no one would dispute that people have differing physical characteristics
but it is archaic and unscientific to describe these physical characteristics using terms like
"black" "white"
yes it is more complicated and requires more effort to describe people in more complex ways, but it better reflects our reality instead of using imprecise language that sustains racism

it is a radical change and your response is the same as most who enjoy the comfort of conventionality

but real change often requires radical shifts that feel uneasy and difficult at first

But if I refuse to use the word black isn’t that suggesting that there’s something distasteful about the colour?

Edit: remember, it’s “Blacklivesmatter”.

How can we stop racism if we don’t talk about it? What would it have been like if it wasn’t mentioned that Floyd was black? “A man with dark hair wearing --- was beaten to death by the police.” That would correctly draw attention to police brutality, but if it had a racial dimension (which most people think it had) it would be neglected.

We need is words that approximately refer to the phenomena we have in mind and if there’s no word for it, it inhibits our ability to talk about it. A description of hair color and skin complexion would in this case totally fail to get the point. The victim was not a dark-haired person with a tan of European descent but of African descent, and therefore it’s likely to have been a racist incident.

unscientific to describe these physical characteristics using terms like
"black" "white" — dazed

Most words we us are not “scientific”. We don’t attempt to make a precise description of a thing when merely using a word to refer to it. Why is it called a smartphone when it’s much more than a phone? How imprecise! Why do we call something a shoe and something a boot? How high around the ankle should the shoe be to become a boot? No one knows exactly, so it’s unscientific! Yet, we are quite comfortable with using those words.

look at Carlos Hoyt's writings, he more completely lays out the approach we would have to take

it's not a perfect approach by any means, and some groups might oppose it because of the disadvantages that might come with no longer being recognized as a group worthy of special protection, but what people would gain outweighs what we would lose
if we taught our children words like "black" "white" were bad words that promoted discrimination, they would grow up with conceptual frameworks that would not leave room for them to not prefer based on racial categories
if we don't do this racism will never end

you are also pretty much arguing that there is something that actually exists "race" that we still need to refer to, the approach I am advocating for here is for those of use who see that there is no such thing in our reality just as we know the world is not flat

you are also pretty much arguing that there is something that actually exists "race" that we still need to refer to, the approach I am advocating for here is for those of use who see that there is no such thing in our reality just as we know the world is not flat — dazed

IN REALITY some people look like their ancestors came from sub-Saharan Africa, some seem to be of European descent and some of East-Asian. Is that relevant for anything? Probably not, but there are those who think it is, and they are the ones who are called racists. They would keep noticing it even if they had no word for it. They see that those people have an origin different from themselves, and they don’t like what seems foreign. The problem is not really the black hair, for some of their own have black hair, and it’s not really the dark skin, for they admire a nice tan, but the totality tells them they are dealing with something foreign.

How are we to explain that people with curly hair tend to be socially disadvantaged. That doesn’t make any sense, does it? It must be due to some arbitrary circumstances then and not at all anything caused by what used to be called racism since we are now not allowed to use that word.

You and other well-meaning anti-racists (or whatever it should be called) may perhaps stop using words that refer to race, but the racists will sure find a term to designate what they consider significant. By taking away the word you just reduce your own ability to talk to them and explain their error.

You and other well-meaning anti-racists (or whatever it should be called) may perhaps stop using words that refer to race, but the racists will sure find a term to designate what they consider significant. By taking away the word you just reduce your own ability to talk to them and explain their error. — Congau

The point is the error can't even be made if you don't see the difference
case in point look at all the physical differences between people who are currently placed in the category of "white"
there are a variety of skin tones, hair textures and colours and yet those people are all seen as the same "white"
my suggestion is to use that language that reframes the brain such that all people are all seen as the same and the physical differences we see are recognized as just that, insignificant physical differences that don't signify different subclasses of humanity

case in point look at all the physical differences between people who are currently placed in the category of "white"
there are a variety of skin tones, hair textures and colours and yet those people are all seen as the same "white" — dazed

That is a good point actually, but the argument works in my favor. There are no words for the subdivisions of the white race, but there is certainly racism among whites. In Northern Europe, Southern Europeans are being looked down upon as they tend to have darker hair and skin. There is no doubt that the Turks are discriminated against in Germany even when they are completely assimilated and speak perfect German. Even though they belong to the white race and there is no particular racial term to denote them, their racial difference works against them.

In the US the racial term “brown” is relatively recent, but of course there has always been racial discrimination against the nameless racial groups that now self-identify as brown.

People of Arab descent and people from the Indian sub-continent have always suffered discrimination in the West without there being a definite racial term for them.

