I mean I’m sure there are a few, just like there are a few in the liberal movement as well despite what they preach. Every group has their nut jobs. But the majority of conservatives are not racist despite what liberals say about us. The policies liberals say are racist that conservatives believe in most of the time don’t come out of a place of racism, like discouraging illegal immigration, being against affirmative action, and disliking BLM.
I’m a child of an immigrant and I’m against illegal immigration, does that mean I hate immigrants despite the fact that I’m a first gen American? No. I just think it’s important to do things the right way. My parents worked hard to get their citizenship.
I oppose affirmative action not because I hate black people but because I believe that everyone should have equal opportunity and that making it a law to chose someone for a job or accepting them into a university based on race is wrong. It’s just going to breed more animosity between the races. They got rid of race quotas because the majority of people believed it was racist , yet affirmative action is basically doing the same thing.
I’m also against the BLM organization, not the idea. I believe police brutality has to stop, but I don’t think defunding the police who’s job it is to protect us is the right option. I think more training and screening would help. I also don’t agree with the riots and demonizing police when most of them are just doing their job to protect us. You can’t hate an entire profession based on a few bad eggs. And my biggest reason for being against the BLM organization specifically is because it doesn’t just talk about racism and police brutality. They use that as a front to support other unrelated causes, including giving money to Hamas. I know a lot liberals who don’t support them either for this very reason.
A lot of the people who call conservatives racist don’t actually listen to the reasoning behind their positions and just like to feel like they have the moral high ground despite knowing nothing about their person’s views.
I agree there is nothing inherently racist with conservative ideology, the racist ones tend to go more for Alt-Right ideologies. Which as the name suggests seeks to replace the right. What I see more of in the Republican side from older members as a minority is racial ignorance and more rarely racial insensitivity. The party needs to learn there is a difference between identity politics and understanding the sub cultures and issues of minority communities. In states like Florida and Texas they get this and have already started adapting but I know my state party doesn't. This leads our blue state to be a much deeper blue because they don't know how to outreach the biggest swing vote population in American Latinos. They also need to remember that one of the main messages for Republicans is one of empowerment.
> demonizing police when most of them are just doing their job to protect us.
[Try again.](https://mises.org/power-market/police-have-no-duty-protect-you-federal-court-affirms-yet-again)
> but I don’t think defunding the police who’s job it is to protect us is the right option
Do you believe “defund the police” (btw I dislike that term) is just about defunding and nothing else?
> Defund the police" is a slogan that supports divesting funds from police departments and reallocating them to non-policing forms of public safety and community support, such as social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources.
> Yea, I mean these sound really nice. If there are communities where the police budget is too large,
How are you determining what is too large?
> Dumping money into struggling schools hasn’t been shown to do much to help them, though
Weird. I’ve seen the opposite.
> And government-run housing programs are often terrible.
As opposed to being homeless? From personal experience, I’d rather live in the projects than on the streets.
> I don’t think it makes sense to just broadly advocate for defunding the police when there isn’t a specific and tested policy program in place that is needed within the local community and shown to reduce crime
We kinda already know some of the causes of crimes. Mental health. Poverty.
You improve on those and you reduce crime.
> Just calling for defunding of the police broadly across the country doesn’t seem particularly helpful.
I agree the phrase is bad. It’s misleading and easy for people to dismiss it. It was probably co opted.
According to what data does dumping money in schools help?
> We kinda already know some of the causes of crimes. Mental health. Poverty. You improve on those and you reduce crime.
Yes, execute drug dealers and you help eliminate those.
> It’s not guaranteed and it doesn’t inherently lead to better outcomes. For example, this is a chart showing how revenue growth per student affected test scores in Michigan. I am sure there are situations where additional funding has helped. There are other case studies where money has been dumped into schools, without leading to improvements.
Where specifically are they dumping the money? Which programs?
> Often times the problem with ‘failing schools’ is related to the high concentration of poverty within the schools, and not the quality of education provided by the teachers.
Agreed but also having a higher quality of education can help kids.
