Devon Hofmeyr reponds to open letter from Francois van Rensburg

RonSwanson

Senior Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
561
Do you know how a reverse image search works?
Yes, but I am also aware of its limitations. Unless it's coupled to a cryptographic hash of a reasonable strength, it's inconclusive, and then even if it was, then how do you attribute it to [something]? Beyond reasonable doubt?
 

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
1,424
Racism and double standards.

We are all born into a particular ethnic group with particular features, of which the pigmentation of your skin is one of those features.
But the colour of your skin is (quite literally) only skin-deep.
In the same way that a book (or a DVD) should not be judged by its cover, humans should not be judged by the colour of their skin.
It does however not imply that a/any book should not be objectively "judged" - there is nothing wrong with "judging" the content of a book.
The cover of the book (or DVD) is trivial, but not the content.
Now apply that same reasoning to humans.
Don't "judge" a person (or group of people) by the colour of their skin - "judge" them objectively as fellow human beings.

In the past, people with dark ("black") skins were legally oppressed by people with light ("white") skins.
This legal abomination has since been abolished.
But the trait to "judge" others purely on the colour of their skin lives on.

In the past, if you happened to be "black", you had less rights than a fellow human being that happened to be "white" - "whites" had more privileges than "blacks" because they were "white".
Racism - pure and simple.

In the present, if you happen to be "white", you have less rights than a fellow human being that happens to be "black" - "blacks" have more privileges than "whites" because they are "black".
Racism - pure and simple.

Here's the (double standard) thing.
If a "white" person says/does something that is not even remotely racist, that person is labeled as a racist because they are "white".
If a "black" person says/does something that is openly racist, that person is not a racist because they are "black".

Go figure.
 
Last edited:

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
20,184
Yes, but I am also aware of its limitations. Unless it's coupled to a cryptographic hash of a reasonable strength, it's inconclusive, and then even if it was, then how do you attribute it to [something]? Beyond reasonable doubt?
Huh?
 
Top