People tend to dislike those who look different from themselves. Kids bully other kids for their looks and grown-ups are skeptical towards people whose appearance indicate that they belong to another group. No particular word is needed in each case for this lamentable but quite universal phenomenon to exist.

A friend and I claimed to be Ferengi from the Star Trek show on a census because we object to the race questions. However it is not as easy as just not using those racially identifying terms because people in different classifications get special benefits and perhaps they should. Native Americans and people of color deserve those benefits.

However, I hate talk of racism too and wish we talked about the values of democracy and why our nation is worth defending and what it means to be a good citizen of a democracy. Thomas Jefferson thought education was essential to being a strong and united Republic and I agree.

"Democracy is a way of life and social organization which above all others is sensitive to the dignity and worth of the individual human personality, affirming the fundamental moral and political equality of all men and recognizing no barriers of race, religion, or circumstance." General Report of the Seminar on "What is Democracy?" August 1939

Martin Luther King didn't make up new values, he repeated the values of democracy in the US and people of color and the American Japanese thought they were fighting for these values when the served in military service during the second world war.

I don't see anyone talking about democratic values so I want to stress I think talking about democratic values is the solution to the problem. Why aren't people speaking of democratic values?

The US has rather fucked views on democracy, the American dream is about the opportunity to succeed even if the majority don't. The US is barely a democracy to begin with, US policy barely takes public opinion into account and the US government actively manipulates and lies to its population.

The US just doesn't address its own issues with the urgency and effectiveness that justice demands. Either the US population just doesn't care about their own problems or the US government thinks those problems aren't actually important. It's just hard to see so many social, economic, environmental, governmental issues being ignored and still think "yeah this is a democracy and what the people want". The resources are there but why does nothing happen?

People tend to dislike those who look different from themselves. Kids bully other kids for their looks and grown-ups are skeptical towards people whose appearance indicate that they belong to another group. No particular word is needed in each case for this lamentable but quite universal phenomenon to exist. — Congau

Oh I recognize that people will find all kinds of other reasons to discriminate and treat each other differently, but we can at least remove one category of discrimination, i.e. racial, if we move into a conceptual framework and use language that excludes the concept of race

your

Even though they belong to the white race — Congau

it's clear that you believe in and endorse the concept of race and so of course my suggested course of action to end racism makes no sense to you

A friend and I claimed to be Ferengi from the Star Trek show on a census because we object to the race questions. However it is not as easy as just not using those racially identifying terms because people in different classifications get special benefits and perhaps they should. Native Americans and people of color deserve those benefits. — Athena

you can retain benefits for certain historically disadvantaged groups through cultural identification. Clearly people belong to distinct cultures, but people do not belong to distinct races as there is no such thing as race in our reality.

It's really just a matter of getting more sophisticated in our language. Describe people's physical attributes, dark skin, dark hair, brown eyes. Then describe their cultural ties, he was born and raised in Jamaica. This more accurately describes someone as the complex individual they are, instead of the harmful, unscientific and imprecise label "black"

you can retain benefits for certain historically disadvantaged groups through cultural identification. Clearly people belong to distinct cultures, but people do not belong to distinct races as there is no such thing as race in our reality.

It's really just a matter of getting more sophisticated in our language. Describe people's physical attributes, dark skin, dark hair, brown eyes. Then describe their cultural ties, he was born and raised in Jamaica. This more accurately describes someone as the complex individual they are, instead of the harmful, unscientific and imprecise label "black" — dazed

That is not at all how an old text describes democracy in the US. It is not how books written during the world wars describe the US democracy when we were called to war to defend it. However since 2000 plenty of books have been written about what has gone wrong in the US. We stopped education for democracy and began educating for a technological society with unknown values in 1958. Could that have lead to the lost memory of what democracy? But even when we had education for democracy, that was a very White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant education that supported prejudice and inequality.

How about autocratic industry could that lead to weakening democracy when most of us became dependent on corporations for employment, instead of owning our own businesses? And we do have a history of exploiting laborers and focusing on gaining wealth. That was curb with laws against monopolies but corporations have gotten around those laws and we remain in denial of that.

It is not like the US does not have problems, but it seems they all center on not understanding democracy?

you can retain benefits for certain historically disadvantaged groups through cultural identification. Clearly people belong to distinct cultures, but people do not belong to distinct races as there is no such thing as race in our reality.

