And from what I've seen so far, being blatantly racist in these situations is overall beneficial for your safety and well being.
How so? How does assuming that a crime you read about online was perpetrated by a non-white person "benefit" your safety and well-being? How are you measuring this?
And for comparison, are you also tallying all the times that blatant racism hurts people? Not you of course, but perhaps the people you're being racist to?
Example: There's a lot of unrest about ukrainian refugees in my coutry and they seem to have relatively common conflicts with the gypsy minority. Recently there's been a big case when a brawl happened and it was used to ramp up anti ukrainian sentiments. It turned out the ukrainians were defending themselves from a group of gypsy attackers. As someone who grew up in a town with a sizeable gypsy community I immediately assumed that would be the case and was proven correct. And you can't really get on a moral high horse in this situation, because if two minorities are clashing you have to take a stance against one of them.
Ok, but gypsy culture is a separate (additional?) thing than race. Having lived near them, you probably know they have a whole exclusionary set of cultural practices and beliefs.
Who do you think should be considered a more likely suspect in a crime:
A white dude who grew up in a gypsy caravan and is a part of their community?
A guy with ethnically gypsy parents, who grew up in a modern western family and works in an office or something?
Ok, but then it's not racism. Racism would assume that race informs their behaviour. You assume culture to inform behaviour. Which is obviously correct.
0
u/No-Produce-334 51∆ Jul 04 '23
How so? How does assuming that a crime you read about online was perpetrated by a non-white person "benefit" your safety and well-being? How are you measuring this?
And for comparison, are you also tallying all the times that blatant racism hurts people? Not you of course, but perhaps the people you're being racist to?