Division Based on Skin Colour

Jul 2015
679
Near East
I have noticed that in spite of the decline of racism in Western societies (or its retreat into the closet), people still divide each other based on skin colour, using labels such as "white" and "black". This mode of identification extends beyond the borders of society, involving peoples from various ethnic groups: "white" Europeans and Americans, "yellow" Asians, "brown Middle Easterners", and "black" Africans. I believe that such outdated racial terminology like "white", "black", "brown", and "yellow" are as arbitrary and shallow as they are casually racist, regardless of whether or not people who use these terms are aware.

In our subconsciousness, the colour white is usually associated with purity, light, and goodness, whilst black often stands for taint, darkness, and evil. We know what subconsciously happens when we associate these colours with human beings. To a lesser degree the same applies to the colours yellow and brown, when associated with people they imply second-class status; neither purely "good" nor purely "evil". Colour-based designation of peoples also has another negative aspect to it. For various reasons the West is currently the most prosperous civilisation, so when people associate "white" skin to the prosperous West and non-white colours to the less prosperous non-West, it may lead to unfounded conclusions regarding inherent superiority and inferiority.

Such colour-based identification is not accurate, since skin colours are not confined to certain ethnicities. Ethnic Europeans don't have a monopoly on "white" skin, "brown" skin is not limited to people in the Near East and north Africa, "yellow" skin exists amongst people other than east Asians, and "black" skin is not confined to ethnic Africans.

Instead of labelling people based on colour why not just call them by their ethnic names?
 

Sephiroth

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
2,986
It is a Top Secret
What is 'yellow' skin though?
I observed this division based on skin color mostly in America and english speaking countries, hence I use it only in english.
 
Mar 2014
8,881
Canterbury
But, people are different colours.

That's not something some racist just made up - it's totally true. Why should we try (and inevitably) fail to pretend it isn't? What purpose would selective blindness serve?
 

Sephiroth

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
2,986
It is a Top Secret
But, people are different colours.

That's not something some racist just made up - it's totally true. Why should we try (and inevitably) fail to pretend it isn't? What purpose would selective blindness serve?
Are you being sarcastic here? ^^
 

notgivenaway

Ad Honorem
Jun 2015
5,787
UK
because names/labels per se are not offensive. The Nubians called themselves black. this was loooong before any Atlantic slave trade happened.
 
Jul 2015
679
Near East
But, people are different colours.

That's not something some racist just made up - it's totally true. Why should we try (and inevitably) fail to pretend it isn't? What purpose would selective blindness serve?
I'm arguing against the usage of skin colour as an arbitrary, shallow, and casually racist way of designating entire ethnic groups, not the fact that people actually have different colours, even within the same ethnic group or family.
 

Isleifson

Ad Honorem
Aug 2013
4,127
Lorraine tudesque
I have noticed that in spite of the decline of racism in Western societies (or its retreat into the closet), people still divide each other based on skin colour, using labels such as "white" and "black". This mode of identification extends beyond the borders of society, involving peoples from various ethnic groups: "white" Europeans and Americans, "yellow" Asians, "brown Middle Easterners", and "black" Africans. I believe that such outdated racial terminology like "white", "black", "brown", and "yellow" are as arbitrary and shallow as they are casually racist, regardless of whether or not people who use these terms are aware.

In our subconsciousness, the colour white is usually associated with purity, light, and goodness, whilst black often stands for taint, darkness, and evil. We know what subconsciously happens when we associate these colours with human beings. To a lesser degree the same applies to the colours yellow and brown, when associated with people they imply second-class status; neither purely "good" nor purely "evil". Colour-based designation of peoples also has another negative aspect to it. For various reasons the West is currently the most prosperous civilisation, so when people associate "white" skin to the prosperous West and non-white colours to the less prosperous non-West, it may lead to unfounded conclusions regarding inherent superiority and inferiority.

Such colour-based identification is not accurate, since skin colours are not confined to certain ethnicities. Ethnic Europeans don't have a monopoly on "white" skin, "brown" skin is not limited to people in the Near East and north Africa, "yellow" skin exists amongst people other than east Asians, and "black" skin is not confined to ethnic Africans.

Instead of labelling people based on colour why not just call them by their ethnic names?
In this non-european country people are divided in 4 groups. Based on her skin colour. So what?


Slavery's last stronghold