Coming soon - Get a detailed view of why an account is flagged as spam!
view details

This post has been de-listed

It is no longer included in search results and normal feeds (front page, hot posts, subreddit posts, etc). It remains visible only via the author's post history.

184
We don't agree on a definition of racism, so how could we have had a sensible referendum debate?
Post Flair (click to view more posts with a particular flair)
Post Body

One thing this referendum has highlighted is how very few people in Australia think they are racist. And yet, the dominate sub-text of the debate appears to be that there is racism at the core of both Yes and No arguments.

From No, it is that the Amendment is divisive on racial grounds, that it elevates one racial group over another, that it moves power to one racial group over others, and that it contradicts the "colour-blindness" of Australian society. From Yes, it is that those No arguments are either racist arguments and/or wholly untrue, and that characterising First Nations people as suffering either no contemporary harm from colonisation or as suffering self-inflected deprivations is racist.

On and on we've all gone about racism, and yet the premise of the arguments on race and racism are wildly different. How can we possibly have a sensible debate?

On one 'side', there is a view that racism is simply "prejudice, discrimination or hatred directed at someone because of their colour, ethnicity or national origin".[1] On the other, it is that racism has to be viewed in the context of power, "racism equals power plus prejudice".[2]

And the two views are colliding:

Dude its being taught in schools to teachers. I know a teacher and they had ... [a] speaker come in who said exactly that, can't be racist to white people because white people have the power.

(from a recent referendum reddit thread, in which it dawned on me that people are miles apart)

Can we possibly resolve these differences?

Should we have had a debate about racism before we even talked about Indigenous Recognition?

Is it even a debate, or do we just need to find (or re-find), as one paper puts it, "sense of mutual respect and common identity"?

Can we put the genie back in the bottle, or do we actually need to face up to this disparity in our views of the world?

[1] https://humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/ahrc_sr_2021_4_keyterms_a4_r2_0.pdf

[2] https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-07453-002

On reverse racism: https://theconversation.com/what-is-reverse-racism-and-whats-wrong-with-the-term-208009

On 'liberal' racism: https://assets.ctfassets.net/qnesrjodfi80/3gnCY08WTuE6w4WeIW8qCg/1d03dbd8bece68a46bb8da3accd579dd/green-who_are_the_racists-transcript.pdf

Human rights commission on racism: https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/race-discrimination/what-racism

Union movement on racism of Voice: https://www.weareunion.org.au/im_confused_is_the_voice_racist

On why communities get along (or don't): https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/research-report-56-processes-of-prejudice-theory-evidence-and-intervention.pdf

Author
Account Strength
70%
Account Age
1 year
Verified Email
Yes
Verified Flair
No
Total Karma
6,153
Link Karma
351
Comment Karma
5,802
Profile updated: 3 days ago
Posts updated: 8 months ago

Subreddit

Post Details

We try to extract some basic information from the post title. This is not always successful or accurate, please use your best judgement and compare these values to the post title and body for confirmation.
Posted
1 year ago