You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Reciprocity and how to treat foreigners

in #life6 years ago

Very practical perspective on the ethics of treatment of foreigners. In general I agree with your points. It's also interesting to note that a foriegner might be someone who comes from a different part of the political country you live in, or from a different cultural group within national boundaries. This kind of thinking can be all the more important there.

Some points that struck me.

If you believe in any sort of racial superiority or adopt a racial identity then this blog post certainly is not for you.

Related to your previous posts on racism, I didn't know that you went as far as to imply that even ascribing yourself a racial identity was racist, but it makes sense from your arguments. Something to think about here.

There are legal exceptions to this if there are sanctions but in the case where there are no sanctions the idea is to treat all customers with equal respect.

What are these legal exceptions? I'm not aware of any laws in the US or Europe which prohibit selling anything to someone from another country. I thought the restriction would come if they decided to bring something back with them that was not permitted to either leave or enter the country they're going back to.

Of course I can think of many things you can buy which are restricted in sale, such as firearms, alcohol, drugs, bonds and stocks, etc. but these are usually based on citizenship, residency, age, proof of capital, etc.

In fact, the average person in this world is an Asian.

Pedantic correction, the idea of an average person is like some kind of genetic bluring average, or meshing everyone's face together (which I've seen done, and it does look Asian). I think this is misleading shorthand for that if you were to pick a random person of those living, they would most likely be Asian.

Sort:  

Related to your previous posts on racism, I didn't know that you went as far as to imply that even ascribing yourself a racial identity was racist, but it makes sense from your arguments. Something to think about here.

A distinction should be made. Society coerces a racial identity on people. If you believe that race is a social construct and you're the victim of this societal coercion then I don't believe it is your fault if you are racist as a result.

On the other hand if you are aware that race is a social construct, if you know it's an identity imposed on citizens by the government (through stuff like the Census), and that it has no basis in genetics, yet you still adopt that identity then you're a willful racist. The key is how do you see yourself internally? Do you see yourself as a color or do you see yourself beyond those categories internally? Society is going to treat you however it's going to treat you regardless of how you see yourself so it's not at all about how racism affects people or how racist society creates a reaction in people but more about people internalizing the false identity.

My post appeals to people who fit into the first category who know race is a social construct and that the only race which matters is the human race. The distinction between foreigner and insider is basically a cultural barrier. This could be people who speak a different language, who believe in a different religion, and who come from a different country (and so they have a different social network) with a different government influencing their behavior.

America to me is it's people and it's people aren't races to me. America to me has American people, or to be more specific the in-group is the United States Citizen. The in-group could also be considered to be those who respect and believe in the ideals of the United States Constitution and anyone who defends it.

So if a person doesn't believe in the US Constitution and instead are in favor of another set of laws then they would be the foreigner in the most definitive sense. But if we are talking less definitive then it could be people in other countries in general. I'm not ultimately the person who determines who is or who isn't a foreigner.

If I'm treated as the foreigner then I'm the foreigner but the criteria isn't always obvious. For those who say "if you weren't born here you're a foreigner" then that is also a criteria. There are also some who say if you weren't born into the tribe (if you're not part of the family) then you're foreign. So it's a fluid concept which isn't clearly defined, but in general it means if you're not a foreigner you're in the in-group and if you're not in the in-group you're a foreigner.

More on race identity/racism. To be clear and specific my definition of racist is anyone who believes in racial ideology. That means if you are a "race realist" which means if you believe race has a genetic basis and that the racial categories imply something real about people then yes you're a racist.

If you believe in genetics, in science, in sociology, in anthropology, then of course you're not racist. If you get your genetics tested and find out that some percentage of you is from a certain part of the world then it's not racist to believe that part of you is from there.

My point is descriptors like "white" and "black" are non specific and are inherently racist. Africa is a continent, and within Africa are different countries with tribes. Europe is a continent and within Europe are different countries with tribes. The history, the ancestry, all of that is real, but you can't know any of that from "white" and "black". As a result you don't get any of the true benefits from learning about your ancestors because it collectivizes people be superficial traits rather than encouraging people to learn where their ancestors came from or their genes came from.

I also want to make it clear I do not believe it is racist for people who have been historically oppressed to fight to improve their conditions. Anyone who has been a victim of racism, or any other kind of systemic oppression is not racist if they form allegiances to combat that oppression. In my opinion that is a reaction to racism rather than to be inherently racist or to actively promote racism.

Anyone who truly believes in civil rights, human rights, would still be willing to fight for those beliefs even if race doesn't exist. If the only race is the human race then oppression is still oppression. If people with big noses of the same race are mistreated or if short people are being bullied then it's the same problem and it's not wrong to combat that problem.