James Cameron's work might be Racist?

Originally posted by inimalist
right, because racial inequity has no historical source or legacy and effects the lives of nobody today

Only if your definition of 'racial' inequality is synonymous with that of 'slavery'.

Racism itself, is a fairly new phenomenon, as Michel Foucault explained ie, the social discourse of 'racism' is very new, as opposed to xenophobia which existed at all times, everywhere.
From beginning of human history and civilization, and ever since there were different tribes and those different tribes became...different tribes... there was xenophobia and divide.

I guess the film "Amazing Grace" must be racist then. What with it having a white hero of a black cause.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Only if your definition of 'racial' inequality is synonymous with that of 'slavery'.

Racism itself, is a fairly new phenomenon, as Michel Foucault explained ie, the social discourse of 'racism' is very new, as opposed to xenophobia which existed at all times, everywhere.
From beginning of human history and civilization, and ever since there were different tribes and those different tribes became...different tribes... there was xenophobia and divide.

I think colonialism is more pertant to the discussion than slavery, but I get what you are saying.

My point was more in respect to your sarcasm about people being offended by things with a racial connotation. Agree with them or not, there are items that bring back images of oppression.

I get your point though, and Foucault is amazing, if in love with semantics

Originally posted by jaden101
I guess the film "Amazing Grace" must be racist then. What with it having a white hero of a black cause.

Amazing Grace has met with criticism for portraying black people as passive and incapable of participating in their emancipation.[6] In the video, "Michael Apted, the director of Amazing Grace, chafes at criticism of the film's focus." CNN's Alphonso Van Marsh elicited angry responses from Apted when asked about whether the focus almost exclusively on whites as protagonists was itself racist.

The film did not explore slavery from the black perspective. Only one reference is made to slave rebellions, in Haiti. Apted explained he did not set out to make another film such as Amistad or Roots, but to explore the legislative battle from the view of white abolitionists such as Wilberforce.

I took a course about the African Diaspora, and a major theme was how black people are responsible for their own freedom.

I don't think either view is comprehensive, but yes, there are people so sensitive to the issue that if no mention of the black contribution is made, they will cry foul. However, this is reasonable given how often they are probably told the equally absurd "White people freed the slaves"

Originally posted by inimalist
I took a course about the African Diaspora,

Now why would you go and do a silly thing like that? You'll only encourage them. Next thing they'll want the vote. And it'll be your fault.

I can't believe that piece of shit is the #2 film of all time.

Carbon fiber skeleton or not, Chewbacca could take any of those freaks.

Originally posted by jaden101
Now why would you go and do a silly thing like that? You'll only encourage them.

jungle fever

Originally posted by lil bitchiness

Racism itself, is a fairly new phenomenon

I saw on the History Channel that Arisotle wrote that Greeks had the ideal human skin color as opposed to black Africans and pale Northerners.

^ That isn't just "different tribes", that's about color.

Originally posted by inimalist
jungle fever

There's a cream for that.

Originally posted by Nemesis X
Read the shocking news here!

Do you know that old Hollywood cliche where a white guy is the hero of a native race? Well that's happening here in James Cameron's Avatar and some people aren't taking kindly to that.

Like the Titanic, people are sinking low to a new level into ridiculousness.

Movies that had white men leading natives into victory are Dances with Wolves, The Last Samurai, and Broken Arrow. I don't think people have had an issue with those movies before but when they see a white man leading the giant smurfs to victory against the humans and their spaceships and giant robots, those people knew they have had enough.

I know we need to get the racism nonsense away from the videogames but is it really necessary for the movies to be next on the hit list?

It's stupid and absolutely pisses me off to no end.

The level of stupidity in our society truly makes me want to go live with the penguins.

People are always looking for a way to make something into a racist remark. Like white people have EVER cared about being subtle when it came to racism.

Originally posted by WhiskeyGirl
Like white people have EVER cared about being subtle when it came to racism.

😕

Originally posted by Robtard
Ah, I was thinking of John Travolta.

Haha, as did I.

I wonder if people who tend to find 'racist' elements in films or games, have some kind if need for superiority. As long as they can put down people with talent down to some kind of moral inferiority, they can feel elevated above the rest. Now, to me that's about as fascist as it gets.

Originally posted by inimalist
ok

however, there are people who don't agree with you. They see the idea as insulting, because it promotes the idea that without the intervention of "white man", people would be left to die out. Inherent in this is the idea that people want to be helped and that the help is benevolent, or rather, this is seen as irrelevant. The lesser is in the interpretation:

"We are weak alone, but here comes whitey to save the day"

appreciate that there is that connection and maybe pay some respect to it. People certainly shouldn't censor themselves, but they should also not just be passive recipiants of culture.

Originally posted by One Free Man
they are dying of aids, hunger, canibalism,

Is cannibalism really such a big cause of death it should be named after aids and starvation? And but couldn't one argue similarly, as has been done, that the western world have benefited greatly from the exploitation of African colonies as well as the enslavement of Africans. Then one could feasible say that yes, on average the descendants of slaves are better off, but it is not so much thanks to the whites and it is partly not about them being better off but the others being worse off.

Originally posted by One Free Man
I disagree. There is loads of precedence of whitey "saving the day". Take africans. they are dying of aids, hunger, canibalism, tribalistic ignorance. Call it racism to say this, but this is what it is. Now look at the african american. here, heating, cooling, westernized philosophy, aidsless, home owners, political power, freedom of speech, equal treatment, etc.

Slavery has indirectly helped every single african american who has claim to a heritage of being subservient to "whitey. (while we're at it, why don't we call black men 'darky?'😉" If african americans were still in africa, the majority would be dying of aids, dictatorships, poverty, or hunger in a ventless hut, prison, or tribal jungle. Call it racist, but this is true.

And now, you can argue all you want that the current system in 70% of africa is a culture and its racist to trash talk it, but that's bullshit. It's not a culture, its a failing system.

The failing systems as you call it were caused by the people from the West, Europeans. A lot of these countries have been corrupted by the West during the colonisation days. Heck, they just divided this continent up among themselves, took what they wanted etc. And now we leave them to rot. We owe a lot of our riches to what we stole from Africa and other colonies. We have more than enough money, food and resources to deal with all the problems these countries have. But we don't because money people rule.

And if you think that a country like America has learned from this history... Alas. Look at Iraq, they're making the exact same mistakes: invade at will, take what you want, leave the country in ruins.

And no, this has not so much to do with racism, I wish there was something like a ideology behind it. But it's all about greed, money, greed, money and lot of selfish indifference.

Originally posted by queeq
The failing systems as you call it were caused by the people from the West, Europeans. A lot of these countries have been corrupted by the West during the colonisation days. Heck, they just divided this continent up among themselves, took what they wanted etc. And now we leave them to rot. We owe a lot of our riches to what we stole from Africa and other colonies. We have more than enough money, food and resources to deal with all the problems these countries have. But we don't because money people rule.

And if you think that a country like America has learned from this history... Alas. Look at Iraq, they're making the exact same mistakes: invade at will, take what you want, leave the country in ruins.

And no, this has not so much to do with racism, I wish there was something like a ideology behind it. But it's all about greed, money, greed, money and lot of selfish indifference.

Resources? Not really. they have everything they did before "whitey" invaded.

South africa? fine. sure. white people have south africa. It's a tiny tip at the bottom of a vast continent.

We didn't cause aids, we didn't take all of their food, and if giving them western technology is going to be blamed for this, I revert to "it's not the hammer that hit your friend on the head, it's you who hit your friend on the head".

Every genocidal, irresponsible, petty politician to reign in africa in the last 50 years has been black.

We didn't cause anything in africa.

as for Iraq, if we were just their to take(oil as some say), why isn't my gas 50c a gallon?

Why are my taxes extra to pay for it?

and people who want to help nigerian starving people have to smuggle food in, or they are denied by the authorities. We are unable to help in many countries due to the governments.

It must be great to have such a lack of historical perspective.

OFM does have a point and not only with African countries but also with Spanish speaking countries in the Americas. Third world countries will continue to have revolutions over and over again UNTIL their political cultures change and I don't mean chaging to shit like socialism. It's a fail system for these nations. Capitalism continues to be introduce to them and little by little they're learning it. Within time they will adapt and drop their old ways.

Originally posted by queeq

And if you think that a country like America has learned from this history... Alas. Look at Iraq, they're making the exact same mistakes: invade at will, take what you want, leave the country in ruins.

There is a rebuilding process happening.