Trolling in the Deep: More Totally Not Racist Thoughts from a Totally Not Racist Person

Holy crap, y’all. For the first time in my blogging history, a troll came around for a second trip! And this time, he left a dropping the size of my parents’ living room.

Seriously, people. This rant amounted up to 1,016 words.

Do you want to see it in all of its trolling glory? Of course you do.

“Let’s try this again.

Winston Churchill once said that Brits and Americans were two people divided by a common language; no more evident was this than in our recent exchange. Much of what I wrote appears to have been ‘lost in translation’- i’ll do my best to clarify things.

Throughout your post you assume that Black people are the ‘victims’ of unwitting White ignorance, ignorance which is implicitly characterized as racist (whatever that means). Consequently, you expect White people to amend their ways to suit their alleged victims. However, this analysis stems from your failure to distinguish between intuitive ethnocentrism (people really do prefer the company of those with whom they share a lot in common) and its more excitable variant, xenophobia. It’s like failing to appreciate the distinction between patriotism and Fascism, milk and water or Blank Slaters and Flat-Earthers (oh wait, forget that last one). It is because you conflate the two that you end-up advocating something which you think is pretty reasonable but is in fact totally beyond the pale. It is not me who thinks that White culture is at its core racist, but you. You want to ‘throw out the baby with the bath water’ because you – and well-meaning idiots* – like you see in every innocent, light-hearted ribbing a deplorable manifestation of White Superiority Complex. You would forever have us tip-toeing around difference for fear of offending anyone, and in the absence of candour ‘free expression’ is as meaningless as the freedom to starve.

Essentially, we disagree about what constitutes ‘racism’ – a term used with such profligate license that it has lost practically all meaning. You appear to be advocating a definition of racism which includes making light of cultural differences whereas I am arguing that it’s a perfectly innocent thing to acknowledge these differences and revel in finding them, and so the ‘Other’, absurd. Doubtless, this will on occasion cause offence, but isn’t that what tolerance is all about? Tolerance is forbearance; it is not acceptance. Mine is the true spirit of ‘celebrating difference’ whereas yours is the totalitarian tyranny of political correctness. Freedom and Equality are not perfectly reconcilable; there exists a tension between the two which sees their relationship in terms of a trade-off: every advance made by one occurs at the expense of the other.

It is not the fault of White people that Black people inhabit a society which happens to be largely the creation of Whites, and Whites shouldn’t be expected to change their outlook to accommodate Blacks because of the accidents of history. This is what is so strikingly unfair about what you advocate – it’s not racism you take exception to, but White ethnocentrism (which you think to be racist). After all, you’re not calling for Blacks to integrate. If they don’t like the criticisms whites have of their customs and practices, then they ought to repudiate them. I don’t consider Rap and ‘Ghetto’ culture, which so many Blacks glorify, to be particularly edifying – does that make me racist? Of course not.

The call for Black integration brings us back to the point about democracy. Democracy has many failings, but its principal virtue lies in its accountability: responsive government makes for effective government. This means majority rule. Why should the majority bend itself to the will of an obstreperous minority?

I described your characterizations of each group’s prejudice as ‘naive’ not because they were without credible foundation (although anecdote is hardly the most informative type of evidence), but because you’re implying that each group’s prejudice is fundamentally different in its nature – Black prejudice is passive, innocent, defensive; White prejudice is oppressive, sinister, borne of ignorance. This is what is so naive: it necessarily depicts Blacks as innocent victims and Whites as villainous oppressors. This smacks of White Guilt Syndrome where you’re seeking to atone for misdeeds which just don’t exist. Whatever enmity exists between Blacks and Whites is primarily the product of their differences, not some inverse power-relationship. If the two groups were equal in power and resources, none of the distrust would disappear; it would simply manifest itself differently. Undeniably, the uneven distribution of power colours the hue of each group’s prejudice, but this is not the root/ultimate CAUSE of enmity but a proximate factor in its constitution. In other words, Blacks resent the power enjoyed by their White peers because it marginalizes their world, not because they abhor inequality full stop.

Finally, two points of order: I haven’t a problem with authority, you might be surprised to learn (note: sarcasm (note: sarcasm)). What I found so objectionable was the suggestion that it would be perfectly acceptable to send a White child to the AP’s office for making a racist remark, but that you wouldn’t do likewise with a child of minority heritage for doing the same thing. I’m glad you made it clear that you wouldn’t do that… right?

