I'm not sure what that first point is trying to get across. It's certainly not a 'big' problem. There are not legions of ethnic minorities using the race card at every turn. There are bad apples of all racial groups of course. For every ethnic minority using 'the race card' I'm sure there's several CVs with 'ethnic' sounding names getting put in the 'no pile', so it's not like being an ethnic minority bestows some kind of magic advantage in society.

As for the second point, for starters I don't think there is such a thing as 'inverse racism' or 'reverse racism' just racism. If a white person is attacked on racial grounds that to me should be treated as a racism attack I know often it isn't, and that's a problem. With racist names though, I would be lying if I said that someone calling me "honky" is likely to have the same psychological impact as someone seeing a black person and yelling out the n word. It's just common sense that it wouldn't for a myriad of reasons. Neither is right though.

Edited by imbored (29 Mar 2015 1.51pm)

According to this weekends polls, a whopping 64% of the voting populace don't think that Labour are fit to govern. Hardly a ringing endorsement for the party that should have the largest number of MP's after the vote.

Of course, your rationale with them is different to UKiP, isn't it? No doubt you will be lauding the 'sensible' election of a Labour government whilst us in the 64% will be lamenting more debt, more punitive tax hikes, more social engineering, more unfettered immigration purely for the sake of it, more EU expansionist facism and zero debate on the direction we want our country to go in.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

I said that neither is right. I just thought I'd add that the impact we know or believe our actions may have is a relevant point in how we behave and interact with others.

Technically, empirical evidence can be by direct observation.

Otherwise all witness testimony in court cases would be anecdotal. I suppose it is you or anybody's right to take it as mere hearsay.

Anyway, this is turning into a mere philosophical debate, rather than the initial point that racism exists in minorities and that validated a UKIP supporter point of view.

I dislike the term "reverse-racism", it seems a poor attempt at validation, and also open to philosophical deconstruction.

Edited by pefwin (29 Mar 2015 5.47pm)

"Everything is air-droppable at least once."

"When the going gets tough, the tough call for close air support."

They don't, at least not the media that's take seriously.

PC movement would castigate the use of reverse racism except to highlight a greater social argument. Political correctness, as a movement is a social engineering concept geared towards highlighting an extreme, knowing that people will move half way towards that stance (ie by constantly focusing on absurd statements about race, you generate discourse on racism, that generally results in the polarisation around the absurd (ie the racists and looney left) and the rest of society move somewhere along the less racist line.

Its about addressing the use of language in society and confronting what people consider acceptable. Even racists, now, are much less racist than they used to be.

And it worked, maybe too well, as some idiots have become poltically correct as its own cause.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

He might be balls deep in supermodels every night.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02