Is a black person calling another black person an Uncle Tom racist?

[Dutch Uncle]

Which is fine....

Awesome! Peace at last.

You're free to dance your victory dance.

For those who haven't been keeping up: https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/display/document/obo-9780199756384/obo-9780199756384-0173.xml
Race is a human classification system that is socially constructed to distinguish between groups of people who share phenotypical characteristics. Since race is socially constructed, dominant groups in society have shaped and informed racial categories in order to maintain systems of power—thereby also producing racial inequality. Racial categorization has primarily been simplistic, essentialist, and typological in nature, forcing people to “fit” into categories that do not necessarily reflect their ethnic or national heritage. The process of racialization has shifted racial boundaries, depending on sociopolitical pressures for inclusion into particular racial groups or even the systematic exclusion of people due to social forces such as war or labor market pressures. Racism is a byproduct of racial categorization that focuses on the hierarchical arrangement of various racial groups. Racism is an oppressive force that creates and reproduces a complex system social inequality. Sociologists strive to illuminate the dynamics behind the persistent and lingering inequalities and injustices that continue to persist in our racialized society.

Now back to those calling others race traitors or Uncle Toms for not staying in their assigned categories.

 

[QP!]

Awesome! Peace at last.

You're free to dance your victory dance.
...

I will as you acknowledge i never said or suggested anything you accused me of or anything resembling a racist point.

You went on a strawman rant equal to saying if you say the word 'nigger' you are racist while ignoring the context of how it was used.

yes 'racist' and 'uncle tom' can be used in racist ways, but i did not do that. And you need to stop being such a Karen and attacking people before you carefully read and understand what they say.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I will as you acknowledge i never said or suggested anything you accused me of or anything resembling a racist point.

You went on a strawman rant equal to saying if you say the word 'nigger' you are racist while ignoring the context of how it was used.

yes 'racist' and 'uncle tom' can be used in racist ways, but i did not do that. And you need to stop being such a Karen and attacking people before you carefully read and understand what they say.

^^^
An example of why I see LWLs and RWJNs as being identical in nature: they use the same tactics of false accusations, refusing to answer questions quid pro quo and refusing to acknowledge previously answered questions.

 

[martin]

I think that the definition of a racist is a person who believes that one race is SUPERIOR to another. I don't see how a black person calling another black person an Uncle Tom expresses any belief as to the superiority of one race to another. It certainly is derogatory, much like calling someone a traitor or a coward is derogatory.... but not, strictly speaking, racist.... imho.

It means not that but the making of judgment based on race. So, yes, a black person calling another black person an Uncle Tom is racist.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

It means not that but the making of judgment based on race. So, yes, a black person calling another black person an Uncle Tom is racist.

Agreed.

Furthermore, a Euro-American calling an African-American an "Uncle Tom" is just as racist as a two people of similar ancestries calling each other "race traitors".

 

[QP!]

^^^
An example of why I see LWLs and RWJNs as being identical in nature: they use the same tactics of false accusations, refusing to answer questions quid pro quo and refusing to acknowledge previously answered questions.

^^^

An example of why i see Dutch as the same as LWL and RWLNs as he continues to lie and use the same tactic. NOtice how he did not address a thing i said instead keeps posing the same strawman.

 

[QP!]

It means not that but the making of judgment based on race. ..

I do not agree with that definition.

For example, i can say 'black people tend to have darker skin than white people'. That is a judgement i have made based on the visual information i take in.

It is a racial comment, but not a racist one.

And i get others do not separate that way and say any 'racial' comment is 'racist'. I just do not agree. And that is ok.

 

[martin]

I do not agree with that definition.

For example, i can say 'black people tend to have darker skin than white people'. That is a judgement i have made based on the visual information i take in.

It is a racial comment, but not a racist one.

And i get others do not separate that way and say any 'racial' comment is 'racist'. I just do not agree. And that is ok.

That's an observation not a judgment.

 

[QP!]

That's an observation not a judgment.

if you believe race is a social construct it is also a judgement.

There are numerous things that cross both lines of observation and judgement.

it is an observation and judgment to see that people like Candice Owens grifts in ways to leverage the known racism and hate of certain people to her personal profit by being what has been referred to as an 'Uncle Tom'.

it is not racist to point out she fits that definition, as the word has been used historically.

A person like you can certainly say you do not like the use of that word as you read other connotations in to it, but that does not mean if someone else refers to it using another historical connotation, that they are racist.

if a person who is not you says 'Candace Owens fits the definition of an Uncle Tom, as i have seen the word used historically due to her grifting', that does not make that person saying that racist.

For instance if instead that same person said " Candace Owens is selling out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it', would you call that a 'racist' statement?

 

[martin]

if you believe race is a social construct it is also a judgement.

There are numerous things that cross both lines of observation and judgement.

it is an observation and judgment to see that people like Candice Owens grifts in ways to leverage the known racism and hate of certain people to her personal profit by being what has been referred to as an 'Uncle Tom'.

it is not racist to point out she fits that definition, as the word has been used historically.

A person like you can certainly say you do not like the use of that word as you read other connotations in to it, but that does not mean if someone else refers to it using another historical connotation, that they are racist.

if a person who is not you says 'Candace Owens fits the definition of an Uncle Tom, as i have seen the word used historically due to her grifting', that does not make that person saying that racist.

For instance if instead that same person said " Candace Owens is selling out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it', would you call that a 'racist' statement?

“Black people tend to have darker skin than white people” is a statement obvious to the point of tautology. I agree certain statements can cross both lines but that isn’t one. “Uncle Tom” is an accusation of race guided conduct or attitude irrespective of merit, racist no matter who says it.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

“Black people tend to have darker skin than white people” is a statement obvious to the point of tautology. I agree certain statements can cross both lines but that isn’t one. “Uncle Tom” is an accusation of race guided conduct or attitude irrespective of merit, racist no matter who says it.

Agreed. It's not a secret that human beings come in a variety of shapes, sizes, skin-tones and other superficial characteristics. What's also not a secret is that bigots try to divide those differences into superior and inferior.

It's well known that businesses have long been biased against people who are "too short", "too fat" or "too dark". While there is a survival advantage toward xenophobia for our Stone Age ancestors*, including birth defects, in modern civilizations, it's stupid and/or ignorant. Still, as the controversy with both Chik-fil-A and Harry Weinstein proved, such bigotry continues to exist.



*who existed for 270,000 of Homo Sapien's 300,000 year existence.

 

[cawacko]

It means not that but the making of judgment based on race. So, yes, a black person calling another black person an Uncle Tom is racist.

For the sake of discussion let me ask this. I think of certain (negative) words, the n*word being the most prevalent, that it's deemed ok when a person of that group uses it among each other but not ok when someone outside that group uses it. If we're talking black people here would you say it's racist for them to use that word among each other?

 

[martin]

For the sake of discussion let me ask this. I think of certain (negative) words, the n*word being the most prevalent, that it's deemed ok when a person of that group uses it among each other but not ok when someone outside that group uses it. If we're talking black people here would you say it's racist for them to use that word among each other?

The word is often used among black people uncritically. In that sense it wouldn’t be racist. “Uncle Tom” is ordinarily an insult.

 

[QP!]

“Black people tend to have darker skin than white people” is a statement obvious to the point of tautology. I agree certain statements can cross both lines but that isn’t one. “Uncle Tom” is an accusation of race guided conduct or attitude irrespective of merit, racist no matter who says it.

What does darker mean other than the perception our specific eyes have evolved to see?

Not being funny here, but if you go down the rabbit hole of race being a social concept (which i agree with) you question why our eye balls determine race when there are far more commonalities between people(s) that are not of the visual sort than just what our eyes see.

You can find people who have 'white' skin who share far more genetic and other commonalities with certain people considered 'black', then other black people do.

But lets escape that more heady discussion and just answer me this.

Do you agree people like this (" Candace Owens is selling out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it', ) exist and can be classified in some regard and if you do then what words would you accept to classify them?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

For the sake of discussion let me ask this. I think of certain (negative) words, the n*word being the most prevalent, that it's deemed ok when a person of that group uses it among each other but not ok when someone outside that group uses it.

If we're talking black people here would you say it's racist for them to use that word among each other?

Group, in this context, equals "race", which has been repeatedly shown to be a social construct, not scientifically correct in human genetics. Ergo, it's wrong for any "group" to demean other "groups" or people within their own "group" by using outdated views.

Yes, it's racist. It's racist for anyone to define someone else with terms that enforce a view that human beings can be subdivided into "races".

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/genetics-history-race-neanderthal-rutherford
Why Race Is Not a Thing, According to Genetics
Scientists are unlocking the secrets to how we’re all related—to each other and to the species that came before us.
Today, scientists routinely map the genomes of the long dead, from Neanderthals to medieval kings. What they’re finding out, says British geneticist Adam Rutherford in A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived, rewrites the story of human life on Earth—with some unexpected twists....

...Paleogenetics is the study of our DNA from things that have been dead for a long time—paleo simply means old. It’s new because we’ve only invented the technology to do it in the last 10 years and, in a serious way, in the last five years....

...Fast forward millennia to the recent riots in Charlottesville, which showed how volatile the issue of race still is in America. How can the study of DNA enlighten us?

In many ways, genetics makes a mockery of race. The characteristics of normal human variation we use to determine broad social categories of race—such as black, Asian, or white—are mostly things like skin color, morphological features, or hair texture, and those are all biologically encoded.

