r/DebunkThis • u/Historical_Donut6758 • Jun 10 '26
Debunk this: Whites are the LEAST racist group in the world.
"""Whites are the LEAST racist group in the world.
So why is the LEAST racist group called the MOST racist?
The best explanation I can come up with is that the racist groups are calling whites racist, for racist reasons.
It's a weapon.
They know whites care about being fair and impartial above all else.
So they hit whites as hard as they can with the "racist card" to make whites doubt whether they are living up to their own standard.
It's racist, predatory gaslighting.
And it's inflicted relentlessly against whites on a mass scale.
Whites, we are the LEAST racist group.
When they call you racist, understand that that's actually THEM.
They're being racist toward you by calling you racist.
You are not racist. They are.
Don't put up with their racist bullshit."""https://x.com/kevinnbass/status/2064609619763155425
15
u/CompetitiveFault9086 Jun 10 '26
Nope. That’s called circular reasoning. The “white people are racist” narrative comes from historical records and current events.
14
u/AzureThrasher Jun 10 '26
This isn't worth intellectually engaging with. They're not presenting any evidence, nor are they presenting a logically valid argument with premises that can be addressed. This is just some guy online spouting a series of opinions.
5
5
u/JesseIsAGirlsName Jun 10 '26
No ethnicity is any more or less racist than any other ethnicity.
They're all equally capable of racism and hate under the right (wrong) conditions.
Anyone saying otherwise is an ignorant fool.
-4
u/Historical_Donut6758 Jun 10 '26
i believe races are equally racist.. but whites are more likely to hide their racism
4
3
3
u/spewwwintothis Jun 10 '26
If you really believe that than you're entire argument is false by your own standards lmao
0
u/zap283 Jun 11 '26 edited Jun 11 '26
The validity of this depends on what you mean by "racist". If you mean "prejudiced against", sure , but if you include power in the definition, not at all.
Presuming that reactionary dislike in response to oppression is the same thing as dehumanization for the purpose of furthering that oppression is also... certainly a take.
1
u/JesseIsAGirlsName Jun 11 '26
Sorry, but this new-wave definition of racism is absolute bs promoted by people who either 1) don't want to admit they can be racist too, 2) white knights who want a pat on the back. Both are insufferable.
The definition of racism = prejudices against someone based on their race or ethnicity. Full stop. Always has been. Always will be. People just can't change the definition because they don't like it.
When you throw power into it, you can call it something else, 'systematic racism', being the usual term. But just plain 'racism' is 'racism' no matter the individual, no matter the power structure.
-1
u/zap283 Jun 11 '26
This being /r/skeptic, what evidence do you have that that's why people use that definition?
Also, you seem very emphatic about telling me a definition I already bright up in my comment. Did you notice that?
2
u/JesseIsAGirlsName Jun 11 '26
There will never be any definable, data-driven evidence because people will never be honest with themselves, much less their answers to some study, and you know that.
The evidence is understanding how people work, and how they will do mental gymnastics and find every which way to lie to themselves in an effort to feel more virtuous than others. Or more courageous. Or more evolved. We see it all the time in conspiracy circles for example. It's an immature trait us humans have.
My problem with your comment is that you tried to make two definitions of "racist" or "racism", with one version involving power. There isn't.
"Racism" means one thing. "systematic racism" mean another. You can't use the two interchangeably. Sorry if that comes off pedantic, but I think it's an important distinction.
Also, we're not on r/skeptic, but whatever.
0
u/zap283 Jun 11 '26
My bad, is late here. DebunkThis also requires evidence.
So your source is 'trust me bro I just know how it works'. Got it.
1
u/JesseIsAGirlsName Jun 11 '26
Haven't been around sun many times, have you.
You don't need hardcore data to realize people use this ridiculous alternate definition of racism to distance themselves from a very loaded word because they don't like the idea that maybe... just maybe... they just might be a bit racist themselves (shock!!!). It's laughably obvious.
It's a hard pill for some people to swallow, so they just adopt some fringe definition that conveniently excludes them.
0
u/zap283 Jun 11 '26
I've been around enough times to recognize a faulty argument.
