You're viewing part of a thread.
I would say it partially has to do with race (in the sense of skin tone). Depending on where you are in Europe. In very "white" northern countries, just having brown skin can easily get you lumped in with all other people with brown skin, regardless of ethnicity or place of origin. Reactionaries will call you a filthy immigrant all the same, even if you're born here. But in southern Italy, the natives are often not easily distinguishable from middle easterners or northern Africa anyways, so discrimination is mostly of national origin, language, and overall cultural identity.
But both will discriminate against eastern Europeans.
I think you do have a point, and I would say it also depends a lot. Even more, this shows how little it makes sense to talk about "in Europe" as if it's a uniform thing.
Immigration policies are completely different and many countries have also completely different histories. Take France for example and see how their colonial past made them paradoxically more multicultural than other countries, where black people are maybe at 1/2 generations max (with all the consequences).
I would say that now discrimination against Eastern Europe has toned down a lot, which is...about time.
this shows how little it makes sense to talk about “in Europe” as if it’s a uniform thing.
Sure is.
The American racial dynamics are completely different from european ones.
I would say that European immigration policies are xenophobic
This is what you've been responding to this entire time:
To anyone reading this, this is textbook red herring fallacy. He's changed it to 'xenophobia and racism are totally different' and then went mask-off with "In Europe something like black lives matter (and the reactionary all lives matter) do not exist because the societies are different."
Sure is what...? Sure is a uniform thing (Europe)?
Also no, I have been responding against comments that specifically made a point about European policies being racist.
Also what mask? What the hell are you talking about, I am trying to explain to a stubborn american who can't accept the world being a little different from their own country that different countries have different issues.
specifically made a point about European policies being racist.
By saying they're xenophobic. Racism is xenophobic. It's a root word we use for people who're against people who don't look/sound/whatever like they do. Racism is a specific target of that, but is still xenophobic. Being an elevated grammar nazi doesn't mean it's somehow better. "We don't specifically hate black people, we hate non-white people." Like congrats, your racism-apologism remains.
I am trying to explain to a stubborn american
And I remain a stubborn Canadian.
By saying they’re xenophobic. Racism is xenophobic.
Yes, but the kind of xenophobia which is embodied in immigration policies in EU is not based on race - hence, it's not racist. People are hated just fine for being poor and for simply wanting to come here from somewhere else. Whether they are "white" (assuming there is such thing, especially in Europe) or not the difference is not relevant in this context. Refugees were treated terribly when they were from Balcans in the same way as they are let die today in the Mediterranean.
Racism is a specific target of that, but is still xenophobic. Being an elevated grammar nazi doesn’t mean it’s somehow better. “We don’t specifically hate black people, we hate non-white people.” Like congrats, your racism-apologism remains.
This is wrong on so many levels:
- First, logically speaking A being a subset of B means that B can also be Not A. This is the case, you said yourself, xenophobia is a generic term. Racism is inherently xenophobic, xenophobia is not inherently racist.
- It's not about grammar, it's about the actual semantics.
- It's not “We don’t specifically hate black people, we hate non-white people.”, it's “We don’t specifically hate black people, we hate everyone which is not us (including other white people).”. This is literally what I have been trying to say, which is what you initially compared to "all lives matter", which is a specific reactionary movement that wants to devalue the violence and systemic racism experienced by black people in US. The fact that you feel unable to make a deeper analysis because in your cultural context this is done specifically to dilute racism doesn't mean that the same applies to everyone. No, saying that European immigration policies are xenophobic is not meant to dilute the suffering of the refugees (whether they are from Syria, Afghanistan, African countries etc.), it's a critique to the European immigration system that applies even without the racist accusation. Again, I will repeat it, the fact that in your cultural context this is generally done in bad faith by people who want to devalue problems that black people suffer is something you have to deal with.
your racism-apologism remains.
Yes, acknowledging that different parts of the world have different problems, while still acknowledging them as problems is an apology for the problem.
And I remain a stubborn Canadian.
Well, let's assume I was referring to America as a continent in the same way as you refer to "all over the place in Europe" as "in Germany" ;)