Irish and Italians and Jews explicitly weren’t considered white at the time. They became white when they started organizing with black people in solidarity in order to break that solidarity. Whiteness is something that can be bestowed on various groups.
To build on your point, it is true they were regarded as racially distinct, I'd say they were de-racialized in several stages. 1 was: they were never included in slavery era black codes. 2 was they were not affected by anti Asian laws 3 was they were not affected by jim crow era race codes. And 4 is the normal assimilative path, the thing the caller is stuck on, of descendents being more assimilated than 1st Gen immigrants, which again is disrupted for racialized and/or original peoples. I think the exploitation of racism vs solidarity is a huge factor, particularly in the reconstruction south, but also in the rust belt. And it's ongoing, we see ot now with certain union leaders tacking trumpward over immigration. So all the caller is doing is begging the question people are somehow voluntarily refusing to speed up a gradual, natural process.
@@goldengameeagleit's kinda like talking about the struggles faced by many women because of societal and institutional misogyny, and guys responding "we go through [insert problem] too".
The discrimination against italians and irishman is not racism, is xenophobia. This guy is confusing discrimination because of race with the discrimination of the foreing.
How do you “nationally assimilate” without abandoning your culture? Like Jovan said, white Americans created these circumstances, but most always complained about them, I never understood.
The moment someone says "you people" everything else afterwards is just not gonna hold up for me. They could be speakijg facts but the moment you ppl come outta their mouths im done lol
Why does ppl think a search engine cant give any solid or good info. Like yeah its google but you can adjust it to show scholarly papers educational paves and so much more then blogs and yahoo answers lol
Okay. I like how this guys defense of forcing other cultures to assimilate is “Learning other languages is hard. So it’s fine to force others to learn my language”.
It’s like he’s using the format of debate to “learn” about things he actually doesn’t know about, and he thinks that makes it good to pushback on every iota of information. Idk what’s up with these folks
Irish and Italians were often targeted because they were predominantly Catholic. I'm not bringing this up to dismiss Jovan's argument, just exanding on how bigotry often overlaps with religious belief as well, not just race, however that's not ignoring the fact that religious groups are also often racialized.
Okay so for the first five minutes or so I kinda understood where this guy was coming from (or at least thought I did) but once he started talking about assimilation he just kept getting worse 😅
A moment of silence for Kichwa BTW, this guy clearly wanted to pretend that he was some expert of Linguistics, but he kinda clearly doesnt know anything about the subject beyond a few big words
Racism and systemic racism are different things. You cannot experience systemic racism unless you are a minority. You can experience racism if you are a part of the majority, but it is still from a minority therefor it will be different than racism from majority/minority to minority. Everyone can experience hate based on their ethnicity.
@@communistgemini As defined by Oxford. Racism: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized. "a program to combat racism" Ethnicity is included in this definition. I agree with the OP here. Anyone can be racist, but a minority being racist to their oppressor is hardly worth being upset about. Systemic racism cannot be done by those who are oppressed and that's the bigger issue that has to be dealt with.
@@dannymccook I don't think I said that, so unless you're agreeing with me and it went over my head, I wouldn't mind if you'd point out what part of my comment implied that.
Dude repeated the myth that mexican natives worshipped Cortez and quezquotl (forgot how to spell that god). If i remember correctly, it is now believe that wasnt the case
27:26…. He’s literally saying that these white colonizers came into other peoples cultures to make it “better” because “these people” socially and culturally weren’t quipped enough to know modern day advances? Even though these cultures were living peacefully and structurally sound before colonization…… Mistaken guns as thunder…. Because most of those cultures never needed guns and lived harmoniously with what they had and who they were…. A better socially etiquette and social construct because originally Africans never had that????…… When once again those nations were living peacefully before colonization and purging. Proving Jovan’s point that white colonizers truly believed they were better so everyone else had to be exactly like them….
