but also, its flip side, Racial Theory 102, "Critical," (CRT) is intellectually shallow and potentially tragic. ASRT was meant to confuse and deceive not only the Wokefied Whoopi. In fairness (to her ignorance) many people don't know that, in reality, Aryan and Semitic are just two linguistic categories, that Jews are not "A Race," but a People/Nation with people who come in every skin-color and imagined ethnicity (including the Chinese-looking Jews of Kaifeng), Many don't know that, in reality, 15M Jews are a tiny minority among "Semitic" nations (350M Arabs, and 100M Ethiopians + a few other small nations). Only recently we've have been learning how extensive was the affiliation between the National Socialist (nicknamed, Nazi) Workers' Party and both Persian "Aryan" Shiites, as well as Arab "Semitic" Sunnites--no Race Qs raised. We also know that millions of Arabs are in fact other people who were colonized and Arabized (eg 50M Imazighen in North Africa, 30M Kurds and 10M Copts in the Middle East+ a few other smaller nations, Yazidies, Assyrians, Samaritans, etc). Slavery, BTW, was also common in Muslim tribal societies, which is why Persian Shiites hate Arab Sunnites. Those who know other languages, probably know that "Race" is simply a category for people and pets, a synonym to the word "kind" and "sort." So the word "mutt" which Obama has once used to describe his race, before he was accused of "not Black enough" and decided to be only "Black," is, actually, neutral. Mainly, we know how racial agitation is idiotic, tragic and is, BTW, what's emboldened Putin to launch his paranoid attack on the Ukraine, when the West is dysfunctionally obsessed with the "Race Lens."
Are people 'misnaming' phenotype? Most racism in the USA seems to rely on color. This is a real thing, with real repercussions. I wish this would be taken on, head on. It feels like you elide this core issue. Race is a social construct. Color is a fact, and it colors people's perceptions, and seems to be the most defining driver of what we call racism.
Not going to guess, so I'd be interested to know what (if anything) Dr. Mason marks on an application or form that asks for a person's race-ethnicity. And then, why? (I'd suspect the answer here might connect to "racelessness.)
What does success look like? I'm not sure I understand what the outcome of Dr. Mason's theory would look like considering how hard it is to change the ways we see things. When you use the same words but mean something different than the traditional meaning it is just confusing. That seems to be the whole problem these days. People try to change the meaning of words from what they were known to mean and use that to confuse and avoid good faith discussions.
Agree, at this point the term ‘racism’ has completely lost all meaning. It has been warped and distorted and now means different things to different people. Our country is obsessed with race and it’s causing more problems that it is fixing
I don’t know who needs to hear this but the Jews that looked typically “Jewish” were identified and killed first in natzi Germany. Most of the the Jews who survived the end of the war, had features closer to their localities. They got to them to eventually, but it took a while. It is interesting and disturbing to see how natural selection works in this context. The writer of this comment is a grandchild to Jewish Holocaust survivors from both Tunisia (which was the first and only North African country that the natzis got to) and Romania.
Thanks so much for sharing part of your story. 💛 Europeans, like every other human society, racialized themselves first (in ways counter to many American ways of thinking about race) which is how Jewish people came to be racialized and persecuted. The people who would then found America took that concept of “race” that they had been and continued to apply among themselves and fashioned it to reflect the new reality in what would become America and in the black and white ways many people have come to think about it. If more people learned and could grapple with the genealogy of “race” across time and place, more people could understand the fallacy of it…and the nefariousness imposed by concepts of “race” and practice of racialization/racism in any time and place. 🙏🏽
@@FreeYourMindTR well there is something to be said about that as well. The idea of darker skin tones as being a “lesser than” exists in other parts of the world on a global scale. And you find in in countries where the west meeting the east. And i don’t know if differences in culture exacerbated it. I’ll give you an example, in the first decades of modern Israel, you had Jews refugees coming from the Middle East (darker looking) and Europeans (lighter skin). The European Jews very quickly to over all the major institutions, and brought their western culture together with them. Middle eastern Jews were marginalized very quickly because they just did not have the skill set to govern in the way modern Israel was by the Brits. Look up a group called the “black panthers” their goal was to fight the “ashkenazi” superiority. Same thing happened to the Ethiopian Jews who came to Israel later, only now 2 and third generation are able to bring opportunities to their communities. And that is interesting because what you saw in israel is a generation of refugees, self segregating based on skin color, without prior “oppression” history among them. So you are right, the definition of race can be argued and it’s definition is arbitrary depending on the lense you look from. I think what tragic about the American story is the slavery part that Africans Americans inability to gain intellectual and physical wealth kept them in a constant “refugee” status for a very long time.
