Racism
- Thread starter Thoreau
- Start date
I hate people who hate that other people think that all white people are racist.
Thoreau
Valued Senior Member
funny
I hate it also. For the most part, it's nothing more than an immature attempt to elevate one's own (or a group's) status at the expense of another. Exactly like someone on a job trying to look better by attempting to make everyone else look worse.
Makes me sick to my stomach.
Thoreau
Valued Senior Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpZOO8Yz_xE
Disturbing... I haven't even heard the KKK spit this kinda crap.
Disturbing... I haven't even heard the KKK spit this kinda crap.
I think hate is despicable.
Racism, the recognition of and selective behavior toward groups that are significantly different from your own, is a strong part of our evolutionary heritage. It once had clear survival value to be very wary of groups unlike your own.
With the advent of modern societies and brains capable of more than knee-jerk reactions to different skin colors and cultures, this kind of violent distrust serves only to make things worse for all concerned.
Unfortunately, it's difficult to overcome such a strong built-in tendency. Many enlightened people that may not have great experience with diverse groups will say they are not racist, but admit to a distinct discomfort when surrounded by a group unlike themselves.
This is natural. But transforming it into organized racial hatred is unacceptable.
With the advent of modern societies and brains capable of more than knee-jerk reactions to different skin colors and cultures, this kind of violent distrust serves only to make things worse for all concerned.
Unfortunately, it's difficult to overcome such a strong built-in tendency. Many enlightened people that may not have great experience with diverse groups will say they are not racist, but admit to a distinct discomfort when surrounded by a group unlike themselves.
This is natural. But transforming it into organized racial hatred is unacceptable.
As am I. But hopefully it is well suppressed when I deal with those unlike myself. I've gotten no complaints so far.
Me either, I don't go around spreading hate or calling ppl names. I do however sometimes express my views with family or friends, who share the same thoughts. I think a lot of ppl will not admit it, even if they are.
I don't know what your views are, but mine are generally that I recognize my own irrational discomfort (fear?) of other "races" for what it is - evolutionary baggage.
Venue: Howard University Law School
Date: Oct 14th 2005.
Speaker: Dr. Kamau Kambon BA, MA, Phd. ((born Leroy Jefferson) Kambon taught at St. Augustine's College, a private North Carolina college, from 1982 to 2000[2] and at North Carolina State University from 2001 to 2005.[3][4][5])
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHAg_5tL4gY&feature=related
References
2)^ Kambon v. St.Augustine's College. UNC Law Bulletin.
3) # ^ MDS 240.
4) # ^ AFS 241.
5) # ^ AFS 241, MDS 240.
-------------------------------------------------
I posted the above information to support the OP's argument and to suggest that a liberal, unquestioning attitude to race could ultimately be very dangerous to people classified as 'white'.
(PS: Please note I do not support or endorse the website shown at the end of the clip)
Last edited:
What I really don't like is that hardly anybody uses the term predjudice anymore. Racist means you hate that fuckers gutz and want to kill him, or at least harm them.
Predjudice is like "White people are racist", "chinese can't drive", "Indian immigrants never speak any english".
Predjudice is like "White people are racist", "chinese can't drive", "Indian immigrants never speak any english".
I'll skip the Godwin invocation
In the 1980s and '90s, there was some controversy surrounding a New York professor named Dr. Leonard Jeffries. His outlook was generally repugnant and its best value was the kind of chuckle you get over a drink when you shake your head and grin and wonder what the hell humanity is coming to. One of his wilder assertions was that a black man could not be racist because he was not empowered to be so. While this statement is clearly fallacious, it does in fact address a problem about racism that, it seems, many do not wish to solve.
The problem is best illustrated during the years of Jeffries' upbringing, and is a more difficult argument to make today. But if you were a black American growing up during the period of Jeffries' youth, the whole of society often seemed structured to exploit everyone else to the advantage of whites. Naturally, resentment would arise. And there could, reasonably, come a point where someone came to fear or resent all white people. While exceptions to the rule always exist, there were times and places in this country where an individual might not be able to find those exceptions.
