Broken Records: Arguments About Race

Broken Records.

Broken Record Arguments:

  1. Having a Broken Record Department is unfair, it amounts to censorship!
  2. Not all whites are what you say. Whites are individuals!
  3. Whites are not uniquely evil.
  4. Blacks are just as racist if not more so.
  5. Racism is dead.
  6. I don’t like your tone. A post of yours made me upset!
  7. Your talk about race is divisive. You need to kiss up to whites.
  8. You see racism in everything!
  9. Black crime statistics
  10. Black rape statistics, particularly the DOJ crime victimization numbers
  11. The average African IQ is 70
  12. Black American IQ
  13. The Bell Curve is right!
  14. The BET Fallacy: Using BET, Chris Rock, Rented Negroes or hip hop videos to prove something about black people
  15. Africans sold their own into slavery. The Arabs traded slaves too!
  16. The bootstrap myth: If Jews or Asians or my grandfather can make it in America, anyone can. Blacks are just a bunch of layabout whiners.
  17. Black pathology: Blacks are their own worst enemies.
  18. There is some truth to stereotypes.
  19. Racism is universal, natural, part of human nature.
  20. The White Inventor argument.
  21. “Your blog is anti-white”
  22. Race is a fact of science
  23. The black-on-black crime argument
  24. The race baiter argument
  25. The Broken Africa stereotype – Africa is a hellhole

Future Broken Record Argument posts:

  1. Take Japan, for instance…
  2. The higher black crime rates proves that blacks have greater criminal tendencies than whites.
  3. Affirmative action
  4. You hate white people: Criticism of whites can only come from hatred or racism.
  5. Whites do not benefit from racism, past (slavery, genocide, Jim Crow, etc) or present.
  6. Making general statements about whites is racist.

See also:

37 thoughts on “Broken Records: Arguments About Race

      • I talked a lot about the IQ stuff in a post the other day. There is no good mechanism to explain all elements of it, and the race realists end up in category errors no matter how charitably you interpret them.

        • I have no ultimate conclusion about the data. The more I learn the more I realize it is complex beyond all data. But some people aren’t comfortable with complexity, specifically as it relates to uncertainty.

          • That was my point: once you control for one factor, another pops up. You control for race, then you have to deal with poverty. Poverty, then symbolic kinship bonds. Cultural influences. Biases in the test. Etc.

      • Plus the argument is “I can’t talk about racism without generalizing about whites.” This is true, but he also otherizes them and compares them to specific ethnicities of which world wide “whiteness” isn’t. Does he mean anglos? All Europeans? What? I am not saying that undoes systematic racism. Of course it doesn’t. Nor are all generalities about “whites” in America or in the former British colonies (his examples) wrong, but since he too hasn’t deal with what “whiteness” is and isn’t, that is an otherizing statement.

        Are light skinned European descended Mexicans “white”?

        Do you see what I am trying to get you to see about the contradictions of liberalism. About the way these arguments and data are framed selectlvely? It is problematic because it actually naturalizes European style concepts as a category itself.

          • Good question. I benefit from white privilege as long as people don’t know I have a mixed ethnic background. I consider that makes me white as do most POC, BUT many white people don’t think so😉

          • Also, black supremacism do challenge the notion that minorities cannot be racist since race and national were European spread discourses. (The latter is undeniably true, but I think once out unto the world any group can take control of it. I think of racial nationalism in East Asia as a example that according to many theorists of race shouldn’t be possible or shouldn’t count as “racism.”)

      • By the way, I wasn’t saying everything he said was weak tea. A lot of it is sound. A lot of what he is arguing against is weak tea bullshit, but some of it is actually weaker versions of arguments I have seen.

        • Although his promotion of “Derailing for dummies” is suspect. That is the text inspired what that you took issue with about allies in the feminism movement a while back.

          • I’m glad you found some value in it. I figured I’d just throw it out there. I come across something on occasion and I just feel like posting it for whatever reason. It takes me a while to process a source of info. This blog is one I’ve been looking at recently. It seemed worthy enough to throw into the discussion, even if I have no clear opinion about any of it at the moment.

  1. Plus I have never heard a anti-racist say whites were unique in history for evil, just dominant in power and thus have the most to benefit from racism. I am sure SOMEONE has said white were uniquely evil outside of the Nation of Islam, but it really is sort of a rare claim.

        • I understand. I wasn’t claiming there is pure data. I just meant I’m interested in the data. I like when people bring up data, even when I disagree with them. Data gives a foothold for meaningful discussion, including arguing about the data itself (how it was collected, measured, analyzed, etc).

          • The data is interesting, but the framing of the data is of vital importance. Most race realists are framing things in really deceptive ways, and most anti-racists are trying to honestly fight that. However, there are a lot of actually structural racist assumptions which shape the discourse of anti-racism in ways that make it easy for it to push the very thing it is fighting against.

          • All good points. I see my job as finding intriguing data and finding the best possible frames in order to, hopefully, gain new perspectives and insights. But first I have to find the data and ponder it, which means dealing with the frames others have put it in.

  2. Having a broken record department does not censor. It allows you to take your arguments on a subject and argue it in the right place. You still have a voice just not where you want it.