So you know that many Jews look like Angel, even if you don't know that the Jews of Kaifeng look more like Melissa. Also, Jews of North African countries under Vichy were shipped to Slavery & Extermination camps. Fortunately, there were always some Arabs who, like the famous Schindler, protected them.
@@wescolumbus621 it is interesting you say that because this is my family story on my mother’s who fled Tunis. They hid in a farm and protected by Muslim Arabs. Unfortunately my grandfather lost a baby brother in the barn because he got the flu and they were unable to seek care due to the circumstances.My grandparents always made sure that To tell us that, that we know Muslim Arabs saved us from the Nazis
@@lilush4756 Once we are well-informed about the diversity of Jews, not just one's family, or circle of friends, it's easy to realize that "Racial Theories" are idiotic and tragic. Under the "Aryan-Semitic" one, had she been in Europe. due to of her looks and last name, Whoopi Goldberg would have probably gotten a double ticket to a Slavery and Death camp. We can't tell exactly how tragic CRT is going to be and we should do everything to stop that profitable, needless idiocy ASAP.
One last note, yes, racelessness should definitely be non-partisan, MLK holiday should be FD-MLK Day and the automatic editor should stop underlying it in red, even if 100% are not likely to "get it." Contrary to Kendi's dubious definition (which I've watched him say), that "Racism is being racist, you know... ," Common usage "Racism" is actually, a code word for unacceptable hate and bigotry towards dark-skin people of African ancestry. To understand what is so confusing to Whoopi and others, I've read Peikoff's "The Cause of Hitler's Germany" which is a fascinating analysis of political science, culture and philosophy before Nazi Germany, in the Weimar Repulic. The irony is, that just like there was stiff ideological competition between global Marxists and National Socialists, the competition today is still between BLMnik global Marxists and the long defeated (though not completely dead) National Socialist ideology, which was, then, anti-Black, anti-Roma, anti-Homosexuals, anti-mentally-impaired and, especially, anti Jew and Mischlings (people mixed with Jewish, or Black-blood)--the sub-human "races." These "blue-eyed, blond" White Supremacist Nazi ideologues are today's Marxists' imagined enemy, which they, somehow, need to revive, for fame and profit, or for ideological satisfaction inside the Leftie echo-chamber. The irony is all of that is needless,
Constantly using the words "race" and "racism" without defining them makes understanding the points being made here confusing. People's ancestry can be determined by many factors; skin colour, shape of the face, body type, height, etc. People who are knowledgeable and travel a lot can often look at a white person and ask, "Hey, are your parents or grandparents from such and such an island in the Caribbean or off the coast of Africa? There is a biological reality that can be tracked/traced to particular areas of the world, even when greater mixing of biological traits occur. The culture (what we celebrate) varies dramatically and can't be ascribed to biological traits with real accuracy because culture, for however long it exists, is manufactured. For instance, language varies amongst people with the similar biological traits. (302 different living languages in China!) Racism (hatred of the biological or cultural differences) is silly because A: what does it matter to you? B: what can you do about it without hurting people and C: It's rude to suggest that traits and cultures either make someone superior or inferior. Certain physical traits might be beneficial or detract, but so what? We should always treat people without prejudice because a scale of good and bad qualities would be somewhat subjective and it's simply morally wrong to look down on people because they lack a quality (often subjective) that others might not have - like beauty or intelligence (of which there are different kinds.) I think the differences, physical and cultural make for a beautiful and wonderful world of variety. Some people are uncomfortable with differences. They like homogeneity, but that doesn't make them hateful, just unworldly, which can lead them to make comments and decisions that are just plain dumb. (We all have status seeking inferiority complexes.) Hatred might not be in their hearts, but their comments and actions can easily be mistaken for hatred. And they can be duped by truly hateful people. Really hateful people are smaller in number and generally very ignorant or (scarily) very intelligent (potentially sociopathic) and have found ways of using our differences to obtain money or power - by dividing us - making it seem as if there are issues with being biologically or culturally different. Whether they actually believe in their hatred of genetic or cultural differences or not is wrong, because their words and actions can lead to emotional and disastrous physical harm. I write and illustrate children's books, so clarity on these issues is valuable. Intuitively, because I like variety, I write and depict people in a way as to reveal the variety the world has to offer in terms of people with different physical and cultural characteristics. And children love it too. Anyway, thanks for the video. It got me thinking out loud. Cheers!