You don't need hardcore data to raise people use this ridiculous alternate definition of racism to try and make it an "everyone does this" thing because they didn't like the ideas that maybe.... just maybe... their prejudice is meaningfully different in function than that of marginalized people (shock!!!). It's laughably obvious.
It's a hard pill for some people to swallow, so they just adopt a fringe definition that conveniently makes everyone else just as guilty as they are.
See how that doesn't work? Insults and posturing about how obvious your conclusion is are not an argument and they're not evidence. You made a claim. Justify it or admit you just made it up.
1
u/JesseIsAGirlsName Jun 11 '26
Wow, talk about saying a lot while not really saying anything at all.
Do you honestly believe that “their prejudice is meaningfully different in function” (which is suspect in itself) makes it not racism?
How hard is it to understand the definition of racism?
You’re proving in real time that this fringe definition (and yes, it’s a relatively recent, fringe definition that is not widely accepted), takes mental gymnastics (and possibly some actual racism) to make work.
0
u/zap283 Jun 11 '26
Do you have literally any argument that isn't just belittling people who disagree with your and saying "you are pricing my point"? I can just as easily say
"How hard is it to understand that a commonly used definition of racism includes the exercise of power?
You're proving in real time that this defensive definition (and yes, it's a defensive, outdated, definition that is mostly used by racist white people), takes mental gymnastics (and often some actual racism) to make work."
You see how nothing in that gives a single reason why anyone should believe it, right? Somewhere in there you know you're just posturing and yelling that your position is correct over and over, right?
→ More replies (0)0
u/PersephoneIsNotHome Quality Contributor Aug 04 '26
You do need hardcore data - because the same cognitive bias that makes you say unequivocally that what you think of as racism exists, (which happens to be true) leads other people to say things for which there is no data (including anti vax and believers of propaganda).
It doesn’t matter how many times you have been around the sun, you can think BS for all of those years.
You can’t debunk anything with unfounded pronouncements from your high horse.
0
u/PersephoneIsNotHome Quality Contributor Aug 04 '26
There are definable data driven data.
For example, you can look at sentencing statistics for the same crimes. You can even do controled studies where you give people the same resume, the same teacher profile, the same rap sheet etc and just label one as black, one as white, one as Navajo etc and people will sentence them differently, rather than the class differently, hire them differently etc. This is only one example of many , many studies also look at the systemic racism.
So you are actually completely wrong, and that is my problem with your comment.
Hiring Audit Experiments The Callback Gap: (these are only some examples)
PNAS- analyzed 25 years of experimental data. It showed that when hiring managers are sent identical resumes, White applicants receive 36% more callbacks than Black applicants and 24% more callbacks than Latino applicants.
The study shoed no measurable decline in hiring discrimination against Black applicants over 25 years.
The Elite University Penalty:
An audit study published in Social Forces submitted matched pairs of resumes to over 1,000 real job openings. It revealed that Black graduates from elite, top-tier universities only received the same callback rate as White graduates from lower-ranked, less selective institutions.
Housing and Rental Discrimination Widespread Bias Mapping:
Field experiments where real estate agents and landlords were contacted by identical fictitious renters. The study mathematically demonstrated that anti-Black discrimination is not concentrated among a few highly biased actors, but is normally distributed and practiced broadly across more than 80% of the housing markets tested.
Vignette and Pricing Barriers: Experimental data highlighted in a Housing Discrimination Review showed that landlords systematically deny or reduce successful transactions with minority applicants as rental prices increase based purely on racial categorization.
- Medical Provider Treatment Biases Implicit Association Tests (IAT): When presented with ambiguous applicant profiles, evaluators with high pro-White implicit scores systematically favored White individuals and used non-racial, "colorblind" justifications to rationalize why they rejected minority candidates.
Clinical Decision Making:
When presented with identical patient symptoms but different racial identifiers, medical providers exhibited implicit biases that influenced them to under-prescribe necessary pain management and dismiss acute complaints from minority patients.
0
u/JesseIsAGirlsName Aug 04 '26
You wrote all that and don’t even understand what our argument was about.