It's really just a matter of getting more sophisticated in our language. Describe people's physical attributes, dark skin, dark hair, brown eyes. Then describe their cultural ties, he was born and raised in Jamaica. This more accurately describes someone as the complex individual they are, instead of the harmful, unscientific and imprecise label "black" — dazed

But Martin Luther King's dream speech had nothing to do with an African culture. It was 100% the culture of the US that children were once taught is our democracy. Since the 1958 National Defense Education Act our culture has radically changed. Some of that change is very good. Women were discriminated against as much as people with dark skin. We liberated women and have been moving on liberating people of color as well, except in the South where the culture of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant supremacy is strong. The South has the aristocracy from the old world. The federal government enforcing change on the South became violet. However, I will go back to the democracy that is in old school books, and books about democracy written during the war years, the democracy people of color and the Japanese Americans thought they were defending in war.

Thomas Jefferson devoted his life to free education for all because he thought that was essential to a strong and united nation. Especially in times of war, before we came to depend so much on military technology, and relied very much on patriotism, we focused on democratic values. I repeat, Martin Luther King was 100% the US culture not at all an African culture. I think we have a huge problem believing the color of a person's skin means the person naturally has a different culture. That just is not so. But it can very much mean they experience a culture of hate because of injustices or an unwillingness to change as is the case in the South. Manifest Destiny came with serious problems because it was also White Anglo Saxon Protestant and that is not a culture for democracy. Without education for democracy we do not have a culture for democracy any more than there would be Christians if churches stopped preaching Christianity and prepared everyone for a technological society with unknown values.

People would continue to discriminate people of different skin colors and differences in appearance that indicate that their origin (their own or their ancestors’) was somewhere else. Sometimes these dissimilarities are very small as when regional characteristics in appearance are said to be detected even within the same country and sometimes large as when it refers to separate parts of the world. The larger the differences the greater the danger of discrimination, but not necessarily. People who look like they come from the Middle East probably have greater problems with discrimination in the West than people from East Asia.

There are no racial terms referring to differences of a more regional nature, but there is still significant discrimination. Would you call it racism when a person from the Middle East faces discrimination in the West? Whether you do or don’t, the phenomenon is not dependent on what anyone calls it since discrimination against Arab looking people is in principle exactly the same as discrimination against sub-Saharan looking people, even though there exists a racial term for the latter but not the former.

Can you please explain to me why people of Middle Eastern origin often face discrimination (racism) in the West even though there is no racial term to signify that group?

If we all stop using words like "black" "white" etc and teach our children that those are bad words then racism will end in a few generations. — dazed

Wrong. Kids need to know they are different. Kids need to know their ethnic background. I agree that terms like "black" and "white" are social constructs and aren't scientifically accurate to describe human groups however there is essentially nothing wrong with being black and white, and because we don't live in a society where humanity is primary and all others are secondary it is good for kids to know their distinctive qualities.

If there are no categories, there can be no opportunity for differential treatment based on those categories — dazed

True, but that is theoretical. We aren't an androgynous society therefore categorization is a consequence of language.

then if you really want to end racism then simply stop using words like black white etc. — dazed

This is not realistic and it doesn't address the problem. Simply not using terms alone doesn't end racism as racism is taught and behavioral. We need to teach generations to value each others as members of the same human family.

Recent horrible events have brought to the forefront the issue of racism, and if you are truly concerned, start with your language, and teach others to move this way. Just stop using colour words you will soon see how your own conceptual framework leaves no room to be racist. — dazed

This doesn't work. I wish people stop using Morgan Freeman because all that tells me is some whites are just merely uncomfortable engaging discussions on racism hence is why many agree with him. Ridding ourselves of racism is beyond simply stop using words.

you won't need equal opportunity for "races" if there are no "races" — dazed

False. If that were true Jim Crow wouldn't exist. If that were true, then the civil rights movement wouldn't exist.

Can you please explain to me why people of Middle Eastern origin often face discrimination (racism) in the West even though there is no racial term to signify that group? — Congau

the fact of non-race based discrimination does not mean we should not make efforts to eliminate race based discrimination.

Wrong. Kids need to know they are different. Kids need to know their ethnic background. I agree that terms like "black" and "white" are social constructs and aren't scientifically accurate to describe human groups however there is essentially nothing wrong with being black and white, and because we don't live in a society where humanity is primary and all others are secondary it is good for kids to know their distinctive qualities. — Anaxagoras

but they are not different, and the language you use highlights that that's where it all begins
if we truly teach them the reality that there are no racial categories of humans then racism would end eventually as children would grow into adults who did not see races but only saw faces

but I suspect you actually believe in racial categories (but use more palatable language like ethnicity instead of race) so again my suggestion wouldn't make sense to you

but they are not different — dazed

By experiences they are. I was raised in an environment where my mother was an activist and racially conscious. I’ve personally experienced racism not just from whites, but other ethnic groups. My experiences differentiate me from the many of you here because I can probably bet that all of you have not experienced what I have, and vice versa.

