Why is the term 'race-baiting'

[lovemydog]

used here by self-described 'progressives' against fellow liberals who discuss civil rights or demographics of voters in the democratic primaries?

Used in this manner, it's an incorrect historical use of the term. It's also an exhibition of ignorance and racist behavior.

That's my opinion.

What's yours?

[Live and Learn]

1. I think the term has been used correctly on DU. I have seen plenty of it here.

the unfair use of statements about race to try to influence the actions or attitudes of a particular group of people

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/race%E2%80%93baiting

[lovemydog]

2. I don't think the term should be used here

by self-described 'progressives' against other liberals.

Where I've seen it most often is by self-described Sanders supporters (some of the more vehement ones) against self-described Clinton supporters who merely raise issues regarding the demographics of Clinton voters.

I think it's an offensive and cheap shot, when used as a pejorative against people of color or those who wish to discuss issues of race in the democratic primaries.

To me, it just a pathetic attempt by white self-described 'progressives' to hide or mask their own defensiveness about the strength and diversity of Clinton's coalition. And it makes them look like the furthest thing from 'progressive' if one's definition of progressive includes an understanding of the history of the use of that term and how it has been used historically.

As you say, it's been used plenty here. To me it's like saying plenty of times 'Oh, you're racist against white people!' That's what tea partiers say, plenty. Not liberals.

Here's an article that describes the historic use of the term, and how it's been coopted by the racist right wing:

http://fusion.net/story/155681/if-youre-confused-about-what-race-baiting-is-heres-a-bit-of-context/

[Live and Learn]

5. Oh please, you can't deny that devisive politics have been used on DU and mainly by the Clinton

supporters. Should it be, no but it is.

[lovemydog]

10. I don't think I've ever see a self-described

Clinton supporter here use the term 'race-baiting' against a self-described Sanders supporter.

[Live and Learn]

12. No, Clinton supporters have done the race baiting - see below for an example.

I get it now, you just don't want us to call the race baiting , race baiting, right?

[lovemydog]

15. No. What I'm saying is that it's an historically

inaccurate use of the term. It goes beyond a mere dictionary definition. And that it's appallingly ignorant of history. Please read my post above, in which I replied to you and also kindly gave you an article that describes the historical ramifications of the term 'race-baiting' and how it is being misused today by the right wing (and, I submit, by some self-described 'progressives').

[Live and Learn]

16. And I maintain that the term is being used correctly. nt

[lovemydog]

18. Why does it most always appear to be used

here by white people, against black people or people who raise issues involving race?

[Live and Learn]

23. How the heck does anybody know who is posting and what they look like?

I sure don't.

[Scootaloo]

19. And I don't think people should call others white supremacists for supporting a Jewish candidate

Funny how that is a thing, though.

[lovemydog]

20. Start a thread on it!

[Scootaloo]

22. I'm not as self-absorbed as some people seem to be, apparently

[Recursion]

3. Because white liberals hate being reminded they have a race

and that it impacts their voting habits, just like everybody else's race does.

[azurnoir]

4. so 'splain how it impacted us when we white folk voted for Barack Obama in '08 and '12?

[Recursion]

8. That's easy: white liberals overwhelmingly supported Obama

At many points in the primary they supported him by a greater margin than black voters, and consistently more than hispanics.

In the general, Obama lost the white vote by a decent margin.

[azurnoir]

9. so whites really didn't vote for Obama at least not many - thanks

[Recursion]

41. Umm... you're welcome? (nt)

[Scootaloo]

24. Make up your mind

Are you trying to take a shit on white liberals, or white people in general? 'Cause you started with the former, and when that got scuttled, you seem to have decided to drop trou for the latter.

[Recursion]

40. I have no idea what you're talking about

That didn't even remotely make sense.

[Live and Learn]

7. And there is a perfect example of what I was saying upstream. Thanks. nt

[lovemydog]

13. I think white privilege

makes many white liberals think they don't even have a race. It's so ingrained as the dominant culture that it's easy to take for granted.

[Bonobo]

6. I think it should be used only when meant to imply that the use of race as an issue is not

intellectually honest.

For the most part, I think that has been how it has been used.

[lovemydog]

11. Thanks for your reply.

I go further than that, but I appreciate hearing from others and their views.

[akbacchus_BC]

14. I have no idea what race baiting is! Probably it is not so viceral in Canada as it is in the US!

But man, I have got to tell you this, I was standing in line to enrol my daughter at primary school and the enroller looked right past me to address the person after me. I asked her, am next in line, did you not see me. Racism exists in Canada but it is very intransparent.

[lovemydog]

17. I've felt a different vibe

when I've visited Canada too. Parts of the USA can be quite different from one another as well. For example, college towns, very liberal cities, urban versus rural areas, etc.

