I mean as someone of Chinese descent who is repulsed by the Chinese government’s actions despite them looking like me, I think my existence alone disproves your argument. I don’t doubt that there are some people who do think like that, but I do doubt that they make up anywhere near a majority.
You can internalize racism you know? And even if not, you can still be convinced that a group is bad by shitty American propaganda even if you look like those people. You’re not unique in that way, but it’s just not really relevant to the situation
They are super related though. Only non-white places are called authoritarian and based on just vibes (usually supported by racism and internalized racism). There is not a definition of authoritarian that encompasses china and doesn’t encompass most of Europe and America also. If you have one, hit me up because I’ve heard a billion and the only way I’ve ever been able to understand it is either “yeah but they’re bad so when they do it it’s authoritarian” or “they are naturally more authoritarian [because of their race]”
Russia is an interesting case, and most scholars of race do not think that Russians are white in any sociological sense, because white supremacists don’t consider them white and they aren’t treated as “white people” by white people. They are “asiatic” to racists. Their skin is, on average, fairly white. But that was never what being white meant, or at least people who claimed so were never consistent about it in history (people whiter than many white people but with black ancestors weren’t white for example, and fair skinned Asian people also aren’t white despite being lighter in skin tone). Whiteness is a category of exclusion
“as someone of Chinese descent” hitting with that stretch from half court on this one. There have been people of Chinese decent in America longer than most white people.
I mean as someone of Chinese descent who is repulsed by the Chinese government’s actions despite them looking like me, I think my existence alone disproves your argument. I don’t doubt that there are some people who do think like that, but I do doubt that they make up anywhere near a majority.
You can internalize racism you know? And even if not, you can still be convinced that a group is bad by shitty American propaganda even if you look like those people. You’re not unique in that way, but it’s just not really relevant to the situation
Okay, fair point, the argument I made wasn’t exactly a good one. I do still think that hating authoritarianism isn’t exactly xenophobia.
They are super related though. Only non-white places are called authoritarian and based on just vibes (usually supported by racism and internalized racism). There is not a definition of authoritarian that encompasses china and doesn’t encompass most of Europe and America also. If you have one, hit me up because I’ve heard a billion and the only way I’ve ever been able to understand it is either “yeah but they’re bad so when they do it it’s authoritarian” or “they are naturally more authoritarian [because of their race]”
Isn’t Russia being criticised for similar authoritarian practices despite them being white (at least the people in power, anyways)?
Russia is an interesting case, and most scholars of race do not think that Russians are white in any sociological sense, because white supremacists don’t consider them white and they aren’t treated as “white people” by white people. They are “asiatic” to racists. Their skin is, on average, fairly white. But that was never what being white meant, or at least people who claimed so were never consistent about it in history (people whiter than many white people but with black ancestors weren’t white for example, and fair skinned Asian people also aren’t white despite being lighter in skin tone). Whiteness is a category of exclusion
“as someone of Chinese descent” hitting with that stretch from half court on this one. There have been people of Chinese decent in America longer than most white people.