"Because most of those cultures never needed guns and lived harmoniously with what they had and who they were…." That's not true most African tribes had been waging wars against each other and taking prisoners of war as slaves for several hundreds of years before white colonizers arrived in Africa.
Would that definition that you use not be institutionalized racism rather than just racism? I agree that white people can't experience systemic or institutionalized racism in America, but racism at its base as far as I understand it, doesn't care who's on which side. You just have to put a race down or place one higher than another in some way. It sounds like an argument of pure semantics in which different dictionaries dictate your stance more than anything else
It is an argument of pure semantics. This is probably the only argument I disagree with when it comes to Jovan. White people, under the institutions that we have today, cannot experience *systemic* racism; it is impossible. White people benefit from these institutions more so than other races. However, interpersonally, white people can face racism from others because racism and all forms of tribalism have never depended on institutions existing as hate and prejudice can form in all of us. Hate and exploitativeness is what influences these institutions to be racist because people create these institutions to benefit their own status group or in-group.
I think the point is that there is no such thing as "just racism". Racism must be systemic, otherwise you’re describing racial prejudice/discrimination. But I would agree that yes, it’s not impossible for white people to experience racism; but that would only happen in a society where white people are put at the bottom of the hierarchy (which does not happen in today’s society and is in no way happening in the foreseeable future, so I guess it’s "impossible" in that sense).
@@arianamiranda3660 my point was that all prejudice based on specific demographics has a base of its own. There is a "just racism" just as there is just sexism but systemic sexism is also a talking point. The same way systemic racism is the topic of discussion here. Systemic, interpersonal, etc. are all examples of levels of that prejudice rather than necessary descriptors for the prejudice to exist at all. Racism on its own is just prejudice or discrimination based on race. It's just that simple and anything more is a specific form of it. To say that anyone can be exempt from all forms of interpersonal discrimination or prejudice based on race is just special pleading. Edit: Claiming racial prejudice is not racism is like saying sex based prejudice or or disabled persons prejudice is not sexism or ablism. The definition is being shifted to exclude any specific part of a demographic you please.
I have no idea why people do this. There’s a difference between an individuals racism and systematic racism. It’s so obvious to everyone that any individual is capable of being racist against any race, that it makes sentences like “white people in america cannot experience racism” sound so stupid. White people in america are the beneficiaries of systematic racism, but it’s still completely possible for someone to have an individual hatred of white people. How often this is the case isn’t really relevant when you make absolute statements like that. It just makes you look delusional. Your definition of racism is everyone else’s definition of systematic racism, the difference is that your definition erases the colloquial understanding of the word “racism”. It’s just messy and leads to worse conversations, rather than using both individual racism and systematic racism.
I made it clear in the video I don't believe individual racism is a thing and I provided my reasonings for this. All racism is systemic and racists are those that uphold systemic racism.
@@jovanmbradley Yeah i just think your definition of racism is bad and has negative utility. Words and definitions are based on utility and what people generally mean when they use a word. I would say that like 90% of people use the word “racism” or “racist” to refer to prejudice, antagonism, or discrimination of a person or peoples based on their race or ethnicity. So when you change the definition of “racism” to fit what most people would call “systematic racism”, you’re actively being detrimental to providing an understanding of what racism and systematic racism means. Systematic racism doesn’t even NEED racists to work, it’s meant to be invisible and work regardless of who’s in power. I see a lot of people fall on this “racism = prejudice + power” and i just think it is actively harmful to these kinds of conversations. When you said “you can’t be racist to white people” you sound delusional to the 90% of people who don’t share your definition of the word. It’s ineffective.
hard disagree. hatred of or mistreatment of white people on the basis of race in the US is an act of bigotry or prejudice, not racism as minorities in the US do not wield systemic power. systemic power is not just relegated to governance but is upheld in social systems as well.