I attached quotation marks to my use of the word ‘fair’ because you and I clearly don’t agree on what constitutes fairness – i’m not even sure there IS such a thing. No-one considers rival interests as equally legitimate: everyone, everywhere – save the manipulated or the misled – looks out for number one; if your best friend fell into a river along with a perfect stranger and you only had the power to rescue one, you would (I hope) always select you BF, because they hold MEANING – utility – for you. And yet, from the POV of ‘fairness’ distinguishing between the two is an impossible choice to make. This is an example of what I mean when I talk about ‘intuitive ethnocentrism’ – we work to advance our interests, and this involves maximizing the utility of those like ourselves. If existence consists in the stabilization of matter (Materialism/Physicalism) then surely ethics – as real phenomena – are reducible to these same premises? A morality which winds-up leaving you dead is arguably not very ‘moral’.

I look forward to your reply,

A Brit.

P. S. you owe me a new monocle.
* Forgive my tendentious rhetoric; I do not consider you an idiot. I genuinely care about what you think.”

Wow.

I don’t know which part of this post is most surprising (and by “surprising” I mean “so predictable a toddler could have seen it coming.”): the accusation of advocating censorship, the long list of arguments against things I never said, the “Not liking rap music doesn’t make me racist!” (no one said it does, dude), the whitewashing of centuries of slavery and oppression as accidents (“We didn’t mean to drag your ancestors from their native lands, I promise!”), the claim that “majority rule” is democratic (I’m sure when Hispanic people eventually outnumber white people in the United States, Shocked&Appalled would totally be fine with a law that changed Spanish to the official language), the idea that I believe all blacks to be innocent of racism and all whites perpetrators of racism (nope, never said that), and to top it all off, a claim that he totally means this all in good faith even though he spent one thousand words essentially accusing me of acting like a character in a George Orwell novel.

Do I need to point out the irony of this statement: “After all, you’re not calling for Blacks to integrate. If they don’t like the criticisms whites have of their customs and practices, then they ought to repudiate them,” within a declaration of how unfair it is to ask white people to repudiate criticisms that black people have of them? I didn’t think so.

(Oh, and I love the promise that he doesn’t think I’m an idiot. Too bad. I hear they make a decent living.)

I will never cease to be amazed by the sense of entitlement and victimization that some white people have when it comes to racism. The idea that saying, “Hey, that’s a little racist,” is the equivalent of calling someone a Klan member. The idea that saying, “Hey, that’s a little racist, and here’s why,” is censorship of thought and speech.

It can’t be that I’m possibly trying to, I don’t know, expand people’s thoughts by suggesting that they think more carefully about how their words affect others, or historical contexts of certain words and phrases.

The only people who get angry or offended when I point out, “Hey, that’s a little racist, and here’s why,” live under the incorrect assumption that I am trying to censor them and tell them what to do.

Let me be clear: you can do whatever you want. You can say whatever you want. You can think whatever you want. You can do, say, or think whatever you want without fear of political or legal consequences. However, you shouldn’t expect to say something like, “I like them because they’re not, like, stereotypical black people,” without fear of social and personal consequences.

You can think, say, or do whatever you want. And other people have the same right to tell you, “I don’t like what you said because of this reason.” You’re free to say what you want, and I’m free to think that you’re a douchebag for saying it and I’m also free to tell you my opinion of you. In turn, you are free to not care what I think about you, and I am free to not care that you don’t care what I think…and so on, and so on, and so on.

Also: I’ve noticed that white people who make racist jokes will often defend themselves with the “God, why can’t we talk about race, why does it have to be such a loaded issue, why can’t you just take a joke? CULTURAL DIFFERENCES ARE FUNNY!” It’s pretty common. And what happens when black people, in turn, make a joke about white people not being able to dance or play basketball (just for an example?) Most of the time, those same white people who cry “CULTURAL DIFFERENCES ARE FUNNY!” will get really mad, or pouty, or annoyed, and they will usually say, “Sure, you can say that, but if I made a joke about your people, I’d be racist. How is that fair?”

Anyway, I usually respond to troll droppings with line-by-line responses, but gosh, why should I have all the fun? Feel free to continue in the comments! (But please stay away from personal attacks.)