Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Given this, it's not for us to make assumptions about what exists inside others or pronouncements about what others should think or do. This is basically just solipsism. The human condition is knowable, the concept of social science couldn't exist otherwise. There are numerous academic, clinical, epidemiological, and business disciplines that depend on doing exactly this. My personal background is in social science…
You can call it solipsism for your own reasons, but what have you done to ensure you're operating with adequate levels of humility, compassion and objectivity? It's not a clinical setting or a formal study involving willing participants. Invoking academic concepts to make unsolicited diagnoses of people's inner thoughts and motivations is not ethical, nor a good-faith form of discussion, and doing so can only bring a…
Nice deflection. But why does it matter? You've successfully deflected a well known and documented sociological and political science fact into a matter of MY personal virtues.
Which is precisely the problem I've been taking about. Nobody cares about your personal virtue. The fact remains that racism has been a critical element driving right wing economic policy and this is a well known and documented fact that has been attested to by the people doing it (like Lee Atwater). This isn't really up for debate, and the fact that you're not bothering to debate it and retreating to ad hominem instead kind of makes that clear.
No we don't need people to undertake "deep inner work." We need to solve the actual societal problems. You need to do the "deep inner work" it takes to address problems that impact objective reality instead of the delicate feelings of people who don't want to confront the things they feel guilty over.