Come on over to my podcast. Read any of my publications to gain more insight into how I define what. The link to my website is in my description boxes. Links to my publications (many of them) are on my website. 🙏🏽 Consider the door open…the ultimate goal. I would hope to inspire more questions than answers…something missing from current discourse.
I have had the privilege of talking to Dr. Mason on the Sophia podcast. And while she and I align in a lot of ways, at the end of the day, I am not sold on skepticism toward race, at least in the way I think she defines it. Mostly for the reasons you mention. I am fully on board with the idea that race is a porous, obviously fictional, vague, and ambiguous idea and that putting it to bed tomorrow would be day too late. BUT I can't get to the idea that race doesn't track something (really a lot of things) about human phenotypes. It is obviously true that we can look at a picture of Jack Harlowe and Lil Nas X and know who will be called 'white' and who 'black.' Even if we think the reasons are thin and shoddy, we can recognize that for a variety of historical reason, Nas's skin color is associated with blackness in a way Harlowe's is not. I think that is what makes me, by Sheena's vocabulary, a constructivist eliminativist. The goal needs to be elimination of this idea - race- that has never produced any good and will never produce any good. But in the way a lot of things are socially constructed - gender roles, psychiatric diagnoses, the 24 hour clock - the idea of 'race' does perform some (however illegitimate) function in contemporary society and is based on SOMETING that allows us to use the term coherently. That is enough to keep me from skepticism.
@@FreeYourMindTR Thing is, I like my answers. I have to say, people who dig into the narrow cracks and look for more questions, sometimes come up with something valuable, but often they end up digging around the cracks forever, placing more value on the minuscule more than necessary. This especially happens for artists. General humanistic functions of art become unfashionable in favour of what appears to be new discoverable details. There's funding for this and it appears to be similar to what scientists do - making discoveries, but for us artists the great inversion of all the traditional functions of art has been replace by fashionable thinking rather than what has worked for thousands of years. Do you have a town square in your neighbourhood? Likely not. That's because Modernists got caught in the weeds of discovery and trying too hard to be original that they ditched the most humanistic of all creations. This might be happening to all of the humanities in universities. There are basic truths that don't change. There are ways of thinking that work and that don't work. Wiggling around in the cracks might get you all kinds of benefits, but I think you can get lost.
Race is the myth. Believing the myth is racism. I think this is what I am hearing. It completely defines how I have felt about this since I was a kid but have not been able to articulate it. Thank you Dr. Mason and FAIR for a great conversation!
Let me add another point of view, which we all add to in helping to see more clearly through this "glass darkly."
I use the word "Race-ism" to mean the belief in race. An -ism like a religion. Dr.Sheena Mason is the first person I've come across to address and associate racism with belief in a way that practically communicates the idea in our current cultural context.
I think people underestimate the power of belief, or maybe just not knowing (thoughfully examining) the Purpose of Belief.
Race-ism as the belief in race. Belief in race meaning accepting race as true. Race-ist being thoughts, words, and actions stemming from race-ism. And how those things make up who we are.
Those things being,
our beliefs,
our thoughts,
our words
and our actions.
Regardless of the labels assigned to them, those things serve to define us.
It's important to not be subject to the definitions of other men.
If they didn't design you don't let them define you.
@@anotherpointofview222 Exactly!!
I feel a kinship with you all. Thank you for your work.
💛 The feeling is mutual
Love Dr Mason and FAIR. You give me hope for a more sane future🙏❣️
This is so good! Mason's philosophy is a great addition to the more overarching skeptical tradition. I worry that the US framework of "race(ism)" might be spreading via English-speaking social media, where the US culture dominates, making these sorts of voices very important.
I'm a big fan of Sheena and a big fan of FAIR! Keep up the good work guys !
Sheena Mason is AMAZING, full stop! I'll be watching this episode many more times. Well done, FAIR and Melissa and Angel!
