Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Should OU suspend basketball players for useing "N" word on national TV?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="inactive" data-source="post: 2727745" data-attributes="member: 7488"><p>What do you mean by "negative racism?" Not reverse racism, but <em>negative</em> racism? How do you define that term? I may agree it's okay, but I'm not sure what you mean by those two words uniquely paired in that context. Do you mean that minority groups can form bands to ensure their rights are protected? Like the Black Caucus or ACLU or LGBT groups (which I concede isn't a "race" but is a minority special interest group)? Then yea, I would support "negative racism" to ensure they have rights and representation equal to that of the majority, sure.</p><p></p><p>Regarding splinter groups, they're not trying to "dictate how campus life is conducted" anymore than ensuring they are provided rights equal to those of the majority in-group. If you want to assert that the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Integration of high schools and universities, abolition of slavery, etc. is considered "dictate how ... life is conducted" then I'd say they should be able to have a voice. Hell, the <a href="https://www.nraila.org/articles/20070105/congressional-sportsmens-caucus-leader" target="_blank">NRA</a>, GOA, Oklahoma Open Carry Association, even OSA could all be considered minority "splinter" groups in this same context. Should we abolish them so gun rights can be handled by the benevolent will of the majority? It's an absurd example but not entirely out of context.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Thank you, that's plainly the point. After hundreds of years of history, here we are right wrong or indifferent. </p><p></p><p>In a perfect world these groups wouldn't need to exist, sure - but in the real world they serve a purpose. For a macro-level example, look at Jim Crow or Poll Taxes or Literacy tests. For mico-level examples, just see a prisoners' dilemma.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I know, for shame <img src="/images/smilies/biggrin.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":D" title="Big Grin :D" data-shortname=":D" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="inactive, post: 2727745, member: 7488"] What do you mean by "negative racism?" Not reverse racism, but [I]negative[/I] racism? How do you define that term? I may agree it's okay, but I'm not sure what you mean by those two words uniquely paired in that context. Do you mean that minority groups can form bands to ensure their rights are protected? Like the Black Caucus or ACLU or LGBT groups (which I concede isn't a "race" but is a minority special interest group)? Then yea, I would support "negative racism" to ensure they have rights and representation equal to that of the majority, sure. Regarding splinter groups, they're not trying to "dictate how campus life is conducted" anymore than ensuring they are provided rights equal to those of the majority in-group. If you want to assert that the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Integration of high schools and universities, abolition of slavery, etc. is considered "dictate how ... life is conducted" then I'd say they should be able to have a voice. Hell, the [URL="https://www.nraila.org/articles/20070105/congressional-sportsmens-caucus-leader"]NRA[/URL], GOA, Oklahoma Open Carry Association, even OSA could all be considered minority "splinter" groups in this same context. Should we abolish them so gun rights can be handled by the benevolent will of the majority? It's an absurd example but not entirely out of context. Thank you, that's plainly the point. After hundreds of years of history, here we are right wrong or indifferent. In a perfect world these groups wouldn't need to exist, sure - but in the real world they serve a purpose. For a macro-level example, look at Jim Crow or Poll Taxes or Literacy tests. For mico-level examples, just see a prisoners' dilemma. I know, for shame :D [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Should OU suspend basketball players for useing "N" word on national TV?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom