D&D General "Red Orc" American Indians and "Yellow Orc" Mongolians in D&D

[Mind of tempest]

Of course. But even so, I don't think suppressing such opinions is the way to go, and no one is advocating for supporting such opinions.

then how are we to ever get rid of them?

This isn't a new issue; "Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it." was stated by Jonathan Swift in the 1700s (and, I am sure, similar sentiments were expressed long before that).

It's like anything else- you just have to trust that, in the long run, the truth will win out. It will not be easy, it will not be costless, and it will not always be pretty. But you can't sacrifice the principles of open discourse when it is convenient ... if you do, why did you bother with the fight in the first place?

After all, the truth that racism is a bad thing ... eventually won out (or, at a minimum, is winning ...). And that was not easy, or costless.

(IMO, etc.)

ah trust that thing I am basically incapable of.

 

[Vaalingrade]

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

I will defend tot he death you right to not be arrested by the government for saying it. Social consequences still exist.

 

[Aldarc]

After all, the truth that racism is a bad thing ... eventually won out (or, at a minimum, is winning ...). And that was not easy, or costless.

Has it? Or has it become more acceptable on account of platforming racists, xenophobes, and the like in the public sphere? Things that were once simply racist dogwhistles in the political sphere have somehow become acceptable to say within some mainstream political circles. I somehow feel that racists have evolved their rhetoric and tactics while the anti-racists are still pretending that the fight looks like it did in the Civil Rights era. This is all to say that I'm quite cynical about your optimism or half-glass full approach to the issue, particularly when I look at how these debates are resurfacing.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

what is racism other than a pointless and fundamentally rotten opinion?

Your theoretical interlocutor would say you're begging the question.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

Has it? Or has it become more acceptable on account of platforming racists, xenophobes, and the like in the public sphere? Things that were once simply racist dogwhistles in the political sphere have somehow become acceptable to say within some mainstream political circles. I somehow feel that racists have evolved their rhetoric and tactics while the anti-racists are still pretending that the fight looks like it did in the Civil Rights era. This is all to say that I'm quite cynical about your optimism or half-glass full approach to the issue, particularly when I look at how these debates are resurfacing.

Never in my entire life, out in the real world, have I ever heard someone make a racist comment and not get immediately blasted for it - on the rare occasion that it has ever happened in my presence. Anecdote, but, still.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Your theoretical interlocutor would say you're begging the question.

true but this is not a formal debate and also it is rather hard to conceive of it being anything else, can you do better?

 

[Filthy Lucre]

true but this is not a formal debate and also it is rather hard to conceive of it being anything else, can you do better?

I hold people to formal standards whenever I'm discussing things like this. Pedantic or not.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I have found that suppressing something generally causes more harm than good, especially when you're talking about opinions.

I used to agree with this completely, but I think the basic design of all the popular forms of social media (and news reporting in much of the world) means that we've entered a situation where opinions/ideas basically either are only amplified or suppressed (or people see it that way, and I can't say they're entirely wrong), and it seems like the amplification of certain ideas, rather than exposing them to sunlight and causing them to fall apart, just makes them reach more vulnerable/susceptible people where those ideas thrive. It seems like the major issue here is maybe the amplification, which didn't really happen in the same way pre-social-media, but virtually all social media was designed to cause (and indeed only in very recent years has any attempt been made to stop this - e.g. YouTube and Facebook recently changing algorithms to no longer push people hard to more extreme material - this was fascinatingly noticeable with my YouTube recommends). Forums don't cause the same amplification, I note, because they don't make decisions on what to show people based on votes etc., and don't try and "increase engagement".

(With news, there have always been attempts to "increase engagement" and so on, but first the 24-hour-news-cycle, and then the proliferation of free "news" on the internet, together with the reliance of an ad-supported model has made it much worse (at least one paywalled UK newspaper shows the "increase engagement" issue can happen without advertising propelling it though)).

Never in my entire life, out in the real world, have I ever heard someone make a racist comment and not get immediately blasted for it - on the rare occasion that it has ever happened in my presence. Anecdote, but, still.

This is an interesting claim. I'd wonder how old you are, what circles you move in, and so on. Because at 43, despite being from relatively liberal/left circles, I've absolutely heard people make racist comments and not get "blasted" (as in severely criticized), and not just white people either. There are certain kinds of racist comment that just aren't likely to fly with anyone in public, but there other kinds of racial stereotyping, particularly, and what I might call "racial sneering", which I've absolutely seen people get away with - and to continue to get away with today. And whilst there may be backlash from some of this when its in public, it's not sufficient to create actual consequences in most cases (c.f. most "cancelled" people getting a louder voice post "cancellation").

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I will defend tot he death you right to not be arrested by the government for saying it. Social consequences still exist.

Yeah, great. I heard the same arguments made by people in the 80s and the 90s and 00s to keep gay people (and later, transgender people) down.

Just because you think the state action dichotomy you learned from XKCD is clever as a one-line retort doesn't mean it's not an old and tired argument that hasn't been gone through for decades. Thanks, though, for your reasoned response that really added to the conversation.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

...it's not sufficient to create actual consequences in most cases (c.f. most "cancelled" people getting a louder voice post "cancellation").

Then I don't think you have any remaining options, it would seem. Since the state can't intervene.