A Pomo Lefty Argument That David Duke Isn't Racist
Since races aren't real, there is no such thing as racism, so David Duke isn't racist. Races are not real groups, they are fictive "constructs" based on arbitrary groupings based on "clines." So there are no races. So there is no racism. Duke hates blacks, but "black" is not a race; it's an arbitrary, scientifically indefensible way of grouping together the most genetically heterogeneous group of humans. So, when Duke and other say "blacks are inferior to whites," it isn't racism. It's merely a form of non-racist bigotry.
Now, that's bullshit.
And it's bullshit that's roughly analogous to the bullshit progressives spew about anti-white racists like Sarah Jeong. Making up an ad hoc, politically expedient re-definition of racism in order to defuse accusations of racism against your own position is a transparent and scurrilous bit of semantic sophistry. 'Racism' does not mean "privilege plus power." 'Racism' means what 'racism' has meant for at least my entire lifetime: it's roughly the view that some individuals are inferior to others merely because of their race. (Though actually racism is a more complicated concept than most people seem to understand. Still, the basic idea is clear enough.)
Even if Duke's heinous attitudes could avoid being racist on a technicality, they wouldn't be any less heinous. Similarly Jeong's Twitter excretions: even if the ridiculous "privilege plus power" re-definition were to take over, her assertions would be just as bad; they'd merely fall into a different category of shittiness--a category other than racism.
But Jeong's views are racist, and we shouldn't let the left dance around that by pretending that words don't mean what they mean. Because words do mean things, and those meanings matter. We should lower the boom on people who try to advance their positions via such sophistries.
But look: they wouldn't try such a desperate ploy if there weren't something to be gained by it. That alone should tell us that we can't let them get away with it.
It also pushes a certain question to the forefront: what is it that they expect to gain by this stratagem?
Now, that's bullshit.
And it's bullshit that's roughly analogous to the bullshit progressives spew about anti-white racists like Sarah Jeong. Making up an ad hoc, politically expedient re-definition of racism in order to defuse accusations of racism against your own position is a transparent and scurrilous bit of semantic sophistry. 'Racism' does not mean "privilege plus power." 'Racism' means what 'racism' has meant for at least my entire lifetime: it's roughly the view that some individuals are inferior to others merely because of their race. (Though actually racism is a more complicated concept than most people seem to understand. Still, the basic idea is clear enough.)
Even if Duke's heinous attitudes could avoid being racist on a technicality, they wouldn't be any less heinous. Similarly Jeong's Twitter excretions: even if the ridiculous "privilege plus power" re-definition were to take over, her assertions would be just as bad; they'd merely fall into a different category of shittiness--a category other than racism.
But Jeong's views are racist, and we shouldn't let the left dance around that by pretending that words don't mean what they mean. Because words do mean things, and those meanings matter. We should lower the boom on people who try to advance their positions via such sophistries.
But look: they wouldn't try such a desperate ploy if there weren't something to be gained by it. That alone should tell us that we can't let them get away with it.
It also pushes a certain question to the forefront: what is it that they expect to gain by this stratagem?
posted by Winston Smith at
11:12 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home