Comment by choeger

2 days ago

It starts by believing that there are distinct human races (which there are not). That alone makes most US Americans racist based on language alone. No (sane) German would nowadays speak of "Rasse" to describe someone with a different skin color.

Then, of course, racism consists of the believe that some races are intrinsically less valuable (in whatever sense) than others. I didn't see Scott Adams voice that part. But I might have missed it or it might have been implied.

But it's important to note that US identity politics of the last couple of decades looks increasingly weird to me as an outsider in any case.

Using "Rasse" as a direct dictionary translation and then saying that it doesn't have the same cultural connotation in another culture is nonsensical. The term "race" means something in the context of American culture, which is due to our troubled history. And Adams' comments are also in the context of that same culture.

But I believe some other countries have their own challenges living up to their nominal multi-ethnic ideals. Surely if I pop open a copy of Der Spiegel and start commenting about the finer points of an immigration policy proposal from an American perspective, I am going to get something wrong.

"It starts by believing that there are distinct human races (which there are not). . That alone makes most US Americans racist based on language alone. "

Sorry, but no.

The scientific community has moved away from 'race' in the biological sense (although there is debate) but the sociological construct of race, which is what we refer to in this context, obviously exists.

When a person 'self identifies' as Black, or Asian or White - that is 'race' - in the 'social construct' sense and it's perfectly accepted and normal - the recognition of that does not make one racist.

  • > but the sociological construct of race, which is what we refer to in this context, obviously exists.

    I doubt that something built on self-identification yields a meaningful concept of racism.

    • It's clear as day, and it's hard to understand that someone could be confused by this.

      It's literally on the census form.

      'Race' is a cultural euphemism for broader ethnicity.

      AKA 'European = White' - 'African = Black' - more or less.

      These are not arbitrary groups of 'self identification' like 'emo' or 'punk'.

      These groups are even self organizing - every single US city is built around small enclaves of groups - they pop right out on urban maps.

      We've been fighting tribal wars since the dawn of time, it's not hard to imagine how the 'Flemish' vs. 'Dutch' is not going to extend to 'European vs. African'.

      Elon Musk, on twitter, 2 days ago, was interjecting on this horrible bit of 'race war' nonsense, talking about 'blacks eviscerate whites' etc..

      Again - while there's feeble support for the notion of 'race' in the field of biology (although I think it's more controversial than stated), we obviously have cultural foundations around those concepts.

      Honestly - this kind of argument is plausibly the 'worst thing' about HN. I don't understand how something so common and obvious could be devoid in the face of some, odd, hair-splitting rhetoric.