Yes, he’s an idiot

White people, men and other “oppressors” should be barred from attending some anti-racism events, a leading university student union has insisted.

Distinguishing between people on the basis of their race is called “racism”.

27 thoughts on “Yes, he’s an idiot”

  1. No, he’s not an idiot, although he’s definitely a racist. He’s deliberately excluding people who might oppose his agenda

  2. Not entirely unreasonable. You wouldn’t staff a rape crisis centre with men, no matter how supportive they were. And how many heterosexuals were welcomed with open arms at Stonewall meetings?

    I question whether it’s necessary. In today’s multicultural London your micro-aggressor is just as likely to be non-white (although still very likely to be male). Also, do white men never suffer these so-called micro-aggressions? I suspect short men would be particularly susceptible.

  3. I can’t remember where I saw this comment (moght even have been here) but it was something along the lines of ‘Do you remember when people went to university to become smarter?’

    I do. It was before they started employing lecturers like this one.

  4. I can’t remember where I saw this comment (moght even have been here) but it was something along the lines of ‘Do you remember when people went to university to become smarter?’

    I do. It was before they started employing lecturers who encouraged this sort of ‘thinking’.

  5. At this point, this stuff is just a load of people playing. We seem to have more of a race industry today than we did in the 80s when I worked with people who would openly state their opinions on black people.

  6. So, to be clear, Tim Worstall puts forward “Distinguishing between people on the basis of their race is called ‘racism'”.

    I think I go along with that; hard to disagree really.

  7. So Much for Subtlety

    Ironman – “I think I go along with that; hard to disagree really.”

    And yet disagree you do. You think that different results between sexes prove that women have different brains but that different results among genetically distinct populations imply nothing about differences between said populations.

    As I keep saying, White people have given up on race. No one else has. It is central to the way the non-Right Wing White population thinks. Thus our immigration policy cannot end well.

  8. Close–at once–all non-science/tech uni courses. Sack all the teachers/assoc admin staff without compensation and confiscate their pensions. Throw the students out and freeze their loans–ie they get no more cash but still have to pay back what has been spent on them. That will pretty much put an end to the activities and socialistic pronouncements of the students union and force a lot of middle-class Marxist spawn to look for work and interact with the harsh facts of reality.

  9. Distinguishing between people on the basis of their race is called “racism”.

    No, distinguishing people on the basis of their race is called distinguishing. Hiring a black man to play Chaka Zulu is not racism.

    Treating people badly on the basis of their race is called prejudice. I think that’s probably what you’re thinking of Tim.

    Racism is the failure of a white person to acknowledge and compensate for their racial power and privelege. Only a white person can be racist, because only white people have racial privelege. All white people have racial privelege and the failure or refusal to acknowledge this, and compensate, is racism.

    Your attempt to claim that anti-racist compensatory policy is racist is, itself, racist.

  10. Ah Mr Interested-Ecks-SMFS, as gloriously clear as ever.

    “White people have given up on race”. Only white people? You would distinguish them from others would you?

  11. Ok, so ironically this was originally just a request, rather than a straight bar, and it’s the usual self-righteous arses making the big noise.

    Thus caught my eye, though: “[these discussions are] not always possible when individuals with more privilege are present as the power imbalance can dominate and drown out oppressed voices […] even if they are not saying anything.”

    Shows rather clearly how oblivious these cosseted narcissists are to the privilege they all enjoy already. They’re standing on a mountaintop, looking down on half the world, and wailing about the horrors getting a hole in your shoe.

  12. “…the power imbalance can dominate and drown out oppressed voices […] even if they are not saying anything.”

    Well, firstly, you can drown out someone who isn’t saying anything and secondly, I take it he’s never seen one of the Great Oppressed in full flow?

    It’d take the Space Shuttle lifting off to drown them out.

  13. JuliaM,

    Your attempt to deny your white privelege and assert a racist denial of racism is racist. As we see from Ironman’s wise and illuminating counsel, a claim by a member of the white race that race itself exists is racist, as is the refusal to agree that non-white races, which do not exist, do not exist.

  14. Just to clarify that, the concept of “race” is a false consciousness invented by the white race.

  15. @JuliaM right! They act like they got drafted for the next Hunger Games. When actually they just volunteered for Big Brother.