Broad resentment of all white people is racist in a certain way, but it was never about the same thing. White people treated blacks as inferior for having black skin. Blacks who resented all whites resented whites on the belief that whites were out to get them. It's a slightly different idea. Not that it helps much, obviously, since white people have, generally, refused to see the difference. Hell, even in my youth, people I encountered white people who genuinely thought they were helping but simply didn't get it. As I wrote recently in another topic, this attitude has compelled some Asian Americans to adopt a self-loathing racism, including surgical alteration of their faces in order to hide their Asian heritage.
There is no question about the acute example provided in post #5, but by and large the topic assertion does little to help the situation. As long as I've been aware racial and ethnic discrimination, I've also been aware of the counterargument that is intended to mitigate the racism of the empowered majority. It is, indeed, a tragedy that racists exist among the minorities, but I have no intention of letting the existence of those folks justify the evils committed and demanded by the empowered majority. Truth is that it will take a generation at least to fix the problem, and the empowered majority (in this case, white people) doesn't seem willing to play ball. It's too much of a commitment to ask of them.
I recently wrote, in a blog entry ....
A friend of mine sent me an e-mail in response. I do wish he'd posted it in the comments, but an excerpt will have to suffice, as I intend to exploit his commentary here:
He also mentioned that he has taken heat for noting, "I personally think it's a LOT easier to go through the day without anyone realizing that you are straight that it is to tell if someone isn't white." And I wonder how anyone could give him heat for that. Apparently it's racist to make such an observation? After all, it's not like you can look at a man and miss the fact that he is gay. Take a look at Richard Curtis, or Larry Craig, or Bob Allen. You could tell they're queer just by looking at them, right? Which is why these Republicans could be elected on platforms that included homophobia. Er ... right?
Oh, it should be noted that the mom in question is, in fact, white. Um ... in case that confused anyone.
Certainly, the situaton is not helped by such folks as Dr. Jeffries or the raving lunatic from the YouTube footage, but I also think the topic comparison overlooks, on the one hand, the role of empowerment, and to the other, the obligations that come with finding a solution. Because it's not just how people act or speak. Certain things, like gayness, can be hidden and closeted to a certain degree. One cannot hide their blackness. Unless, of course, they're Michael Jackson.
Not all -isms are the same. I don't think the "only whites are racist" mindset is nearly as pervasive as your expression suggests. Rather, I think it's that many are willing to acknowledge subtle--and not-so-subtle--differences. Doesn't mean people know what to do about it. After all, it's easy enough for me to look at the white racists and tell them to get over it, but that doesn't really help. They've been for so long unwilling that there is a legitimate question of whether they're capable. And in that case, we owe their illness our compassion. And once again, the people who insist on doing the most damage require everyone else to feel sorry for them before they're able to stop. Yes, it sucks. But if it's important enough to bring this ugly cycle to an end, the human species will be capable of figuring it out.
MZ3Boy84 said:
In the 1980s and '90s, there was some controversy surrounding a New York professor named Dr. Leonard Jeffries. His outlook was generally repugnant and its best value was the kind of chuckle you get over a drink when you shake your head and grin and wonder what the hell humanity is coming to. One of his wilder assertions was that a black man could not be racist because he was not empowered to be so. While this statement is clearly fallacious, it does in fact address a problem about racism that, it seems, many do not wish to solve.
The problem is best illustrated during the years of Jeffries' upbringing, and is a more difficult argument to make today. But if you were a black American growing up during the period of Jeffries' youth, the whole of society often seemed structured to exploit everyone else to the advantage of whites. Naturally, resentment would arise. And there could, reasonably, come a point where someone came to fear or resent all white people. While exceptions to the rule always exist, there were times and places in this country where an individual might not be able to find those exceptions.