@@asundergrowth Bigotry or prejudice against someone on the basis of their race/ethnicity/skin color IS racism in the way that pretty much everyone understands and uses the word (including the dictionaries most people refer to). SYSTEMIC racism would be the term we would use to describe a system of laws and regulations that has been created within the system we all live in with the intention of harming or otherwise discriminating against an ethnic or racial group. If you want to take the word (racism) and strip it of the meaning that everyone uses it for and apply the definition of a different term (systemic racism), i would say you’re creating negative utility. Bigotry and prejudice are not descriptive enough to describe someone’s hate of a specific race. What are they hating? The color of someone’s skin? That’s just racism. Idk why the fuck people would want to have less words and definitions to use when describing large very important and sometimes confusing topics like this.
nah I don't agree, I'm a native English speaker but I have a feeling it would be a nightmare to learn because most English words dont sound like how they're spelled lol
Sorry but i have to disagree. no genders or cases, barely any conjungations, 3 verbal tenses for exaggeration and English is hard? Guys you don't know what you're talking about I'm sorry. ever tried to learn Balkan languages? Lol
Are you joking? Slaves weren't the only people forced to be uneducated. Women and the poor were as well. I love Jovan and side with him on many topics, this isn't one of them. He is just blatantly wrong.
This lowkey feels like whiteness lashing out. I have multiple videos talking about the oppression of women and the poor. But I post a video talking about the oppression of racial groups and all of a sudden I'm wrong? very interesting
@@Tikky503 lol ik boo I love twisting the words of ppl who comments like this it's fun. Again if you side with the caller then you're pretty much a trash bag. Don't comment or watch videos like this and it won't show up on your feed it's basic knowledge of apps like this my dude
@@Tikky503 ahh so instead of listening and gaining an understanding of the stance the creator has you decided that everyone listening to a debate on systematic racism is toxic? Honey I think the saying you're looking for is don't judge a book by its cover. You would have learned jovans stance and what his viewers and supporters stand for too.
you can't use the redefinition of a word and pretend that it always meant that. a bunch of racist Marxists used power and influence to change the definition of words like "racism" to SPECIFCLY fit your power based argument. that's not debate. Racism does not require power to be racism. it is simply judging someone whether postivly or negatively based on race. if I think a jew is a competent lawyer, or an Italian a competent chef, BECAUSE of their race that's racism, same as if I assumed incompetence. this is such a dishonest and insidious rhetoric you repeat without even understanding where it comes from.
@@jovanmbradley you are quite literally appealing to definitions when you attempt to paint racism as suddenly requiring power so it can fit your heinous world view. because someone in a position of power who has the same view you do changed the definition. not because society started using the world differently. you are just a racist with the privilege to get away with it.
Race is a social construct. We should assess social constructs based on their utility, considering whether they decrease human suffering and promote human rights. I argue that race's existence is counterproductive to utility. Therefore, we should strive for its abolition and promote cultural assimilation. Here, culture is distinct from race and ethnicity, which are social constructs, and refers instead to a set of beliefs and customs. These beliefs and customs can either enhance or detract from utility; they can empower or disempower people, cause harm, or reduce harm. When discussing cultural assimilation, it's crucial to emphasize what people assimilate into. Presently, there isn't a culture that fully embodies what I'd describe as good cultural values. Western culture, in particular, is rife with toxic values such as patriarchy, misogyny, queerphobia, racism, and tribalism. These are aspects I believe should be eradicated from Western culture. When I speak of assimilation, I don't refer to assimilating into Western or White culture. Instead, I envision assimilation into a new culture that prioritize equality, inclusivity, and human rights. This requires redefining cultural norms and actively rejecting harmful ideologies and cultural aspects in order to create a culture that truly serves the well-being of all individuals.
Irish and Italians and Jews explicitly weren’t considered white at the time. They became white when they started organizing with black people in solidarity in order to break that solidarity. Whiteness is something that can be bestowed on various groups.
you ate with this
@@jovanmbradley bro was cooking then ate
@@jovanmbradleyhe's so woke it's damn near a sleeping disorder 🤣. My boy ate indeed.