    High black crime rates do not show a tendency for blacks. I am sure some see it that way, but it is just their line 9f reasoning. In fact one person charged with several crimes will not be counted as one on those stats. For example if Robert was charged for rape, murder, and armed robbery then the stats will put it in as 1 rape by (insert race), 1 murder by ( insert race) and so on.

    Criticizing someone does not equal being racist. People constructively criticize all the time and most try to do better.

    Affirmative action is a nice argument, but weak one considering the program does not just benefit blacks. It benefits everyone minus white men.

    Whites not benefiting from slavery past or present. …I think free labor was a great benefit in the past. More than you make care to know, but I am sure someone else could better make that case.

    Making general statements about anyone is racist. Not just when they are made about whites, but if you read abagond he actually says many most but never a general statement to all.

    Aside from that I think it is a bit sad that you are attempting to make a name for yourself by arguing issues from another man’s blog. Creepy and exposes deeper issues. I have seen this from someone before and they were two comments from a straight jacket. Unless you are that very guy then sorry I responded.

    • Both skepoet and I are anti-racists. He is probably more critical of US society than I am, in many ways. He comes from a more alternative perspective, in terms of ideolology, intellect, and place of residence. He has traveled to and lived in other countries, unlike myself.

      He has high standards when it comes to arguments, but his criticisms are typically fair and intelligent. I always take his views seriously. I wouldn’t advise dismissing him out of hand. If you give him a chance, he’ll explain himself.

      • Sorry but I am not one you have to explain anti- racist attitudes to. I don’t call or judge people as anything other than what they show me. So the likelihood of me calling you or anyone a racist is slim. Not my style as I tend to listen to what people have to say and disagree if I don’t agree.

        I did not dismiss him or aleast I don’t feel I did. As I stated I listen to all sides and am very patient.

        I did however assume in my last statement and that was my mistake. I ran into a guy once that did the stalk and follow thing with blog posys. He was extremely crazy and so I thought this might be part 2. I apologize.

        Thanks for the level headed and kind response .🙂

        • I didn’t even realist you were talking about me? I actually just read through those posts and saw some of them which seemed to responding to claims I have never actually heard said. Anywhere.

          And if one wanted to call me a racist, I suppose I would not deny them that. That is honestly not for me to judge. I do worry about these sorts of blogs use of racial theory that assumes that we have agreed definitions for what, say, “whiteness” is worldwide. I have no idea how that is meaningful outside of Anglo discourse. Racial relations in Latin America, where I currently live, have an entirely different pattern and are much subtle/less binary, but just as vicious.

          • I just pressed reply so I was not sure at all who would respond or who it would actually be addressed to. I actually just responded to this:

            Future Broken Record Argument posts:

            Take Japan, for instance…
            The higher black crime rates proves that blacks have greater criminal tendencies than whites.
            Affirmative action
            You hate white people: Criticism of whites can only come from hatred or racism.
            Whites do not benefit from racism, past (slavery, genocide, Jim Crow, etc) or present.
            Making general statements about whites is racist.

            Sorry for bringing about any confusion.

  3. I will look through other posts. I need a change of pace and this might be it. What do you think about the idea that America is becoming a police state?

    • Becoming a police state? Given it has more people in prison per capita and per raw numbers than USSR did during the worse of the terror (although we do execute less people) says US probably already is a police state. As it is my home country, that saddens me a good bit.

      • Lol. OK so becoming was the wrong choice of words. I believe for me it is a “becoming” because I am just starting to pay any real attention.

        • Yeah, when I discovered a lot portion of US manufacturing overall output was prison labor in the 2000s is when I noticed. It’s fair though. I think it is hard to hide how bad it has gotten now.

    • I’m with skepoet on this, although I’ll state it more strongly. I think the police state debate is long over. We went down that road before I was born. The entire Cold War was about the build up of the US as a police state, for to fight the enemy the state had to implement social control on the citizenry. But I’d argue it began even earlier with the backlash against the wave of immigration around 1900. Prohibition was one of the early expressions of the US government playing with the idea of becoming a police state.

      • Thanks for the detail. I have to admit that the idea of a police state is new to me. Though very interesting none the less. If you guys have the time I would be interested in learning as much as you can tell me. Where it began, maybe even why etc.

        • I don’t normally write directly about the police state. But I write about many issues that touch upon it and cover similar territory.

          I’m not an expert about what makes a police state. Mass incarceration and the militarization of the police, though, seem like clear indicators to me.

          Is it really a police state at this point? I guess it depends on how you wish to define it.

          My views are expressed partly in posts such as this recent writing of mine:

          In the end, I don’t care what it is called. Label it a police state or not. The oppressive and dysfunctional reality we face is the same, either way.

          My thoughts lately have been heavily influenced by the race angle. For example, I really appreciate Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow. That book will get you thinking.

          “Yet there is no denying that if your goal were to consign African Americans to a permanent underclass—one which the rest of us would be culturally and legally permitted to discriminate against in employment, housing, voting rights, and government benefits—the war on drugs would be a great way to do it.”

  4. Sorry it took me so long to comment. I actually lost the link to get here. I put it on follow so it should be much easier to get to.🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s