this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
23 points (100.0% liked)

World News

2 readers
2 users here now

News from around the world!

founded 1 year ago
 

The row centres around the exhibition 'This is Colonialism' and the museum's decision to restrict white people from entering a small section of the display

Police officers are gathered in front of the Zeche Zollern museum in Dortmund, the focus of what social networks are describing as a racism scandal.

The row centres around the exhibition 'This is Colonialism' and the museum's decision to restrict white people from entering a small section of the display. For several months now, Saturdays at the museum have been reserved for black people and people of colour to explore a colonialism exhibition

The museum claims the objective is not to be discriminatory, but to reserve a safe space for reflection for non-whites.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

For several months now, Saturdays at the museum have been reserved for black people and people of colour to explore a colonialism exhibition

Ohhh noo. Anyways...

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

What's the blood quantum for being allowed in, do you think?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Heaven forbid that us white people feel the tiniest modicum of discomfort. I sincerely hope it'll help foster a sense of empathy for those that continue to suffer real substantive harm.

Also, I find it pretty unlikely that the people who would cry about this tiny concession are the same people who would be interested in going to this exhibit anyways.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Racism is either wrong or it isn't.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's massively over-simplified.

Discrimination is bad. But not all discrimination is the same. Ubiquity and power dynamics play a huge role in what makes racism so damaging.

And, unfortunately, sometimes correcting for past discrimination can itself involve discrimination.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's massively over-simplified.

No, it's really not. Racism is either wrong, or it isn't. There's not a middle ground here. That not all incidents of racism are equally bad does not mean any incident, large or small, of racism is not bad.

And, unfortunately, sometimes correcting for past discrimination can itself involve discrimination.

There's nothing more permanent than a temporary solution, as the saying goes. That is precisely why all solutions, even imperfect ones, must be built on solid principles. Affirmative action, for example, is built on solid principles (unless one is some right-libertarian market fetishist, but fuck them), because it seeks the integration and inclusion of all races, even though it currently predominantly benefits non-majority groups. It seeks a better world, a world where people aren't treated differently based on who their parents or grandparents were. Racism based on the idea of inferiority is far worse than racism based on the idea of collective ethnic guilt - but both are still bad. Racism based on collective ethnic guilt is worse than racism based on a simple but fundamental 'othering' of a racial group - but both are still bad.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Considering that people, incorrectly in my opinion, refer to affirmative action as racism constantly, this seems like an odd comment to square.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's because people are shitheads and I hate them.

Affirmative action is simply the implementation of the view that society should be comprised, in as many areas as possible, of demographics which reflect the demographics of society as a whole - ie that prejudices should not be allowed to dictate the construction of the institutions which rule our daily lives. It does not 'other' anyone - it welcomes them into areas previously closed off. And the principle would, in theory, defend a white minority same as a black or Asian minority. It is a way forward, a better world, a more united world, not a less united one.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah and I agree with that.

The issue comes in when actually trying to implement affirmative action. It will, sometimes, temporarily demand discrimination to be done to correct for past injustices. And that discrimination is sometimes going to be based on race.

But that discrimination based on race is what a lot of people are calling "racism". But it is not the same as actual racism. Not in effect or in principle.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would love to go to an exhibit on colonialism and its vast crimes, and I am upset by the matter on principle. I don't know why everyone is suddenly interested in running apologia for racial segregation.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's not unavailable to you. You can pick literally any other time but that four hours, like any other well adjusted adult would do.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It’s not unavailable to you. You can pick literally any other time but that four hours, like any other well adjusted adult would do.

You would say this, then, about a whites only 4 hours at the same museum, then, right?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you this opposed to women's shelters not allowing men in order to provide a safe space for women?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

No, because women's shelters are not a public venue to begin with.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, as that would be completely ignorant of the contextual reality of the situation.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

'Context' is not a 'get-out-of-jail-free' card. Malcolm X's pre-Mecca racism, for example. was far, far less heinous than the racism of the America he lived in due to context - but that does not mean it wasn't bad. Likewise, othering a race with benevolent intent is still, at its core, othering a race of human beings.

And in any case, the point is meant to refute the idea that "you can pick literally any other time". That you can pick another time does not mean that the circumstances which force you to do so are right. Even if you still think it is correct to continue this practice, that "It's only 4 hours" is not a valid argument regarding whether the principle of the thing is moral or not.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you also consider affirmative action racism? Is women's sports blocking male competitors misandry?

There's a world where this could be racist, but it's not the one we live in yet.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Do you also consider affirmative action racism?

No

Is women’s sports blocking male competitors misandry?

Misandry is a strong word for it, but I would say it's not ideal. Of course, there's also the broader issue of the most physical sports being, by their nature, a discriminatory (in the most literal, not moral, sense of the word) endeavor, from weight to height to genetics, and since I'm not a big sports person to begin with, I try not to have strong opinions on the subject.

I do have strong opinions on non-physical sports with separate women's divisions, and especially those which bar women from participating in non-women's divisions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

“The other water fountain is right there, boy.”

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nice false equivalence. That's not what's going on here.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just letting you know what you sound like.

Take a moment to think about what brought you to defend discrimination based on skin color. Then consider if that’s a positive for humanity.

Here I thought we settled this bullshit already but I guess some have some catching up to do. We really were too lax on the South when we beat their ass.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

My dude, you are getting baited by the people you're decrying. This policy is affirmative action to help get minority groups who otherwise might not go in to see the exhibit. It's attempting to address structural issues by carving out a safe space for the victims of colonialism. It IS a form of discrimination, as is affirmative action in general, but the purpose and intent is positive. It is neither segregation nor racism.

If you don't believe me, I'd urge you to consider who ran this news piece, and what their motivations might have been. When you call this racism, you yourself are siding with racists.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

No I’m simply living my morals consistently regardless of who’s being harmed.

Which is more than you can say.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Fuck racism and anyone who defends it.

How some of you make it more complicated than that I will never understand.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

All the people in this thread standing up against "racism" for the most minor of limitations to the dominant racial group.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The proportion of comments here against an exhibit on colonialism being reserved 1 day a week for the victims of colonialism is disturbing.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And this is just a manufactured rightwing "controversy". The museum had been doing this for months (it's literally just 4 hours a week) without issue until a radio station associated with Germany's far-right saw something they could spin as anti-white to rile up the "oppressed" white whiners on far-right Twitter.

The German version of this story has more information, but frankly it should have been obvious to all these "reverse racism" whiners that it was just a BS rightwing controversy regular people shouldn't give two shits about. The associated party, AfD, is Germany's far-right racist party, which has been ruled in court to be legitimately suspected to be a "threat to democracy".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The fact that it became an issue "on social media" only after a white journalist documented that they were refused admission sort of tells you the whole story here.

Nobody cared, until angry racists made a big deal about it. It's likely that, on balance, the vast majority of people don't care and aren't paying any attention to the racists. But if it involves angry racists, it leads, because that shit generates clicks and controversy. JOURNALISM.