Oh, and here's an article on it that contains both the dictionary definition and more historical context:

http://fusion.net/story/155681/if-youre-confused-about-what-race-baiting-is-heres-a-bit-of-context/

[akbacchus_BC]

33. BC is kind of different but you have to remember we had Expo and the Winter Games in 2010.

Expo really put BC on the map. Believe me when I tell you that some people in Toronto did not realise BC existed and how nice the weather it, it rains a lot though!

[Scootaloo]

37. Bonobo gives an apt description of it just above your post

Essentially it's a form of trolling that uses accusations or insinuations of racism as a primary component.

Contrast to racist trolling, which uses assertions against a race as the main part of the trolling.

Note that the two aren't mutually exclusive - "Race X is all garbage and if you don't agree you clearly hate Race Y." This is a primary argument in many posts in the I/P forum, for example.

[JonLeibowitz]

21. I concur with Bonobo upthread: it is when introducing race in a way unnatural to the discussion

It is meant to troll the DUers reading the topic.

For instance, today I read multiple posts suggesting that "Hillary is fighting two white men right now" and therefore needs all the support she can get. This is race-baiting, IMO, as it is irrelevant to the primary because our other candidates (Bernie/O'Malley) both strongly support minority rights despite being white men. Unless the claim is that it is impossible for white men to be fierce advocates for minorities, in which case that is just plain old bigotry.

[Live and Learn]

25. A very good example. nt

[lovemydog]

30. It aggrieved you?

[JonLeibowitz]

31. It's bigoted to say one candidate deserves more support because they are more of a minority.

Not to mention of course that Clinton is white too. Not that Sanders is Jewish, a class of people historically discriminated against.

[Live and Learn]

39. Unjust accusations always agrieve me, why wouldn't they? nt

[Scootaloo]

26. That's always a funny one.

Am I blind or is Clinton whiter than most brands of sliced bread? And isn't Sanders a white minority?

[JonLeibowitz]

34. I think people are ascribing races to candidates now based on how minority groups voted in primarie

It's fairly bizarre

The most annoying race baiting recurring topic on DU is that white liberals are somehow racist because they vote for a candidate that many minorities did not vote for. Or that the level of support of a candidate among a minority group indicates how dedicated he or she is to their causes. There is a lot of nastiness I see these days.

[Scootaloo]

36. My favorite one?

Sanders is a racist for proposing public tuition at public universities. Why? How? What?

Yes, this was a logic pretzel brought to us by a poster who I will not name, but who was made famous by her antisemtiic posts on frontpagemag. Anyway, on to the logic.

You see, the core of the thesis that Sanders is a racist for proposing free college tuition is that not all Historical Black universities are public universities. Some of them - the ivy leagues, the for-profit schools, the seminaries - would ineed be left out of Sanders' tuition proposal. So that must mean Sanders is an evil racist, plotting against the institution of HBU's.

Of course, plenty - the majority, in fact - of HBU's are public schools and would be included.
And of course, only something like 3% of black graduates come from HBU's
Not to mention that the majority of the remaining 97% of black graduates are from public schools, and would benefit from Sanders' proposal.

None of that mattered though. Sanders was an evil racist sack of shit for proposing tuition-free education for public schools, because HE JUST IS, OKAY!

[lovemydog]

28. With all due respect

it was your post accusing another poster of 'race baiting' that I decided to start this thread. That thread is locked so I couldn't respond there.

I hope you'll read the article I posted upthread, which explains perhaps better than I can, why I find that a poor choice of term. For me, it goes beyond just the dictionary definition, to an historical one.

I hope you enjoyed a good holiday weekend.

[JonLeibowitz]

32. The post was the epitome of bigotry, I am glad to have called it out.

At the same time, an OP like yours is helpful to clarify things for the community. I hope you see how others look at race-baiting and bigotry in the context of DU discussions now.

Btw, both posts were hidden because DU juries agreed that they were racist and sexist.

[lovemydog]

35. We disagree.

[Bad Dog]

27. The only people I've known to use the term

are right wingers worried about their own loss of privilege. Cops shooting a disproportionate amount of black suspects isn't the problem, it's those who bring the truth to light.

[lovemydog]

29. Same here.

I know some wonderful Sanders supporters offline. None of them would use that term against a fellow liberal who tries to discuss issues involving race. If they did I or one of my friends would correct them in no uncertain terms.

[Bad Dog]

42. I'm strictly neutral.

Not being American I don't have a vote, and that means I don't have to make a choice between Sanders and Clinton. I don't want Trump to get in. I've found that both Sanders and Clinton camps have some wonderful supporters, unfortunately they both got some right idiots as well.

[lovemydog]

43. That's for sure!

[Bad Dog]

44. It's important to remember that the behaviour of some "supporters"

has absolutely nothing to do with either candidate.

[Scootaloo]

38. 'Course, context of use matters

There's a pretty big difference between this:

Person A: "Wow, sure are a lot of black people getting killed by cops!"
person B: "Stop race-baiting!"

and this:

Person A: "My candidate got 3% more of the Latino vote, so clearly your candidate and all their supporters must have something against Latinos!"
Person B: "Stop race baiting!"