Broad resentment of all white people is racist in a certain way, but it was never about the same thing. White people treated blacks as inferior for having black skin. Blacks who resented all whites resented whites on the belief that whites were out to get them. It's a slightly different idea. Not that it helps much, obviously, since white people have, generally, refused to see the difference. Hell, even in my youth, people I encountered white people who genuinely thought they were helping but simply didn't get it. As I wrote recently in another topic, this attitude has compelled some Asian Americans to adopt a self-loathing racism, including surgical alteration of their faces in order to hide their Asian heritage.
There is no question about the acute example provided in post #5, but by and large the topic assertion does little to help the situation. As long as I've been aware racial and ethnic discrimination, I've also been aware of the counterargument that is intended to mitigate the racism of the empowered majority. It is, indeed, a tragedy that racists exist among the minorities, but I have no intention of letting the existence of those folks justify the evils committed and demanded by the empowered majority. Truth is that it will take a generation at least to fix the problem, and the empowered majority (in this case, white people) doesn't seem willing to play ball. It's too much of a commitment to ask of them.
I recently wrote, in a blog entry ....
A friend of mine sent me an e-mail in response. I do wish he'd posted it in the comments, but an excerpt will have to suffice, as I intend to exploit his commentary here:
He also mentioned that he has taken heat for noting, "I personally think it's a LOT easier to go through the day without anyone realizing that you are straight that it is to tell if someone isn't white." And I wonder how anyone could give him heat for that. Apparently it's racist to make such an observation? After all, it's not like you can look at a man and miss the fact that he is gay. Take a look at Richard Curtis, or Larry Craig, or Bob Allen. You could tell they're queer just by looking at them, right? Which is why these Republicans could be elected on platforms that included homophobia. Er ... right?
Oh, it should be noted that the mom in question is, in fact, white. Um ... in case that confused anyone.
Certainly, the situaton is not helped by such folks as Dr. Jeffries or the raving lunatic from the YouTube footage, but I also think the topic comparison overlooks, on the one hand, the role of empowerment, and to the other, the obligations that come with finding a solution. Because it's not just how people act or speak. Certain things, like gayness, can be hidden and closeted to a certain degree. One cannot hide their blackness. Unless, of course, they're Michael Jackson.
Not all -isms are the same. I don't think the "only whites are racist" mindset is nearly as pervasive as your expression suggests. Rather, I think it's that many are willing to acknowledge subtle--and not-so-subtle--differences. Doesn't mean people know what to do about it. After all, it's easy enough for me to look at the white racists and tell them to get over it, but that doesn't really help. They've been for so long unwilling that there is a legitimate question of whether they're capable. And in that case, we owe their illness our compassion. And once again, the people who insist on doing the most damage require everyone else to feel sorry for them before they're able to stop. Yes, it sucks. But if it's important enough to bring this ugly cycle to an end, the human species will be capable of figuring it out.
Thoreau
Valued Senior Member
What I meant when I said that many people think that only whites are racist is because in today's American society it is generally accepted if a black man acts out violently out against a white man. Ok, maybe accepted isn't the word I am looking for, but rather it is not seen as a racially motivated crime.
Think about this...
If a white man calls a black person a n***er and proceeds to physically attack them, it is concidered a racially motivated hate crime.
However, if a black man calls a white man a cracker, and proceeds to attack them, it is just a crime.
And yes, I censored the "N" word, because I personally do not approve of the word in ANY context. That's just my personal preference.
But anyways, back to the topic at hand.
And its not just when it comes to black-on-white or white-on-black crimes.
It just erks me because it is somehow OK for blacks to segregate in many ways, but its not OK for whites. For example, BET (Black Entertainment Television). For those Americans that are aware of this, we know that BET is a TV station that focuses on black people. But what if WHITE people were to create a WET? Do you honestly think that it would even air? NO. It would be deemed racist and discriminatory. Why? Hell if I know.
Another good example is the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). Same question... what if they were to create a NAAWP? Same results would happen. It would be judged from the start as a racist organization.
I think that Americans as a whole need to get their act together. Many African Americans are eager to state that they are a minority and should have equal rights. Well, in America and many other countries they DO have equal rights, and in some cases more rights than others.
Many colleges have a quota, so-to-speak, where they have to have a minimum amount of minority students, which has caused many universities to lower their acceptance standards for entrance into thier college just to meet the minimum ratio limits.
And the same thing happens with jobs. Many companies have the same rule, thus ends up hiring people that aren't fully qualified.
Example:
Two men go in to interview for the same job as an accountant, a white man and a black man. Now, the white man has 20 years of experience and a Master's degree in accounting. The black man has 6 years of experience and an associates degree. Now, normally the company would hire the most qualified individual regardless of race. But unfortunately this company has a racial quota that they have to meet, a certain ratio of minorites to whites. Knowing this, they hire the less qualified man, leaving the other left looking for a job. Is this fair?
The reason I don't think that its fair is because no one should be given ANYTHING purely based on race. If you want that nice paying job with a good company, EARN it just like everyone else has to.
And many people are going disagree with me. I don't care. I am a firm believer in EQUAL opprotunity. I don't believe ANYONE should be given anything unless you earn it.
And my personal opinion regarding the NAACP thing, is that ANY organization that centers around one group of people AND excludes others is racist.
Think about this...
If a white man calls a black person a n***er and proceeds to physically attack them, it is concidered a racially motivated hate crime.
However, if a black man calls a white man a cracker, and proceeds to attack them, it is just a crime.
And yes, I censored the "N" word, because I personally do not approve of the word in ANY context. That's just my personal preference.
But anyways, back to the topic at hand.
And its not just when it comes to black-on-white or white-on-black crimes.
It just erks me because it is somehow OK for blacks to segregate in many ways, but its not OK for whites. For example, BET (Black Entertainment Television). For those Americans that are aware of this, we know that BET is a TV station that focuses on black people. But what if WHITE people were to create a WET? Do you honestly think that it would even air? NO. It would be deemed racist and discriminatory. Why? Hell if I know.
Another good example is the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). Same question... what if they were to create a NAAWP? Same results would happen. It would be judged from the start as a racist organization.
I think that Americans as a whole need to get their act together. Many African Americans are eager to state that they are a minority and should have equal rights. Well, in America and many other countries they DO have equal rights, and in some cases more rights than others.
Many colleges have a quota, so-to-speak, where they have to have a minimum amount of minority students, which has caused many universities to lower their acceptance standards for entrance into thier college just to meet the minimum ratio limits.
And the same thing happens with jobs. Many companies have the same rule, thus ends up hiring people that aren't fully qualified.
Example:
Two men go in to interview for the same job as an accountant, a white man and a black man. Now, the white man has 20 years of experience and a Master's degree in accounting. The black man has 6 years of experience and an associates degree. Now, normally the company would hire the most qualified individual regardless of race. But unfortunately this company has a racial quota that they have to meet, a certain ratio of minorites to whites. Knowing this, they hire the less qualified man, leaving the other left looking for a job. Is this fair?
The reason I don't think that its fair is because no one should be given ANYTHING purely based on race. If you want that nice paying job with a good company, EARN it just like everyone else has to.
And many people are going disagree with me. I don't care. I am a firm believer in EQUAL opprotunity. I don't believe ANYONE should be given anything unless you earn it.
And my personal opinion regarding the NAACP thing, is that ANY organization that centers around one group of people AND excludes others is racist.
How about in Huckleberry Finn?
My personal belief is that the current emphasis placed on race should be completely transplanted to an emphasis on the poor.
Thoreau
Valued Senior Member
Please elaborate.
I feel that the biggest hurdle many minorities face today isn't their race but their economic status. A middle-class black man has more resources available to him to combat discrimination compared to a lower-class individual of any skin color.
For instance, there was a recent study in New York City that showed a good amount of lower class citizens ended up in jail not because they did the crime but because they couldn't afford bail. Or that they gave a guilty plea not because they were guilty but because doing so resulted in less time in jail compared to pleading not guilty. While a good amount of lower class New Yorkers are minorities, there are whites who're plagued by this as well.
How about police discrimination in New York City? People always bring that up as a sign of the racism evident in today's system. However, look at the vast majority of those harassed by police officers. What are they? Lower income citizens. Of all skin colors.
So I see the best way to help minorities as a whole is to help the poor as a whole. Remove any racial pretense. How can you stop the idea of race when you push a policy that's based on race?
EDIT: Not that I'm denying that racism is alive and well in today's society, or that hate crimes do take place by every skin color. I just think that the fastest way to quell it is to help the poor.
I think you're mixing a few issues, MZ3Boy84.
The issue with the nature of hate crimes and assaults depends on a few variables, including laws in the local jurisdiction and the outlook of a prosecutor. Take the Jena 6, for instance. The protests we saw over that one came about because a racist prosecutor threatened black students and viewed assaults and threats by white students as "just" whatever, be it a fight or a taunt, or ... whatever. It was a combination of suddenly, seemingly arbitrarily, raising the stakes against black assailants while also threatening black students that brought the protests.
There are also jurisdictions that don't have hate crime laws. So some of the comparison might literally be an apples and oranges thing.
As to BET, while I, personally think it's just a stupid network, what's your opinion of Lifetime or Oxygen, which are clearly aimed at women? The reality is that the major networks are aimed at a white male audience. There's the family guy joke about the George Lopez Show: it reinforces the inappropriate stereotype that George Lopez is funny. Or the notion of the "Cosby black"; the 1980s television series The Cosby Show presented blacks as if they lived in a white world. The show was more accessible to a white audience than black. The idea of making a network to specifically break that mold has certain merits, but being so forward as to call it Black Entertainment Television only justifies folks who want to make an issue out of it. For many, Lifetime and Oxygen are acceptable because women can be white, too.
I find this a disappointing argument. You would be better served to consider things like the "Miss Black America" pageant, except that I would probably respond that I'm more worried about the sexism than the racism.
The problem with the NAAWP argument is one of starting points. If we pretended that, at the advent of the NAACP, black people were on equal footing with white people in American society, then you'd have an argument. But we've reached a point where many white people feel the gap between the races is small enough that blacks should just shut up about it. This is unfortunate, because what they're saying is that it's enough that I get better treatment than the next guy when I'm pulled over by a cop simply because the next guy is black.
As to jobs, I'm sure you can find an example of what you're talking about, but the disparities are getting just hilarious. And as to equal opportunity, ethnic minorities in the United States are still being shafted in the educational system, so there are some adjustments being made in universities and the job market. The quickest way to end that would be if society put some effort into ironing out the problems that lead to these alleged necessities. Eliminate any question, break the strands that lead all the way back through this nation's history. But that's too much to ask of white people right now, so we're stuck with patchwork "solutions".
It won't be over until it's over. And while some might think it's over, the people who are still living the reality will disagree. And until those strands of history are broken, I'm going to give the oppressed minorities the benefit of the doubt.
The issue with the nature of hate crimes and assaults depends on a few variables, including laws in the local jurisdiction and the outlook of a prosecutor. Take the Jena 6, for instance. The protests we saw over that one came about because a racist prosecutor threatened black students and viewed assaults and threats by white students as "just" whatever, be it a fight or a taunt, or ... whatever. It was a combination of suddenly, seemingly arbitrarily, raising the stakes against black assailants while also threatening black students that brought the protests.
There are also jurisdictions that don't have hate crime laws. So some of the comparison might literally be an apples and oranges thing.