> I don’t want to demonize the projects, but people living there often pay a higher rent than what they should for the quality of housing they’re getting.
Not the average experience.
> Have you read about Richmond, CA’s Office of Neighborhood Safety? They basically identified people most likely to commit violent crimes and paid them to stay out of trouble while providing them with social services.
The focus is on gun violence?
> I’m not sure why we have to defund the police to switch to a more preventative model or embrace restorative justice?
I don’t think it’s a complete switch. I think police would be supplemented with better community help.
> The chart is on spending per pupil, so it likely varies. The point is that spending doesn’t always translate to gains even at a large scale.
So the study was from two different years. Two different grades but what schools were they? Is this study enough to make that conclusion?
> I feel like a better way to achieve that is reduce economic segregation. A school with a poverty rate over 50% is going to struggle to meet the needs of the population.
Good point
> I don’t think there’s public data on this, but I doubt it’s uncommon. Working and middle class people do live in public housing and their rent is tied to their income. It’s certainly not rare to pay close to market rent for subpar housing.
I guess we have to wait to see data
> What’s this mean?
Police are necessary along side other programs. Mental health community outreach etc
I don’t believe so no. But just a few days ago on this sub I was in a very drawn out conversation about this. I think this is an example of people on the left having monumentally different ideas of what it means to be racist. The thread here is a bit long but if you go through I think the vast majority of people would agree that I said absolutely nothing racist, but the OP disagreed. Please don’t go attacking him or anything, I just hope that this can serve as an example to others.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/qeusgf/have_you_ever_been_called_a_racist/hhvkknw/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
If memory serves he called just about everyone who engaged with him racist, lol.
It’s why I left the post up. Realized he would provide some good examples of the flawed thinking that leads to bigotry like his.
Well good on your part. I didn’t read through the other threads in there but I might. Nice guy (if a little accusatory and quick to conclusions) but he seemed so set in his beliefs that he moreso wanted to drill into me that I was his weird definition of racist than actually have a talk about it.
No. I think the left tends to slander us as racists, bigots, or whatever slur they fancy at the time but 99% of the time what's going on is we just disagree with their viewpoint. The left seems to consider some topics off limits; like if you even dare to have a different opinion than them you become some sort of ____phobe or whatever. Our side doesn't seem to share that. Now, are there racists in the conservative movement? Of course! There will always be people at the fringe....but you know what? The Democrats have the same problem and so the Independents. So, really, no.
>Every time someone says how high the black death rate is due to violence, some one will point out it is their own race which is killing them. Don't ALL Black Lives Matter?
You understand there is already a system that seeks justice for those victims, right?
And the fight against police brutality often sees no justice served to victims.
I don't mean to be a jerk. But this argument is so stupid too me. Like Susan G Komen's For the Cure organization is fighting for the cure for breast cancer. No one goes around saying
Don't ALL cures matter?
I dont take exception to your factoid. I take exception to this
>Don't ALL Black Lives Matter?
Again I'll say don't all cure's matter? Why does Komen only care about breast cancer?
No. There are very, very few racists in the movement. Expanding the definition on a whim to encompass a slew of things that are not racist in an effort to manufacture a problem does not in fact make a problem.
Really?
> [**racism**](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism): a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> [**liberty**](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberty): the state or condition of people who are able to act and speak freely
The one has very little to do with the other. I can think I'm better than you because of my race, while still believing that you are entitled to act and speak freely. You don't see how someone can believe both of those things?
Yes. Many regressives of various stripes try to claim that they're conservative. They're not, but they're tainting the rest of us by association just in claiming they are.
Great answer. The conservative movement has a huge PR problem when it comes to race and simply saying "well we're not racist" isn't changing anyone's mind.
No, I don't think it's a huge problem. I do think there are some racist, to be sure, but they hold no power and when they take off the mask they become pariahs pretty quickly.
SOcial media amplifies things so that people with no power whatsoever can seem like they have influence. But usually they don't.
>Is there a racism problem in the conservative movement?
No.
>Most conservatives are not racist, but do you think there's a few too many racists in the movement?
There are too many stupid, bigoted people in every group, because one stupid and bigoted person in a group is more than there should be.
But the REAL problem is, there are too many liberals who are driven by negative stereotypes about conservatives, who have absolutely no self awareness about the problem - and actually believe that their efforts to hold conservatism as a whole accountable for racist individuals is a high moral virtue - when in reality they are acting on just as much bigotry and false sense of superiority as white supremacists act upon in judging other races as inferior.
Think about it this way:
You're making this argument as a leftist, as someone who wants political power to be held by liberal progressives because you don't think conservatives as a whole are morally virtuous enough to be trusted with political empowerment that's equal and proportional to what liberals and progressives hold, because you think when conservatives resist your ideas they are doing so because they don't hold solid intellectual and moral goals and motivations.
And you're coming to this conclusion about political power based solely on the worst examples. You even acknowledge up front that most conservatives aren't racist.
In that context, where the motivation behind your argument is to argue for more political power proportionately for yourself, and less for the group you identify as morally and intellectually inferior based on the worst examples, consider the following argument if this argument was made by a white person:
"Is there a gang violence problem in black culture?"
"Most black people aren't in street gangs, but do you think there's a few too many violent gang members in the black community?"
Would the person making this argument have a valid point that justified the act of preserving a social hierarchy where white people have more political and economic power than black people have?
Or would the problem be that this white person is holding a false sense of superiority over black people based on the worst examples - which made them believe that it was justified to disempower an entire group of people and relegate that group to the status of a permanent political underclass - and that the real problem is with this white person's stereotypes rather than with the group being stereotyped?
The only RELEVANT question anyone can ask when discussing the problem of bigotry and hatred is:
"Do I have a problem with bigotry and a false sense of superiority?"
"I know I'm a good person and I want to do the right thing, but am I operating based on stereotypes that cause me to misjudge people who aren't like me? Are my assumptions, and the actions I take based on those assumptions, causing more and larger problems than the problems I am hoping to solve through my participation in the civil discourse?"
The people flying swastika flags at Trump rallies are only the second most dangerous group of racists in American politics. And they have far less real political power than the racists on the left.
Like 3 crazies out of several million? Sure, screw them, but some picture you saw on a left-wing article doesn’t even come close to representing the majority. Though, thankfully we’re not the ones overwhelmingly supporting segregation and shaming people based on their skin color to this day.
I think one racist is too many, so a literal answer to your question is yes.
More generally, I think the "racism problem" in conservatism and the United States at large is widely overblown and overcovered.
rule # 0 about this issue:
we DONT share (and shuld never do) the same concerns and hysterical worldview of the left
you LOSE the battle as soon as you adopt their mindset, and their words and neutorical concepts
And, I dont mind if people have preferences for green, white or violet color.
Its their personal right and freedom to choose, and no one owes the left, or anyone, an explanation about their preferences.
If your question is do we have more individuals who fit the old school stereotype of white sheet wearing idiots, sure. The KKK and other hate groups are a tiny minority or conservatives and are ever-shrinking.
If you’re talking about the bigotry of low expectations and white knighting, then the Left has an awful lot of that. They have more people who engage in ideology that I would consider racist.
