racism

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

I think this thread was started to stir some ****.

Which is my point - anytime white people (presumably 99% in here are not black) presume to comment in any way on racism pertaining to black people - other than to agree that it all is racism, etc. - it is looked upon by most in a negative light

Such is life.

In the end, who can blame people in this regard. Black people are routinely told by the govt. and others (mostly the D party) that they are special and deserve an automatic advantage over non-black people because of a 40 year long attempt to right the wrongs of slavery, which ended in 1864. Moreover, the Civil Rights Act (designed to end discrimination) was 40 years ago. In the end, as long as one part of society gets an automatic leg up because of nothing they have done and because of nothing the other parts have done, there will be racism and resentment Yet, when any person (white or black) dares to point this out, they are lambasted as a racist.

Again, such is life.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

In the end, who can blame people in this regard. Black people are routinely told by the govt. and others (mostly the D party) that they are special and deserve an automatic advantage over non-black people because of a 40 year long attempt to right the wrongs of slavery, which ended in 1864. Moreover, the Civil Rights Act (designed to end discrimination) was 40 years ago. In the end, as long as one part of society gets an automatic leg up because of nothing they have done and because of nothing the other parts have done, there will be racism and resentment Yet, when any person (white or black) dares to point this out, they are lambasted as a racist.

Well, speaking of ****-stirring... are you implying that racism simply vanished upon enactment of the Civil Rights Act and that blacks are no longer a "suspect class" subject to hostile treatment by society at large? Although I think blacks in America have made great strides over the past few decades, I think that we are far from being a post-racial society, even despite the appointment of an African-American president. It will take generations before we have sorted out fully the wrongdoings and poverty imposed by a racist/segregationist society, and we are still barely a generation into the Civil Rights Era. This is going to take a looong time... probably not within our lifetimes.

[strandinthewind]

^^^

Of course not - racism is alive and well, though not nearly as bad as it was.

All I am saying is that as long as some black kid is given an automatic leg up over some equally or more deserving white kid - racism will be prolonged. Note - racism itself cannot be eradicated by the Civil Rights Act. All the Act was designed to do was give minorities as leg up to right the wrongs of the past. Forty years have now gone by. I say that is enough - mission accomplished as much as it can ever be under such a standard.

I say the FAR better standard is to base the leg up on poverty. That way people who truly need a leg up get it as opposed to a minority getting it based on correcting something that they and the people they are up against had nothing to do with.

Put it this way, in your opinion, when is the goal reached? When will the later generations have sufficiently paid for the awful institution of slavery? When will enough generations have gone by so that black people do not deserve the automatic leg up? Will the system that gives these rights actually work - or does it just perpetuate the stigma and actually prolong racism?

Finally, does it really accomplish these goals when you have two applicants -

1. a white guy from the poorest part of Appalachia whose historically uneducated family has been spit upon for generations

2. a black guy who comes from an upper middle class family with four generation of college degrees.

Who deserves the leg up? The answer is obvious - the poor white guy does because any fault of slavery that may have affected the black family since 1964 has been righted Unlike the white guy, the black guy needs no help.

Thus, I say help the poor out and get rid of help based on race. People will feel less resentment this way - thus, lessening race hate.

The govt. cannot eradicate racism. Only people can do that. And, the current system obviously is not working to accomplish that goal after 40 years. So, I say change it to address the current actual problem. Interestingly, under "my" plan, any poor black person is still as protected as under the current plan. My plan just prevents people who do not need help from getting it at the cost of the poor person they are up against.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

. . . and we are still barely a generation into the Civil Rights Era . . . .

We are three or four generations into it as generation are generally defined in terms of 10 to 15 years

Put it this way - should Obama's children get preferential treatment over the poor white guy I earlier used an an example. Of course, they should not. To assert they should is ridiculous because they do not need it. the poor white guy does.

Thus, I say help should be given to all those who need it and the common denominator is poverty.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

All I am saying is that as long as some black kid is given an automatic leg up over some equally or more deserving white kid - racism will be prolonged. Note - racism itself cannot be eradicated by the Civil Rights Act. All the Act was designed to do was give minorities as leg up to right the wrongs of the past. Forty years have now gone by. I say that is enough - mission accomplished as much as it can ever be under such a standard.

I think what you are referring to is affirmative action vs. the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which basically neutralized discrimination against minorities and women in a number of different areas without addressing the issue of "reparations." As much as I want to agree with you that 40 years is enough time for all of the historical wrongs to be righted, the sad fact is that a disproportionately high number of African American males are in the U.S. penal system, black households are consistently the poorest across the board and blacks are woefully underrepresented at the top tiers of elite schools and at the highest levels of the corporate ladder. While some of these numbers have improved over the years, we are far from seeing true parrity between white vs. AA on so many levels. Until we see the statistics improving, I don't see how we can just simply wash our hands of the past.

I say the FAR better standard is to base the leg up on poverty. That way people who truly need a leg up get it as opposed to a minority getting it based on correcting something that they and the people they are up against had nothing to do with.