Sheena's on 🔥! Theory of racelessness ftw
Wonderful insight, Dr. Mason. Thank you.
I am excited about Dr. Mason’s theory. It’s innovative and brilliant, and she articulates it well. Thank you for producing this podcast episode. I will definitely buy her book!
What a beautiful discussion. I can’t help sharing my notes/reflections as I listen …
I loved the clarity about the unique problem for Americans racialized as black who have taken on “Black Pride” as a reaction and defense against oppression/stigmatization.
Unfortunately, taking on such an identity always carries the mark of the reactivity and pain that produced it, and risks becoming a straitjacket made of that pain.
1:20:58 “Message appropriately so you keep the door open for as many people as possible.” ABSOLUTELY. This is a difficult skill to develop!
1:23:00 “Race IS the hierarchy. Racism is belief in the hierarchy and the act of racialization.” This is exceptionally clear. WHERE does the hierarchy exist? Does it exist inside YOU-do you think you are inferior/superior-or does it exist outside? If it no longer exists in you, what happens outside, how does it look different to you? We will not know until we undo the hierarchy inside.
1:31:29. “If we can get to a place of being more motivated by love … “ That’s it! It really is that, as shocking as that is.
Finally, one of the astonishing things I see going here is the gradual development of an American ethnicity. Not a “White” ethnicity, not a hyphenated identity, but a trans-racial ethnicity that all American-born-and-bread people partake of. I live in Germany right now. We Americans of whatever color are DIFFERENT. Of course our human sameness is most obvious and important, but there is an ethnic difference that comes across in myriad ways that include language, facial expression, movement patterns, ways of thinking and acting-many many many things. Maybe one day we will be able to see it as it is without the blinder of race.
Forward, onward! 😊
Thank you, Sheena! I was trying to figure out why I felt so hopeless about racism. 'Leaping out of the toxic fishbowl' is sanity!
Thank you for such a brilliant interview filled with heart.
Go, Sheena! Keep doing your good work!
Thank you for great conversations like this one.
Dr Mason on fire here
I find it somewhat funny to witness how counter intuitive racelessness is for American audience, as many societies just don't have that specific constract. Where I grew up there is much tribalism - national, ethnic and religious. I was also very aware to genetics and to differences between populations. But untill I began watching American media, I never asked my self what my or others' race was.
Agree. America was making progress in terms of working towards a society where race wasn’t focused on but the last 4-5 years it has devolved to a state that has me shaking my head. It doesn’t help having hordes of ‘professors’ out there obsessing and talking about race constantly
Hi Dr Mason
1:08:20 I appreciated the discussion about the comparison of race and sex/gender/nonbinary.
I also think this comparison doesn’t work … here are my thoughts as of today:
1. Sex, unlike race, is neither merely a social construction, nor is it any problem in itself.
2. The problem is what we (currently) call sexism-placing barriers in front of people because of their sex, placing false expectations, treating people unfairly, all of the behaviors we talk about that are similar to racism.
3. BUT, if we want a true sexuality parallel with race/racism, then a better choice is gender/genderism.
4. Genderism is a better term than sexism, because it highlights the unnecessary, socially-constructed nature of the bias. And similarly, it can be undone by Dr. Mason’s gorgeous Racelessness logic.
5. Like race, gender doesn’t actually exist. So if we want to get rid of genderism (which is to “genderize” humans in the same way we “racialize” them), then what we need to do is get rid of gender. As with following race to its root in racism, we can follow gender to its root in genderism. The problem is the making of “gender” through the concretization of sex roles, by genderism. THIS is what people find stultifying.
Right now there is vast confusion about this, both in the terms we use and the solutions we seek. The conceptual confusion has provided fertile ground for the growth of an extraordinary number of new and (in my view), unhelpful constructs, including “cisgender” and “cisheteronormativity”. These terms function similarly to Whiteness/white supremacy in the Race narrative.
In that narrative, the category of Black, rather than being a helpful reconstruction of the negative race-construct of Black used to justify slavery, actually has the effect of reifying the category of both Black and White. In the American context, rather than movement towards an ethnic concept of “American” that unites us, we strengthen the racialized categories that divide us.
