Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
George Steiner, Is he right?.
Racism, he said, is inherent in everyone. Racial tolerance is only skin-deep.
The above statement was taken from the 'Max Hastings' column in the Mail,
Probably should have gone in Poitics, but no matter.
I tend to agree with it, but do you?.
The above statement was taken from the 'Max Hastings' column in the Mail,
Probably should have gone in Poitics, but no matter.
I tend to agree with it, but do you?.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Lonnie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Northerners scorn southerners, scots ditton english, irish catholics ditto irish prot''s, hindus ditto *****', muslims ditto everyone else.
All above r human psyche. The sooner we realise that our dislikes of others can only be resolved by acceptance/respect of another's difference/opinion the better chance we have of living together in peace.
A sense of humour and jokes across our differences make it easier and a lot more fun to face our intolerences.
All above r human psyche. The sooner we realise that our dislikes of others can only be resolved by acceptance/respect of another's difference/opinion the better chance we have of living together in peace.
A sense of humour and jokes across our differences make it easier and a lot more fun to face our intolerences.
-- answer removed --
I have not read the El Pais interview, and the reports of it could be misleading and taken out of context. If, the words attributed to George Steiner are accurate, then he would appear not to know what racism is.
The example he gave of neighbours playing loud music and lowering his house price is not a good example of racism. He would be pi$sed off regardless of their race, if their behaviour were having a detrimental affect on his life.
If, for example, they were playing loud music all day because they were deaf, he would probably lash out at deaf people. I do not believe this shows a moral flaw, or contempt for others, it is just that when we are harassed we tend not to be rational.
Having said that, we are all prejudiced in some way as we are a product of our upbringing and environment.
The example he gave of neighbours playing loud music and lowering his house price is not a good example of racism. He would be pi$sed off regardless of their race, if their behaviour were having a detrimental affect on his life.
If, for example, they were playing loud music all day because they were deaf, he would probably lash out at deaf people. I do not believe this shows a moral flaw, or contempt for others, it is just that when we are harassed we tend not to be rational.
Having said that, we are all prejudiced in some way as we are a product of our upbringing and environment.
Steiner made the original comment. Hastings thought his choice of words "a little careless" but found himself forced to agree with his assessment. The subject was not racial prejudice but racism - the ability, need, imperative to separate the world into "us" and "them" when the differences between "us" and "them" cause us difficulties. Hastings was not sanctioning the results of racism but recognizing that it exists and admitting that it affected him personally. His position was that no-one is (entirely) race-blind and that to ignore the cultural impact of social change or the effort required of some people to accommodate to immigration was stupid and short-sighted.
I'm no apologist for expressed racism but the case Steiner made and to which Hastings gave publicity is entirely cogent. The situation has been paralleled in every major city in the world. In some cases it is a matter of colour and language; in others, of accent, dress or religion. As each group rises through the social ranks and becomes the norm it views disparagingly the newer immigrants who have come to take their place. It's not pretty, it's not to be admired, but it is human nature. People often confuse having a reason with having an excuse.
I'm no apologist for expressed racism but the case Steiner made and to which Hastings gave publicity is entirely cogent. The situation has been paralleled in every major city in the world. In some cases it is a matter of colour and language; in others, of accent, dress or religion. As each group rises through the social ranks and becomes the norm it views disparagingly the newer immigrants who have come to take their place. It's not pretty, it's not to be admired, but it is human nature. People often confuse having a reason with having an excuse.
Lonnie.
Bang on.
For instance, I know myself that I have some racial/social prejudices which have been created by media representations of certain races rather than from personal knowledge.
An example - I always assume Oriental kids are brainy. That's a racial prejudice. If I were interviewing three people for a technical job (I work in computers) and favoured the Chinese applicant over two non-Orientals, then that would be racism, because my actions had been informed by irrationaly racial prejudice.
You may think that black men are lazy - that would be a racial prejudice...but if you then used your prejudice to deny black men promotion in your company - voila! Racism.
It's a fine but important distinction.
Bang on.
For instance, I know myself that I have some racial/social prejudices which have been created by media representations of certain races rather than from personal knowledge.
An example - I always assume Oriental kids are brainy. That's a racial prejudice. If I were interviewing three people for a technical job (I work in computers) and favoured the Chinese applicant over two non-Orientals, then that would be racism, because my actions had been informed by irrationaly racial prejudice.
You may think that black men are lazy - that would be a racial prejudice...but if you then used your prejudice to deny black men promotion in your company - voila! Racism.
It's a fine but important distinction.
Hastings may well have a point.
But Jake is spot-on. If it is inherent in us all, that doesn't make it any less unacceptable.
Violence, greed, laziness, selfishness. They're all within us. They all the characteristics of a tw*t.
Anyone with any self-worth does their best to overcome them. The rest bleat that it's 'just the way they are'.
But Jake is spot-on. If it is inherent in us all, that doesn't make it any less unacceptable.
Violence, greed, laziness, selfishness. They're all within us. They all the characteristics of a tw*t.
Anyone with any self-worth does their best to overcome them. The rest bleat that it's 'just the way they are'.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.