Why isn't this murder?

[kentonio]

If he is exhibiting racist tendencies, he must be a right winger, since racism is defined as right wing. Even if they have left leanings in every other matter, they are right wing because all racists are right wing and all right wingers are racist.

As I'm generally a right winger (just not in the US sense), why would I advance such a ridiculous argument? The US conservative movement has a deep well of racism on its extremes, pointing that out feels like pointing out that the sky is blue.

[The Mad Monk]

Nevertheless, it's the feeling I get from you and others. It really bothers me.

[kentonio]

Nevertheless, it's the feeling I get from you and others. It really bothers me.

Well apologies for that dude, despite your libertarian views being pretty incomprehensible to me most of the time, I've always thought you were a decent guy.

[Felch]

As I'm generally a right winger (just not in the US sense), why would I advance such a ridiculous argument? The US conservative movement has a deep well of racism on its extremes, pointing that out feels like pointing out that the sky is blue.

I'd say it's a racist country in general. I know I can't stand Welsh people.

[Lorizael]

That is of course true, yet for centuries being a black person in America meant that you were routinely oppressed. Is it then a reasonable burden to put on people who lived through that oppression that they must not use race based generalities, despite suffering under the same for generations? More importantly can anyone really claim comparison between a rich white radio host spouting racist comments and a black person who suffered under oppression expressing anti-white sentiment?

Thankfully in a few more generations it will all (hopefully) be history and then the normal rules of equality can begin to apply, but now? When people are still walking the streets who lived through segregation? Seriously?

Is it okay if a rich black radio host (who is too young to have lived through segregation) spouts racist comments?

[giblets]

If he is exhibiting racist tendencies, he must be a right winger, since racism is defined as right wing. Even if they have left leanings in every other matter, they are right wing because all racists are right wing and all right wingers are racist.

If they are undeniably left wing, they are never racist even if they act in what would be described as a racist manner if they were right wing, because left wingers and never racist and racists are never left wing.

I would expect racism to be more common on the right because racism is anti-egalitarian in nature.

[The Mad Monk]

That implies that the right is defined by anti-egalitarianism.

How do you define egalitarian?

[giblets]

Whatever the dictionary defines it as, I agree with it.

[The Mad Monk]

Well, you see, that's the problem...

Egalitarianism in economics is a controversial phrase with conflicting potential meanings. It may refer either to equality of opportunity, the view that the government ought not to discriminate against citizens or hinder opportunities for them to prosper, or the quite different notion of equality of outcome, a state of economic affairs in which the government promotes equal prosperity for all citizens.

The free-market economist Milton Friedman supports equality-of-opportunity economic egalitarianism. Economist John Maynard Keynes supported more equal outcomes.

An early example of equality-of-outcome economic egalitarianism is Xu Xing, a scholar of the Chinese philosophy of Agriculturalism, who supported the fixing of prices, in which all similar goods and services, regardless of differences in quality and demand, are set at exactly the same, unchanging price.[8]

In the years following World War II, the social democracies of Europe have all adoped egalitarian programs designed to promote general access to health care and education.

[edit] PoliticalEgalitarianism in politics can be of at least two forms. One form is equality of persons in right, sometimes referred to as natural rights, and John Locke is sometimes considered the founder of this form.[9]

Another form is a distributive egalitarianism in which the wealth created by labor is organized and controlled in some equal manner. Karl Marx is considered an influential proponent of this form of egalitarianism.[10]

[edit] PhilosophicalAt a cultural level, egalitarian theories have developed in sophistication and acceptance during the past two hundred years. Among the notable broadly egalitarian philosophies are socialism, communism, anarchism, libertarianism, left-libertarianism, social liberalism and progressivism, all of which propound economic, political, and legal egalitarianism. Several egalitarian ideas enjoy wide support among intellectuals and in the general populations of many countries. Whether any of these ideas have been significantly implemented in practice, however, remains a controversial question.

...do you see it?

[giblets]

Yes. I should create my own definitions of words. Then maybe I would be more like Ben.

[The Mad Monk]

Yes. I should create my own definitions of words. Then maybe I would be more like Ben.

[giblets]

Now I see your edit. "Equality of opportunity" as defined in your quote is a misnomer and it only offer a very limited form of equality because if the government doesn't do anything there will be a huge disparity in the opportunities different people have in life.

[The Mad Monk]

I thought you might need a little more.

Is it possible to have both equality of opportunity and equality of result at the same time?

[giblets]

I thought you might need a little more.

Is it possible to have both equality of opportunity and equality of result at the same time?

As you've defined those terms, no. But if one person is capable of achieving huge results and another person is only capable of achieving meager results, they never really had equal opportunities to begin with. And the person with more results has options available to them that the person with meager results doesn't have, so they aren't equally free either.

[kentonio]

Is it okay if a rich black radio host (who is too young to have lived through segregation) spouts racist comments?

I'd certainly have a lot less sympathy for it. I don't think its something that has a really clear answer to be honest.