• PixelProf@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    6 months ago

    I think he’s basically saying that it’s racist to “artificially” integrate communities, because (I think he’s saying) if they need to be integrated, then that’s the same as saying that black folks are necessarily inferior. I don’t think he’s trying to say they’re inferior, but that laws forcing integration are based on that assumption. So he can be well educated and successful because he isn’t inherently inferior, therefore there is no need for forced integration.

    … Which is such a weird stretch of naturalism in a direction I wasn’t ready for. Naturalist BS is usually, “X deserves fewer rights because they are naturally inferior”, whereas this is “We should ignore historical circumstances because X is not naturally inferior”.

    Start a game of monopoly after three other players have already gone around the board 10 times and created lots of rules explicitly preventing you from playing how they did and see how much the argument of “well, to give you any kind of advantage here would just be stating you’re inferior, and we can’t do that.”

    Man probably got angry at his golf handicap making him feel inferior and took things too far. Among other things.

    • mechoman444@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Honestly I think his core argument is an overly worded “pull yourself up by your boot straps” crap.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Correct, he’s being an idiot.

      He’s intentionally conflating disenfranchisement with inferiority.