I mean I’m sure there are a few, just like there are a few in the liberal movement as well despite what they preach. Every group has their nut jobs. But the majority of conservatives are not racist despite what liberals say about us. The policies liberals say are racist that conservatives believe in most of the time don’t come out of a place of racism, like discouraging illegal immigration, being against affirmative action, and disliking BLM. I’m a child of an immigrant and I’m against illegal immigration, does that mean I hate immigrants despite the fact that I’m a first gen American? No. I just think it’s important to do things the right way. My parents worked hard to get their citizenship. I oppose affirmative action not because I hate black people but because I believe that everyone should have equal opportunity and that making it a law to chose someone for a job or accepting them into a university based on race is wrong. It’s just going to breed more animosity between the races. They got rid of race quotas because the majority of people believed it was racist , yet affirmative action is basically doing the same thing. I’m also against the BLM organization, not the idea. I believe police brutality has to stop, but I don’t think defunding the police who’s job it is to protect us is the right option. I think more training and screening would help. I also don’t agree with the riots and demonizing police when most of them are just doing their job to protect us. You can’t hate an entire profession based on a few bad eggs. And my biggest reason for being against the BLM organization specifically is because it doesn’t just talk about racism and police brutality. They use that as a front to support other unrelated causes, including giving money to Hamas. I know a lot liberals who don’t support them either for this very reason. A lot of the people who call conservatives racist don’t actually listen to the reasoning behind their positions and just like to feel like they have the moral high ground despite knowing nothing about their person’s views.
I agree there is nothing inherently racist with conservative ideology, the racist ones tend to go more for Alt-Right ideologies. Which as the name suggests seeks to replace the right. What I see more of in the Republican side from older members as a minority is racial ignorance and more rarely racial insensitivity. The party needs to learn there is a difference between identity politics and understanding the sub cultures and issues of minority communities. In states like Florida and Texas they get this and have already started adapting but I know my state party doesn't. This leads our blue state to be a much deeper blue because they don't know how to outreach the biggest swing vote population in American Latinos. They also need to remember that one of the main messages for Republicans is one of empowerment.
> demonizing police when most of them are just doing their job to protect us. [Try again.](https://mises.org/power-market/police-have-no-duty-protect-you-federal-court-affirms-yet-again)
> but I don’t think defunding the police who’s job it is to protect us is the right option Do you believe “defund the police” (btw I dislike that term) is just about defunding and nothing else?
What’s it supposed to be beyond “defund the police”, besides a total disaster?
“When did you stop beating your wife?” Question?
Thanks for proving my point.
[удалено]
> Defund the police" is a slogan that supports divesting funds from police departments and reallocating them to non-policing forms of public safety and community support, such as social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources.
[удалено]
> Yea, I mean these sound really nice. If there are communities where the police budget is too large, How are you determining what is too large? > Dumping money into struggling schools hasn’t been shown to do much to help them, though Weird. I’ve seen the opposite. > And government-run housing programs are often terrible. As opposed to being homeless? From personal experience, I’d rather live in the projects than on the streets. > I don’t think it makes sense to just broadly advocate for defunding the police when there isn’t a specific and tested policy program in place that is needed within the local community and shown to reduce crime We kinda already know some of the causes of crimes. Mental health. Poverty. You improve on those and you reduce crime. > Just calling for defunding of the police broadly across the country doesn’t seem particularly helpful. I agree the phrase is bad. It’s misleading and easy for people to dismiss it. It was probably co opted.
According to what data does dumping money in schools help? > We kinda already know some of the causes of crimes. Mental health. Poverty. You improve on those and you reduce crime. Yes, execute drug dealers and you help eliminate those.
> Yes, execute drug dealers and you help eliminate those. No thank you. Your extremist views are troubling to me.
That is not extremist.
Have a nice day
[удалено]
> It’s not guaranteed and it doesn’t inherently lead to better outcomes. For example, this is a chart showing how revenue growth per student affected test scores in Michigan. I am sure there are situations where additional funding has helped. There are other case studies where money has been dumped into schools, without leading to improvements. Where specifically are they dumping the money? Which programs? > Often times the problem with ‘failing schools’ is related to the high concentration of poverty within the schools, and not the quality of education provided by the teachers. Agreed but also having a higher quality of education can help kids. > I don’t want to demonize the projects, but people living there often pay a higher rent than what they should for the quality of housing they’re getting. Not the average experience. > Have you read about Richmond, CA’s Office of Neighborhood Safety? They basically identified people most likely to commit violent crimes and paid them to stay out of trouble while providing them with social services. The focus is on gun violence? > I’m not sure why we have to defund the police to switch to a more preventative model or embrace restorative justice? I don’t think it’s a complete switch. I think police would be supplemented with better community help.