  16. “Distinguishing between people on the basis of their race is called “racism”.” All sorts of things are called “racism”. That’s why I contend that everyone, probably without exception, is “racist” under one or other definition of the word.

  17. There is only one meaningful definition of the word, and that is the one used by people in power. Under this definition, only white people are racist, and non-whites by definition cannot be racist. A black man publicly announcing that he would like to industrially slaughter every white person in the world is not racist, because he is not articulating racial class privelege.

  18. So Much for Subtlety

    Ironman – “Only white people? You would distinguish them from others would you?”

    Black people have slightly more melanin than White people. That means in places like Oslo, their children are slightly more likely to get rickets and some other diseases.

    It is not racism to distinguish children at risk on the basis of their skin colour when they are at risk due to their skin colour. As it is not sexist to point out women do not do well at the higher end of the IQ test. Because it is true.

    On the other hand aggressively pretending not to notice, to the point of denying reality, is actually racism.

  19. As it is not sexist to point out women do not do well at the higher end of the IQ test.

    Yes it is. Such an assertion, which may be used to justify inequality of outcome, is an articulation of male privelege.

    I don’t know why people keep making up their own definitions of words like racism and sexism, then trying to assert that you aren’t racists and sexists. If you assert that inequality can be explained by innate capacities, or in any other way justified, you are a sexist (or racist, etc).

  20. Ian B – that smacks of the “tax avoidance” terminology debate.

    You seem to be suggesting that as asserting that “inequality is justified in certain circumstances” is sexist (or racist), but by definition is a justified assertion, then some sexism (or racism) is justifiable. That then suggests that there is justifiable sexism (or racism) and unjustifiable sexism (or racism) – just as people draw a distinction between justifiable tax avoidance (such as using an ISA), unacceptable avoidance (treaty shopping, for example) and abusive avoidance (as defined by the GAAR, say).

    The problem is that, in my experience, most people think “sexism” (or “racism”) only connotes something unjustifiable. To most people, “Justifiable sexism (or racism)”, such as not letting ladies into the gents’ toilets, is perfectly acceptable common sense.

    By widening the terms, you make them confusing and unhelpful.

    There’s a debate to be had about whether any particular justification is reasonable, of course. But that’s a different matter altogether 🙂

  21. Pellinor,

    I’m just saying what the words mean. Racism is a systemic power differential between two races. The racist race is that race who benefit from the power differential. To be a member of the power group is to be racist. The best such a person can do is to compensate for their racism by attempting to reduce the manifestation of their privelege; for instance by not attending a BME meeting, or by transferring money from their race to the race against whom they are priveleged.

    All members of the racial power group (whites) are racists, who commit the act of racism by failing to compensate (checking their privelege). Another notable act of racism is to attempt to claim that the power differential does not exist by accusing members of oppressed groups of racism, or “inverse racism”. Indeed, it is quite clear from this term that a racist power relationship is unidirectional (white over black), otherwise it could not be “inverted”.

    All whites are racists. No non-whites are racist. Any claim to the contrary is right wing neoliberal sophistry.

  22. UCL’s claim to fame was that they were the first university in England to admit and treat Protestants and Catholics equally, and the first in England to admit and treat men and women equally. My sister was there thirty years ago, at which time the students were still quite proud of that heritage. Things change.

  23. Andrew,

    > And how many heterosexuals were welcomed with open arms at Stonewall meetings?

    OK, I never went to a meeting, but I did use to know a guy in Stonewall (really nice bloke), and I’m pretty sure they’d have welcomed anyone willing to help the cause.

  24. Also, these eejits who think white people can’t be victims of racism should be encouraged to wander round Dundee wearing England shirts during the next World Cup.

  25. Scotland and England is a slightly different thing, since it is xenophobia rather than racism. Scots cannot be xenophobes as they are the victim group in our power analysis, due to an history and current status as the victims of colonial imperialist oppression by the English.

  26. Also, those eejits who think white people can’t be victims of racism should be encouraged to wander round Rotherham while being a 12 year old white girl.

  27. Lol, Ian B is correct sadly. I have no idea why we did this to ourselves. All other peoples on Earth just see it as a good thing that whitey hates himself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *