@mcfate
Then why don't we hear that word used more often?
The Whoopie Goldberg incident initiated this thought. At first I had to understand it Jews were, in face, a Race. That didn't take long, but I did have questions at first.
Then I realized that the term "Race" was irrelevant to the topic. It was Bigotry or Groupism. "Race" was just an attribute of Bigotry in order to create "Racism". That mindset allows many other non-race, unjust actions to be justified.
@damselfly59 @mcfate
What if the bigotry is reversed and it's all about me and my tribe?
Only-Me-ism?
Same mindset.
Jingoist have this mindset, and we're seeing a lot of it in the US.
There's no difference at all. "I'm the only one that matters" and "Nobody else matters" are just two different ways of saying the same thing.
Okay, here's the thing: "race" is an imaginary construct, with no actual analogue in the real world.
If you call a Muslim-hater a racist, they'll bicker with you over whether being a Muslim is a race. Call them a religious bigot.
The Nazi's defined a "full Jew" as someone who had three or more Jewish grandparents. People with fewer than that could apply for the status of "probationary human", effectively.
Whoopie β not bafflingly β imagines racism is a skin color thing, and that's all. It's not.
She shows HER blind spots by imagining it is, or somehow thinking you could tell Nazis you didn't give a shit about Judaism, and they'd take it into consideration.
@mcfate
At the core of Whoopie's fault is that she's weighting the overt indicator more than the underlying belief construct: Because Jews are often average Caucasian-looking they cannot be the target of racism.
The trigger/indicator is not the issue. It's the underlying belief construct. And, that extends far beyond race. Anything that can be construed as a tribe is a label that can be used.
The core of her fault is letting her mouth run about things she never actually took the time to understand.
@mcfate
But isn't that the business model of those shows? Run off their mouths and create drama?
Run off too far and you get suspended for a few weeks.
What would be better is to unpack it so that society becomes more sophisticated on the topic. Maybe then we'll find ways of teaching the benefits and importance of morality - at scale.
Evidently not, seeing that they suspended her for two weeks.
"We're giving you a two-week time-out for successfully executing our business model."
Best of luck making society "more sophisticated" on ANY topic.
@mcfate
Well, I'll at least keep thinking about how to! :-)
Story-telling is probably a better way to teach morality.
@mcfate
Actually, this issue has aligned itself perfectly with the business model of ANY TV show: get viewers.
The Whoopie issue showed up on the PBS Newshour! They never get into lurid news stories. This can only increase viewership.
Okay, you're at this point claiming that Goldberg did this DELIBERATELY. Are you sure that's where you want to be?
@mcfate
That's giving her too much credit.
And, I don't believe in conspiracies that are subtle, like threading the needle between truculence and a hate-crime.
Okay, I have absolutely no idea at all what you ARE saying, then.
This is the show's "business model" that she was acting out, she did it without being conscious of doing it, and they suspended her for accidentally succeeding? Am I getting this right?
@mcfate
The business model is to generate viewers.
There are many ways to achieve this. One is to encourage the performers to be a provocateur. If is a civil discussion it doesn't attract viewers.
At the extreme end of that axis is offensive and socially-unacceptable conduct that scares away sponsors.
The business model requires that they stay somewhere in a moderate zone.
But, the point I was trying to make is that this got so much press that it will ultimately benefit the show.
So, what then does any of this have to do with Goldberg's being an ignoramus, other than by happenstance?
Also, she's apparently livid about the suspension and threatening to quit on her own. Would that "ultimately benefit the show"?
Also, saying the "business model is to generate viewers" is something like saying "the business model of a store is to sell things".
@mcfate
She clearly an ignoramus. I'm not debating that. I was putting a finer point on it because it applies to other groups that are abused.
She can bitch all she wants, and it will merely attract more viewers. People love train wrecks. I actually care very little about this and would rather back out of this rabbit hole.
What I'm more interested in is how do we become more civil and sophisticated in our collective understanding of each other. Media is a means.
@mcfate
...and...
I want to ensure you that I'm not trying to defend any antisemitism committed by anyone. If you read that into my response, I'm sorry.
No. I'm actually mostly trying to figure out why "groupism" is at all better than "bigotry".
Believe me, if I though you were defending antisemitism, you'd have heard about it.
@mcfate
<phew!>
I think "bigotry" is associated with close-minded 'philistines'.
It might be too loaded of a term to get across my point.
For instance, if a "liberal" were to say "All conservatives are X", would I be able to safely call them a bigot in 2022?
Calling them a "groupist" might provide a runway for a more productive argument.
I suspect it'd provide. a runway for bickering about novel un-words, but best of luck to you with it.
@jurban @mcfate
Not me-ism.