Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum

You are not logged in. Would you like to login?



6/01/2017 4:02 pm  #1


Racial profiling and Free speech

So I had a depressing conversation with someone I know on a Discord server. Here's the conversation:

Other person: By the way also don't be spreading your racism to our users in pm. If they'd like to talk to you in private, fine, but you won't be staying if you do, especially if you're inviting it
Me: Excuse me, what?
You are implying that I forcefully message people to spread what you think is racism (all facts conceded, a purely liberal fascism technique)?

Her: No I haven't said that. I said you won't be spreading your racism through pm to our members

Me: What exactly does that mean? Do elaborate. Suppose that I'm talking about racism, or I want to talk about racism with whosoever I'm already talking to in PM.
Are you telling me that I can't do that?

Me: It is completely gratuitous that I'm granting you the rhetorical power by the usage of the term racism. But even that conceded, I do want my question answered.

Call it whatever helps you sleep at night. It's vile and you won't be spreading it to our members in pm, especially not at your invitation. If you're in a pm conversation with someone who asks you, then fine. But you're not going to be inviting people to pm you are not going to pm people to ask if they want to talk about it privately
If I catch word of either of those things, you're gone

Me: Again, just to be clear. If someone wants to talk about racism, you're literally telling me that I can't invite them to PM's?

Her: You can. But you'll be banned from our server

Me: Thanks, I'll leave right now. I consider your stuff a form of authoritarian bulverism at best, and whatever you don't understand, you call morally vile.

Her: Probably for the best. Bye.

Me: Farewell.

What set the person off was the following, something which I had posted a night before.

If you're not going to allow for any reasonable reservations about a particular group of people on the basis of statistic, in that if the statistic is has shown that there's a correlation between them and a specific act, and then call it racism, I'm not sure if there is any kind of conversation possible between people who hold these two dissenting opinions.

The motivating reason for assent to the proposition that a group of people do act 'x' is not individuals per se, but the group as a whole. Incidentally, anyone has the right to discriminate and be safe and what not, and can have reservations---this would, however, incidentally have the effect of discriminating against the said people who are being racially profiled or discriminated.

Making inferences from a statistic that makes us harbor reservations about any group of people, shouldn't make us racists, especially when it concerns someones safety and so on. I had a liberal argue that her safety isn't something that could be had, if it meant the 'loss of dignity' of the other person. The underlying premise here is perhaps that everyone should be treated equally, unless their intentions and actions prove us wrong. But obviously, with certain groups of people and people who have dangerous tendencies, even if they haven't committed an act that makes us condemn them, we aren't willing to wait that long, nor do I think it'd be reasonable for us to be asked to do so.


Now that's all set and done, here's my question: Is racial profiling intrinsically wrong, and should people who argue it be protected by freedom of speech if it is?

Last edited by Dennis (6/01/2017 4:15 pm)

 

6/01/2017 4:51 pm  #2


Re: Racial profiling and Free speech

Yes, racial profiling is intrinsically wrong because to me it blatantly leads to discrimination and can easily be abused as the history of the USA up to today shows. 

If it is, then I would say they shouldn't be protected by Free Speech if they are using it to advocate hate speech. If just in a debate and offer reasons for it then I guess sure, why not?

On another related note not to imply anything Dennis or give hostility but most defenders of profiling I've met usually mean for African-Americans, Mexicans, Muslims or other minorities yet when white supremacy is shown as the greatest domestic terrorism threat in the USA, these people are rarely advocating a profiling in this regard and are silent about it. So my reservations towards profiling are that is mostly is association with a covert form of racism marked by inconsistency.

 

6/01/2017 5:00 pm  #3


Re: Racial profiling and Free speech

I don't think that all forms of discrimination are unjustified, similarly, I don't think that its abuse would show that it of itself is intrinsically wrong. I'm fine with profiling any and every race, but again, this would come to a priority issue, where maybe one race is profiled more than another, and so on. However, that is an issue of application and a valid criteria of debate, but if it's applied to every race (so that there is no inconsistency, which seems to be your problem), I don't see what's wrong with it.

     Thread Starter
 

6/01/2017 7:42 pm  #4


Re: Racial profiling and Free speech

Yeah well I don't think it's plausible we could develop a form of racial profiling that is "fair" and "unbiased". We both know racial profiling is always or in the most case advocated by white people so that for me already cast suspicions on the intention behind it and to the whole enterprise is based on being unbiased.

 

6/01/2017 7:57 pm  #5


Re: Racial profiling and Free speech

AKG wrote:

Yes, racial profiling is intrinsically wrong because to me it blatantly leads to discrimination and can easily be abused as the history of the USA up to today shows.

What some action tends to "lead to" can't be the reason for calling it "intrinsically" wrong. Intrinsically wrong actions are wrong in themselves, not by reference to what they lead to or to their susceptibility for abuse.

 

6/01/2017 8:02 pm  #6


Re: Racial profiling and Free speech

AKG wrote:

On another related note not to imply anything Dennis or give hostility but most defenders of profiling I've met usually mean for African-Americans, Mexicans, Muslims or other minorities yet when white supremacy is shown as the greatest domestic terrorism threat in the USA, these people are rarely advocating a profiling in this regard and are silent about it.

