|
Post by agito on May 22, 2010 11:05:56 GMT -6
and now I'm dissappointed with most of the Dkos community www.dailykos.com/story/2010/5/22/868683/-Racism-is-NOT.-A.-RIGHT The diarist does a really good job of explaining a few things, but racism is a right. One of the most despairing aspects of racial relations is how quickly the single word "racism" quickly conflagrates into a catch all phrase for the different types of racism, and any exploratory or enlightening discussion of those types of racism quickly get tuned out. For me, racism in general is a thought process, and a symptom of weakness. When one individual decides to take a whole population and equates them all with one attribute, that's intellectual laziness. So when I see a statement that says "racism is not a right." I immediately see "weakness is not a right." You'll understand if I laugh. The discussion is important because we want to minimalize governments interference in personal choice as much as possible. When one's individual choice involves murder (or any other infringement on the choices of another), then the regulation is easily seen as necessary. But the individual reasoning one goes through when choosing who to be friends with, who they might date, where they might shop and who they want to do business with is a thought process that is filled with many weaknesses (not just ones related to ethnicity), that the government can have no hope of ever corralling.
|
|
|
Post by waltc on May 22, 2010 11:49:46 GMT -6
I give the Dkos diarist a "A" for hyperbole, dishonesty and insults , that's for sure.
But the whole issue of racism and who is a racist has been so twisted by the Left during Obama's campaign - where everyone who didn't agree or criticized Obama was labeled a racist. Furthermore it's used by the Left as a weapon to shut down people they disagree with. If you want secure borders and want the government to enforce immigration laws - you're a racist. If want schools to admit students solely on the basis of test scores - you're a racist.
Nowadays I just laugh when some rich, white liberal like Behar, Maer or Stewart labels people and policies they hate as racist.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on May 22, 2010 12:02:54 GMT -6
and now I'm dissappointed with most of the Dkos community I am too, after reading the author's totalitarian rant. He's wrong in too many ways to fully discuss here. But some really stood out: - "Owning and operating a Business isn’t a Right, it’s a privilege that comes with the responsibility of respecting all those other peoples rights."
No. "Ownership" of private property, which includes a private business, is not just a "privilege." It is a right. "Operating" a business, however, is subject to laws and regulations.
- "Yes, it’s true the First Amendment does include "Freedom of Association" – but you know what it doesn’t have? Freedom to Disassociate from people you don’t like."
That's a ridulous and illogical interpretation. "Freedom of Association" clearly means "Freedom NOT to Associate" as well.
- "those people, the ones with the "Rights", have the right to associate and do commerce with YOU even if you don’t necessarily like them."
That's a completely totalitarian premise. It's also false. In fact, the Civil Rights Act says only that you don't have the right to "not associate" and "not do commerce" with people based solely on certain criteria--such as race. But a business absolutely DOES have the right to refuse service or not do commerce with anyone it pleases for any other reason not specifically protected by the Civil Rights Act (or any subsequent legislation.)
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on May 22, 2010 12:15:46 GMT -6
Closely related to racism is religious persecution. This is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by fredorbob on May 29, 2010 23:09:36 GMT -6
I do not like when people talk about what is a "right" or what is a "privilege".
It just seems wrong. Like they are categorized: Right in column A or Privilege in Column B.
A) What is a "right", well technically none of the rights are absolute even if a sentence in the Constitution is in bold letters and ends in an exclamation point like the right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
B) What is a "privilege", well fuck if the mighty "rights" can be infringed so easily then anything under this category is beyond fucked.
|
|
|
Post by agito on May 31, 2010 23:18:51 GMT -6
those are good points fredorbob.
I think it's generally accepted form of shorthand, "rights" are the things which aren't supposed to be negotiated in any context, and yet here people are arguing about them, which shows how fragile "rights" can be.
That being said, it is important for our culture to have some nebulous idea of "rights" even if half of them are the "buffer" rights that get challenged, while others remain sacrosanct.
|
|