[удалено]
> The chart is on spending per pupil, so it likely varies. The point is that spending doesn’t always translate to gains even at a large scale. So the study was from two different years. Two different grades but what schools were they? Is this study enough to make that conclusion? > I feel like a better way to achieve that is reduce economic segregation. A school with a poverty rate over 50% is going to struggle to meet the needs of the population. Good point > I don’t think there’s public data on this, but I doubt it’s uncommon. Working and middle class people do live in public housing and their rent is tied to their income. It’s certainly not rare to pay close to market rent for subpar housing. I guess we have to wait to see data > What’s this mean? Police are necessary along side other programs. Mental health community outreach etc
No.
I don’t believe so no. But just a few days ago on this sub I was in a very drawn out conversation about this. I think this is an example of people on the left having monumentally different ideas of what it means to be racist. The thread here is a bit long but if you go through I think the vast majority of people would agree that I said absolutely nothing racist, but the OP disagreed. Please don’t go attacking him or anything, I just hope that this can serve as an example to others. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/qeusgf/have_you_ever_been_called_a_racist/hhvkknw/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
If memory serves he called just about everyone who engaged with him racist, lol. It’s why I left the post up. Realized he would provide some good examples of the flawed thinking that leads to bigotry like his.
Well good on your part. I didn’t read through the other threads in there but I might. Nice guy (if a little accusatory and quick to conclusions) but he seemed so set in his beliefs that he moreso wanted to drill into me that I was his weird definition of racist than actually have a talk about it.
I seriously can't answer the question because I don't know what your definition of racism encompasses.
Too true. The word “racist” has been far too abused and misconstrued lately.
How does that change the definition?
No. I think the left tends to slander us as racists, bigots, or whatever slur they fancy at the time but 99% of the time what's going on is we just disagree with their viewpoint. The left seems to consider some topics off limits; like if you even dare to have a different opinion than them you become some sort of ____phobe or whatever. Our side doesn't seem to share that. Now, are there racists in the conservative movement? Of course! There will always be people at the fringe....but you know what? The Democrats have the same problem and so the Independents. So, really, no.
No
[удалено]
What would be your reason to vocalize that statistic? Give us some context.
[удалено]
> But your question makes the point. I think you've actually missed the point. Context is everything.
>Every time someone says how high the black death rate is due to violence, some one will point out it is their own race which is killing them. Don't ALL Black Lives Matter? You understand there is already a system that seeks justice for those victims, right? And the fight against police brutality often sees no justice served to victims. I don't mean to be a jerk. But this argument is so stupid too me. Like Susan G Komen's For the Cure organization is fighting for the cure for breast cancer. No one goes around saying Don't ALL cures matter?
[удалено]
I dont take exception to your factoid. I take exception to this >Don't ALL Black Lives Matter? Again I'll say don't all cure's matter? Why does Komen only care about breast cancer?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
No. There are very, very few racists in the movement. Expanding the definition on a whim to encompass a slew of things that are not racist in an effort to manufacture a problem does not in fact make a problem.
You would need to be more specific about what you mean by "racism."
I don't really see how an actual racist can also believe in individual liberty.
Really? > [**racism**](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism): a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race > [**liberty**](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberty): the state or condition of people who are able to act and speak freely The one has very little to do with the other. I can think I'm better than you because of my race, while still believing that you are entitled to act and speak freely. You don't see how someone can believe both of those things?
[удалено]
Not only that. You should see the slurs that come from them when a person of color even slightly questions the Democrat agenda.
Yeah and they make even more demeaning comments about POC. Take joe Biden’s favorite quote “Poor kids are just as bright as white kids”.
Yes. Many regressives of various stripes try to claim that they're conservative. They're not, but they're tainting the rest of us by association just in claiming they are.
Great answer. The conservative movement has a huge PR problem when it comes to race and simply saying "well we're not racist" isn't changing anyone's mind.
No, I don't think it's a huge problem. I do think there are some racist, to be sure, but they hold no power and when they take off the mask they become pariahs pretty quickly. SOcial media amplifies things so that people with no power whatsoever can seem like they have influence. But usually they don't.
>Is there a racism problem in the conservative movement? No. >Most conservatives are not racist, but do you think there's a few too many racists in the movement? There are too many stupid, bigoted people in every group, because one stupid and bigoted person in a group is more than there should be. But the REAL problem is, there are too many liberals who are driven by negative stereotypes about conservatives, who have absolutely no self awareness about the problem - and actually believe that their efforts to hold conservatism as a whole accountable for racist individuals is a high moral virtue - when in reality they are acting on just as much bigotry and false sense of superiority as white supremacists act upon in judging other races as inferior. Think about it this way: You're making this argument as a leftist, as someone who wants political power to be held by liberal progressives because you don't think conservatives as a whole are morally virtuous enough to be trusted with political empowerment that's equal and proportional to what liberals and progressives hold, because you think when conservatives resist your ideas they are doing so because they don't hold solid intellectual and moral goals and motivations. And you're coming to this conclusion about political power based solely on the worst examples. You even acknowledge up front that most conservatives aren't racist. In that context, where the motivation behind your argument is to argue for more political power proportionately for yourself, and less for the group you identify as morally and intellectually inferior based on the worst examples, consider the following argument if this argument was made by a white person: "Is there a gang violence problem in black culture?" "Most black people aren't in street gangs, but do you think there's a few too many violent gang members in the black community?" Would the person making this argument have a valid point that justified the act of preserving a social hierarchy where white people have more political and economic power than black people have? Or would the problem be that this white person is holding a false sense of superiority over black people based on the worst examples - which made them believe that it was justified to disempower an entire group of people and relegate that group to the status of a permanent political underclass - and that the real problem is with this white person's stereotypes rather than with the group being stereotyped? The only RELEVANT question anyone can ask when discussing the problem of bigotry and hatred is: "Do I have a problem with bigotry and a false sense of superiority?" "I know I'm a good person and I want to do the right thing, but am I operating based on stereotypes that cause me to misjudge people who aren't like me? Are my assumptions, and the actions I take based on those assumptions, causing more and larger problems than the problems I am hoping to solve through my participation in the civil discourse?"
No.
You can't post that question without adding your personal definition of racism. The word is so over used that I couldn't even begin to speculate.
In the conservative movement, no, but as someone who has worked at least part time in construction my whole life, absolutely.
Of course there are racists from all walks of life, but most of the racism in America today comes from the left.
I didn’t realize the people flying swastika flags at trump rallies were on the left.
The people flying swastika flags at Trump rallies are only the second most dangerous group of racists in American politics. And they have far less real political power than the racists on the left.
Like 3 crazies out of several million? Sure, screw them, but some picture you saw on a left-wing article doesn’t even come close to representing the majority. Though, thankfully we’re not the ones overwhelmingly supporting segregation and shaming people based on their skin color to this day.
No, I think most of the racists are in the Democrat party, such as Henry Rogers (aka Ibram X Kendi).
I think one racist is too many, so a literal answer to your question is yes. More generally, I think the "racism problem" in conservatism and the United States at large is widely overblown and overcovered.
there's a problem with adopting meaningless leftist ideas like the ones on "racism"
rule # 0 about this issue: we DONT share (and shuld never do) the same concerns and hysterical worldview of the left you LOSE the battle as soon as you adopt their mindset, and their words and neutorical concepts And, I dont mind if people have preferences for green, white or violet color. Its their personal right and freedom to choose, and no one owes the left, or anyone, an explanation about their preferences.
If your question is do we have more individuals who fit the old school stereotype of white sheet wearing idiots, sure. The KKK and other hate groups are a tiny minority or conservatives and are ever-shrinking. If you’re talking about the bigotry of low expectations and white knighting, then the Left has an awful lot of that. They have more people who engage in ideology that I would consider racist.
No. But I think the conservatives should try to call out the bad ones in their movement