quote: arguments in a idealistic dream world without enough contact to the real world.
You are correct in this point, there are not now and have never been any truly capitalist nations. When that argument is pushed far enough, it fails just as you point out. However, the US comes the closest to true capitalism, and I would say that this is the reason the US is the most successful of all the nations.
quote: So people starve because they've fallen and they can't get up? That would be funny if it wasn't tragically callous.
In the United States, I would guess that very very few starve. Of these few, I doubt that there are ANY AT ALL who have just gotten fired from their job, or who just can be productive enough. To starve in the United States, one has to try very hard. This does not apply to children. When children starve, it is the result of abusive parents, or some similar situation.
quote:But it was capitalism's finest hour.
I would tell you that the main cause of all those tragedies was government manipulation of the markets, not the system of capitalism.
As for the Robespierre thing, I would point out that the only thing we share is a name.
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
1) Do you believe that racism is a problem that impacts on the likelihood of employment in America today?
2) Do you believe that racism within the black community is more prevalent and more damaging than racism towards blacks from the white community?
3) Do you believe it is the fault of minority groups that they are generally economically disadvantaged in the US today (considering that all races are equal under law)?
I'm not trying to bait you with these questions, I'm just trying to clarify what you mean.
Posts: 2945 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I would tell you that the main cause of all those tragedies was government manipulation of the markets, not the system of capitalism.
As for the Robespierre thing, I would point out that the only thing we share is a name.
Fair enough about the name thing, though of course it was your choice to pick a notorious figure from history for a screen name.
You may have a point about the french revolution, there was certainly plenty of market manipulation by the Crown, the Nobility, and greedy traders.
The Potato Famine seems more cut-and-dried though. The crop failed. Prices rose dramatically. The government declined to support prices. People starved. Isn't that what laisssez-faire capitalists expect? Government indifference to suffering?
posted
I don't know whether to laugh or to cry or what.
That's an interesting site ya got there Danzig. Not that there's anything wrong with it....just an interesting topic for a website....
Posts: 463 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Leto, can you clarify something for me? You said “And I forgot to add to that: almost all of that prejudice is eminating from white communities outward, with residual effects on minority communities” I read this to mean almost all of the prejudice in America.
However, your next post deals with world-wide racism by whites. Did you mean that almost all prejudice in the world is emanating from white communities outward?
Dagonee
You did not read my whole post. I said that anyone who claims that the racism most prevalent today is not only perpetrated by whites, but is the product of hundreds of years of white (European or European-descent) racism. "Almost all" prejudice in America is white on non-white. To even attempt to portray otherwise, given the population and the vast majority of both criminal convictions (in that area) and case studies is to basically deny the plain facts that are sitting there for you to read.
Robes, Robes, Robes... it is becoming more and more apparent that you are an apologist for a racist America, and your only intent in this thread is to a) claim that since whites are not the only ones being racist, that all ethnicities are equally racist (using the ever-so-fallacious "Two Wrongs Make a Right argument as well as blatantly misrepresenting the actual presence of racism for each ethnicity) and b) trying to impose an ethnocentric point of view as if it were objective.
quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Apparently, you're not able to validate what I challenged you on in my last reply. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do I need to validate? I have made no claims about numbers.
Oh, yes you did. AND I quote:
quote:White people are the only faces among the world's richest? Alsaud, Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal is #6. And there are plenty of other non-white rich people in the world.
To which I asked you to list those top 50 "plenty." No reply.
quote:I would argue that the slavery perpetrated by whites is a drop in the bucket when compared to the overall amount of people in the entire world that have been slaves.
To which I replied: PROVE IT. You have, to date, not.
I, however, have shown multiple sources to quantify everything I said, which I would bet you have replied to without having read a single link (to which I expect the reply, "I read a couple!").
quote:Your citation of some un-sourced poll about perceived percentages of population of the races shows just that, what people perceive the % population of minorities to be. I disagree that this shows americans then think that minorities have it better than they actually do because of a greater physical presence.
SOURCE Note the study: National Opinion Research Center You have no right to claim unscrupulous sources, since you have provided little to none. All throughout the thread, you have made up numbers—which I have shown to be incorrect or misrepresented—or just plain ignored history and made stuff up. Read the link, since it paints the picture in a much different light than you would prefer to paint it with your skewed glasses on. Particularly, read the part about how the vast majority of those polled feel that blacks are the laziest ethnic group (and that all non-whites are viewed as lazier than whites).
quote:As far as your cited studies about hiring practices, how do they apply to what I have said about the morality of applying laws based on skin color?
You are proposing that blacks have no problems, or are creating their own problems. Obviously, that is not so.
quote:I say that the studies you cited found racism. However, as pointed out before, these instances do not represent the entire work place, or even a majority.
The study you quoted was a smaller study that was narrowed down to about nine places. As I said, multiple other studies pretty much corroborate those results, the most popular of which I linked (the Washington Post study). Just because I do not list for you all of the multiple studies done on the issue does not mean they do not exist. In fact, many of them are general knowledge, both with minority rights and womens rights. Check out the ACLU's site for a listing, if you wish. I've supported my statements with a crapload more in one post than you have the entire thread. If you want to start tossing out attempts to discredit through no sources linked, then nothing you have said thus far means a damn thing.
quote:When you cite the voting records of certain states and claim that those states are racist, you make many assumptions.
When you put words into my mouth, it shows that you have poor critical thinking skills, and cannot debate anything without creating straw men. I said that there were, even in this modern day, a great deal of racist people taking part in government. Every post you have made has been to the effect of, "yeah, there is racism, but it's not anywhere important." No, you did not say those precise words, but you may as well have.
quote:While I would assume that most of those voting to keep the anti-integration policy were white, we do not know the #'s. What % of those that voted in the 1/3 were black or other?
More ignorance. In the early 1900's, voting was made private for a reason. Polls could be taken outside the voting areas to gauge what specific people voted, but these were not done or are not cited in the link. That you even try to claim that this makes the implication that a third of the voting public of a state voted to keep a racist legislation any less bad is astounding.
However, let me fill you in on some more information about voting (while simultaneously addressing Jacare's dodge): while it's very commendable of jacare to bring up the abundance of pork that comes up in modern legislature, pork comes up almost exclusively in creating legislature, not taking legislature away. While the Constitution itself requires at the least more than three-fourths of the states (through Congress) to repeal legislature, states have far more leeway, and can remove legislature with a majority. With changed made to state-level existing legislature of this kind—meaning legislature that has been made obsolete by federal law—the ticket on the ballot is usually solely to do with the legislation being removed. What jacare is referring to is when legislation is changed in terms of economic issues and amendments. However, to dispel doubt: Oregon ballot. Alabama ballot (click the act number in parenthases to get the actual text of that issue). Interestingly enough, the Kentucky ballot included a measure to introduce a poll tax, which in and of itself is pretty much racist in nature. Gee... that kinda makes Kentucky look even worse when it comes to racism, jacare!
quote:I would also point out that even if we assume this vote shows racism, it shows that 2/3 of the state is not racist.