and the language you use highlights that that's where it all begins — dazed

The existence of racism, it’s sustainability, and it’s perennial influence in society does not solely rest in language alone that is the whole point. Racism is also an experience. Racism is also behavioral.

if we truly teach them the reality that there are no racial categories of humans then racism would end eventually as children would grow into adults who did not see races but only saw faces — dazed

We are not at the point yet in human existence. First off we just need to treat each other with respect. Equality is the key. People need to see each other as equals in humanity before we can discuss the particulars of racial categorization.

but I suspect you actually believe in racial categories (but use more palatable language like ethnicity instead of race) so again my suggestion wouldn't make sense to you — dazed

No because your suggestion is quite stupid and others here have told you racism is beyond language. We cannot simply start with language alone. We simply cannot ignore it as you’ve tried to do with the Morgan Freeman video. You see, there lies the crux of the issue. When I have discussions with some of my white college buddies on race they love to use me. Freeman as a go to reference because, what it tells me is that white people in the United States at least most are, are uncomfortable with acknowledging the dark history behind American colonialism.

So while we all always talk about never forgetting 9/11, people want to avoid discussing racism. This is why many like yourself use Morgan Freeman because you see him as a black man that thinks like you because one black man that thinks like you is a representation of validity. No. Getting rid of racism doesn’t just start with language or forgetting our pigmentation. Getting rid of racism is generational, and it begins by teaching future generations that we are all a part of the same family and that we all are equal. However knowing that I will prepare my kids to know they’re black because we have yet lived in a society that will see them as equal parts of the same species. I invite you to watch this:

Speaking on language and the experiences of many black Americans let me share this in relation to the OP:



As I said racism is beyond language. I apologize for the graphic language but this is the reality many blacks have faced.

Jane Elliot points out how long she has been doing the same exercise. Interestingly she herself ends with the point that there is only one category of our existence, i.e. human. This highlights that the real solution lies in changing our conceptual frameworks to reflect our true reality.

We can talk about Martin Luther King's dream for decades, as we have done, but the key is to restructure our brains so that there is no room for racial discrimination. The only way to do this is to actually change our language to reflect the reality of our existence.

Carlos Hoyt better articulates this approach than me and also has a more developed thought out approach to implementing it. Here is a link to one of his presentations

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Fo-IBh_yMqo9PJYXHsLizUgF0FgTnRze/edit#slide=id.p62


this approach won't work right away, it will take generations, but it is the only true solution. We can talk about seeing our differences as not mattering, but the truth is that there are no differences to see.

Getting to a point where human brains no longer place people in different categories of human existence based on skin colour is the true path to the end of racism. When differences in skin colour are perceived the same as differences in eye colour (i.e. varied physical adaptions within the same species, and not as signifiers of different kinds of people), then we will achieved our aim.

but as Hoyt points out so long as you continue to use racial language you are sustaining the conceptual framework upon which racism depends. As he suggests, use "racialized black" and "racialize white" if you need to really go there. But don't talk about race as if it exists, because it doesn't and talking about it as if it does allows racism to continue.

Can you please explain to me why people of Middle Eastern origin often face discrimination (racism) in the West even though there is no racial term to signify that group?
— Congau

the fact of non-race based discrimination does not mean we should not make efforts to eliminate race based discrimination. — dazed

I’m again trying to make you answer my question. People from the Middle East suffer from racism in Europe and North America. Or do you deny that? If so why?
They are being discriminated against because of the color of their skin, which is a phenomenon normally referred to as racism. Yet, there exists no particular racial term for that group of people: They are called white.

According to your theory racism against people from the Middle East wouldn’t be possible since a racial term is lacking, but as far as I can see, it is clearly happening. Please explain!

According to your theory racism against people from the Middle East wouldn’t be possible since a racial term is lacking, but as far as I can see, it is clearly happening. Please explain! — Congau

if as you suggest this group belongs to the race "white" then the discrimination that you refer to must be based on characteristics other than "race", so it would still occurr in the absence of the process of racialization

We can talk about Martin Luther King's dream for decades, as we have done, but the key is to restructure our brains so that there is no room for racial discrimination. The only way to do this is to actually change our language to reflect the reality of our existence. — dazed

Agreed however this is also preceded by ridding our society of stereotypes, changing. In order for us to rid our society of racism we need to rid our society collectively of the policies and the continued resistance against an egalitarian model. Simply changing our language is not enough.

Getting to a point where human brains no longer place people in different categories of human existence based on skin colour is the true path to the end of racism. — dazed

Yes, but that also means collectively of changing systems where categories continuously place people in boxes which also perpetuates oppression.