To build on your point, it is true they were regarded as racially distinct, I'd say they were de-racialized in several stages. 1 was: they were never included in slavery era black codes. 2 was they were not affected by anti Asian laws 3 was they were not affected by jim crow era race codes. And 4 is the normal assimilative path, the thing the caller is stuck on, of descendents being more assimilated than 1st Gen immigrants, which again is disrupted for racialized and/or original peoples. I think the exploitation of racism vs solidarity is a huge factor, particularly in the reconstruction south, but also in the rust belt. And it's ongoing, we see ot now with certain union leaders tacking trumpward over immigration.
So all the caller is doing is begging the question people are somehow voluntarily refusing to speed up a gradual, natural process.
@@TheGLaDOSvideoCoremy cooking slaps.
White Guy Resists Urge to Say "The Irish Had It Just as Bad" Challenge (impossible)
So real! It’s one thing to recognize they had a shitty hand but it’s another to try and use that to diminish the suffering of another group
@@goldengameeagleit's kinda like talking about the struggles faced by many women because of societal and institutional misogyny, and guys responding "we go through [insert problem] too".
@@michaelregis1015 like the incels going MRA mode
they did, but that's the thing they weren't white back then
14:14 saying that black people don't speak 'properly' is a bit of a self report
Omg I did not catch that. Freudian slip lmao
That and he said "the blacks"/"you blacks" a couple times too
Dude was sus as fuuuck
Leme axe u a westion lil homie
No way he tried to gaslight you into thinking that you werent being interrupted 😭😭
The discrimination against italians and irishman is not racism, is xenophobia. This guy is confusing discrimination because of race with the discrimination of the foreing.
How do you “nationally assimilate” without abandoning your culture? Like Jovan said, white Americans created these circumstances, but most always complained about them, I never understood.
It's funny to hear him defending english when it was a language the British forced on to the Irish
Wow, dude is just totally unaware what interrupting means. Hats off to you Jovan for not flipping your top at him!
dude legit mad that Jovan had facts/stats to back his points.
Caller is arguing in bad faith, he just wants to talk over Jovan. It's a power trip.
He started defending whiteness
The moment someone says "you people" everything else afterwards is just not gonna hold up for me. They could be speakijg facts but the moment you ppl come outta their mouths im done lol
Caller: I'm not a Yt supremacist
Also Caller: Non yt ppl have to assimilate
😂😂😂
Dude wont stop yapping
I for one would have loved to hear the rest of what Jovan was going to say!
The made-up and misused words; the flat-out wrong history…this caller is not neeeeeearly as smart as he thinks he is.
Why does ppl think a search engine cant give any solid or good info. Like yeah its google but you can adjust it to show scholarly papers educational paves and so much more then blogs and yahoo answers lol
Such a stupid point lol
@@5324man1 lol sure buddy we know you don't know how technology works its okay. I'm surprised you figured out how to leave a UA-cam comment 👏👏
Of course he RAN!
Okay. I like how this guys defense of forcing other cultures to assimilate is “Learning other languages is hard. So it’s fine to force others to learn my language”.
Bro interrupts every other sentence
The amount of dog whistles this guy was giving off had my pups going crazy. Makes me wanna revisit the alt-right playbook series by innuendo studios
Destroying a culture is not making them adhere to etiquette. Indigenous people's choice is to die or assimilate.
Poor colonizers 😂😂😂
It’s like he’s using the format of debate to “learn” about things he actually doesn’t know about, and he thinks that makes it good to pushback on every iota of information. Idk what’s up with these folks
guest really just talks to talk lol he has nothing of substance to say
Dude is a clue-less rock.
Thank you so much Jovan ❤
Caller needs to learn how to stop talking and actually listen, not just hear.
Wow this guy is really racist
Personally, I think Racism can also be interpersonal and systemic. Usually the interpersonal is used to empower systemic.
3:15 not to mention that they weren’t seen as white either
Caller ended up getting so mad that you were completely right that he ragequit.
