>"The "hive mind" framing is probably a little much 😅"
Let me clarify. Rather than just suggesting that the few dozen local real estate experts who consulted on drawing the boundaries of zones A, B, C and D had the intention of harming Black people thereby - they tend to frame it as the "whites" doing that to the "Blacks".
>"The "hive mind" framing is probably a little much 😅"
Let me clarify. Rather than just suggesting that the few dozen local real estate experts who consulted on drawing the boundaries of zones A, B, C and D had the intention of harming Black people thereby - they tend to frame it as the "whites" doing that to the "Blacks".
There are many, many other examples, where any misdeed (real or distorted) by some white person becomes attributed to whites or whiteness. To me that bespeaks an odd kind of gross over-generalizing, or collective guilt, which would only be appropriate if the individual actors in question had obtained group consent (including that of future generations) - or if there was one white hive-mind responsible anything any white person or group does. If one white person (or 2% of white people) did something, then all white people should be held accountable.
Obviously one could do the same for any other race or population group, implying that they have a "hive mind" which justifies speaking of them as a unitary agent with shared beliefs, motivations, and responsibility. However, today at least, such imputation would likely be challenged and rightly so. "Black people" didn't carjack you, some individuals did - without first consulting with any Black hive mind. There's no collective guilt for what other people did, which was not under one's control or strong influence. And that principle should be applied to all population groups. "Right handed people" did not steal your bicycle or break into your shed, a particular person or small group did. Others in that broad group are not responsible.
Today's tendency in some quarters is to disavow personal responsibility for what one has actually done or failed to do, while highlighting the putative collective responsibility of designated other population groups.
Right handers control our destiny in every democracy. Think about it.
"Rather than just suggesting that the few dozen local real estate experts who consulted on drawing the boundaries of zones A, B, C and D had the intention of harming Black people thereby - they tend to frame it as the "whites" doing that to the "Blacks"."
Yeah, sadly this kind of logical fallacy is rife in all social justice movements at the moment. Men vs women, gay vs straight, trans vs "cis", black vs white. The same people who condemn people for judging them for a particular immutable trait gleefully condemn everybody whose immutable traits match their "oppressors."
Finding a bogeyman to blame for all of life's injustices (or your personal failings) on isn't a new instinct unfortunately. The tricky thing is finding the balance between recognising that some people do this, and acknowledging that others really do have genuine grievances.
>"The "hive mind" framing is probably a little much 😅"
Let me clarify. Rather than just suggesting that the few dozen local real estate experts who consulted on drawing the boundaries of zones A, B, C and D had the intention of harming Black people thereby - they tend to frame it as the "whites" doing that to the "Blacks".
There are many, many other examples, where any misdeed (real or distorted) by some white person becomes attributed to whites or whiteness. To me that bespeaks an odd kind of gross over-generalizing, or collective guilt, which would only be appropriate if the individual actors in question had obtained group consent (including that of future generations) - or if there was one white hive-mind responsible anything any white person or group does. If one white person (or 2% of white people) did something, then all white people should be held accountable.
Obviously one could do the same for any other race or population group, implying that they have a "hive mind" which justifies speaking of them as a unitary agent with shared beliefs, motivations, and responsibility. However, today at least, such imputation would likely be challenged and rightly so. "Black people" didn't carjack you, some individuals did - without first consulting with any Black hive mind. There's no collective guilt for what other people did, which was not under one's control or strong influence. And that principle should be applied to all population groups. "Right handed people" did not steal your bicycle or break into your shed, a particular person or small group did. Others in that broad group are not responsible.
Today's tendency in some quarters is to disavow personal responsibility for what one has actually done or failed to do, while highlighting the putative collective responsibility of designated other population groups.
Right handers control our destiny in every democracy. Think about it.
"Rather than just suggesting that the few dozen local real estate experts who consulted on drawing the boundaries of zones A, B, C and D had the intention of harming Black people thereby - they tend to frame it as the "whites" doing that to the "Blacks"."
Yeah, sadly this kind of logical fallacy is rife in all social justice movements at the moment. Men vs women, gay vs straight, trans vs "cis", black vs white. The same people who condemn people for judging them for a particular immutable trait gleefully condemn everybody whose immutable traits match their "oppressors."
Finding a bogeyman to blame for all of life's injustices (or your personal failings) on isn't a new instinct unfortunately. The tricky thing is finding the balance between recognising that some people do this, and acknowledging that others really do have genuine grievances.