As to BET, while I, personally think it's just a stupid network, what's your opinion of Lifetime or Oxygen, which are clearly aimed at women? The reality is that the major networks are aimed at a white male audience. There's the family guy joke about the George Lopez Show: it reinforces the inappropriate stereotype that George Lopez is funny. Or the notion of the "Cosby black"; the 1980s television series The Cosby Show presented blacks as if they lived in a white world. The show was more accessible to a white audience than black. The idea of making a network to specifically break that mold has certain merits, but being so forward as to call it Black Entertainment Television only justifies folks who want to make an issue out of it. For many, Lifetime and Oxygen are acceptable because women can be white, too.
MZ3Boy84 said:
I find this a disappointing argument. You would be better served to consider things like the "Miss Black America" pageant, except that I would probably respond that I'm more worried about the sexism than the racism.
The problem with the NAAWP argument is one of starting points. If we pretended that, at the advent of the NAACP, black people were on equal footing with white people in American society, then you'd have an argument. But we've reached a point where many white people feel the gap between the races is small enough that blacks should just shut up about it. This is unfortunate, because what they're saying is that it's enough that I get better treatment than the next guy when I'm pulled over by a cop simply because the next guy is black.
As to jobs, I'm sure you can find an example of what you're talking about, but the disparities are getting just hilarious. And as to equal opportunity, ethnic minorities in the United States are still being shafted in the educational system, so there are some adjustments being made in universities and the job market. The quickest way to end that would be if society put some effort into ironing out the problems that lead to these alleged necessities. Eliminate any question, break the strands that lead all the way back through this nation's history. But that's too much to ask of white people right now, so we're stuck with patchwork "solutions".
It won't be over until it's over. And while some might think it's over, the people who are still living the reality will disagree. And until those strands of history are broken, I'm going to give the oppressed minorities the benefit of the doubt.
Thoreau
Valued Senior Member
My opinion on female orriented networks is that I have no problem with them. Why? Because males can watch them and not feel left out (aside from the Tampon commericials lol)
I agree with you about the starting points of these organizations. Yes, they were needed... keyword... NEEDED. Since they are no longer needed and African Americans do have equal rights, these organizations should be mandated to shut down.
And there is no gap between the different races other than those that are created by ourselves, such as the various hate groups that arise from time to time like the KKK and Black Panter party. Blacks share every equal right that whites do in America. And being treated fairly by the cops has nothing to do with it. Being related to a cop myself, I am aware that many officers approach African Americans more cautiously due to crimes rates around America. Unfortunately, African Americans account for over 63% of the crimes in America. I agree that the crime has its ties with poverty, but again that is nothing that one cannot change. Black people are not bound with chains in ghetto's. They have every opprotunity that anyone else does to get a job, go to college and live a healthy and productive upper class life.
Yes, isn't hilarious??? ITS TRUE and pathetic! I watched it happen NUMEROUS times in places I've worked over my lifetime. I had a friend who was an all around great guy with a great personality. I won't disclose where I was working. But the position was for a locomotive electrician. I told my boss about my friend and he was eager to give him an interview. My friend has a BA in electrical engineering and had worked for another locomotive company for 6 years before the company was forced to close due to financial reasons. Well my boss hooked him up with and interview. The interview went great and my boss offered him a job right then and there. My friend was to start working 4 days from then. THEN some damn government equal opprotunity agency stopped in the next day to do an investigation. They said that the company did not have enough minorities and that if we didn't hire 4 more than the company would be fined. And after 30 days after the fine, they didn't have enough minorities, then the company would be permanately shut down. Due to the happenings, they ended up hiring 2 ILLEGAL hispanics and 2 WAY underqualified black guys, thus leaving my friend who was more than qualified, left to find another job. He got to work on his first day and was told that they were unable to hire him at this time.
How are minorities getting shafted???? Do you have any idea how many educational grants and scholorships are out there JUST for being a certain race? I think its complete bullshit that anyone can get a grant or a scholorship just for being born a certain color.