Thought of the day

It genuinely bothers me when people try and take the individual out of a situation. Of course, circumstances matter. Ideas matter. Context matters. We don’t live in a vacuum. But when people try and use blanket assertions, culling statistics or even stereotypes, and apply them to individuals, it gets under my skin. People have individual personalities, individual tendencies, individual backgrounds, individual perspectives. In short, we are all individuals. I know. Crazy.

18 Responses

  1. Would that not all apply to religion as well?

    Take the individual out of the situation and place blame for bad things squarely on an idea, a concept.

  2. It depends. Is the person doing something in the name of religion or explicitly because of religion. And are we talking about the individual or a large group of people? If we’re talking about groups, then we probably want to apply statistics or prevailing trends and ideas.

  3. Incidentally, the motivation for this post comes from those caricature feminists who use the ugly tactic of declaring that any disagreement from a man is based in sexism and the idea that women just can’t be right. It’s a cop-out.

  4. Which are strangely similar to claim made about disagreeing with Obama. Must be racism.

  5. Sometimes.

    If the claim from the caricature feminists is that society is male-dominated and results in a lot of sexism, then I agree (real feminists say this, not just caricatures) . Just the same, if the claim is that the Tea Party is white (and, incidentally, male-dominated) and the policies they push overwhelming favor whites, resulting in a lot of racism, then I agree. That doesn’t mean I think all Tea Party supporters are racist. And not all men are sexist.

    This comes down to the difference between characterizing a group and characterizing individuals based upon the groups to which they belong.

  6. By that rational the NAACP being primarily black and advocating policies that would primarily ‘favor’ blacks that makes them a racist organization.

    I don’t think all incidental results can be attributed to a group, when the motivations have nothing to do with those incidental or at best theoretical results.

  7. The NAACP doesn’t have policies that seek to keep whites down. The same might fairly be said about the intention behind a lot of Tea Party supporters in regards to blacks, but overall the group is good for whites and bad for blacks and other minorities.

  8. Bad how? Because there would have to be drastic cuts to the already overextended, constitutionally dubious, social programs that minorities tend to benefit from more than whites?

    I still have to disagree.

    I am a firm believer that most government programs, at all levels, tend to either create new problems or fail to solve the problems they were intended to address.

    Give me a 10% flat tax on earnings over 40,000$ and no tax deductions or credits. That’s what fair looks like, for everyone. Toss on a requirement for a balanced federal budget and I’ll break out the party hats and champagne flutes.

  9. I’m curious to how the tea party positions favor whites over racial minorities too.

  10. Because they hold the exact same positions as the Republican Party, just a little further to the right and with a couple of fewer special interests?

  11. That’s just passing the buck, I’m afraid.

    Since you said “The NAACP doesn’t have policies that seek to keep whites down. The same might fairly be said about the intention behind a lot of Tea Party supporters in regards to blacks,” could you name a policy that the tea party supports for the intention of keeping blacks down?

  12. The re-segregation of schools in Wake County, NC.

  13. The re-localization he means.

    They want them segregated in the same way that schools in Augusta, Maine are segregated from the ones in Montgomery, Georgia.

  14. Because the added convenience of shaving 1 or 2 miles from a student’s ride in is worth it. It isn’t about ensuring that wealthy kids become concentrated in order to enrich their own schools.

  15. Right. The relative socioeconomic position of a student determines how much money will be spent per student.

    I’m sure someone has produced evidence of that.

    Is that the only so called example?

  16. All the policies that increase the income gap, the draconian drug laws (partially corrected by the current administration) that put blacks in prison for absurdly long times, anti-labor positions.

    I didn’t think it was a secret that the Republicans aren’t good for raising up the poor or maintaining the middle class (especially the lower-middle).

  17. Even if that’s true, there are blacks in the upper class and whites in the lower classes.

    Race isn’t the issue. If you want to go this route than can it not be said that democrats are bad for anyone wishing to get into the upper class? That democrats hold people back, black or white?

    I don’t believe either narrative, however good they look on a fundraiser flier.

  18. In particular I like your “anti labor” bit.

    Labor is simply a product that people can sell. While yes employees have the right to bargain with their employer, where did this idea come from that selling your labor is somehow different than selling cars or pretzels?

    Selling your own labor is a business like any other and should be subject to the same rules and regulations. Which its not, it has a glorified place. A business cannot decide to change its supplier of labor (a union) if they can’t reach a pay agreement.

    Big labor is the exact same thing as big business and has all the same problems.

Leave a comment

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: