- 17 Mar, 2021
- 0 Comments
- 40 Secs Read
premises of the racist's
After reading Holmes pp. 31-46 (sections 1.7-1.11), and viewing the interview with Ian Haney Lopez on ‘dog-whistle politics’ (https://vimeo.com/87730931), please answer the following:
Even if we were to assume the first premises of the racist's argument as true, why according to Holmes does the conclusion not follow? ('Superior races ought to dominate inferior races'). Explain why, by every standard available (natural law, utilitarianism, universalizability) that racist's argument cannot succeed.
Very few people these days are willing to make the racist argument directly and publicly. In its place, people use 'dog-whistles'. Why are dog-whistles so effective according to Ian Haney Lopez? Give your own example of a dog-whistle that you have heard used by people, and explain how it works.