It isn't magnitude but proportion that is relevant for profiling. Imagine a society in which only 1% of the population is white, but 99% of white people have committed a crime, whereas some smaller number, say 10%, of the rest of the population has committed a crime. In such a society, most crimes are not committed by white people, but it's reasonable and just to profile white people.

 

6/01/2017 10:42 pm  #7


Re: Racial profiling and Free speech

So then in the case of domestic terrorism which white supremacy is the greatest threat, and has committed most of the terror attacks, profiling white people in this regards, would be just in that case?

Like I said, the fact that racial profiling is almost exclusively advocated by white people to me reveals an intrinsic racist/biased view to it. 

Are there actually ANY benefits to racial profiling? I have yet to hear any, and so far all it seems to do is increase racial hostilities.

 

6/02/2017 1:08 am  #8


Re: Racial profiling and Free speech

I agree with Greg about the importance of proportionality.

AKG wrote:

Are there actually ANY benefits to racial profiling? I have yet to hear any, and so far all it seems to do is increase racial hostilities.

To take a completely different example, consider someone who has known to have been with someone who has an disordered attraction towards certain kinds of people. Would I let them babysit my (hypothetical) daughter? The answer is no, the point is that in cases where we discriminate, most of the times, we aren't willing to wait after the fact the deed has been done in order to judge someone. Now, if someone want to argue that this isn't analogous towards profiling or discriminating people of race, then unless there is sufficient reason to provide why this is not the case, it would become a form of special pleading.

Being a non-white myself, I totally understand what it feels to be discriminated against, and that's not to say that white people aren't discriminated, but my hurt feelings is of no importance when the issue of safety of others is concerned, especially if there is a statistic which warrants a justified correlation between any group of people and a particularly abhorring act(s). So I don't think racial profiling or discrimination on the basis of race is always unjustified, discrimination is a means of survival and defense, and I think anyone who says that I shouldn't be allowed to put this forward, or perhaps even go as far as to say that it doesn't come under free speech, and thus what I say shouldn't be protected by it, has to provide argument of why this should be the case, or conform to some form of authoritarian bulverism as in my the original post.

Last edited by Dennis (6/02/2017 1:34 am)

     Thread Starter
 

6/02/2017 4:56 am  #9


Re: Racial profiling and Free speech

Much of this conversation has already been had in another thread. Depressingly few people actuelly seem to want to engage the arguments as opposed to wallow in the all polluting sea of political grievance mongering.

http://classicaltheism.boardhost.com/viewtopic.php?id=700&p=1

To recap: whether or not to subject members of a certain demographic, natural or gerrymandered, to additional checks due to the presence of unlawful activities on the parts of some members of that demographic is an entirely 'prudential' matter i.e. one that should or should not be taken based on the consequences which would likely follow from it - for instance in the case of the proposed profiling of visitors from certain Islamic nations where terrorist groups are a problem it would be weighing potential preventative benefit against potential 'herd hostility' such a move might engender towards citizens of that country (or Muslims as a while).

In order for profilers to commit the moral mistake of racism or xenophobia they would have to claim there is an inherent, essential connection between race/nationality and said unlawful action e.g. Arabs inherently prone to terrorism, Italians inherently prone to gang-violence or the Irish inherently prone to drunkenness.

Lets look at some examples analogues to profiling:

1. If the police have a reason to believe that a crowd contains members of a certain infamous gang and that said gang is mainly composed of women it would not be sexist for them to spend more time interviewing the female members of said crowd.

2. If a large number of terrorist bombing were carried out by Catholic Irish Republicans then it would not be unreasonable to subject those who feel into that category to additional surveillance or background checks.

AKG wrote:

Like I said, the fact that racial profiling is almost exclusively advocated by white people to me reveals an intrinsic racist/biased view to it.

Since by 'racial' I assume what is really meant here is people of a certain national origin e.g. Saudi then one might argue other Islamic countries have a duty to their citizens to subject visitors from said problem nations to additional checks and profiling (since the largest victim demographic for Islamic terrorism are normal Muslims). Now I doubt there is one country in the world so rife with terrorism that it would justify such actions but they could ex hypothesi be justified.

AKG wrote:

On another related note not to imply anything Dennis or give hostility but most defenders of profiling I've met usually mean for African-Americans, Mexicans, Muslims or other minorities yet when white supremacy is shown as the greatest domestic terrorism threat in the USA, these people are rarely advocating a profiling in this regard and are silent about it. So my reservations towards profiling are that is mostly is association with a covert form of racism marked by inconsistency.

A possible difference here is that the profiling proposed in the interests of preventing hardline Islamic terrorism usually applies to foreign nationals visiting the country. In the case of White Supremacists or other homegrown problems one would hope a reasonable government would have already composed a profile (the difference being that it would have been done more covertly). The unfortunate thing about successful 'covert' intelligence gathering and prevention is that almost by its very nature people won't know about it.
 

 

6/02/2017 5:11 am  #10


Re: Racial profiling and Free speech

By "racial" I think the term here is referring to skin colour, and not of national origin.

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum