I was asked in Europe if Australians were rascist, and seemed to have difficulty explaining that on the one hand Australia did have a race relations problem but on the other hand I found it implausible that were any Australian politians refering to the Aborigines as "the Aborigine problem".
The word rascist seems to obsure more than it reveals. You could say that both Winston Churchill and Hitler were both white male racists, but what use is this information? I don't think you can really be non-racist anymore than you can really have a zero blood alchohol level. Saying X are or are not racist seems to be pointless unless you quantify what level of racism you are talking about. Even then quantifying the actual damage caused and how to mitigate it seems more useful.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dancing_serpent
Akward
Date: 2008-10-07 12:17 pm (UTC)The word rascist seems to obsure more than it reveals. You could say that both Winston Churchill and Hitler were both white male racists, but what use is this information? I don't think you can really be non-racist anymore than you can really have a zero blood alchohol level. Saying X are or are not racist seems to be pointless unless you quantify what level of racism you are talking about. Even then quantifying the actual damage caused and how to mitigate it seems more useful.