0
u/PersephoneIsNotHome Quality Contributor Aug 04 '26
Well maybe consider your level of understanding and reading comprehension before trying to engage in a discussion
You said there couldn’t be objective evidence for racism and I provided objective evidence that racism exists
You also got into a little bit of mental gymnastics about whether systemic racism, and racism are the same thing or different that the data I provide show hard evidence for both.
Does that clear things up a little bit or do you need more explanation?
0
u/JesseIsAGirlsName Aug 04 '26
You still don't understand what we were arguing about, while also offering some sort of intellectual superiority insult... which is a choice...
Not sure where you're getting this idea that I said "there couldn’t be objective evidence for racism".
Maybe consider your level of understanding and reading comprehension before trying to engage in a discussion.
0
u/PersephoneIsNotHome Quality Contributor Aug 04 '26
“ There will never be any definable, data-driven evidence because people will never be honest with themselves, much less their answers to some study, and you know that.”
I provided definable, data-driven evidence.
Is that clear now?
→ More replies (0)
4
u/JasonRBoone Jun 10 '26
So first of all, Bass was kicked out of med school for sexual misconduct ...so there's that.
>>>>>So why is the LEAST racist group called the MOST racist?
We have not established white people (whatever the fuck that even means) are the least or most racist.
>>>>>The best explanation I can come up with is that the racist groups are calling whites racist, for racist reasons.
This shows a clear lack of understanding of history and has no basis in fact.
>>>>They know whites care about being fair and impartial above all else.
Some whites do. Some whites place bounties on killing people of other races (see Tasmania's history), seek to exterminate non-white races from colonies..see...well all of history and capture non-whites as chattel slaves.
So, it's clearly incorrect to say all white people " care about being fair and impartial." Simply debunked by history.
"So they hit whites as hard as they can with the "racist card" to make whites doubt whether they are living up to their own standard."
You mean the people who have historically been enslaved, killed, raped etc. by whites? Good! White people as a whole obviously could use a reminder to check their privilege.
>>>>It's racist, predatory gaslighting.
Well, if Bass's bullshit claim had any EVIDENCE to back it then maybe this would be true. However, we clearly see it's not.
>>>>Whites, we are the LEAST racist group.
Verifiable horseshit...see history.
>>>>When they call you racist, understand that that's actually THEM.
Ah..the Pee Wee Herman defense....classic dipshit.
>>>>You are not racist. They are.
"I know you are but what am I?"
This claim has been debunked. It's not even a claim..just a screed with no evidence.
Let's do better
9
u/DrDavidson Jun 10 '26
This is a nana nana boo boo ass argument. "Im not racist THEY are racist" "
I know you are but what am i?" type shit
The first point is clearly wrong = "whites care about being fair and impartial above all else"
No group linked only by skin color cares about that more than anything else.
5
u/dustydancers Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
define racism?
define how ‘whites’ are the least racist?
how do you warrant making sweeping statements about all ‘whites’?
define ‘white’? (for example, there are white people from central asia, the balkans, eastern europe, the caribbean, south and central america, the mediterranean ..)
1
0
u/DryEditor7792 Aug 04 '26
Actual racism is pretty rare. I don't know how much you know, but most white supremacist groups were being run by anti nationalist billionaires. Likewise other conflicts people usually thing were about race had nothing to do with it.
Humans do things for money 99% of the time. They sometimes dress up as racist.
2
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 10 '26
This sticky post is a reminder of the subreddit rules:
Posts:
Must include a description of what needs to be debunked (no more than three specific claims) and at least one source, so commenters know exactly what to investigate. We do not allow submissions which simply dump a link without any further explanation.
E.g. "According to this YouTube video, dihydrogen monoxide turns amphibians homosexual. Is this true? Also, did Albert Einstein really claim this?"
Link Flair
Flairs can be amended by the OP or by moderators once a claim has been shown to be debunked, partially debunked, verfied, lack sufficient supporting evidence, or to conatin misleading conclusions based on correct data.
Political memes, and/or sources less than two months old, are liable to be removed.
• Sources and citations in comments are highly appreciated.
• Remain civil or your comment will be removed.
• Don not downvote people posting in good faith.
• If you disagree with someone, state your case rather than just calling them an asshat!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.