Similar to the strategy of “Black Pride”, the construct of “Nonbinary/Queer” reconstructs formerly rejected aspects of sexuality and attempts to subvert or reverse the normative hierarchy. In doing so, **it remains steadfast within the game of gender**, in exactly the same way as “Black Pride” stays within the game of race.
Race IS racism, as Dr. Mason eloquently clarifies. Gender IS genderism. Which is sexism. No difference.
You can’t get rid of the stultifying effects of “Cisheteronormativity” with “Nonbinary” because by inventing and reifying this new category, you simultaneously reify the normative category on which it is based. As with dropping race to end racism, the solution is to drop the fixation on gender to end sexism. If we deflate gender, then people can be exactly who they are no matter their sex. Isn’t this what we want?
Mason's intent and research are impressive! No wonder it's all very tricky. First off, any word in any language is a social construct. A child raised by a pack of wolves, for instance, will not have any social constructs, because such child has no language, other than some sounds which wolves make. Most human beings raised among other human beings, communicating what we observe, think, feel learn and teach--all require word construction and, as Mellisa notes, it comes with the act of division and sub-division into memorable categories and patterns. When, however, we use any word/term to camouflage irrational belief, fear, envy, hate and to justify bigotry violence, even genocidal rage--that's pathological, idiotic and potentially tragic. That's why German Schools Racial Theory 101, "Aryan-Semitic" (ASRT), but also, its flip side, Racial Theory 102, "Critical," (CRT) is intellectually shallow and potentially tragic.
ASRT was meant to confuse and deceive not only the Wokefied Whoopi. In fairness (to her ignorance) many people don't know that, in reality, Aryan and Semitic are just two linguistic categories, that Jews are not "A Race," but a People/Nation with people who come in every skin-color and imagined ethnicity (including the Chinese-looking Jews of Kaifeng), Many don't know that, in reality, 15M Jews are a tiny minority among "Semitic" nations (350M Arabs, and 100M Ethiopians + a few other small nations). Only recently we've have been learning how extensive was the affiliation between the National Socialist (nicknamed, Nazi) Workers' Party and both Persian "Aryan" Shiites, as well as Arab "Semitic" Sunnites--no Race Qs raised. We also know that millions of Arabs are in fact other people who were colonized and Arabized (eg 50M Imazighen in North Africa, 30M Kurds and 10M Copts in the Middle East+ a few other smaller nations, Yazidies, Assyrians, Samaritans, etc). Slavery, BTW, was also common in Muslim tribal societies, which is why Persian Shiites hate Arab Sunnites.
Those who know other languages, probably know that "Race" is simply a category for people and pets, a synonym to the word "kind" and "sort." So the word "mutt" which Obama has once used to describe his race, before he was accused of "not Black enough" and decided to be only "Black," is, actually, neutral. Mainly, we know how racial agitation is idiotic, tragic and is, BTW, what's emboldened Putin to launch his paranoid attack on the Ukraine, when the West is dysfunctionally obsessed with the "Race Lens."
Are people 'misnaming' phenotype? Most racism in the USA seems to rely on color. This is a real thing, with real repercussions. I wish this would be taken on, head on. It feels like you elide this core issue. Race is a social construct. Color is a fact, and it colors people's perceptions, and seems to be the most defining driver of what we call racism.
True. But facial morphology is also a factor.
Not going to guess, so I'd be interested to know what (if anything) Dr. Mason marks on an application or form that asks for a person's race-ethnicity. And then, why? (I'd suspect the answer here might connect to "racelessness.)
I select refuse to answer or leave blank if there’s no such option. I do the same for my children.
@@FreeYourMindTR I do this too. I find the “tracking” if my race inappropriate.
What does success look like? I'm not sure I understand what the outcome of Dr. Mason's theory would look like considering how hard it is to change the ways we see things.
When you use the same words but mean something different than the traditional meaning it is just confusing. That seems to be the whole problem these days. People try to change the meaning of words from what they were known to mean and use that to confuse and avoid good faith discussions.
Agree, at this point the term ‘racism’ has completely lost all meaning. It has been warped and distorted and now means different things to different people. Our country is obsessed with race and it’s causing more problems that it is fixing
I don’t know who needs to hear this but the Jews that looked typically “Jewish” were identified and killed first in natzi Germany. Most of the the Jews who survived the end of the war, had features closer to their localities. They got to them to eventually, but it took a while. It is interesting and disturbing to see how natural selection works in this context.
The writer of this comment is a grandchild to Jewish Holocaust survivors from both Tunisia (which was the first and only North African country that the natzis got to) and Romania.
Thanks so much for sharing part of your story. 💛
Europeans, like every other human society, racialized themselves first (in ways counter to many American ways of thinking about race) which is how Jewish people came to be racialized and persecuted. The people who would then found America took that concept of “race” that they had been and continued to apply among themselves and fashioned it to reflect the new reality in what would become America and in the black and white ways many people have come to think about it. If more people learned and could grapple with the genealogy of “race” across time and place, more people could understand the fallacy of it…and the nefariousness imposed by concepts of “race” and practice of racialization/racism in any time and place. 🙏🏽
@@FreeYourMindTR well there is something to be said about that as well. The idea of darker skin tones as being a “lesser than” exists in other parts of the world on a global scale. And you find in in countries where the west meeting the east. And i don’t know if differences in culture exacerbated it. I’ll give you an example, in the first decades of modern Israel, you had Jews refugees coming from the Middle East (darker looking) and Europeans (lighter skin). The European Jews very quickly to over all the major institutions, and brought their western culture together with them. Middle eastern Jews were marginalized very quickly because they just did not have the skill set to govern in the way modern Israel was by the Brits. Look up a group called the “black panthers” their goal was to fight the “ashkenazi” superiority. Same thing happened to the Ethiopian Jews who came to Israel later, only now 2 and third generation are able to bring opportunities to their communities. And that is interesting because what you saw in israel is a generation of refugees, self segregating based on skin color, without prior “oppression” history among them. So you are right, the definition of race can be argued and it’s definition is arbitrary depending on the lense you look from. I think what tragic about the American story is the slavery part that Africans Americans inability to gain intellectual and physical wealth kept them in a constant “refugee” status for a very long time.
So you know that many Jews look like Angel, even if you don't know that the Jews of Kaifeng look more like Melissa. Also, Jews of North African countries under Vichy were shipped to Slavery & Extermination camps. Fortunately, there were always some Arabs who, like the famous Schindler, protected them.
@@wescolumbus621 it is interesting you say that because this is my family story on my mother’s who fled Tunis. They hid in a farm and protected by Muslim Arabs. Unfortunately my grandfather lost a baby brother in the barn because he got the flu and they were unable to seek care due to the circumstances.My grandparents always made sure that To tell us that, that we know Muslim Arabs saved us from the Nazis
@@lilush4756 Once we are well-informed about the diversity of Jews, not just one's family, or circle of friends, it's easy to realize that "Racial Theories" are idiotic and tragic. Under the "Aryan-Semitic" one, had she been in Europe. due to of her looks and last name, Whoopi Goldberg would have probably gotten a double ticket to a Slavery and Death camp.
We can't tell exactly how tragic CRT is going to be and we should do everything to stop that profitable, needless idiocy ASAP.
One last note, yes, racelessness should definitely be non-partisan, MLK holiday should be FD-MLK Day and the automatic editor should stop underlying it in red, even if 100% are not likely to "get it." Contrary to Kendi's dubious definition (which I've watched him say), that "Racism is being racist, you know... ," Common usage "Racism" is actually, a code word for unacceptable hate and bigotry towards dark-skin people of African ancestry.
