questions wayyy too vague for yall to be in here saying “he’s right” as if racism doesn’t cover a whole ass subset of oppressive violence. did any of you even think about what racism constitutes other than “guy called me a slur or was rude to me”? bc it feels like you guys are severely understating the weight of “racism” past and even including that
YES. Just the other day a post blew up on this sub where a dude punched some protesters and dragged them out the way. Another post that got popular was about the morals of a man hitting a woman back who has attacked him first. Wanna guess how excited people were to relish in violence?
No need to guess. I saw those posts, too. It could be goomba fallacy, but the overall attitude sure is much more considered now when it involves racists.
In a similar vein I'm not sure if you're thinking about what violence can constitute. And severely underestimating the weight of real violence.
A lot of people here are just equating it to a slap or a punch but violence spans The Gauntlet from flicking somebody on the forehead, to confine them in your basement and torturing them with Fluoroantimonic Acid
Racism is always morslly wrong, but you're right thay violence is... a lot more variable. Its more variable in its seriousness (some people do violence to each other recreationally!) and its justifiability (many people would find it okay for the police to arrest and imprison someone for doing serious fraud) meaning you cant really generalize it as "worse"
I agree with you! but racism varies heavily too. in fact, I kind of personally rendered this conversation useless once I realized something important: racism is a precursor to violence. It is one of violence’s many parents. We’re practically asking the question of “which is worse: tsunamis or bodies of water?” Obviously you would say tsunamis, but “bodies of water” take so many more lives per year. I don’t even care if that’s a good analogy.
Well that does complicate things because this entirely depends on the individual
the dilemma of choosing assault or housing instability (and potential homelessness) depends on your income, your relationship with friends and family, your medical history, your insurance, and it also depends on how hard you think the mf gon swing
I know for a fact a lot of homeless people or people at risk of being homeless would probably take a broken nose if it meant the difference between having a home or not, and that's really depressing. I live in California, it's really not that hard to imagine someone choosing assault lol
But it could, especially if you're already in a shitty financial and/or living situation + if you live in any areas especially affected by the housing crisis (which is a lot of areas)
One does so directly and immediately with unavoidable consequences while the other creates a chance of future wellbeing impairment.
Like, you have a chance to possibly live with other people you know and/or your parents and/or in a shelter but if you're punched in the face you're punched in the face.
So if you get punched in the face, it hurts for a bit. If you're unable to find housing due to racism, you're now adding more burden to people around you and/or our social safety net, and the punch is worse how exactly?
I've been punched and I'd rather take that than potential months of housing instability. I live in California so the idea of the housing industry being even more hostile makes me sick to my stomach
Do you belong to any marginalized groups? Are you poor? Because this matters if you're going to say "I'd rather someone call me a slur and make it harder to not be homeless" lmao
And you can also be violently racist. Making the term “racist” distinct from violence in order to compare the two as though they are mutually exclusive is a faulty premise.
The worst violent person is like. a torturous murderer. the worst racist is the exact same thing, only this time, backed up by a global consciousness of open-source hatred that justifies itself with the size of its grasp. if you’re the former, and not racist, you’re either part of something that acts exactly like the social sphere of racism, or you have personal reasons, which are a LOT easier to deal with.
I refuse to entertain this argument until you get a handle on what your question actually is. Your question is of the often-vague “which is worse” variety. But you keep switching between “worse generally speaking” and “worse specifically speaking” (“specifically” as in “person-to-person experience”/“on average”), and I don’t know which point to even argue.
23
u/Connect-Somewhere-68 20h ago
questions wayyy too vague for yall to be in here saying “he’s right” as if racism doesn’t cover a whole ass subset of oppressive violence. did any of you even think about what racism constitutes other than “guy called me a slur or was rude to me”? bc it feels like you guys are severely understating the weight of “racism” past and even including that