Man removed from UK flight over 'prayer' message on phone

[grumbler]

Is grumbler ever a pleasure to debate with? I don't recall.

It's never a pleasure for you, that's for sure! 

[grumbler]

There really isn't any debate happening here. Just conjecture on the motives of people we have no idea about, since they weren't cooperative enough to say something like grumbler's analogy demands.

To the extent that the first person even potentially exhibited racism, even that is kind of bogus. He might have been engaging in some profiling, but that isn't necessarily racist per se.

We don't have enough evidence to support your analogy, which is what my hypothetical was pointing out.  My hypothetical was about your analogy, not about what happened to the British guy.

[Berkut]

There really isn't any debate happening here. Just conjecture on the motives of people we have no idea about, since they weren't cooperative enough to say something like grumbler's analogy demands.

To the extent that the first person even potentially exhibited racism, even that is kind of bogus. He might have been engaging in some profiling, but that isn't necessarily racist per se.

We don't have enough evidence to support your analogy, which is what my hypothetical was pointing out.  My hypothetical was about your analogy, not about what happened to the British guy.

Given a lack of evidence, it is reasonable to assume that people acted, well, reasonably and without malice.

So my analogy, while based on some assumptions, is based on reasonable assumptions giving people the benefit of the doubt. If we do that, then in fact this guy got screwed by an unfortunate set of circumstances that were essentially random, and not motivated by malice.

Your analogy requires someone to make explicit racist remarks as justification for their actions. Obviously, if anyone involved had done that, my analysis would change.

So no, your analogy pretty much sucks, since it cannot be supported by what actually happened. Mine simply asks the reader to not assume that everyone involved is a member of the KKK. I might be wrong, but it seems like a reasonable sin given that nobody was wearing a white robe at the time.

[garbon]

I think you are making the mistake that it has to be racism as in hatred. I think it is more racism in terms of fear. Guy who looks like he could be a muslim and typing to ISI men leading to terror.

[Valmy]

I think you are making the mistake that it has to be racism as in hatred. I think it is more racism in terms of fear. Guy who looks like he could be a muslim and typing to ISI men leading to terror.

You can be racist in all kinds of not hateful ways. Just presuming somebody is great at sports because they are black is not hatred.

[Berkut]

I think you are making the mistake that it has to be racism as in hatred. I think it is more racism in terms of fear. Guy who looks like he could be a muslim and typing to ISI men leading to terror.

I think it is entirely possible that in the exact same circumstance, where all the details are the same except that the guy is white, the outcome is the same.

It is also possible that the outcome would be different, as well - that the guy being black was a necessary condition to what followed.

We simply do not know.

There is some level of profiling going on all the time though - and that isn't necessarily a bad thing. We do that constantly. Had the circumstances been identical, but the victim was a 8 year old girl for instance, it is almost impossible to imagine it coming out the same, because the odds of a 8 year old girl being a member of ISIS are so low that the person in question would almost certainly assume that whatever he saw had nothing to do with terrorism.

My point is simply that there are a huge number of assumptions that have to be made to get from the facts of the story to valid outrage at some kind of systemic injustice happening, rather than just a unfortunate sequence of events that resulted in some guy missing his flight. I don't doubt that there is actual racism happening out there, and actual injustice. I don't think it serves anyones purpose to manufacture it where there isn't any real evidence to support it.

[Martinus]

I think you are making the mistake that it has to be racism as in hatred. I think it is more racism in terms of fear. Guy who looks like he could be a muslim and typing to ISI men leading to terror.

You can be racist in all kinds of not hateful ways. Just presuming somebody is great at sports because they are black is not hatred.

Is it still racism if a stereotype is statistically significant?

Is it racist to assume that a Native American is alcohol intolerant?

[Berkut]

Sam Harris had a pretty interesting podcast talking to some crazy chick about profiling....

[Razgovory]

The Sam Harris who thinks it just might be okay to kill people for thinking the wrong thing? Man, no wonder Berkut has been loopy lately.

[Berkut]

No, not that Sam Harris.

[Razgovory]

I don't know of any other Sam Harris besides the Athiest one who believes in Psychic powers.

[Admiral Yi]

Is it still racism if a stereotype is statistically significant?

Is it racist to assume that a Native American is alcohol intolerant?

It's logical contradictions like this that render the current usage of "racist" meaningless.  Which is why I've always been pushing my preferred alternative, bigot, taken to mean someone who wishes a racial or ethnic group ill.

Course I'm explaining this to a person who uses homophobe to describe anyone who disagrees with him.

[garbon]

I think you are making the mistake that it has to be racism as in hatred. I think it is more racism in terms of fear. Guy who looks like he could be a muslim and typing to ISI men leading to terror.

I think it is entirely possible that in the exact same circumstance, where all the details are the same except that the guy is white, the outcome is the same.

Lots of things are possible but not probable.

[Martinus]

Is it still racism if a stereotype is statistically significant?

Is it racist to assume that a Native American is alcohol intolerant?

It's logical contradictions like this that render the current usage of "racist" meaningless.  Which is why I've always been pushing my preferred alternative, bigot, taken to mean someone who wishes a racial or ethnic group ill.

Course I'm explaining this to a person who uses homophobe to describe anyone who disagrees with him.

Not any more.

[grumbler]

It's logical contradictions like this that render the current usage of "racist" meaningless.  Which is why I've always been pushing my preferred alternative, bigot, taken to mean someone who wishes a racial or ethnic group ill.

A bigot is someone who continues to hold intolerant beliefs even after the facts have been explained to him.  There is an overlap between the populations of racists and that of bigots, but they aren't synonyms.

"Racial bigot" might work, though.