To understand what is so confusing to Whoopi and others, I've read Peikoff's "The Cause of Hitler's Germany" which is a fascinating analysis of political science, culture and philosophy before Nazi Germany, in the Weimar Repulic. The irony is, that just like there was stiff ideological competition between global Marxists and National Socialists, the competition today is still between BLMnik global Marxists and the long defeated (though not completely dead) National Socialist ideology, which was, then, anti-Black, anti-Roma, anti-Homosexuals, anti-mentally-impaired and, especially, anti Jew and Mischlings (people mixed with Jewish, or Black-blood)--the sub-human "races." These "blue-eyed, blond" White Supremacist Nazi ideologues are today's Marxists' imagined enemy, which they, somehow, need to revive, for fame and profit, or for ideological satisfaction inside the Leftie echo-chamber. The irony is all of that is needless,
Constantly using the words "race" and "racism" without defining them makes understanding the points being made here confusing. People's ancestry can be determined by many factors; skin colour, shape of the face, body type, height, etc. People who are knowledgeable and travel a lot can often look at a white person and ask, "Hey, are your parents or grandparents from such and such an island in the Caribbean or off the coast of Africa? There is a biological reality that can be tracked/traced to particular areas of the world, even when greater mixing of biological traits occur. The culture (what we celebrate) varies dramatically and can't be ascribed to biological traits with real accuracy because culture, for however long it exists, is manufactured. For instance, language varies amongst people with the similar biological traits. (302 different living languages in China!) Racism (hatred of the biological or cultural differences) is silly because A: what does it matter to you? B: what can you do about it without hurting people and C: It's rude to suggest that traits and cultures either make someone superior or inferior. Certain physical traits might be beneficial or detract, but so what? We should always treat people without prejudice because a scale of good and bad qualities would be somewhat subjective and it's simply morally wrong to look down on people because they lack a quality (often subjective) that others might not have - like beauty or intelligence (of which there are different kinds.) I think the differences, physical and cultural make for a beautiful and wonderful world of variety. Some people are uncomfortable with differences. They like homogeneity, but that doesn't make them hateful, just unworldly, which can lead them to make comments and decisions that are just plain dumb. (We all have status seeking inferiority complexes.) Hatred might not be in their hearts, but their comments and actions can easily be mistaken for hatred. And they can be duped by truly hateful people. Really hateful people are smaller in number and generally very ignorant or (scarily) very intelligent (potentially sociopathic) and have found ways of using our differences to obtain money or power - by dividing us - making it seem as if there are issues with being biologically or culturally different. Whether they actually believe in their hatred of genetic or cultural differences or not is wrong, because their words and actions can lead to emotional and disastrous physical harm. I write and illustrate children's books, so clarity on these issues is valuable. Intuitively, because I like variety, I write and depict people in a way as to reveal the variety the world has to offer in terms of people with different physical and cultural characteristics. And children love it too. Anyway, thanks for the video. It got me thinking out loud. Cheers!
Come on over to my podcast. Read any of my publications to gain more insight into how I define what. The link to my website is in my description boxes. Links to my publications (many of them) are on my website. 🙏🏽 Consider the door open…the ultimate goal. I would hope to inspire more questions than answers…something missing from current discourse.
I have had the privilege of talking to Dr. Mason on the Sophia podcast. And while she and I align in a lot of ways, at the end of the day, I am not sold on skepticism toward race, at least in the way I think she defines it. Mostly for the reasons you mention. I am fully on board with the idea that race is a porous, obviously fictional, vague, and ambiguous idea and that putting it to bed tomorrow would be day too late. BUT I can't get to the idea that race doesn't track something (really a lot of things) about human phenotypes. It is obviously true that we can look at a picture of Jack Harlowe and Lil Nas X and know who will be called 'white' and who 'black.' Even if we think the reasons are thin and shoddy, we can recognize that for a variety of historical reason, Nas's skin color is associated with blackness in a way Harlowe's is not.
I think that is what makes me, by Sheena's vocabulary, a constructivist eliminativist. The goal needs to be elimination of this idea - race- that has never produced any good and will never produce any good. But in the way a lot of things are socially constructed - gender roles, psychiatric diagnoses, the 24 hour clock - the idea of 'race' does perform some (however illegitimate) function in contemporary society and is based on SOMETING that allows us to use the term coherently. That is enough to keep me from skepticism.
@@FreeYourMindTR Thing is, I like my answers. I have to say, people who dig into the narrow cracks and look for more questions, sometimes come up with something valuable, but often they end up digging around the cracks forever, placing more value on the minuscule more than necessary. This especially happens for artists. General humanistic functions of art become unfashionable in favour of what appears to be new discoverable details. There's funding for this and it appears to be similar to what scientists do - making discoveries, but for us artists the great inversion of all the traditional functions of art has been replace by fashionable thinking rather than what has worked for thousands of years. Do you have a town square in your neighbourhood? Likely not. That's because Modernists got caught in the weeds of discovery and trying too hard to be original that they ditched the most humanistic of all creations. This might be happening to all of the humanities in universities. There are basic truths that don't change. There are ways of thinking that work and that don't work. Wiggling around in the cracks might get you all kinds of benefits, but I think you can get lost.
Your intro is too long.
Apparently human phenotypes don't exist.🙄