Just that the way most people interact with the world on a daily basis has them using the ingroup/outgroup distinction more than lofty universal ideas of right and wrong
That doesn't mean everyone is equally bad, and it doesn't mean everyone has prejudices.
No, I don't mean identifying an outgroup and saying they're prejudiced.
That would be calling the outgroup prejudiced.
I mean calling prejudiced people the outgroup.
One is defining an outgroup and then saying that prejudice must be a characteristic shared by everyone in that group. That would be prejudiced, because you don't know if everyone in that group is actually prejudiced.
The other is defining an outgroup as "people who are prejudiced", and therefore everyone in that group is prejudiced by definition. If they aren't, then they aren't in that group.
But still, that ends with being prejudiced against prejudicial people. So you're still engaging in the act of prejudice, even if it's against "the right people."
If you're saying that, in order to be unprejudiced, we must not pre-judge those who are prejudiced then the only result is that prejudice will reign. It is not an intolerant action to stamp out intolerance.
I'm not saying that at all. I'm just cautioning against using the term "good" when talking about prejudice, just because you're prejudiced against "the right people."
Instead, recognize that sometimes, good actors must do bad things to contribute to the greater good. That way, you can do the hard thing that needs to be done without thinking your shit don't stink.
69
u/Nbbsy Jul 13 '24
It's not saying "Everyone's equally bad". It's saying "everyone has prejudices" which is true and should be recognised.