D&D General (Anecdotal) conversations with Asian gamers on some problems they currently face in the D&D world of RPG gaming

[Bedrockgames]

Anti-racism is not a political stance. It is a human rights stance, and suggesting that this is just "a political disagreement" is another way in which racism is allowed to endure.

All you are doing is insisting people adopt all of your assumptions, down the line without question, and if they don't, you label them a racist or as promising racism. I am probably not smart enough to contend with this argument. I am old enough and have lived long enough to know when an argument feels like a form of sophistry. Especially when it is this uncompromising and unbending, and frames anyone who disagrees as morally bad.

 

[Imaculata]

They're both manifestations of the racist system, just one is more of a boogey man that's easily dismissed by most white people and the other is a lot harder to face because it's something ingrained in all of us.

The patterns that our brains learn, help keep us safe in every day life. They are not based on a personal bias of us based on skin color or race, but on life experience. Racism is not based on facts, like those brain patterns are. And they are not some defensive coping mechanism or instinct. They are not the same.

Identifying the ways in which you benefit from racist systems is the first stem to dismantling racism. You can't be an ally if you don't know or won't accept in which ways you're part of the problem.

I'm not a part of the problem.

 

[Marandahir]

All you are doing is insisting people adopt all of your assumptions, down the line without question, and if they don't, you label them a racist or as promising racism. I am probably not smart enough to contend with this argument. I am old enough and have lived long enough to know when an argument feels like a form of sophistry. Especially when it is this uncompromising and unbending, and frames anyone who disagrees as morally bad.

I'm not saying you're morally bad. I'm not saying that sitting on the sidelines = white hooded lynchers. That would be diminishing the intensity of evil in the latter case.

But there is a spectrum of evil, and sitting on the sidelines is taking a stance to not be anti-racist. And that's part of the problem.

I'm not a part of the problem.

If you can't acknowledge that you're part of the problem, then by definition, you kinda are. This is textbook case of head in the sand.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

The insane lines around the block to renew drivers licenses in the inner cities vs the easy-in easy-out DMVs in the white suburbs should say everything you need to know about access. Just because by law you can have a passport doesn't mean it's economically/socially feasible when you're struggling to put food on the plate.

I'm not talking about all black people suffering. The Obamas are somewhat of an exception because they've been able to hold such high office and make a lot of money on the office-to-book-tour pipeline. But even then, they're not protected from other forms of racism. Just that they've escaped the economic discrimination faced predominantly by inner city people of darker skin pigments.

I've also worked with white children living in villages so poor their families could not afford a toilet so they had to naughty word in a hole in the ground. I knew another family who paid their electricity bill in potatoes because that was all they had. I don't think they benefited much from being white.

 

[Cadence]

I would protest all the cases of racism you listed, at the same time. Your analogy does not fit.

I think the crime analogy fits very well, especially after you stated "Surely we agree that all crime is also bad? You don't need to make a distinction in the types of crime to be against all crime."

Protesting everything seems to require a level of colocation, cloning, or time-loops that I haven't mastered yet.

 

[Marandahir]

I've also worked with white children living in villages so poor their families could not afford a toilet so they had to naughty word in a whole in the group. I know another family who paid their electricity bill in potatoes because that was all they had. I don't think they benefited much from being white.

And that's terrible too, and a major problem we also have to face and solve. Economic discrimination is a big problem.

But they're still benefiting from being white. Just because they're suffering doesn't mean others aren't suffering more. It's a compounding effect.

 

[Imaculata]

Protesting everything seems to require a level of colocation, cloning, or time-loops that I haven't mastered yet.

Nonsense, we simply protest the issues that are most prevalent in our society, and affect us the most. And we don't have to pick and choose. We can protest income inequality while at the same time also protesting police violence. Another problem with your analogy, is that a lot of these issues of racism are connected.

That is why your analogy does not fit, no matter how hard you try to make it fit.

 

[Cadence]

This definition is very new to most people, and hasn't been the default usage in common use (in fact it still isn't the default usage). Just in certain places in academia and activist circles was it so. This is a much deeper argument than I think this thread can manage, and probably well beyond the scope of the forums politics rules. But I think this is a very dangerous definite not racism, and one that weakens the power of the word to address much more active and destructive forms of racism. I just can't sign off on this definition.

Once you know which set of definitions they're using, would there be a benefit to continue the discussion, but in your own writing to use "systemic racism", "racism from a position of systemic power", or "race based bigotry" as appropriate to each specific meaning?

Even if it isn't clear why the other side wants a vocabulary change - if one's goal is to fight all racial bigotry, why is it important enough to derail things to make it clear that a majority member needs to be able to call a minority who calls them a slur a "racist" instead of just a "racial bigot"?

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

And that's terrible too, and a major problem we also have to face and solve. Economic discrimination is a big problem.

But they're still benefiting from being white. Just because they're suffering doesn't mean others aren't suffering more. It's a compounding effect.

Which situation do think imbues an individual with a larger advantage:

1) White skin vs. Black skin
2) Born to a future US president vs. Born to a family who can't afford a toilet

 

[Marandahir]

Which situation do think imbues an individual with a larger advantage:

1) White skin vs. Black skin
2) Born to a future US president vs. Born to a family who can't afford a toilet

Straw argument. 99.9999% of Americans do not fall into category #2.

73% of Americans identify as White in the US census, and the remaining 27% are by and large victims of systematic oppression of some sort or another, INCLUDING the Obamas, even if they've largely been able to "make it."