A few thoughts on the latest round of White Guilt discussions

[Dildo Argentino]

nobody? 

So...
i was thinking about the racism thing, and suddenly it struck me that racism appears to be self reinforcing due to a prisoners dilemma setup in any given encounter.  of course, with iterated prisoner's dilemma, then altruistic strategies prevail and you get to have your non race member friends, but with someone you've never met, it isn't iterated and so greedy strategy prevails. (which is exactly what we see)
thinking about it in these terms gives me little hope that racism will ever be overcome to any extent.

it seemed like such a clear description that i googled it looking for analysis of race relations in this context and was surprised not to get any results out of the hat.
perhaps i am overlooking something?

It's an interesting notion. But the thing is: if your prejudice puts all black people in the same box, should I consider my encounters with black strangers to be separate, individual non-iterated prisoner's dilemma games? (side note: PD: prisoner's dilemma! - that can't have been intentional, but it's great!) Or (given the assumption that the prejudice does not differentiate), should I consider those encounters to be a single iterated prisoner's dilemma game between me and "black people"? Because in the latter case, tit-for-tat should still be the best simple, robust strategy... and I guess this is a fairly good description of the difference between "prejudice allowed to take control when it shouldn't" (each one is a separate game, so defection is the best strategy), and prejudice recognised and kept under control (it's an iterated series of games, tit-for-tat is best).

[Elder Iptuous]

Roger,
i don't know if it's really looking too deeply.  it's just an examination of the choice one has in an encounter with someone of a different race where there is already a social history of oppression. each person has two choices, and the decision grid seems to me to have the preference order that defines the prisoner's dilemma.
i was really surprised that i didn't immediately find anything regarding this by a quick search.

holist,
no. you're having an encounter with an individual, and there is no previous history with them.  the person you meet on the street doesn't know that you've been altruistic in the past. or he doesn't know that you're employing any given strategy as an individual.

[Dildo Argentino]

holist,
no. you're having an encounter with an individual, and there is no previous history with them.  the person you meet on the street doesn't know that you've been altruistic in the past. or he doesn't know that you're employing any given strategy as an individual.

Yes, but if you are acting on prejudice, it is arguable that you are not having an encounter with an individual. You are having an encounter with "black people" - and indeed, you do have a previous history with them. Of course the person in the street is not going to know about that previous history I have with their race... part of why action based on prejudice often doesn't work (achieve the desired end).

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Somebody shut that guy the fuck up. Jesus H. FUCK.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Somebody shut that guy the fuck up. Jesus H. FUCK.

Sounds like SOMEONE has a case of the Mondays HORRIBLE HICK TOWN IN HORRIBLE HICK STATE, THEN EXPOSED TO FOREIGN VERSION OF THE SAME THING.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Somebody shut that guy the fuck up. Jesus H. FUCK.

Sounds like SOMEONE has a case of the Mondays HORRIBLE HICK TOWN IN HORRIBLE HICK STATE, THEN EXPOSED TO FOREIGN VERSION OF THE SAME THING.

Yeah. It's supposed to something you can LEAVE. 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Somebody shut that guy the fuck up. Jesus H. FUCK.

Sounds like SOMEONE has a case of the Mondays HORRIBLE HICK TOWN IN HORRIBLE HICK STATE, THEN EXPOSED TO FOREIGN VERSION OF THE SAME THING.

Yeah. It's supposed to something you can LEAVE. 

You need to find a stronger gravitational pull.

Tucson
Portland
Providence

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Somebody shut that guy the fuck up. Jesus H. FUCK.

Sounds like SOMEONE has a case of the Mondays HORRIBLE HICK TOWN IN HORRIBLE HICK STATE, THEN EXPOSED TO FOREIGN VERSION OF THE SAME THING.

Yeah. It's supposed to something you can LEAVE. 

You need to find a stronger gravitational pull.

Tucson
Portland
Providence

I take the lastest near-inability to get out of Austin as a SIGN. "DON'T GO BACK THERE."

If I wasn't worried about my dog, I wouldn't have. Fuck it.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Somebody shut that guy the fuck up. Jesus H. FUCK.

Sounds like SOMEONE has a case of the Mondays HORRIBLE HICK TOWN IN HORRIBLE HICK STATE, THEN EXPOSED TO FOREIGN VERSION OF THE SAME THING.

Yeah. It's supposed to something you can LEAVE. 

You need to find a stronger gravitational pull.

Tucson
Portland
Providence

I take the lastest near-inability to get out of Austin as a SIGN. "DON'T GO BACK THERE."

If I wasn't worried about my dog, I wouldn't have. Fuck it.

Get dog & daughter.  Run like hell.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Somebody shut that guy the fuck up. Jesus H. FUCK.

Sounds like SOMEONE has a case of the Mondays HORRIBLE HICK TOWN IN HORRIBLE HICK STATE, THEN EXPOSED TO FOREIGN VERSION OF THE SAME THING.

Yeah. It's supposed to something you can LEAVE. 

You need to find a stronger gravitational pull.

Tucson
Portland
Providence

I take the lastest near-inability to get out of Austin as a SIGN. "DON'T GO BACK THERE."

If I wasn't worried about my dog, I wouldn't have. Fuck it.

Get dog & daughter.  Run like hell.

Gotcha.

Shopping list: Pet carrier.

[Juana]

Because it's not really relevant to the issue at hand? I had a head-noddy moment with it, too, but it has nothing to do with whether or not I've picked up shitty memes.

I think it is highly relevant to the discussion of prejudice.  The idea of different cultures having different reality grids, but that no one set of grids from any one culture is True.  So, with that understanding, it would be completely counterintuitive to trade in prejudice.

It's relevant to whether a person is *actively* and *intentionally* prejudiced. Passive and unintentional prejudice - those shitty memes - are not particularly related to it.

Sure it is, if one holds as a core value equality and fairness to all peoples, then one would actively identify and reject signal which would cause one to make irrational judgements.

Uh huh...that's half the point I've been making the entire time. The other half is that a person doesn't always notice they have those bad signals until it's either pointed out to them or they learn to examine their grid.

[Don Coyote]

I wonder if he is aware of the irony intent in denying he had prejudices?

[trippinprincezz13]

Not to bring up the stupid purse thing again, but it is an honest question, as it is something that comes to my mind time and again:

I know I'm not perfect, but I do make a concerted effort not to judge people beyond any personal interactions I may have with them.

That said, I do clutch/readjust my purse when someone I don't know walks by, regardless of race. But I've found myself feeling bad for it when it's a person of color. Obviously that person doesn't know that's how I react to everyone and that it's not out of Black/Hispanic/etc. fear. I usually try to look up and smile, regardless of who it is, because also really like being friendly to people. Mixed signals, I know.

I don't know, I guess what I'm saying is what do I do/how am I supposed to let someone know that I'm reacting to them not because of what they look like, but because I don't know them?

[Juana]

I wonder if he is aware of the irony intent in denying he had prejudices?

I suspect not.

Not to bring up the stupid purse thing again, but it is an honest question, as it is something that comes to my mind time and again:

I know I'm not perfect, but I do make a concerted effort not to judge people beyond any personal interactions I may have with them.

That said, I do clutch/readjust my purse when someone I don't know walks by, regardless of race. But I've found myself feeling bad for it when it's a person of color. Obviously that person doesn't know that's how I react to everyone and that it's not out of Black/Hispanic/etc. fear. I usually try to look up and smile, regardless of who it is, because also really like being friendly to people. Mixed signals, I know.

I don't know, I guess what I'm saying is what do I do/how am I supposed to let someone know that I'm reacting to them not because of what they look like, but because I don't know them?

The smiling helps, I imagine, as long as you don't look excessively nervous.

[P3nT4gR4m]

The thing about prejudice is that that's largely how your brain works. Burn fingers in fire = prejudiced against burning your fingers in fire. What is generally called prejudice in threads like this is not the totality of prejudice (which helps us survive) but bad-signal prejudice, which is patently bullshit. These kind of things should be getting revised all the time. If you get stuck with one, it becomes a phobia. Congratulations - you've just moved one step closer to full retard. Your brain is bent.

FTR - I used to be racist, on account of I was brought up that way. Racism was hardly an issue, tho, given that the only race I ever came into contact with was white. I was also sectarianist. That was a bit more serious. That got me into a serious fuckton of fights for no reason other than the other guy was a "dirty fenian bastard". I grew out of these prejudces. Just like some people do and some people don't. Oh, yeah, a lot of it is buried deep, like layers of an onion but it's no big thing to get rid of them and replace them with prejudices that work (for now) the system is designed with a certain amount of fluidity built in.

Someone accusing me of having a bunch of lameass prejudices built in, that I'm not aware of, is likely to illicit a very mocking response. It's condescending, it's wrong and if whoever decides to dig their heels in and preach at me about soci-fucking-ology (of all things) There is going to be very little recourse to my taking their bullshit seriously, in the slightest.