this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
-21 points (18.2% liked)

Asklemmy

44123 readers
652 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Cloak@lemmy.ml
14specks@lemmy.ml
mekhos@lemmy.ml
tmpod@lemmy.pt
-21
what's the difference between classism and racism? (lemmy.ca)
submitted 1 day ago by 1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
NSFW 42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Should we allow one, both, or none?

all 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kwakigra@beehaw.org 1 points 5 hours ago

Racism is an extreme form of Classism which is caste-based.

Social class distinctions can vary by time and place and has been an issue among humans at least since the advent of agriculture. Social class may be determined by wealth, pedigree, politics, appearance, language, and likely hundreds of other variables depending on the social constructs of the given society.

Racism is derived from 17th-century European pseudoscience which proposed that there are "races" of humans which determine their intelligence, values, and appearance. According to the philosophy of racism which has been completely debunked as science for over a century, "White" people, the dominant caste, do not have inherent racialized characteristics while all other racialized groups (which are different over place and time) are born with certain characteristics that may or may not be tolerated depending on how liberal the racist is. I can't describe here the rules of why a person may be labeled a given race because it's as complicated as the entire field of sociology and unique to time and place.

Personally, I don't think any kind of classism is legitimate. That being said the majority of people throughout the world believe that at least some forms of classism are legitimate so it's not a question of allowing it, rather choosing how to deal with people who may discriminate against you for arbitrary and typically non-sensical reasons.

[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

One is based on something you can't control.

[–] 1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

so if your born in a rich family. is that in your control?

[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 4 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

No, but at the same time, wealth doesn't need to be made out by someone as being a matter of class, just a manifestation of what you've been able to give/receive in society.

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago

I know a guy earning six figures that considers himself working class because "I work", we all know he's comfortably middle upper.

I don't judge him based upon his wealth but that doesn't mean class isn't a thing.

[–] 1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

So would it be fair to say if someone was a higher status than you, there should be no ill will against them? only the select few who exploit those below them?

[–] Count042@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Is it fair to hate slavers? Or is it only fair if they are actively enslaving people? /s

At this point, it's obvious you're a bad faith actor here (and an incompetent one at that), but on the miniscule chance you aren't:

It is as impossible to be a good person, and be a slaver as it is to be a billionaire and a good person.

Both of those require active exploitation of people. You're just used to framing the exploitation in terms that don't make the exploitation clear for billionaires.

[–] 1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago

whats the difference between a slave and you?

[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 2 points 20 hours ago

It's always fair to say people should only be judged by their character.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 17 points 1 day ago (3 children)

None.

Racism, as we all (should) know is skin shallow. That is enough. Not being of the "right" color establishes that an individual has no rights, no freedoms, and in extremes cases, not even humanity.

Classism is just a reviewed version of the cast system. Where you are born on the social pyramid dictates your fate. Born poor, die poor.

None are tolerable. All human beings are born equal.

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I will absolutely judge people based on their class. You don't come to obtain and maintain massive wealth without being an absolute shit person

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 2 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

What you are doing, by taking that position, is just subscribing to the current social model. That's not even a criticism; it's joining the band wagon.

Let's say you have a big success tomorrow and you manage to amass a great fortune. Are you going to give it away? Are you going to do something with your newly found wealth to truly change something for better?

The top three wealth holders in the planet are there because people allowed it. Facebook was just so groudbreaking, so innovative, so useful to connect to people. Amazon is just so convenient, so easy to use. And electric cars never existed before.

They were enabled and still are by the same people that cry today against them. If the notion of true equality really existed, the moment those individuals started becoming too big, people would remove trust and start demanding them to do good, tangible good, for others.

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Let's say you have a big success tomorrow and you manage to amass a great fortune. Are you going to give it away? Are you going to do something with your newly found wealth to truly change something for better?

Yes??? Of course I would?

The top three wealth holders in the planet are there because people allowed it. Facebook was just so groudbreaking, so innovative, so useful to connect to people. Amazon is just so convenient, so easy to use. And electric cars never existed before.

Ohhhh, you're a capitalist

They were enabled and still are by the same people that cry today against them. If the notion of true equality really existed, the moment those individuals started becoming too big, people would remove trust and start demanding them to do good, tangible good, for others.

That's literally what myself and many others are doing? Except in my opinion they are evil until they intentionally drop their net worth to the single digit millions and transfer their companies to the workers who actually made them what they are today

What you are doing, by taking that position, is just subscribing to the current social model. That's not even a criticism; it's joining the band wagon.

Lmao, I'm an anarchist, not a liberal on a band wagon

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 0 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Let's say you have a big success tomorrow and you manage to amass a great fortune. Are you going to give it away? Are you going to do something with your newly found wealth to truly change something for better?

Yes??? Of course I would?

I honestly hope so. Until that day, we do not know. Hopefully, you will set the example.

The top three wealth holders in the planet are there because people allowed it. Facebook was just so groudbreaking, so innovative, so useful to connect to people. Amazon is just so convenient, so easy to use. And electric cars never existed before.

Ohhhh, you're a capitalist

Shit. I am? Why?

They were enabled and still are by the same people that cry today against them. If the notion of true equality really existed, the moment those individuals started becoming too big, people would remove trust and start demanding them to do good, tangible good, for others.

That's literally what myself and many others are doing? Except in my opinion they are evil until they intentionally drop their net worth to the single digit millions and transfer their companies to the workers who actually made them what they are today

I can't disagree on that.

What you are doing, by taking that position, is just subscribing to the current social model. That's not even a criticism; it's joining the band wagon.

Lmao, I'm an anarchist, not a liberal on a band wagon

It's easy to just shout out loud, when everyone else already is as well.

I personally like the anarchist proposal: a flat society, without classes. Unfortunately, at the moment, very far from being attainable.

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I honestly hope so. Until that day, we do not know. Hopefully, you will set the example

This reads to me like you're assuming I'd be a class traitor until proven otherwise, and I don't like that.

Shit. I am? Why?

Sorry, it sounded like you were defending billionaires as if they actually earned their wealth. I'm glad to be wrong, but you do continue to sound like a liberal

It's easy to just shout out loud, when everyone else already is as well

Why do you assume I didnt start until it became trendy? I quit Facebook and Amazon a decade ago, and have been consistently putting my freedom and safety on the line in furtherance of my leftist values for just as long

I can't disagree on that.

So you're not arguing that the upper class isn't evil, you were just under the assumption that I'm an all-talk idealist or something?

Unfortunately, at the moment, very far from being attainable

I'm gonna keep doing praxis anyway

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I honestly hope so. Until that day, we do not know. Hopefully, you will set the example

This reads to me like you're assuming I'd be a class traitor until proven otherwise, and I don't like that.

I so deeply despise the use of "class" as if it as any meaning or use besides forcibly dividing people into societal boxes.

Until proven otherwise, you will strictly adhere to your principles and ideals. Like or not, is up to you. I don't exist to gain your unwavering approval.

Shit. I am? Why?

Sorry, it sounded like you were defending billionaires as if they actually earned their wealth. I'm glad to be wrong, but you do continue to sound like a liberal

I risk we do not share the same understanding of what being liberal entails. I consider myself a liberal individual. But being politically liberal seems to be a charged connotation nowadays.

It's easy to just shout out loud, when everyone else already is as well

Why do you assume I didnt start until it became trendy? I quit Facebook and Amazon a decade ago, and have been consistently putting my freedom and safety on the line in furtherance of my leftist values for just as long.

Quit FB I don't even remember when and I have a serious distrust towards Amazon.

I can't disagree on that.

So you're not arguing that the upper class isn't evil, you were just under the assumption that I'm an all-talk idealist or something?

I can't disagree that multi-million/billion/trillion fortunes should be dissipated and returned fully into the economic and social fabric. You still may be. I don't know you.

Even Marx was a man of his time: his daughters were educated to play the piano, draw and sing, like any middle class girl of the time. While at the same time, his work heavily criticized society and social norms has it stood.

It's a tall price to pay to truly embody an ideal.

Unfortunately, at the moment, very far from being attainable

I'm gonna keep doing praxis anyway.

Keep on that trail.

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

This is such a bizarre interaction

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 2 points 5 hours ago

I agree.

[–] SouthEndSunset@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Are people not racist based on accent as well though?

For example Irish people?

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 0 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not directly conected with english speaking countries so that example always evades me but you're right.

The scottish also had it bad with the english as well. And some time back I read a news report on how a man had been insulted in a train for not speaking english, in London. He was speaking welsh...

Racism picks on any small thing to rise divergence, usually something the target of it can't change. But anything works.

[–] SouthEndSunset@lemm.ee 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

I wasn’t saying you were wrong, I was just wondering if I was. True about the Scot’s, and the Welsh too….and the Cornish. Basically any form of Celt.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 2 points 13 hours ago

We're just exchanging ideas here and you brought up a very good point.

But it made think that by contrast, in Africa, several ethnic groups coexist and language was not that big of a concern for conflict.

[–] 1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca -4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

well at least there's one sane person on this website.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 day ago

It wildly depends on who you ask, so don't waste your praise on me.

[–] sndmn@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

How high are you right meow?

[–] 1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

i dont get high anymore.

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Not very, it is mostly downvoted so won't appear very high in most people's feeds

[–] sndmn@lemmy.ca 2 points 23 hours ago

How high are you right meow?

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The difference?

Its right there in the names

[–] mydude@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Racism is ignorance and can be mended with understanding. Classism is an ongoing war, and can be mended with (upward) mobility, strikes or even riots/civil disobedience.