Movies in General

A core point of racism that it is rather culturalism than connected to "race". It is a narrative that serves a purpose within the person in a society that expresses that kind of prejudice. Racism allows an unquestionable matter of fact statement about others to the exclusion of others from the cool group. "Racism" starts at school because not everyone is allowed to join prestigious groups of peers and not each of these groups has the same prestige. Such a group is the minimum shared cultural entity and nations are just larger groups consitsting of many layers of subgroups within and having clear group characteristics at the exclusion of others who can rarely simply chose to belong to that cool group.

Chinese racism can not be weighted against European or American racism, but each complaint about racism should start by finding out the own racism of a group and what its effects were. I'm sorry to say that the great culture of China maneuvered themselves into a quagmire of problems since early modern times due to snobbery at other people's capabilities and achievements. The Chinese racism was not so blatant aimed at monetary benefits as China was a scholar-led nation and not a merchant-led nation like the European and American ones (grouped under the Southern Barbarian label). The problem with racism is that it's an expression of internal problems within a society by pointing at another culture.

I think you have a slight problem with other nation's racism because you are yourself racist in a way that you can not tolerate someone not liking and admiring the Chinese. Get over it, look at the achievements, how many martial arts choreographies are based on Asian and how many on European or African templates? Bruce Lee fought an uphill battle, but he made Asian martial arts king of the hill.

Originally Posted by Kurt

A core point of racism that it is rather culturalism than connected to "race" is that it is a narrative that serves a purpose within the person in a society that expresses that kind of prejudice. Racism allows an unquestionable matter of fact statement about others to the exclusion of others from the cool group. "Racism" starts at school because not everyone is allowed to join prestigious groups of peers and not each of these groups has the same prestige. Such a group is the minimum shared cultural entity and nations are just larger groups consitsting of many layers of subgroups within and having clear group characteristics at the exclusion of others who can rarely simply chose to belong to that cool group.

Chinese racism can not be weighted against European or American racism, but each complaint about racism should start by finding out the own racism of a group and what its effects were. I'm sorry to say that the great culture of China maneuvered themselves into a quagmire of problems since early modern times due to snobbery at other people's capabilities and achievements. The Chinese racism was not so blatant aimed at monetary benefits as China was a scholar-led nation and not a merchant-led nation like the European and American ones (grouped under the Southern Barbarian label). The problem with racism is that it's an expression of internal problems within a society by pointing at another culture.

I think you have a slight problem with other nation's racism because you are yourself racist in a way that you can not tolerate someone not liking and admiring the Chinese. Get over it, look at the achievements, how many martial arts choreographies are based on Asian and how many on European or African templates? Bruce Lee fought an uphill battle, but he made Asian martial arts king of the hill.

rac·ism   [rey-siz-uhm]
noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

rac·ist  [rey-sist]
noun
1. a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that a certain human race is superior to any or all others.

Which part does that fit it? All he said was pointing out the hypocrisy of people calling Chinese racist, while they themselves invented the word of "racism" by modern definitions. And how is pointing that out, and debunk how people think of Chinese vs the reality is being racist? You are a German, I have German friends, they tell me they are sick of the Hitler references, so what if the whole world think Germans are all Nazi to your face all the time, and you got fed up about it and tell them that Germany today has nothing to do with Hitler, does trying to explain to people the reality make you a racist?

Did he say that Chinese culture is superior? Did he say the Chinese race is superior? Did he said he hate or cannot stand of another race that is not Chinese? I mean, do you want to send a new definition to Dictionary.com | Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com to update them on the entry for racism?

Originally Posted by Kurt

A core point of racism that it is rather culturalism than connected to "race" is that it is a narrative that serves a purpose within the person in a society that expresses that kind of prejudice. Racism allows an unquestionable matter of fact statement about others to the exclusion of others from the cool group. "Racism" starts at school because not everyone is allowed to join prestigious groups of peers and not each of these groups has the same prestige. Such a group is the minimum shared cultural entity and nations are just larger groups consitsting of many layers of subgroups within and having clear group characteristics at the exclusion of others who can rarely simply chose to belong to that cool group.

Chinese racism can not be weighted against European or American racism, but each complaint about racism should start by finding out the own racism of a group and what its effects were. I'm sorry to say that the great culture of China maneuvered themselves into a quagmire of problems since early modern times due to snobbery at other people's capabilities and achievements. The Chinese racism was not so blatant aimed at monetary benefits as China was a scholar-led nation and not a merchant-led nation like the European and American ones (grouped under the Southern Barbarian label). The problem with racism is that it's an expression of internal problems within a society by pointing at another culture.

I think you have a slight problem with other nation's racism because you are yourself racist in a way that you can not tolerate someone not liking and admiring the Chinese. Get over it, look at the achievements, how many martial arts choreographies are based on Asian and how many on European or African templates? Bruce Lee fought an uphill battle, but he made Asian martial arts king of the hill.

Much of what you said again are thought "crimes." You cannot measure racism by thought and thoughts are never worse than acts.

I never said I don't like people that don't admire the Chinese. I could care less. Where did I say that? I hope you're not being racist because maybe you think another Chinese said that you automatically think I believe that too. I don't value those people's opinion in the first place. And that's not a crime either. This is like the whole talk about soft power. Westerners perpetuate a version that other countries should seek that has no power in it at all. It's a trick to make it look that power comes from getting people to like things from your culture. That's not power. Power lies with those that get to decide what you have is worthy of being liked. Why would I care about someone admiring the Chinese when I find their opinion worthless in the first place? I know Westerners complain about how the West has given the world so much but aren't appreciative or respectful. That's why many Westerners think the world owes them something and they justify their anger because people aren't appreciative of them. So by your definition that's racism.

Originally Posted by jackliu

rac·ism   [rey-siz-uhm]
noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

rac·ist  [rey-sist]
noun
1. a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that a certain human race is superior to any or all others.

Which part does that fit it? All he said was pointing out the hypocrisy of people calling Chinese racist, while they themselves invented the word of "racism" by modern definitions. And how is pointing that out, and debunk how people think of Chinese vs the reality is being racist? You are a German, I have German friends, they tell me they are sick of the Hitler references, so what if the whole world think Germans are all Nazi to your face all the time, and you got fed up about it and tell them that Germany today has nothing to do with Hitler, does trying to explain to people the reality make you a racist?

Did he say that Chinese culture is superior? Did he say the Chinese race is superior? Did he said he hate or cannot stand of another race that is not Chinese? I mean, do you want to send a new definition to Dictionary.com | Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com to update them on the entry for racism?

Exactly.

Originally Posted by jackliu

rac·ism   [rey-siz-uhm]
noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

rac·ist  [rey-sist]
noun
1. a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that a certain human race is superior to any or all others.

Which part does that fit it? All he said was pointing out the hypocrisy of people calling Chinese racist, while they themselves invented the word of "racism" by modern definitions. And how is pointing that out, and debunk how people think of Chinese vs the reality is being racist? You are a German, I have German friends, they tell me they are sick of the Hitler references, so what if the whole world think Germans are all Nazi to your face all the time, and you got fed up about it and tell them that Germany today has nothing to do with Hitler, does trying to explain to people the reality make you a racist?

Did he say that Chinese culture is superior? Did he say the Chinese race is superior? Did he said he hate or cannot stand of another race that is not Chinese? I mean, do you want to send a new definition to Dictionary.com | Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com to update them on the entry for racism?

Oh man, how old and cheap is that dictionary? You might try careful reading again. Racism claims to be about race. The problem is the constant evolution of the word race and the concept behind. A few decades ago the Scots, the English, the Welsh and the Irish were called different races. That's the problem that multiple different layers of meaning in time get pressed into one template.
The general theories about skin colour relations derive from colonialism where the Europeans travelling by ship together faced others they could conquer and exploit. The Japanese were the first Asian nations to be considered "White" by merit, no matter how recent the Korean or Chinese ancestry of them was. And here you get the problem of racial doctrines and good racial purity as developed in the Anglo-Saxon World that frowned upon mixed blooded, while in the Spanish and Portuguese spheres a system based on mixed bloods was erected. Arabian derived Islamic culture race theory is even more complicated, except that they considered pure breed Arabs the most valuable humans because others derived from slaves, but had their usefulness.

Racism is stating that they look at race, derive at it from classifying something phenotypical, attribute it with mental and physical characteristics and for this reason can judge upon cultures and people from a superior position. Or in a nutshell: you make categorizations without looking at the individual.
China did that, Europe did that, the Arabians did that and so on. Strong expression of racism are always connected to goals within the society to which the racist belongs that are deemed best achieveable by mobbing someone considered outside.
China felt very superior on the racism scale and had a bad awakening, plus finding out that a lot of people did not consider their old culture worth a penny. They are still on the long tour back to a better position in the racism ranking and some Chinese look with envy upon the most admired and also most controversial group and want to take a shortcut to success. Sorry, but I don't get your problem.

As to the penal code and thought crimes, you can cause a person massive health and psychological problems and destroy a life without ever being guilty in front of any court. We have different understanding of thought crimes and this feels like a doublespeak discussion. It's not thoughts, but expressions of thoughts without punishable acts that can wreak havoc.

Originally Posted by Kurt

Oh man, how old and cheap is that dictionary? You might try careful reading again. Racism claims to be about race. The problem is the constant evolution of the word race and the concept behind. A few decades ago the Scots, the English, the Welsh and the Irish were called different races. That's the problem that multiple different layers of meaning in time get pressed into one template.
The general theories about skin colour relations derive from colonialism where the Europeans travelling by ship together faced others they could conquer and exploit. The Japanese were the first Asian nations to be considered "White" by merit, no matter how recent the Korean or Chinese ancestry of them was. And here you get the problem of racial doctrines and good racial purity as developed in the Anglo-Saxon World that frowned upon mixed blooded, while in the Spanish and Portuguese spheres a system based on mixed bloods was erected. Arabian derived Islamic culture race theory is even more complicated, except that they considered pure breed Arabs the most valuable humans because others derived from slaves, but had their usefulness.

Racism is stating that they look at race, derive at it from classifying something phenotypical, attribute it with mental and physical characteristics and for this reason can judge upon cultures and people from a superior position. Or in a nutshell: you make categorizations without looking at the individual.
China did that, Europe did that, the Arabians did that and so on. Strong expression of racism are always connected to goals within the society to which the racist belongs that are deemed best achieveable by mobbing someone considered outside.
China felt very superior on the racism scale and had a bad awakening, plus finding out that a lot of people did not consider their old culture worth a penny. They are still on the long tour back to a better position in the racism ranking and some Chinese look with envy upon the most admired and also most controversial group and want to take a shortcut to success. Sorry, but I don't get your problem.

As to the penal code and thought crimes, you can cause a person massive health and psychological problems and destroy a life without ever being guilty in front of any court. We have different understanding of thought crimes and this feels like a doublespeak discussion. It's not thoughts, but expressions of thoughts without punishable acts that can wreak havoc.

WOW!!!!! so by this definition, you know what? Everyone on earth is a racist in one way or the other, because every culture on earth are somewhat egocentric, all culture think they themselves are more important than others, so by this definition, the Israelite are the most racist of them all, they actually think they are the chosen people, the American are the most racist currently, they think they got this "American exceptionalism" even in this concept they didn't expressed their opinion that "American is better than all other peoples" but they fact that they think they are special, then by your definition they are god damn racist right?

I mean... doesn't this kinda defeat the whole purpose of the definition of "racism" if everyone on earth is a god damn racist by your new definition? So that mean when you call AssassinsMace a racist, that means you are calling him a human, then you know what? I think you are a damn racist as well, you got any objections to that?

I think the poster who said that "Racism is about actions rather than thoughts" hit the nail on the head.

No one can, or should, be held accountable for their private thoughts. They can, and should, however, be held accountable for their actions.

Originally Posted by solarz

I think the poster who said that "Racism is about actions rather than thoughts" hit the nail on the head.

No one can, or should, be held accountable for their private thoughts. They can, and should, however, be held accountable for their actions.

I concur, but actions are lots of expressions of thoughts we also do on subconcious level, not just saying insults.


As to the Europe China relation, you need to look at the two extremes such as The Chinese Ceramic Influence on Europe., the Chinese haughtiness in not exchanging any goods as all foreign produce was considered "inferior", but acquiring a hoard of silver in exchange (a major problem for other economies because of liquidity drain as silver was for coins). The Europeans were later looking down on the Chinese when drugs were able to extract silver and goods while the military of China seemed helpless.

This racism has a lot to do with the perceived ability of a culture to manage to obtain things themselves that people of another culture also want. This evaluation is connected to a judgment on the means employed to this end as fair or foul and it is usually biased by the barter conditions between the two. As I said, racism itself is more of a construct out of the trophy wife colonialism era and the concept usually described with racism today is a form of culturalism.

Originally Posted by Kurt

I concur, but actions are lots of expressions of thoughts we also do on subconcious level, not just saying insults.


As to the Europe China relation, you need to look at the two extremes such as The Chinese Ceramic Influence on Europe., the Chinese haughtiness in not exchanging any goods as all foreign was "inferior", but acquiring a hoard of silver in exchange and the looking down when drugs were able to extract silver and goods while the military of China seemed helpless.

This racism has a lot to do with the perceived ability of a culture to manage to obtain things themselves that people of another culture also want and with the judgment on the means employed to this end as fair or foul. That judgement is usually biased by the barter conditions in between the two. As I said, racism itself is more of a construct out of the trophy wife colonialism era and the concept usually described with racism today is a form of culturalism.

I have no clue what you're trying to say.

It's called spin. Because if thinking was a crime, do they really think China is the only criminal of it? I thought they say Chinese are automatons. Now all of the sudden it's convenient to make Chinese guilty of being the "most" thinking of the world to make Chinese out to be the only criminal of it. The problem is you don't act without thinking also. It's easy to conclude that the worst actors of racism are also the worst thinkers because acting on your thoughts and forcing people to abide by what you think is the next step. The worst actors aren't the Chinese so to make thinking worse is only because guess who they know are the worst actors? It just like basic racism. Anything that's "different" from me has to be worse. That's why there's this bizarro world molestation of common sense where now thinking is worse than actually enslaving and using phsyically brutality and violating human rights. Everything accused of the Chinese, they were hypocritically worse. Fact! Oh yeah we're suppose to believe the myth of the benevolent loving dictator. It's like US slave owners in the deep South. They thought they were the victim when slaves would escape after they gave the ungrateful slaves shelter and food... but they were still a slave owned like an animal.

Originally Posted by AssassinsMace

It's called spin. Because if thinking was a crime, do they really think China is the only criminal of it? I thought they say Chinese are automatons. Now all of the sudden it's convenient to make Chinese guilty of being the "most" thinking of the world to make Chinese out to be the only criminal of it. The problem is you don't act without thinking also. It's easy to conclude that the worst actors of racism are also the worst thinkers because acting on your thoughts and forcing people to abide by what you think is the next step. The worst actors aren't the Chinese so to make thinking worse is only because guess who they know are the worst actors? It just like basic racism. Anything that's "different" from me has to be worse. That's why there's this bizarro world molestation of common sense where now thinking is worse than actually enslaving and using phsyically brutality and violating human rights. Everything accused of the Chinese, they were hypocritically worse. Fact! Oh yeah we're suppose to believe the myth of the benevolent loving dictator. It's like US slave owners in the deep South. They thought they were the victim when slaves would escape after they gave the ungrateful slaves shelter and food... but they were still a slave owned like an animal.

I have a slight problem understanding this. So you want to express an opinion that there's a spin making China look worse?
If this refers to my post you seem to mistake things. I expressed the opinion that Chinese racism caused China lots of troubles that are lasting until today. The combination of Chinese with European(and colonies) racism can be seen as swinging between extremes of perceived supremacy over the centuries.

It's impossible to get with this discussion anywhere because you want to play a one-sided blame game that justifies your opinion of the world.
Btw. I'm in Bavaria, it has been one of the closest friends of Chinain Europe, even throughout the opium days. Relationships had a slump when a German ambassador was attacked and Bavaria was part of the counterstrike with their usual urge to proof themselves military superior to the northern German Prussians. Since then, the (in)famous conservative Communist-eater Bavarian politician F.J. Strauss has been instrumental in establishing Chinese medicine in Germany during Mao's days with Chinese support. There's a deep running admiration of Chinese culture with mutual exchange as the Chinese tower in Munich highlights.

Current Chinese problems with Germany and other countries are based on the claim of Chinese know-how theft for an advantage in deadly economic market competition. So far a number of Chinese investors have done much to aleviate that problems by cooperatiing rather than plundering the German Mittelstand companies they bought. It will help you a lot to read about the German Mittelstand as this is an analogue to the structures Chinese economy thrived upon during their heyday and much of it has been lost in the Chinese turmoils. As long as China does not have a renown self-built know-how base the theft claim will persist and there are few structures where you can learn as much about know how base as from the Mittelstand (in Germany, Switzerland and Austria).
I often read a strong urge to have all things domestic in China, especially military stuff. This is impossible without intellectual property theft. You can try to whiten this by military neccessity claims, but all these applications are more or less dual use with impacts on other fields. That's a tough question on ethics with no easy answer, but the theft perception can maneuver the rising China into a dangerous position, capable of threatening China's rise.

For solarz I rearranged my previous comment in more simple sentence structure.

Originally Posted by Kurt

I concur, but actions are lots of expressions of thoughts we also do on subconcious level, not just saying insults.


As to the Europe China relation, you need to look at the two extremes such as The Chinese Ceramic Influence on Europe., the Chinese haughtiness in not exchanging any goods as all foreign produce was considered "inferior", but acquiring a hoard of silver in exchange (a major problem for other economies because of liquidity drain as silver was for coins). The Europeans were later looking down on the Chinese when drugs were able to extract silver and goods while the military of China seemed helpless.

This racism has a lot to do with the perceived ability of a culture to manage to obtain things themselves that people of another culture also want. This evaluation is connected to a judgment on the means employed to this end as fair or foul and it is usually biased by the barter conditions between the two. As I said, racism itself is more of a construct out of the trophy wife colonialism era and the concept usually described with racism today is a form of culturalism.

I'm still not too sure what you are trying to express, but I think you are committing a fallacy of equivocation. Racism has a specific and agreed upon meaning. It is not what you call "culturalism".

Racism happens when a trait is ascribed to all members of a perceived race or ethnicity, and action is then taken based on that belief. This action can be benign, or it can be terribly destructive. Usually, society concerns itself with stopping the destructive actions, while the more benign actions pass under the radar.

I think it is important to make this distinction. We should be concerned about Racism, not for its own sake, but for its destructive consequences. A benign racism is no more "evil" than any other benign personality traits and beliefs.

For example, a Jewish father's insistence that his daughter marry into a Jewish family is certainly an instance of Racism, but it is no more cause for concern than a Chinese father's insistence that his daughter marry a rich man.

Originally Posted by solarz

I'm still not too sure what you are trying to express, but I think you are committing a fallacy of equivocation. Racism has a specific and agreed upon meaning. It is not what you call "culturalism".

Racism happens when a trait is ascribed to all members of a perceived race or ethnicity, and action is then taken based on that belief. This action can be benign, or it can be terribly destructive. Usually, society concerns itself with stopping the destructive actions, while the more benign actions pass under the radar.

I think it is important to make this distinction. We should be concerned about Racism, not for its own sake, but for its destructive consequences. A benign racism is no more "evil" than any other benign personality traits and beliefs.

For example, a Jewish father's insistence that his daughter marry into a Jewish family is certainly an instance of Racism, but it is no more cause for concern than a Chinese father's insistence that his daughter marry a rich man.

How did you define a Jewish race?

Originally Posted by Kurt

How did you define a Jewish race?

Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia