BS: 'Racism' a catch-all accusation?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Racism' a catch-all accusation?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Feb 11 - 02:40 PM

But, even allowing for that, LH: returning to my original example in OP from today's Times, can either "bastard" or "Italian" actually be denounced in any way as "racist"?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: 'Racism' a catch-all accusation?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Feb 11 - 12:53 PM

Well, as always, it's a question of individual perception what "race" means....and people can argue about the exact definitions all the livelong day.

We use all kinds of words in ways that can be called into question, after all. For example:

Black people aren't black.
White people aren't white.
North American Indian/Native American/whatever the hell you wish to call them aren't red.
Jews aren't necessarily religious nor are they necessarily of a specific genetic stock.
Muslims aren't necessarily religious either. I've met a few Muslims (people who identified themselves as such) who were also atheistic, but who still claimed to be Muslim, so for them it was merely a label of cultural origin.
Gays aren't all gay. ;-) Some are, in fact, a bit anxious or morose.
The USA Department of Defense actually engages in attack most of the time.

And so on... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: 'Racism' a catch-all accusation?
From: pdq
Date: 21 Feb 11 - 11:59 AM

The term "race" refers to the genetic makeup of a human being, nothing else.

The term "ethnic group" can mean religion, race, nationality or even language. Jews are an ethnic group based on religion and genetic makeup. Some people claim that "hispanic" is an ethnic classification, but it must be based on language since there seems to be little relation between a Cuban of pure Spanish ancestry and a Mexican of pure native blood.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Racism' a catch-all accusation?
From: GUEST,Wolfgang without cookie
Date: 21 Feb 11 - 11:47 AM

In the context of this discussion one can revive CarolC's accusation of "racism against Muslims" (thread: popular views on Obama).
When artbrooks mentioned that Muslims are not a race, Carol posted:
In the US, artbrooks, the term 'race' may only be used to refer to skin color, hair texture, and eye, nose and lip shape, but in much of the world it can be applied to groups that are defined in other ways. Racism is a behavior. I don't see the appropriateness of only using it in reference to that particular behavior as directed toward people based on the physical characteristics that I just listed. The behavior is just as heinous regardless of whom is on the receiving end of it, and we do not have any suitable words to describe that behavior when it is directed towards groups that you don't consider a race.

Wolfgang (belonging for instance to the race of spectacle wearers)

Subject: RE: BS: 'Racism' a catch-all accusation?
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 21 Feb 11 - 11:26 AM

Generally the more precisely correct term for such language would be an "ethnic slur", the conflict being over ethnicity, rather than race. "Ethnocentrism" is too hard to pronounce, I guess, and doesn't sound as scary. Functionally, it can be (conceivably) as dehumanizing.

~ Becky in Tucson

Subject: RE: BS: 'Racism' a catch-all accusation?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Feb 11 - 10:52 AM

No kidding. It's been used that way for a very long time now in North America, whether or not it had any actual relevance to the matter at hand. It's among the most convenient possible ways of raising a whole lot of outrage that just will not go away, ruining someone's career, forcing them to defend themselves against something they cannot possibly disprove (rather as the accusation of witchcraft was once used to dispose of one's enemies), and/or causing a miscarriage of justice in some cases.

Subject: BS: 'Racism': catch-all accusation?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Feb 11 - 10:05 AM

I gather from an article by Gabriele Marcotti on the back page of 'The Game' section of today's Times that Gennaro  Gattuso has attempted to justify his attacks on Joe Jordan during and after AC Milan's recent match against Tottenham Hotspur by accusations of "racism", which, it appears, Mr Jordan must contrive to confute.  

The article is oddly reticent as to what Signor Gattuso accuses Mr Jordan of saying;  but I gather from Google that the alleged words are "Italian bastard".  I can understand  possible objection to the second word, but can see nothing "racist" about it.  As to the first, Signor Gattuso is Italian, and I fail to see any "racist" connotations in a statement of this fact there either. Even if Mr Jordan's words have been accurately reported, which he categorically denies, what on earth is supposed to be "racist" in accurately mentioning a European person's nationality? 

I carry away from this incident a distinct impression that "racism" has become a sort of catch-all complaint when anyone feels aggrieved for any reason; an unanswerable "yah-boo" justification for any sort of immoderate response ~~ even where no reference to "race" as such has in fact occurred.

If so, then surely this is a trend to be vigorously resisted, as liable to diminish and disinfect any genuine instance where racism is indeed at issue.


~Michael~