He's just mad he can't hit him like other people in his life. Gives off abuser energy
The true epitome of a libertarian omfg
15:51 i think with debate and stuff, we need to get away from “i” and “me.” it doesn’t matter what this guy thinks about AAVE, *workplaces* do
25:48 and there it is :D
did that mf say tribals??
Irish and Italians were often targeted because they were predominantly Catholic.
I'm not bringing this up to dismiss Jovan's argument, just exanding on how bigotry often overlaps with religious belief as well, not just race, however that's not ignoring the fact that religious groups are also often racialized.
I’m going to assume he’s not Irish or of Irish descent.
Okay so for the first five minutes or so I kinda understood where this guy was coming from (or at least thought I did) but once he started talking about assimilation he just kept getting worse 😅
I mean, objectively, if you were to grab a lot of uh… “explorers” and try them at The Hague, things wouldn’t go great for them
the way this guy keeps referring to black americans as “you guys/you people” is sooooo icky lmao
Caller attempts to disprove systemic racism by personally being a racist.
A moment of silence for Kichwa
BTW, this guy clearly wanted to pretend that he was some expert of Linguistics, but he kinda clearly doesnt know anything about the subject beyond a few big words
Highly entertaining
What a coward
So when this guy says they use the latin alphabet everywhere except the "far east and south" does he know about eastern and southern Europe?
This dude gives off DV energy
Racism and systemic racism are different things. You cannot experience systemic racism unless you are a minority. You can experience racism if you are a part of the majority, but it is still from a minority therefor it will be different than racism from majority/minority to minority.
Everyone can experience hate based on their ethnicity.
Ethnicity's ≠ race. So it's not racism. It's xenophobia
@@communistgemini As defined by Oxford.
Racism:
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.
"a program to combat racism"
Ethnicity is included in this definition.
I agree with the OP here. Anyone can be racist, but a minority being racist to their oppressor is hardly worth being upset about.
Systemic racism cannot be done by those who are oppressed and that's the bigger issue that has to be dealt with.
@@NubifierIt’s definitely not a big problem, but claiming that you can’t be racist against white people is super dumb.
@@dannymccookwe're talking about America though, so yeah, you cannot. Somewhere else? Absolutely.
@@dannymccook I don't think I said that, so unless you're agreeing with me and it went over my head, I wouldn't mind if you'd point out what part of my comment implied that.
Dude repeated the myth that mexican natives worshipped Cortez and quezquotl (forgot how to spell that god). If i remember correctly, it is now believe that wasnt the case
27:26…. He’s literally saying that these white colonizers came into other peoples cultures to make it “better” because “these people” socially and culturally weren’t quipped enough to know modern day advances? Even though these cultures were living peacefully and structurally sound before colonization……
Mistaken guns as thunder….
Because most of those cultures never needed guns and lived harmoniously with what they had and who they were….
A better socially etiquette and social construct because originally Africans never had that????……
When once again those nations were living peacefully before colonization and purging.
Proving Jovan’s point that white colonizers truly believed they were better so everyone else had to be exactly like them….
"Because most of those cultures never needed guns and lived harmoniously with what they had and who they were…."
That's not true most African tribes had been waging wars against each other and taking prisoners of war as slaves for several hundreds of years before white colonizers arrived in Africa.
Hence why debating Trump supporters is pointless
Would that definition that you use not be institutionalized racism rather than just racism?
I agree that white people can't experience systemic or institutionalized racism in America, but racism at its base as far as I understand it, doesn't care who's on which side. You just have to put a race down or place one higher than another in some way.
It sounds like an argument of pure semantics in which different dictionaries dictate your stance more than anything else
It is an argument of pure semantics. This is probably the only argument I disagree with when it comes to Jovan. White people, under the institutions that we have today, cannot experience *systemic* racism; it is impossible. White people benefit from these institutions more so than other races. However, interpersonally, white people can face racism from others because racism and all forms of tribalism have never depended on institutions existing as hate and prejudice can form in all of us. Hate and exploitativeness is what influences these institutions to be racist because people create these institutions to benefit their own status group or in-group.