I would like to point out yet again that I wasn't saying that Kentucky (or any of the other states) were majority racist. I was showing that with just the three states I pointed out, almost a million voters voted in favor of outright racist legislation. Even if the number was whittled down to a quarter or a fifth for each state and counted across all fifty, the incredible amount of open racism is staggering. However, I was pointing out the incredibly high numbers in these well-known cases, and showing that your claims that racism not being a very big problem are very much false and apologetic towards a presently racism system.
quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Even on a law that had no more power, almost 40% of the people voted against allowing mixed marriages. In 1998. Astounding.
Again, how many of those voting to keep the ban were white?
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In view of the fact that blacks make up more than 20 percent of the voting age population in the state, and in all likelihood voted almost unanimously to remove the ban, as part of the Alabama constitution. In fact, the referendum to remove the ban was voted down by a majority of voters in 24 of Alabama's 67 counties. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Was the study unable to obtain data on the racial makeup of the voters in Alabama? Why do they say "it is probable that a majority of the white voters in the state wished to keep the ban on interracial marriage" without actually providing any #'s? They may well be right, but if the #'s support them, why not show the #'s?
More attempts to discredit through ignorance. You're not even debunking what I said, just creating a question that you do not want answered. You are more than willing to believe that if even three percent of those total votes were black, that it would somehow justify the 97 percent that were white somehow (arbitrary numbers, but a ballpark figure from numbers given for actual population statistics to registered voters by ethnicity). Completely ludicrous. You're willing to accept that a small number of blacks allowing racism as if it meant the majority of blacks, yet when constant and a wide variety of proof is given for actual prevalence of white racism, you are trying to downplay it as if it's not so bad. Do you even realize how apologist you are sounding?
quote:The idea that any group could be under-represented in a democratic government is not logical. Everyone's vote counts as ONE vote. What is the mechanism for this oppression? Should minorities be given more votes in order to "balance" this system?
Your "point" about democratic votes counting as one vote will be applicable the day America is a literal democracy. As it stands, America is—and has always been—a representative democracy. And by representation, this means that groups of people are represented in our branches by elected officials who make decisions to benefit the groups they represent. Blacks make up roughly a bit more than a tenth of the United States. Blacks do not have a tenth of representation within the whole of government, and arguably in a few areas (like the Supreme Court).
quote:As I pointed out earlier, minorities actually get much more political say than most other groups.
PROVE IT. Don't you dare try to argue against my post by attacking source and then failing to cite your own is complete and utter bull-crap on your part, and representative of how weak and fallacious your stance truly is. You have cited nothing to back that claim up. Prove how minorities have more political say than whites.
quote:When politicians are able to tailor their messages to certain blocks of voters, they do so. Minorities are greedily fought over by both parties.
Once again, prove it. Read any federal government textbook, and it will clearly point out that smaller groups like individual minority groups are not heavily campaigned to except in city and county elections, or only through media in larger ones. You not only have me to prove wrong, but you have a number of textbooks to prove wrong.
quote:While the democrats typically get most of the black vote(95% for Gore in 2000), both they and the Republicans will pander to the black vote endlessly. Republicans will go out of their way to show minority participation in their party, and democrats will put forth laws that benefit blacks.
Name some laws to specifically benefit blacks (try to not use AA for once). Republicans going out of their way to show support from minorities comes off like waving the "token black guy" in a crowd of over 90% middle-aged white men. The Democratic conventions are only slightly better (and in some cases, not at all).
quote:Here is an interesting article by Walter Williams on the topic of political power for minorities.
Which does not mention how much political power they hold, and is basically a short argument that political power does not equate to economic power. His argument is not as much racially driven as it is economically driven, and he's using a generalized case of ethnicity as a qualifier to show how poliutical power does not equate to economic power. Whatever point you hoped to make by linking this was fruitless, because he states it pretty clearly a few times that what I just said was his point.
quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dislike me all you wish; pre-judge me to whatever extreme your heart desires. Disregard the plain truth, however, and you're only hurting yourself.
The "plain truth" as you put it, is not so plain. You offer no solution and not even a hint of what the actual problem is.
You're not even willing to acknowledge the problem, so your accusation about a solution is rather ridiculous. As far as you are concerned, there is no problem. Actually, you are saying that the problem is that of the blacks.
quote:I have stated many times that I believe the problems you point out can be solved by applying a large dose of capitalism.
This is as stupid a statement as those who would like to fool themselves into thinking socialism will solve all of the world's ills. You need to stop trying to apply economic systems as a way to fix social problems, or else you are never going to seem like you are "getting" the point. That you even attempt to apply an economic system to a social problem shows that you have not thought the issue out, and are now just spouting ideological rhetoric.
quote:People who prosper together, will get along.
Examples? Of course not—more ideological rhetoric without basis in fact.
quote:When Blacks are told by the gov. that they are not smart enough to get into a university without help, they will eventually believe it.
Um, blacks have been told this by everyone for the last half century. As I showed up above in the survey about people's attitudes towards different ethnicities, it is still a popular thought today. Government programs haven't magically brought this to bear. It's been around for centuries. And if you are so naive that you really feel how "smart" you are is what gets you admittance into a college, then it's really not worth debating with you any longer, because you obviously have no clue about the requirements colleges have for admittance (of which academic scores are only part of).
quote:When whites are told that they do not deserve a spot in a university becuase a minority is less qualified but under-represented, they will resent this.
I keep hearing this. I am going to state my reply in boldface, so it is easier for you to read: where are the mass examples of whites being turned down in lieu of non-whites? I keep hearing this mentioned, but never cited. It sounds more to me like a scaled-down version of the "they're out to get us" claims made on many openly racist sites and literature throughout the nation and world (and history).
quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And I forgot to add to that: almost all of that prejudice is eminating from white communities outward, with residual effects on minority communities. To even attempt to paint it any other way is ludicrous and indicative of a painfully ignorant and naive view.
Those who oppose racial equality seem to enjoy blaming one particular race for ALL RACISM.
Your two errors here:
I did not equate white racism as all racism. That you continually try to misinterpret that as such shows a very flawed thinking on your part, and an unwillingness to honest evaluate the ethical infractions of the ethnicity you belong to. In short—ethnocentrism at its finest (and a very small leap to outright racism).
I do not oppose racial equality, despite your constant saying so. In fact, I have repeatedly pointed out why your arguments are opposing racial equality.
quote:I have not suggested that all racism is a result of black behaviour, and I would say neither has anyone else on this thread.
You have, and Storm Saxon has from the very first post. In fact, the whole of what you say boils down to, "yeah, there is still racism, but nowadays the racism is mostly on the side of the blacks, and they should fix that."
quote:The point originally made was that blacks who identify themselves primarily as blacks, and not americans, are doing plenty to seperate themselves from others based on race.
Then by that logic, one should not identify themselves from any heritage, nor even national association. In fact, why have borders? Acknowledging our diversity is not separatist. Being separatist is when one uses a specific qualifier to physically, economically, or socially separate themselves from the rest of society. The Nation of Islam is a prime example of this, as is a large part of the Libertarian Party platform (however, in a different manner, and for different reasons). Acknowledging and accepting our diversity is the only way people can learn to not let differences that ethnicities have become a barrier for equal and pro-social relations. Everything you have argued supports an inequality of state and the demand that diversity not be embraced (and instead ignored). If something is ignored, it does not go away.
quote:This does not equate to "all racism is the fault of blacks" You seem to be claiming that prejudice is only a "white problem". Is this your claim?
I never said racism is a white problem only. I did, however, say that racism in America is a problem not only originating from whites, but propagated by a white-biased system.
quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Robespierre is under the misguided assumption that since the Emancipation Proclamation, there has been no government-sponsored racism. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do you intentionally ignore what I have said about this, then state the contrary? I have not yet mentioned the Emancipation Proclamation. Nor have I claimed that state sponsored racism doesn't exist in the world. I have said just the opposite. I have said the US gov's program of Afirmative Action is indeed a state sponsered program of racism.
I have not advocated Affirmative Action once. I have not advocated Affirmative Action at all. In case you didn't read, I have not advocated Affirmative Action. Now stop trying to use that when debating me. What you have not properly debated with me is that the current government and economic system is biased towards whites. In fact, you claim otherwise without any basis in fact.
quote:As per your comments on the prevelance of white owned slaves in the history of the world, where are your #'s? How many slaves have there been since the beginning of time, and how many were owned by whites?
Yet another glaring fallacy. Racism does not equal slavery, which is my point. Racism and racist actions have been taken more by European nations throughout history than most of the rest of the world, and like I said, up until the 1990s, many of those white European systems were still in place. And you have no right to challeng my "#'s" [sic], since you can't provide your own. In fact, I was the first to challenge you on your statement to the contrary, and you have yet to quantify the results. However, allow me to give you a partial list of nations Europe has over-run and used for slave labor or ruled through racism throughout history: Morocco, Algeria, Syria, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar (Burma), the Philippines, Australia, not to mention all the way up the Ivory Coast, including South Africa. By all means, Robespierre, please inform everyone of some other general ethnicity other than caucasians who were so thorough in their colonial racism.
quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And it's nice that your last statement is that you win if whites haven't enslaved more people than the rest of the planet combined.
No, I am saying that Leto's statements about the genetic evil of white people are way out of line, and that he must prove that slavery is something that only white's have participated in, or even done the majority of slave holding.
I've not once said that there was a "genetic evil of white people." Once again, you are trying to validate your argument by creating arguments your opponent never made. That is a Straw Man, and if you continue with it, you are not going to be worth debating, because you are admitting defeat by making up your own arguments.
quote:And I forgot to add to that: almost all of that prejudice is eminating from white communities outward, with residual effects on minority communities. To even attempt to paint it any other way is ludicrous and indicative of a painfully ignorant and naive view.
Here Leto points out that he believes almost all prejudice in America to be coming from white people.
No, I believe that almost all prejudice eminates from white communities outward, with residual effects on minority communities. Note the word "almost" as well as the generalities to "communities" instead of saying "everyone." You are really terrible at understanding the English language if you got what you got from that statement.
quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sorry to break it to all the American white kids out there who believe that "colorblind" is the way to go—and I'm willing to place money on the fact that everyone who has posted that stance here is white as the driven snow
How convenient coming from a white guy.
You seem perfectly happy in the present racist-based system. That doesn't surprise me, as you're probably white.
Leto has made it clear that he puts all white people in one catagory.
Nope, just apologists like you who are happy to live in an ethnocentric world.
quote:Leto is the person here who is making judgements about people based on their race. Leto is the one dismissing arguments because of his perception of the race of those making the arguments.
You forgot "and Leto is the only one who has taken every point I have tried to make, ripped it to shreds, and shown factual basis for every bit of contention." If I was dismissing you, Robespierre, I would be doing like Storm Saxon has been doing to me, and not replying. I even pointed out the prejudice SS is displaying by this behavior, but he is content to live in hypocrisy... so be it. I, however, have responded in spades to you, despite your straw man attacks, your blatant trolling for a flame war, and your habit of making up history. Like I said, the only judgement I have made is about apologists like you. And yet you keep your apologetics up and act like I'm attacking anyone who is white. It's not a coincidence that many people who are white have posted here as not only not felt attacked by my posts, but actually agree. You should perhaps put some thought into that, and whether or not you are actually judging from an ethnocentric viewpoint. I don't actually expect you to, but the offer should be made available, even to the most unrepentant of apologists.
quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would it really be equal opportunity if one group did not, by and large, have the financial wherewithal to prepare themselves as well as another group, and also did not have the social power to have much hope of ever getting such a financial position? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would say that yes, it would be equal opportunity. Equal opportunity implies that laws apply equally to all people.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is why an economist will never run the country.
"Laws apply equally" and "equal opportunity" are mutually exclusive, first off. Second off, money will not solve the issues of social perception. Third, throughout history, different nations sharing prosperity have eventually fallen victim to the nasty bug of greed. France and England are the most popular example of this, though Spain qualifies as well. If prosperity brought peace, quite a few wars fought between these nations would not have happened.
Tresopax:
quote:e stories from various workplaces are anecdotal. It would be easy enough to find similar accounts of whites being mistreated because of their skin color, but a few cases of something happening does not imply a widespread problem.
FIND SOME. And just because I only gave two links on the matter, don't fool yourself into thinking those are the only two. Those are the only two I keep bookmarked on my computer. If you really think those results are not indicative of a larger representation, as I said already, go to the ACLU website or search on your own. Ask Kayla if she would help. You will find that instances where blacks or hispanics are discriminated or actively mistreated outweighs the handful of incidents you may possibly find of whites. I can't even believe you tried to claim that they were similar in number.
quote:Actually, I believe minorities are more likely to be racist than whites - mainly because they're kinda allowed to.
Tres, that is actually infuriating. If you cannot prove such an utter and outright lie, then I suggest you remove such rubbish from the post. I find it hard to believe you actually feel that.
"Chocodile" (and I find it hard to believe that you are either a new memeber or not an associate of a certain other member):
quote:I've read through most of the forum, and am a little shocked at the negative response to Robespierre's comments.
Not once did I hear Robespierre make a racist statement, and yet Leto tries to invalidate questions or statements he makes based on race.
I would have to dissect the arguments more to find out why, but the shifts in focus are interesting.
Why don't you get back to us when you read everything? You go on in your post to accuse me of racism without proof, yet you accuse me of not showing Robespierre's racism. I show how the attitudes Robespierre is expressing are racist or racist-apologetic by nature in more than one post, yet you disregard that.
Posting under assumed names is neither effective nor worth bothering with.
Little nitpick for Morbo:
quote:Sorry if this is a little off-topic. I'd also like to say that though I disagree with many of Robespierre's views, I do admire your debating skills. Your refutation of LetoII's long stat-filled post was surprisingly good.
Considering a great deal of my reply to his rebuttal was "that's not what I said" due to his creating arguments I never made in order to attempt to rebut, I would say he did a piss-poor job in everything but length.
Posts: 6907 | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: I even pointed out the prejudice SS is displaying by this behavior, but he is content to live in hypocrisy... so be it.
How generous of you!
quote: It's not a coincidence that many people who are white have posted here as not only not felt attacked by my posts, but actually agree. You should perhaps put some thought into that, and whether or not you are actually judging from an ethnocentric viewpoint. I don't actually expect you to, but the offer should be made available, even to the most unrepentant of apologists.
Your tactic of getting more and more angry doesn't seem to be working, it doesn't make you any more insightful or any more correct. As for your issues with storm saxon, I could care less. Please stop bringing it up, its your problem, you deal with it.
quote: Laws apply equally" and "equal opportunity" are mutually exclusive
Your statement here is clearly false.
quote: Note the word "almost" as well as the generalities to "communities" instead of saying "everyone."
Yeah, I NOTED that, it gives your racism a nice happy shiney outer-casing.
quote: then it's really not worth debating with you any longer,
I am almost certain that you are correct here.
quote: Don't you dare try to argue against my post by attacking source and then failing to cite your own is complete and utter bull-crap on your part, and representative of how weak and fallacious your stance truly is. You have cited nothing to back that claim up. Prove how minorities have more political say than whites.
I am speaking about my OPINION on racism. You seem to think the issue can be proven correct one way or the other by your rampant googling. None of these things can be objectively proven, you know this. And when you post something so specific as a poll, you may expect people to wonder where the poll came from.
What is the point behind all your foaming seething rage? Are you trying to say anything at all, or are you just attemping to cloud people's minds? Are you sitting there with your rhetoric book, just waiting for the next opportunity to pretend like you understand logic and logical fallacies? You have totally and completely mis-understood almost every logical fallacy you have attempted to accuse me of. Did you just finish an intro philosophy class or what?
What exactly is it that you are trying to say? Do you think its possible to *not* be racist when being black defines one's self?
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Until you can PROVE anything you say, I am no longer going to continue going back and forth with you. You keep intentionally misquoting me or making up something I didn't even say (or adding meaning that wasn't there). You are convinced and happy to be apologetic to your ethnocentric views. Since you cannot look outside your own viewpoint, you cannot fathom what so many people here have been saying repeatedly, and instead reply with more and more useless and baseless rhetoric. It's tiresome and pointless.
Until you can actually rebut something I say, I really have nothing more to say to you.
Posts: 6907 | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and everyone note: he's accusing me of being angry and seething, yet I'm the one methodically putting together information (which is not googled, save for the state ballots). Also note that he has gone from claiming everything he says is totally true to claiming opinion. I gave facts, I gave sources for facts, and I backed up every summary I gave. You, on the other hand, have not.
And as for the "intro to psyche" nonsense... kid, I've more than likely got ten years of experience on you. You're the one who is calling everything from a college perspective. Maybe when you get out in the real world, you'll learn how your OPINION is not all it's cracked up to be. However, unless you can substantiate any of your ridiculous OPINIONs, there's really nothing more to say.
Posts: 6907 | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Leto II said: You did not read my whole post. I said that anyone who claims that the racism most prevalent today is not only perpetrated by whites, but is the product of hundreds of years of white (European or European-descent) racism. "Almost all" prejudice in America is white on non-white. To even attempt to portray otherwise, given the population and the vast majority of both criminal convictions (in that area) and case studies is to basically deny the plain facts that are sitting there for you to read.
I did too read your whole post. The first one in question here made the point you state above: that most racism in America is white on non-white. I agree with you here, if for no other reason that the numbers and relative economic power make it so.
However, in the very next post, you talk about world-wide racism and make the claim that the most prevalent in the world is caused by those of European dissent. Except you didn’t explicitly say so in that post, so I asked for clarification.
Now that you’ve given it, I can say you’re full of it. Recent victims of genocide perpetrated by non-whites: 800,000 in Rawanda, 1,700,000 in Cambodia, 200,000 in East Timor, 100,000 Kurds in Iraq in just one year. These are non-combatant deaths perpetrated for ethnic/racial reasons in the last 30 years.
These are just examples; I’m aware of European- and American- crimes of a similar nature, especially those going back farther. My point is not to say one race is better or worse than another, but to say that human beings are flawed. One of the most consistent crimes committed by most of humanity has been the treating of other groups as subhuman, whether by killing or enslaving them.
The worst effects of racism are mostly perpetrated by the dominant race in each culture and mostly felt by the minorities within that culture. In America, that means whites commit most of it. In areas of the world where whites are not the majority (i.e., most of it), others commit most of it.
As you said, “To even attempt to portray otherwise, given the population and the vast majority of both criminal convictions (in that area) and case studies is to basically deny the plain facts that are sitting there for you to read.”
quote: I am no longer going to continue going back and forth with you.
This is a good idea.
However, I will continue to refute your posts.
quote: You keep intentionally misquoting me
Do I? Where have I posted an inaccurate quote of something you posted?
quote: You are convinced and happy to be apologetic to your ethnocentric views.
This is the best defense you have been able to muster. Name calling. Before I was just a white guy, now I am ethnocentric.
quote: you cannot fathom what so many people here have been saying repeatedly
Yeah, what exactly have you been saying? I certainly don't claim to know what you're talking about.
quote:and instead reply with more and more useless and baseless rhetoric. It's tiresome and pointless.
