The row centres around the exhibition ‘This is Colonialism’ and the museum’s decision to restrict white people from entering a small section of the display

Police officers are gathered in front of the Zeche Zollern museum in Dortmund, the focus of what social networks are describing as a racism scandal.

The row centres around the exhibition ‘This is Colonialism’ and the museum’s decision to restrict white people from entering a small section of the display. For several months now, Saturdays at the museum have been reserved for black people and people of colour to explore a colonialism exhibition

The museum claims the objective is not to be discriminatory, but to reserve a safe space for reflection for non-whites.

  • enkers@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    For several months now, Saturdays at the museum have been reserved for black people and people of colour to explore a colonialism exhibition

    Ohhh noo. Anyways…

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Heaven forbid that us white people feel the tiniest modicum of discomfort. I sincerely hope it’ll help foster a sense of empathy for those that continue to suffer real substantive harm.

        Also, I find it pretty unlikely that the people who would cry about this tiny concession are the same people who would be interested in going to this exhibit anyways.

        • PugJesus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I would love to go to an exhibit on colonialism and its vast crimes, and I am upset by the matter on principle. I don’t know why everyone is suddenly interested in running apologia for racial segregation.

          • enkers@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not unavailable to you. You can pick literally any other time but that four hours, like any other well adjusted adult would do.

            • PugJesus@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s not unavailable to you. You can pick literally any other time but that four hours, like any other well adjusted adult would do.

              You would say this, then, about a whites only 4 hours at the same museum, then, right?

              • Andjhostet@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Are you this opposed to women’s shelters not allowing men in order to provide a safe space for women?

                • PugJesus@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  ‘Context’ is not a ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ card. Malcolm X’s pre-Mecca racism, for example. was far, far less heinous than the racism of the America he lived in due to context - but that does not mean it wasn’t bad. Likewise, othering a race with benevolent intent is still, at its core, othering a race of human beings.

                  And in any case, the point is meant to refute the idea that “you can pick literally any other time”. That you can pick another time does not mean that the circumstances which force you to do so are right. Even if you still think it is correct to continue this practice, that “It’s only 4 hours” is not a valid argument regarding whether the principle of the thing is moral or not.

                  • enkers@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Do you also consider affirmative action racism? Is women’s sports blocking male competitors misandry?

                    There’s a world where this could be racist, but it’s not the one we live in yet.

                • earthling@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Just letting you know what you sound like.

                  Take a moment to think about what brought you to defend discrimination based on skin color. Then consider if that’s a positive for humanity.

                  Here I thought we settled this bullshit already but I guess some have some catching up to do. We really were too lax on the South when we beat their ass.

                  • enkers@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    My dude, you are getting baited by the people you’re decrying. This policy is affirmative action to help get minority groups who otherwise might not go in to see the exhibit. It’s attempting to address structural issues by carving out a safe space for the victims of colonialism. It IS a form of discrimination, as is affirmative action in general, but the purpose and intent is positive. It is neither segregation nor racism.

                    If you don’t believe me, I’d urge you to consider who ran this news piece, and what their motivations might have been. When you call this racism, you yourself are siding with racists.

          • darq@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s massively over-simplified.

            Discrimination is bad. But not all discrimination is the same. Ubiquity and power dynamics play a huge role in what makes racism so damaging.

            And, unfortunately, sometimes correcting for past discrimination can itself involve discrimination.

            • PugJesus@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              That’s massively over-simplified.

              No, it’s really not. Racism is either wrong, or it isn’t. There’s not a middle ground here. That not all incidents of racism are equally bad does not mean any incident, large or small, of racism is not bad.

              And, unfortunately, sometimes correcting for past discrimination can itself involve discrimination.

              There’s nothing more permanent than a temporary solution, as the saying goes. That is precisely why all solutions, even imperfect ones, must be built on solid principles. Affirmative action, for example, is built on solid principles (unless one is some right-libertarian market fetishist, but fuck them), because it seeks the integration and inclusion of all races, even though it currently predominantly benefits non-majority groups. It seeks a better world, a world where people aren’t treated differently based on who their parents or grandparents were. Racism based on the idea of inferiority is far worse than racism based on the idea of collective ethnic guilt - but both are still bad. Racism based on collective ethnic guilt is worse than racism based on a simple but fundamental ‘othering’ of a racial group - but both are still bad.

              • darq@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Considering that people, incorrectly in my opinion, refer to affirmative action as racism constantly, this seems like an odd comment to square.

                • PugJesus@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  That’s because people are shitheads and I hate them.

                  Affirmative action is simply the implementation of the view that society should be comprised, in as many areas as possible, of demographics which reflect the demographics of society as a whole - ie that prejudices should not be allowed to dictate the construction of the institutions which rule our daily lives. It does not ‘other’ anyone - it welcomes them into areas previously closed off. And the principle would, in theory, defend a white minority same as a black or Asian minority. It is a way forward, a better world, a more united world, not a less united one.

                  • darq@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yeah and I agree with that.

                    The issue comes in when actually trying to implement affirmative action. It will, sometimes, temporarily demand discrimination to be done to correct for past injustices. And that discrimination is sometimes going to be based on race.

                    But that discrimination based on race is what a lot of people are calling “racism”. But it is not the same as actual racism. Not in effect or in principle.

        • earthling@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Fuck racism and anyone who defends it.

          How some of you make it more complicated than that I will never understand.

    • Zaktor
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      All the people in this thread standing up against “racism” for the most minor of limitations to the dominant racial group.

      • Actaeon@artemis.camp
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The proportion of comments here against an exhibit on colonialism being reserved 1 day a week for the victims of colonialism is disturbing.

        • Zaktor
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          And this is just a manufactured rightwing “controversy”. The museum had been doing this for months (it’s literally just 4 hours a week) without issue until a radio station associated with Germany’s far-right saw something they could spin as anti-white to rile up the “oppressed” white whiners on far-right Twitter.

          The German version of this story has more information, but frankly it should have been obvious to all these “reverse racism” whiners that it was just a BS rightwing controversy regular people shouldn’t give two shits about. The associated party, AfD, is Germany’s far-right racist party, which has been ruled in court to be legitimately suspected to be a “threat to democracy”.

          • RickRussell_CA@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The fact that it became an issue “on social media” only after a white journalist documented that they were refused admission sort of tells you the whole story here.

            Nobody cared, until angry racists made a big deal about it. It’s likely that, on balance, the vast majority of people don’t care and aren’t paying any attention to the racists. But if it involves angry racists, it leads, because that shit generates clicks and controversy. JOURNALISM.