I think the point is that there is no such thing as "just racism". Racism must be systemic, otherwise you’re describing racial prejudice/discrimination. But I would agree that yes, it’s not impossible for white people to experience racism; but that would only happen in a society where white people are put at the bottom of the hierarchy (which does not happen in today’s society and is in no way happening in the foreseeable future, so I guess it’s "impossible" in that sense).
@@arianamiranda3660 then I'd fundamentally disagree. Just as there is agism and ablism and sexism, there is just racism.
@@DarkThunder3400 I.. didn’t deny the existence of racism..
@@arianamiranda3660 my point was that all prejudice based on specific demographics has a base of its own. There is a "just racism" just as there is just sexism but systemic sexism is also a talking point. The same way systemic racism is the topic of discussion here. Systemic, interpersonal, etc. are all examples of levels of that prejudice rather than necessary descriptors for the prejudice to exist at all.
Racism on its own is just prejudice or discrimination based on race. It's just that simple and anything more is a specific form of it. To say that anyone can be exempt from all forms of interpersonal discrimination or prejudice based on race is just special pleading.
Edit:
Claiming racial prejudice is not racism is like saying sex based prejudice or or disabled persons prejudice is not sexism or ablism. The definition is being shifted to exclude any specific part of a demographic you please.
Lol isn't a white supremacist but seems to know a whole lot about them and makes apologies for them
😂
Interpersonal and Systemic racism are different forms of racism. Both are racism. Your definition is kind of dumb, to be honest.
I have no idea why people do this. There’s a difference between an individuals racism and systematic racism. It’s so obvious to everyone that any individual is capable of being racist against any race, that it makes sentences like “white people in america cannot experience racism” sound so stupid. White people in america are the beneficiaries of systematic racism, but it’s still completely possible for someone to have an individual hatred of white people. How often this is the case isn’t really relevant when you make absolute statements like that. It just makes you look delusional. Your definition of racism is everyone else’s definition of systematic racism, the difference is that your definition erases the colloquial understanding of the word “racism”. It’s just messy and leads to worse conversations, rather than using both individual racism and systematic racism.
I made it clear in the video I don't believe individual racism is a thing and I provided my reasonings for this. All racism is systemic and racists are those that uphold systemic racism.
@@jovanmbradley Yeah i just think your definition of racism is bad and has negative utility. Words and definitions are based on utility and what people generally mean when they use a word. I would say that like 90% of people use the word “racism” or “racist” to refer to prejudice, antagonism, or discrimination of a person or peoples based on their race or ethnicity. So when you change the definition of “racism” to fit what most people would call “systematic racism”, you’re actively being detrimental to providing an understanding of what racism and systematic racism means. Systematic racism doesn’t even NEED racists to work, it’s meant to be invisible and work regardless of who’s in power. I see a lot of people fall on this “racism = prejudice + power” and i just think it is actively harmful to these kinds of conversations. When you said “you can’t be racist to white people” you sound delusional to the 90% of people who don’t share your definition of the word. It’s ineffective.
hard disagree. hatred of or mistreatment of white people on the basis of race in the US is an act of bigotry or prejudice, not racism as minorities in the US do not wield systemic power. systemic power is not just relegated to governance but is upheld in social systems as well.
@@asundergrowth Bigotry or prejudice against someone on the basis of their race/ethnicity/skin color IS racism in the way that pretty much everyone understands and uses the word (including the dictionaries most people refer to). SYSTEMIC racism would be the term we would use to describe a system of laws and regulations that has been created within the system we all live in with the intention of harming or otherwise discriminating against an ethnic or racial group. If you want to take the word (racism) and strip it of the meaning that everyone uses it for and apply the definition of a different term (systemic racism), i would say you’re creating negative utility. Bigotry and prejudice are not descriptive enough to describe someone’s hate of a specific race. What are they hating? The color of someone’s skin? That’s just racism. Idk why the fuck people would want to have less words and definitions to use when describing large very important and sometimes confusing topics like this.