But when we look at the full genomes from people all over the world, those differences represent a tiny fraction of the differences between people. There is, for instance, more genetic diversity within Africa than in the rest of the world put together. If you take someone from Ethiopia and someone from the Sudan, they are more likely to be more genetically different from each other than either one of those people is to anyone else on the planet!

 

[martin]

What does darker mean other than the perception our specific eyes have evolved to see?

Not being funny here, but if you go down the rabbit hole of race being a social concept (which i agree with) you question why our eye balls determine race when there are far more commonalities between people(s) that are not of the visual sort than just what our eyes see.

You can find people who have 'white' skin who share far more genetic and other commonalities with certain people considered 'black', then other black people do.

But lets escape that more heady discussion and just answer me this.

Do you agree people like this (" Candace Owens is selling out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it', ) exist and can be classified in some regard and if you do then what words would you accept to classify them?

hypocrite?

Don't know who she is.

 

[QP!]

hypocrite

Ok great i accept that is your word for that set of actions. I don't think hypocrite defines it well but that is just my view. Your definition is:

Hypocrite - "a person like Candace Owens who sells out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it',

Do you agree historically that a person who is not you could define it thusly:

Uncle Tom - "a person like Candace Owens who sells out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it',


And you are both saying the same thing but you both just have differing views on the defining classification words?

Meaning you can have the exact same intent and in explanation define that person like Candace the exact same way?

 

[martin]

Ok great i accept that is your word for that set of actions. I don't think hypocrite defines it well but that is just my view. Your definition is:

Hypocrite - "a person like Candace Owens who sells out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it',

Do you agree historically that a person who is not you could define it thusly:

Uncle Tom - "a person like Candace Owens who sells out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it',


And you are both saying the same thing but you both just have differing views on the defining classification words?

Meaning you can have the exact same intent and in explanation define that person like Candace the exact same way?

You left the question mark off the quote. I said I don't know she is, also don't know in what context "she sells other people out". In a general way it sounds hypocritical. It wouldn't be hypocritical for a black person to use the term "Uncle Tom" in an unfriendly manner, including "selling out" another black person, since there is no pretense that the name caller is not black himself. It would be racist, in my opinion.

 

[QP!]

You left the question mark off the quote. I said I don't know she is, also don't know in what context "she sells other people out". In a general way it sounds hypocritical. It wouldn't be hypocritical for a black person to use the term "Uncle Tom" in an unfriendly manner, including "selling out" another black person, since there is no pretense that the name caller is not black himself. It would be racist, in my opinion.

You'll notice i did not include race in that example so i am not sure why you inserted it. I said "shared a trait" deliberately to genericize it. The person, Candace Owens does not need to be known for the exmple to be read. She is simply a person who has certain traits, others tend to want to denigrate and she is willing to serve the role of doing it against similar people.

And again, I am not challenging your opinion it is hypocritical as everyone is entitled to form their own opinion. I am asking if you can accept people who form other opinions and think it is "a person like Candace Owens who sells out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it' and if they say to them that is what they would historically associate with an Uncle Tom, can you accept that?

or would you say 'no, only the way i look at it is acceptable'.

But lets move on and answer this simple question if you will. Do you agree this type of person exists ..."a person (x) who sells out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it'?

Because if you do, we are arguing the same thing. You would simply call the person a 'hypocrite', someone else might say 'uncle Tom' but you are both speaking to the same thing. So both are racist or neither is racist.

 

[martin]

You'll notice i did not include race in that example so i am not sure why you inserted it. I said "shared a trait" deliberately to genericize it. The person, Candace Owens does not need to be known for the exmple to be read. She is simply a person who has certain traits, others tend to want to denigrate and she is willing to serve the role of doing it against similar people.

And again, I am not challenging your opinion it is hypocritical as everyone is entitled to form their own opinion. I am asking if you can accept people who form other opinions and think it is "a person like Candace Owens who sells out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it' and if they say to them that is what they would historically associate with an Uncle Tom, can you accept that?

or would you say 'no, only the way i look at it is acceptable'.

But lets move on and answer this simple question if you will. Do you agree this type of person exists ..."a person (x) who sells out people who share a trait with her to ingratiate herself with others who denigrate that trait and will reward her for doing it'?

Because if you do, we are arguing the same thing. You would simply call the person a 'hypocrite', someone else might say 'uncle Tom' but you are both speaking to the same thing. So both are racist or neither is racist.

You've lost me. I didn't include race in your example. Said I don't who she is, only that it is hypocritical to act antagonistically toward someone for an attribute you share. However if the shared attribute was obsequity by two black people toward white people then
one calling the other "Uncle Tom" would be both hypocritical and racist.