Check out your last long winded reply, the one with all the mock rhetoric. That is a serious chunk of nothing. You made some points about issues previously discussed. I pointed this out and refuted your racism. I am not going to address the same points with you 5 or 6 times. Decide what it is that you are saying, and make that point. Tell me what you think about the issue.
quote:Oh, and everyone note: he's accusing me of being angry and seething,
This is correct, I am.
quote:yet I'm the one methodically putting together information (which is not googled, save for the state ballots).
All your vaunted information is meaningless! I pointed this out in my rebuttal to your initial tirade. What is it that you have shown with your information? Have you shown that I am wrong? Is my opinion that people should never be judged by their skin color, wrong?
quote: Also note that he has gone from claiming everything he says is totally true to claiming opinion.
[sarcasm] I claim that everything I say is TRUE! [/sarcasm] Come on man, what is this? When have I claimed that what I am saying is objective fact? This thread is about opinions.
quote: I gave facts, I gave sources for facts, and I backed up every summary I gave.
Yes yes, you have all sorts of facts, and they add up to nothing.
quote: Maybe when you get out in the real world, you'll learn how your OPINION is not all it's cracked up to be.
You're right, maybe when I finish my swim in the sea of white priviledge, I will towel myself off with my white priviledge towel and drive to my white priviledge home and enjoy some tasty white priviledge steaks. Maybe when I am done there, I will return to the real world, who knows?
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
If being black defines who someone is, is it possible to *not* be racist?
I would say it is not probable in our society today for someone who defines themselves primarily as black to not be a racist. Their labelling of themselves as black may be a reaction to historical injustice, but it is none-the-less a devisive way to see the world. What do you think?
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: claim that since whites are not the only ones being racist, that all ethnicities are equally racist (using the ever-so-fallacious "Two Wrongs Make a Right argument as well as blatantly misrepresenting the actual presence of racism for each ethnicity)
What unit of measure does on use to quantify racism so that you may make claims about its relative equality or lack there of in any culture over another?
Perhaps we should create an objective way of measuring racism right now. I will name the unit Leto. Each prejudicial comment, each dismissal of someone's opinion based on race, and each broad generalization will equal one metric Leto.
I don't claim to have a perfect Leto Meter just yet, but give me time. But from my observations, you are somewhere in the 10-20 Leto range. This is not too bad for a lifetime, but a pretty bad record for one thread. Perhaps if you can find a way to reduce your emitted Letos by even one half, your arguments will seem much more reasonable.
1 Leto = 2 cubic Tablespoons of rage
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
You're obviously really passionate about this, and have somehow forgotten the liklihood that Storm Saxton and Robespierre have had a different experience with racism than you have. I have a few suggestions.
If your goal is to pursuade people to shed ethnocentric or racist views, I don't see it happening. Calling them "a typical white guy," then throwing up your hands because they are content to live in hypocrisy seems a little short sighted to me. Who is your audience here?
So far Leto, it seems to me like your goal, the only thing that would make you happy right now, is to shame storm saxton and robespierre for being obviously racist white guys. This doesn't help me find the answers to the question this thread asks.
Sopwiths point earlier:
quote: ...it's not all black and white, figuratively or literally. Racism can be regionalized by exposure and can run in many different directions.
Maybe racism is always relative to the people involved.
My brain is so smeared by these wonderful rage-fests that I can't even think to define "a racist" now.
Posts: 45 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
One long-standing problem I've had with this debate, and one that goes back to the original question of the thread, is the assignment of racism to one group.
Racism begins, in its deepest foundations, as a matter of saying "I am of this group, a group that outshines any other group." Such a standing is not beholding to one ethnic group or another, it is found within all of them. Once a person identifies themself first and foremost as a member of a specific ethnic group, the seeds for racism have been sewn.
Leto's assertion that whites hold the bragging rights to racism is, strangely enough, a racist effort in its own rights. It states, pretty much, we are the kings of this little cesspit and everyone else's attempts at it pale in comparison.
In America, today, whites tend to take that view and the guilt and pride that goes along with it. If you're going to be a villain, be a big one, I guess you could say. Sadly, it's not the case in the real world.
Racism is a stance bred from both the individual and the segment of society they are brought up in. Be you black, white, Hispanic, Asian or whatever, you always have within your power the ability to selectively shift your perspective of another person. There is no membership card needed, there is no class that has to be taken. You simply believe in it and then externalize it.
As Dagonee pointed out, there are huge examples of racism outside of America in our world that do not follow the White vs. Black ethnocentric view that are held by American whites.
I'd add to his list the Turkish attempt at genocide of the Armenians, the Serbs work against the Muslims of Bosnia and Kosovo, the Japanese atrocities against the Chinese and Koreans, the Vietnamese and Camobodian assaults on the Montagnards. How about the Hutus and Tutsis? Perhaps the Zimbabweian government against the white citizens of their lands? The Hindi versus the Naga? The persecutions of the Mestizos in Central America? The Canadian persecution of the Matee (sp?). The list literally goes on and on.
It is simply a problem of groups versus groups, and whites do not have the corner on the market as some would have you believe. Don't think I am downplaying this at all. Racism is a horrible scourge on mankind, all of mankind. Groups prosecute it and individuals suffer; sometimes individuals prosecute it and groups suffer.
But never think that your own brand of homegrown evil is necessarily the biggest and baddest. Perhaps it is closest to your heart and life, but somewhere out there, there is true evil, not waiting to happen, but happening day in and day out, in ways you could never discover in your worst nightmares.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love Sopwith's argument. It's like those people who claim that global warming theorists are egotistical. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
As in the "It's not all America's fault" camp? Well, that's true, but for a solution, we've got to address our own problems. But hey, that's a wholly different debate.
quote: Racism is a stance bred from both the individual and the segment of society they are brought up in. Be you black, white, Hispanic, Asian or whatever, you always have within your power the ability to selectively shift your perspective of another person. There is no membership card needed, there is no class that has to be taken. You simply believe in it and then externalize it.
This is a brilliant statement. It takes us back to the original topic in a good way. There is no way to attribute blame for racism to any one group. The very concept itself is racist. Racism, as you point out, is a very personal thing. To be sure, it IS very strongly effected by economics and even proximity. But all these are merely factors which may contribute to racism, not the root cause of it.
quote: I love Sopwith's argument. It's like those people who claim that global warming theorists are egotistical.
Tom, what would you say is the root cause of racism in an individual? Is the individual ever responsible for his or her own thoughts?
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Robespierre, that's really what it comes down to, for you: the belief that, since every individual is ultimately responsible for his own actions, the government should not be attempting to legislate behavior. *shrug*
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, I didn't ask you what I thought. I already know what I think and why. What do you think should be done, what do you think is the root cause?
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe global warming theorist are egotistical. *cough*
Sopwith made some good points even though I think he got a little carried away. Personally, I don't think there's true evil out there waiting to happen...
Lets think about the individual to whom the question of this thread applies. Warning: hypothetical scenario!
He has learned to tolerate other races, and he has learned that judging people by their race is wrong. But he has also learned that his own race (black, white, jewish) defines who he is.
I think the root of the problem is in there someplace. Is it even possible to have both ideologies? Do they contradict or what?
Posts: 45 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Before it goes further, I would like to say, in our country's struggle with racism, I DO believe that it is in our best interests to legislate penalties for racist actions in the areas of housing, economic opportunity, health care, etc.
If that's legislating our thoughts, then so be it. I believe, however, that it is legislation of our actions and that is a necessity.
We have no way to set back the clock and get a big Do-Over. We can only set the groundwork for a fair playing field today, hope for the best and penalize those who would do their worst.
That being said, there is no guarantee of financial success to anyone in this world, no matter what some would have you believe. I'm not going to side with Robes on this because I don't believe in his hands-off approach. I won't side with Leto either for his assignment of blame actually lends nothing to a solution.
Both look at economics, but disregard much of what it means to be human and humane. Ivory towers of different designs, but ivory towers just the same.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I doubt legislating thoughts is possible. Actions are the result of thoughts, but your actions speak who you are anyway. "You are who you successfully pretend to be." You could be a racist individual, and try to cover up for it by being overly nice and helpful to minorities. Until your words or actions become racist, there's really nothing to punish. This idea of 'punishing the crime before it's been committed' is by in large why Phil k. Dick's story "the Minority Report" is important.
A big source of the heated rages in this thread is the confusion between reactionary responses against white guilt, and white racism responses to minorities.
posted
Chocodile, I hate backed up every claim with empirical data. Robespierre has not. In fact, pretty much every post of his on this last page has been nothing but personal pot-shots trying to discredit... well, discredit thin air. I don't buy your "you have had different experiences" as some kind of justification for Robespierre being a apologist for a racist system (that we live in today). Robespierre has admitted to working solely from opinion. I have shown where I am working from fact. It's Robes' right to feel however hw wishes, but it's equally my right to point out how incorrect and apologist his opinions are. I don't expect them to change, because he's fought tooth and nail to keep them, even in the face of fact (which he denies but cannot accurately debunk). I suggest that if you can do nothing but try to play arbitter between Robespierre and myself, Chocodile, that you just stay out of the conversation.
Robespierre:
quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maybe when you get out in the real world, you'll learn how your OPINION is not all it's cracked up to be. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right, maybe when I finish my swim in the sea of white priviledge, I will towel myself off with my white priviledge towel and drive to my white priviledge home and enjoy some tasty white priviledge steaks. Maybe when I am done there, I will return to the real world, who knows?
Nice try to twist it. When you get out of college in four years, and finally enter a world that is not primarily viewed as an ideological hypothetical, you will see that the application to the hypothetical world you have come to know and love does not work the same as the real world. Some of this you will learn while in school. Some of this—like your attitude of capitalism as a panacea—are just going to take time and experience, instead of hypothetical and book-work experience.
But go ahead and try to twist this post around, too, while still having not really debunked anything I said earlier or offered any substantiating evidence to your own "opinions."
Posts: 6907 | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stay out of the conversation? This is a Forum Thread, you are debating OFF TOPIC, and I'm a little annoyed. If you are having a Private conversation, get his ICQ#. I defended him because I don't like the idea that brining up ideas can get you attacked based on being "a typical white guy."
Robespierre brought up some ideologies.
Maybe you are giving Robespierre too much power over you.
quote:Leto's assertion that whites hold the bragging rights to racism is, strangely enough, a racist effort in its own rights. It states, pretty much, we are the kings of this little cesspit and everyone else's attempts at it pale in comparison.
Are you saying that you don't believe that the vast majority of racism in America is perpetrated by whites on non-whites?
Are you saying that you don't believe that America's social system is biased towards whites?
Are you seriously saying that racist ideas which permeate even to today are not the result of white racism?
Because you see, Sopwith, that's what I've been saying. I have never said that all whites are racist, yet this seems to repeatedly come up as if I had. What I have said is that many of the white posters in this thread have ethnocentric views, and stated that it is evident. I have also said that much of the nation still operates on an ethnocentric view, and supported that with sources.
In terms of being "kings of this little cesspit" of racism: you may not like to think of it that way, Sopwith, but white on non-white discrimination and racism is by far more prevalent than any other. In fact number two to white on non-white discrimination is gender prejudice, then religious discrimination, then non-white on white. Don't believe me, Sopwith? You don't have to take my word for it—look it up yourself.
Posts: 6907 | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Robespierre, if you continue trolling like that, don't expect me to answer you at all in this thread any more. I clarified the point of something off-topic out to you. You have yet to adequately respond to anything else, and have now stooped to trolling instead of actually talking about the subject.
Posts: 6907 | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just a quick clarification: I hope no one interprets my previous post as an attempt to minimize America’s racial crimes because other people do it, too.
My point is merely that if racism as treated as a peculiarly “white” problem, then it will not be treated as a problem that is part of the human condition. This will doom to failure any effort to reduce racism’s effects on the world.
Of course, the racism of whites against minorities leads to the greatest amount of oppression in America. The presence of racism amongst minority groups should condemned where it occurs, but it is clearly not where we need to focus our proactive efforts at remediation.
Part of the problem now is caused by the fact that overt racism has been largely pushed to the margins of society. Those whites who are genuinely not consciously racist do not consider racists to be part of their group, so they do not view it as “their” problem. This leads people of good intent believe two things:
1) “Racism is perpetrated by ‘others,’ so it’s not my responsibility to stop it.”
2) “I’m not in the Klan, I don’t discriminate in hiring, renting, or any other aspect of my commercial or private life, so I’m not racist.”
The civil rights movement was successful because it brought home the reality of racism in the South to those people of good intent who had previously maintained their neutrality through ignorance. It forced people to choose sides.
Most people, I believe, will condemn a particular anecdote of overt racist behavior. Witness the reaction to Denny’s treatment of the black Secret Service agents.
