• OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    So why is that you picked Indian as being the common attribute among them? Why didn’t you say “a few married workers were terrible”, or “workers with 3 kids”, or “people over 50”? Why did you instantly jump to them being Indian to be the single defining attribute?

    THAT is prime racism.

      • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        Right, but they were also under 6’ tall. Or were politically left-leaning. Or had dark hair. Or whatever other things they might share. Why didn’t you emphasize that? Did it even cross your mind that maybe the socio-economic background might have more influence on their work ethic than what country they happened to be born in?

        You didn’t even think twice about any of those factors and settled firmly on “Indian” as the single defining thing among them. That’s racism buried so deep you don’t even recognize it.

        I feel a bit bad for people like you. The first step in becoming a better person is recognizing your biases, accepting them, and trying to overcome them. You’re just in utter denial.

        • 1984@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          You are right about me not recognizing it or agreeing with it. You ask why I didn’t pick other attributes. Because I wanted to say Indian. Why should I pick something else that doesn’t describe the situation properly?

          You think I should have said “those guys who had dark hair and were left leaning” were bad at their job? Why, when I meant the Indian people in particular?