Ironically English is the most simplest language ever. Compare to African. Arabic. And nahuatl other indigenous languages
did a bot write this?
nah I don't agree, I'm a native English speaker but I have a feeling it would be a nightmare to learn because most English words dont sound like how they're spelled lol
Like everyone knows English is the one of the hardest languages to learn. A simple Google search tells you this.
Korean's simpler than english
Sorry but i have to disagree. no genders or cases, barely any conjungations, 3 verbal tenses for exaggeration and English is hard? Guys you don't know what you're talking about I'm sorry. ever tried to learn Balkan languages? Lol
Are you joking? Slaves weren't the only people forced to be uneducated. Women and the poor were as well.
I love Jovan and side with him on many topics, this isn't one of them. He is just blatantly wrong.
dawg the topic was racism he never denied that other groups were oppressed
This lowkey feels like whiteness lashing out. I have multiple videos talking about the oppression of women and the poor. But I post a video talking about the oppression of racial groups and all of a sudden I'm wrong? very interesting
Why did this end up in my feed? This mindset is toxic, you people need help
Ik right defending white supremacy is horrible. But it's a debate and he allows ppl to call in who has different views then educates them.
@@Polcat94 Im talking about you too love.
@@Tikky503 lol ik boo I love twisting the words of ppl who comments like this it's fun. Again if you side with the caller then you're pretty much a trash bag. Don't comment or watch videos like this and it won't show up on your feed it's basic knowledge of apps like this my dude
@@Polcat94 I didnt side with anyone, I heard this guys first comments and closed the video. it was a little sad to hear
@@Tikky503 ahh so instead of listening and gaining an understanding of the stance the creator has you decided that everyone listening to a debate on systematic racism is toxic? Honey I think the saying you're looking for is don't judge a book by its cover. You would have learned jovans stance and what his viewers and supporters stand for too.
first.
second
you can't use the redefinition of a word and pretend that it always meant that. a bunch of racist Marxists used power and influence to change the definition of words like "racism" to SPECIFCLY fit your power based argument.
that's not debate. Racism does not require power to be racism. it is simply judging someone whether postivly or negatively based on race. if I think a jew is a competent lawyer, or an Italian a competent chef, BECAUSE of their race that's racism, same as if I assumed incompetence.
this is such a dishonest and insidious rhetoric you repeat without even understanding where it comes from.
Yeah this is just an appeal to definitions fallacy, definitions are by nature descriptive not prescriptive
@@jovanmbradley you are quite literally appealing to definitions when you attempt to paint racism as suddenly requiring power so it can fit your heinous world view.
because someone in a position of power who has the same view you do changed the definition. not because society started using the world differently.
you are just a racist with the privilege to get away with it.
@@bubbadumps3747no, that would be a prescriptive analysis.
Race is a social construct. We should assess social constructs based on their utility, considering whether they decrease human suffering and promote human rights. I argue that race's existence is counterproductive to utility. Therefore, we should strive for its abolition and promote cultural assimilation. Here, culture is distinct from race and ethnicity, which are social constructs, and refers instead to a set of beliefs and customs. These beliefs and customs can either enhance or detract from utility; they can empower or disempower people, cause harm, or reduce harm.
When discussing cultural assimilation, it's crucial to emphasize what people assimilate into. Presently, there isn't a culture that fully embodies what I'd describe as good cultural values. Western culture, in particular, is rife with toxic values such as patriarchy, misogyny, queerphobia, racism, and tribalism. These are aspects I believe should be eradicated from Western culture. When I speak of assimilation, I don't refer to assimilating into Western or White culture. Instead, I envision assimilation into a new culture that prioritize equality, inclusivity, and human rights. This requires redefining cultural norms and actively rejecting harmful ideologies and cultural aspects in order to create a culture that truly serves the well-being of all individuals.