The problem arises when the harm is discovered via aggregate analysis. “Blacks are twice as likely to be denied a loan” or “Blacks earn XX% less than similarly educated whites” may be true statements, but there’s no individual victim for someone reading these statistics to empathize with. Hence, any call for action based on such facts falls flat compared to a call for action coming from video of the dogs and fire hoses in Selma.
What’s the solution? I don’t know. But no solution will work until we realize there are two problems: First, the continued tendency of people to treat members of other racial/ethnic groups poorly, and, second, the social and economic harm that is the legacy of racism in America.
Solving the first requires the recognition that the tendency toward racism is universal to humanity and that moral improvement cannot be coerced. This suggests the same type of solution for minimizing all racism throughout the world. This is also the only way we can prevent the second type of problems from recurring again and again.
The second problem requires acknowledging America’s particular history of racism and the effects thereof, and thus a solution to these problems will be unique to America.
I don’t know how to solve either problem. But the lack of a concrete solution shouldn’t keep us from acknowledging the problem.
posted
Tell you what, Robespierre. I'll save you some trouble and not write at all, and you can make up my arguments and posts for me. I'm just looking to cut out the middle-man, so to speak.
Then you can, y'know, write me as actually saying I favor Affirmative Action in the present day and age. That way when, among other things, when you constantly tell me I believe that, it'll be true.
You love speaking as though it's fact...until someone pops up and gives you hard numbers. Then, when the numbers are proven reasonably valid, it's, "But I'm only speaking my OPINION on racism."
quote: so they do not view it as “their” problem. This leads people of good intent believe two things:
1) “Racism is perpetrated by ‘others,’ so it’s not my responsibility to stop it.”
2) “I’m not in the Klan, I don’t discriminate in hiring, renting, or any other aspect of my commercial or private life, so I’m not racist.”
The civil rights movement was successful because it brought home the reality of racism in the South to those people of good intent who had previously maintained their neutrality through ignorance. It forced people to choose sides.
This is true. However, there are more than two groups. I do not believe it is not my responsibility to stop it, or that there is nothing I can do. Where do I draw the line between solving other pressing problems in my life and preventing racism?
Legally, both of these groups are fine. The state cannot police thoughts. So I suppose, as individuals, we need to display the appropriate response when we witness racism in our lives.
Posts: 45 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Witness the reaction to Denny’s treatment of the black Secret Service agents.
Actually, I always thought this was a pretty poor example. I mean, they went into Denny's and got no service?! Hello! That happens to everyone at Denny's!
Two quick things. First, I should have qualified my statement more and said something like “This has a tendency to lead some people of good intent believe two things.”
Second, I meant to attribute both those thoughts to the same group of people. I view both thoughts as understandable but misguided reactions to the current racial situation today, and I think their prevalence is what leads to some of the strong reactions to accusations of widespread racism in America. The group is made up of basically good people who have an incorrect, not malicious, view of race relations. This does not make that view any less harmful.
And no, I don’t mean people should spend every moment fighting racism. There’s lots of other bad things going on in the world that need attention, too, not to mention our own personal responsibilities.
quote:Megachirops said: Actually, I always thought this was a pretty poor example. I mean, they went into Denny's and got no service?! Hello! That happens to everyone at Denny's!
Too true. When I was in high school, I hung out with the theater crowd. We would regularly go to Denny’s after a late-night movie, get a table, and wait while we watched 5 or 6 groups that came in after us get served meals before we got drinks.
But where the hell else were we gonna go at 2:30 in the morning?
In the Secret Service case, their (white) colleagues were served immediately, even though they got tables at the same time.
Of course, there’s a whole ‘nother thread to be had about why the black Secret Service agents were sitting at a separate table.
quote: Are you seriously saying that racist ideas which permeate even to today are not the result of white racism?
This question is extremely loaded, and doesn't really say anything. Leto, I think you have a talent for trying to get under peoples collars.
Posts: 45 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Choc, you've hit on the theme of Leto. He's been the off and on again schoolyard bully of Hatrack for some time. Sooner or later, he lays into someone.
Been there, done that. His tactics are bombard with statistics, wheedle and needle for reaction, pick a specific target to beat down and berate, and generally fling crap at anyone who doesn't bow down and kiss his butt. But he does have one redeeming feature, he's so blatantly beligerent that you can't say he's luring anyone into a trap, until you try to answer one of his rather pointed questions. You see, by the time he asks it, he's already prepared 15 responses to anything you might say. He's probably got Google fired up and on a warm idle to bring up a ton of links, some of which he hasn't even bothered to read in a light that doesn't reek of his preconceived notions.
And if that doesn't work, he calls you a troll. But then again, the pot always could call the kettle black.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: You love speaking as though it's fact...until someone pops up and gives you hard numbers. Then, when the numbers are proven reasonably valid, it's, "But I'm only speaking my OPINION on racism."
Rakeesh, what have I been speaking of as though it were fact? I have stated what I believe should be done to alleviate some of the racial tension in America. What numbers prove me wrong?
Rakeesh, although you have not gone to the extremes that Leto has, you are in danger of falling into the same trap. Just what is it that you are arguing that is related to the topic? Do individuals have responsibility for their own racism? Or is it something forced upon them by their environment?
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nice of you to not answer my questions, Sopwith, while replying with personal insults instead of addressing the point. How's that for the pot and the kettle?
Choco, in the United States of America, the vast majority of racism can be traced back to its white racist roots, in both the government and in the civilian circles. It may sound loaded to you, but can you really deny that it is not so? Can you really deny that there is an ethnic bias in America today, and that almost all of it stems from racist roots? Can you really attribute trends that span across the nation with regard to prejudice as if they were merely isolated, individual incidents and nothing more?
What I have said over and over and over is that the racism most prevalent in America is either directly related to or a knee-jerk response to white racism (of non-whites). We can always point out extremes with ease—like the KKK, ANP, Black Panthers, and Nation of Islam—but the more insidious and underlying prejudices and ethnocentric ideas are what keep the nation at a constant level of inequality, not the extremes.
If being any ethnicity is the sole defining factor of who you are, then you are most likely in one of those above-listed extremist groups, and not representative of the greater population (either of your ethnicity or the whole). If being any ethnicity leads one to believe that either their ethnic background is superior or other ethnicities are inferior, then that is racism (and, as I kept pointing out, is something very prevalent in America today). If being any given ethnicity is something acknowledged and/or celebrated, separate from being a determiner of one's character, then it is most definitely not racism. The problem people have is that when someone wants to celebrate their ethnicity, two groups immediately oppose the idea: one group who wants no ethnicity to ever be acknowledged and celebrated, and one who holds such celebrations in contempt as if they are racist—and who usually belong to a majority so large and used to social bias in favor of their own background that they don't see any point to the celebration outside of shutting them out of the celebration.
The problem, Choco, is that non-white ethnicities are damned if they do celebrate their diversity, and damned if they don't. If they celebrate and accept it, they are viewed as racist and separatist by apologists. If they do not, they are viewed as "trying to be white" by extremists on the other end of the spectrum. All the while, all people anywhere want is a "fair shake." The sad thing is that in today's world, there's fair and then there's Fair, with the lesser (bare-minimum legislation and "equal" rules) fair usually placed firmly at the feet of minorities as their "equal opportunity," and the greater (social acceptance and perception along with a "birds of a feather" ethnocentrism) Fair from which that lesser fair is judged from to begin with. In other words, the greater group is pretty much dictating to the lesser group what fair is, and what the terms "equal opportunity" shall be defined as. That's neither fair nor equal.
Posts: 6907 | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: It may sound loaded to you, but can you really deny that it is not so? Can you really deny that there is an ethnic bias in America today, and that almost all of it stems from racist roots? Can you really attribute trends that span across the nation with regard to prejudice as if they were merely isolated, individual incidents and nothing more?
This sounds loaded because it is loaded. I never said any of those things, and I don't disagree with what you're saying now. You bring them up in a frame that suggest (indirectly) that I did bring them up. Our goal was to define racism, and determine the answer to the question of the thread, which is where your discussion is now leading us.
However, this part I do not understand:
quote: but the more insidious and underlying prejudices and ethnocentric ideas are what keep the nation at a constant level of inequality, not the extremes.
If being any ethnicity is the sole defining factor of who you are, then you are most likely in one of those above-listed extremist groups
From this, I hear you saying: You cannot define yourself by your race and not be racsit. Ethnocentric ideas cause racism that is more harmful because it is more prevelant than extremism.
It sounds to me like you are only damned if you do celebrate your diversity. If white people started celebrating their whiteness, they would be causing themselves harm.
quote: Nice of you to not answer my questions, Sopwith, while replying with personal insults instead of addressing the point. How's that for the pot and the kettle?
That's great unintentionally self-deprecatory passive-aggressive irony, John.
While many on this thread have stooped to personal attacks, questioning of motives, racism and downright mean ad hominum attacks, you have one of the most belligerent tones on the thread.
I complimented Robespierre on his debating skills even though I disagree with most of his postions. I agree with many of your views, but your belligerent tone doesn't advance your arguments a whit.
Why don't you try to be a skooch more detached and objective [edit: and everyone else on the thread as well, including me], as you are claiming Robespierre is not? Passion is great in its place, but in excess it invariably makes you look foolish. I am living proof of that.
quote: I clarified the point of something off-topic out to you.
And I think you very much for your brilliant clarification.
Will you now explain why its okay to label people who you perceive as "typical white guy"'s? How does this further your arguments, and is your racism "okay" because other white people agree with your characterization?
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:From this, I hear you saying: You cannot define yourself by your race and not be racsit. Ethnocentric ideas cause racism that is more harmful because it is more prevelant than extremism. It sounds to me like you are only damned if you do celebrate your diversity. If white people started celebrating their whiteness, they would be causing themselves harm.
If that's what you hear, then you have a hearing problem.
One can have their ethnic background contribute to their definition of who they are and not be racist. In fact, people do this daily: "yeah, I'm Italian and I love pasta," or even "I like this book because it relates to my ethnic roots." You don't think whites celebrate their 'whiteness?' Have you never been to a St. Paddy's Day parade? An Italian-American festival? White people have celebrations of their roots all the time, and usually go even deeper than skin color to regional specific celebration. In addition, I've never been chased out of an African-American festival, the Latin-American celebrations I've attended, nor the Italian parties or Irish festivals I've attended, though I am either not at all or only related to the aforementioned ethnicities.
The dangerous ethnocentrism in America is the one that "equality" is solely determined according to parameters set by the majority. In this case, what I have been arguing against is the notion that America is somehow equal because there is no outward racist legislature, even though there is a profound amount of prejudicial hiring, discrimination in workplaces and in public attitude, and even when removing obsolete legislation with racist content. Sure, all the laws and rules point toward a more equal nation (note I said more equal, not totally equal), but the people still by and large have social misconceptions and prejudices that have either never been addressed or have never been fully addressed.
It's easy to give concessions and claim "everything is okay now" when one's group is still at an unfair advantage to another group (or groups). Since the mid-1900s, we've made great strides toward equality, but we are far from "there" yet, and to claim otherwise belies an ignorance and acceptance to a white ethnocentrism in America. (just to give an opposite, belief that anything white is "the Devil" is an equally ethnocentrist ideology... however, it's much easier to point that out because it's so different from the more "normal" and insidious opposite)
Posts: 6907 | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: You don't think whites celebrate their 'whiteness?' Have you never been to a St. Paddy's Day parade? An Italian-American festival?
You are deliberately confusing ethnicity with race. Celebrating one's Irish roots does equate with celebrating one's whiteness. There exist black italians. Are they celebrating their whiteness when they celebrate their Italian heritage?
If these people were to define themselves solely by their ethnic background, they would be, to use your word of the day, ethno-centric.
quote: In addition, I've never been chased out of an African-American festival, the Latin-American celebrations I've attended
Perhaps you were able to control your urge to dismiss people based on their race.
quote: In this case, what I have been arguing against is the notion that America is somehow equal because there is no outward racist legislature,
We argue against the same thing. Affirmative Action (outwardly racist legislature) has not made America equal somehow.
quote:but the people still by and large have social misconceptions and prejudices that have either never been addressed or have never been fully addressed.
Would you say that an individual is responsible for his or her own thoughts? How should we as a society go about fixing this problem?
quote: and claim "everything is okay now"
Has anyone in this thread claimed that? If not, why bring it up over and over?
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: If that's what you hear, then you have a hearing problem
You become inflammatory on purpose. I see it now. You deliberately have forgotten that I said.
quote: However, this part I do not understand:
My apparent hearing problem is due to your constant muffled mumblings.
You made some clarifications though, thank you.
quote: One can have their ethnic background contribute to their definition of who they are and not be racist.
Now we need to find out exactly where the racist line is between having your ethnic background define who you are and having your ethnic background contribute to your definition of who you are. This way, we can explain to someone, in detail, WHY he is racist, instead of just name calling.
Also, maybe you should start a new thread regarding the idea that "The dangerous ethnocentrism in America is the one that "equality" is solely determined according to parameters set by the majority."
So far, we are dealing with the individual, and what he can do to affect change in his life and surroundings. How can an individual identify racism and act accordingly.
Posts: 45 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
