I wound up in a discussion with a leftist today on racism. Well, it drifted a little to take in all of the classic “isms” that the left hates. I decided it was about time to blow his mind, especially since things weren’t going anywhere useful.
So I said I don’t care if people are racist. He didn’t react well.
Here’s the thing though. The left tends to want to change minds. I don’t care about that. I only want to control behaviors. It is literally impossible to change minds without the consent of the owner. I don’t care if you hate black people or white people or women or Jews. Go ahead. Have fun. You just will be held accountable for treating all groups properly in public and, to some degree, in private. If you hate black people, feel free. Just don’t try to string any of them up. If you hate Jews, I don’t care. Just keep the gas chambers out of it.
Because you really can’t do anything else and that pisses the left off to no end. Over time, when people don’t get to abuse the object of their hatred for long enough, they’ll probably change their minds anyhow. Maybe they won’t. I don’t care. I just want a civil society. If you grumble under your breath as you politely greet that trans casher, feel free. I don’t care. It’s the behavior that matters, not the underlying mindset.
As I said, the left hate that. They want to feel like everyone genuinely likes everyone else and reality doesn’t work that way. It’s why I’m so against hate crime legislation. It’s aleady a crime, why do you need an additional rider on it to change people’s minds? I care about how you act, not how you think. You shouldn’t be beating someone senseless regardless, what difference does it make why you did it? You did it! Is some physical abuse better than other physical abuse because of what was going on, or not going on, in your head at the time?
Of course, my debate partner didn’t like that but he couldn’t tell me why he didn’t like it. That’s pretty standard. They lack the capacity to rationally articulate why things are bad. He just didn’t like it, he couldn’t explain why. It was all fee-fees, I’m sure. That’s the thing though, laws aren’t something to be predicated on your feelings. You don’t set a speed limit because you like that speed. You do it based on circumstances and safety. If murder is going to be illegal, then it shouldn’t matter why you killed someone, outside of things like self-defense and the like, the very fact that you did it is enough. Don’t do that!
I don’t like religion. Any religion, but for the moment let’s just limit that to Christianity. I can think your religious beliefs are as stupid as I like, so long as I don’t discriminate against Christians. If I treat you exactly the same as I treat everyone else, what difference does it make it I detest your beliefs internally None whatsoever. The same goes for race, gender, sexual orientation or anything else. So long as you don’t violate social dictates, I don’t give a crap what’s in your head.
And neither should you.
Except there is a distinguishing element present in hate crimes that makes it reasonable to treat them differently. Remember that the hate factor is not a crime in and of itself. There is, however, a real difference to society if I beat you up because you just took a baseball bat to my car, than if I beat you up because there is some aspect of your personhood that I don’t care for. In the first case, I deserve some punishment, but it’s not that often that I am likely to repeat my transgression if it takes someone smashing my car to set me off.
If I am likely to assault someone simply because I don’t like something about his race, religion, etc., then I need more time for contemplation (and hence punishment that includes removal from that society) than the first me.
Hate IS an aggravating factor, not a crime.
Actually, there isn’t. There’s a fundamental difference between taking a baseball bat to your car and taking one to you, one is a crime against property and one is a crime against a person, but why you do it is entirely irrelevant. I don’t care if you beat someone up because they cut you off in traffic or because they hate the color of your skin. The crime is the same. Someone got physically assaulted. We don’t have mind crimes. We punish actions, not thoughts. Hate might be an aggravating factor but it shouldn’t be a punishable offense. The action, yes. The thought behind the action, no.
“Hate might be an aggravating factor but it shouldn’t be a punishable offense. The action, yes. The thought behind the action, no.”
My point exactly.
BTW, have you seen this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89cnR4pU_7k&ab_channel=MajestyofReason and does it merit discussion on your moral realism post?
I don’t have time to watch a 90+ minute video on something I don’t really care about. All I can say is that I’ve never had a discussion with a moral realist that ended with them having the slightest bit of evidence for their claims, much like I’ve never had a discussion with a theist where they had anything to show for their faith. They’re both essentially doing the same thing IMO.