What I have always felt, and this may be controversial... but what I have always felt is that if you are a white, able-minded, able-bodied male in the U.S., you have absolutely zero excuse for not being financially successful and/or self-sufficient (unless one chooses, for whatever reason, not to be so). The world is your veritable oyster. I'm not saying that everyone has to pursue wealth for wealth's sake. And I'm not saying that people do not have mitigating circumstances that are above and beyond the color of ones skin. But I don't think white people generally worry about being denied housing or employment because they are white. I don't think white people feel intimidated at a mostly white college campus because they are white. I don't think white people feel like they are profiled by the cops, taxi drivers or shopkeepers. But then again, I'm not white, so I don't know for sure. But, in general, I feel a lot less sympathy for a capable white male who struggles vs. a capable black male who struggles- rational or not. Sure, overt racial discrimination is illegal, but there are so, so many gray, insidious areas where ones skin color still does matter in every day society.

Put it this way, in your opinion, when is the goal reached? When will the later generations have sufficiently paid for the awful institution of slavery? When will enough generations have gone by so that black people do not deserve the automatic leg up? Will the system that gives these rights actually work - or does it just perpetuate the stigma and actually prolong racism?

So you are saying that affirmative action is actually creating/prolonging racism? I am not sure if that is a popularly held notion. I certainly don't feel that way.

Regarding the time horizon for "repairing the wrongs," I just don't know. But knowing that a "generation" is typically considered to pass every 25-27 years or so, we are now just in the middle of the second generation, all the while, millions of those oppressed pre-1964 are still alive and still feeling the repercussions of lost opportunities, lack of education, under-employment, etc. It isn't like their children and their children's children will somehow all inherit trust funds and they will be able to pay for ivy league educations with ease. Yes, the numbers of black college graduates and professionals is increasing... but I don't think we're still at the level of mission accomplished.

Finally, does it really accomplish these goals when you have two applicants -

1. a white guy from the poorest part of Appalachia whose historically uneducated family has been spit upon for generations

2. a black guy who comes from an upper middle class family with four generation of college degrees.

Who deserves the leg up? The answer is obvious - the poor white guy does because any fault of slavery that may have affected the black family since 1964 has been righted Unlike the white guy, the black guy needs no help.

I think this example is rather extreme, but any sort of entitlement program can be stressed to its limits with unintended consequences. But why eradicate a program that works for the majority just to penalize a few stray outer-limit blips? Yes, on the surface it seems unfair that black guy #2 gets preferential treatment in this case, but then again you don't know what kind of struggles or missed opportunities he had to endure along his educational journey due to his blackness.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

What I have always felt, and this may be controversial... but what I have always felt is that if you are a white, able-minded, able-bodied male in the U.S., you have absolutely zero excuse for not being financially successful and/or self-sufficient (unless one chooses, for whatever reason, not to be so). The world is your veritable oyster. I'm not saying that everyone has to pursue wealth for wealth's sake. And I'm not saying that people do not have mitigating circumstances that are above and beyond the color of ones skin. But I don't think white people generally worry about being denied housing or employment because they are white. I don't think white people feel intimidated at a mostly white college campus because they are white. I don't think white people feel like they are profiled by the cops, taxi drivers or shopkeepers. But then again, I'm not white, so I don't know for sure. But, in general, I feel a lot less sympathy for a capable white male who struggles vs. a capable black male who struggles- rational or not. Sure, overt racial discrimination is illegal, but there are so, so many gray, insidious areas where ones skin color still does matter in every day society . . . .

I see what you are saying, but I think giving advantage to the poor as a whole as opposed to the black (or other minority) poor the advantage solves this problem with the added benefit of also helping white poor.

Also, I suggest that if you go to the poorer areas of the country, like Appalachia, the white people feel oppressed as well. That oppression come from the rich of all color, shapes, and sizes.

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

So you are saying that affirmative action is actually creating/prolonging racism? I am not sure if that is a popularly held notion. I certainly don't feel that way . . . .

The current system perpetuates the racism because it tells black people (or other minorities) that they do not have to work as hard to get ahead because you get an automatic break because you are black. That whole notion makes white people hate (resent, etc.) black people on some level. How could it not when they and their kids are losing out. Thus, the perpetuation argument. Put another way, two wrongs do not make a right So, I say that until we as a society move away from the whole "this group over that group" mentality, it will only get worse.

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

I think this example is rather extreme, but any sort of entitlement program can be stressed to its limits with unintended consequences. But why eradicate a program that works for the majority just to penalize a few stray outer-limit blips? Yes, on the surface it seems unfair that black guy #2 gets preferential treatment in this case, but then again you don't know what kind of struggles or missed opportunities he had to endure along his educational journey due to his blackness.

The black person in my example deserves no leg up no matter what their history is. They come from four "generations" of educated people and they have the financial means to get educated, etc. Put another way, AA and the Act have worked for them - they are no longer eligible for the cure. Conversely, the poor white kid from generations of uneducated people in Appalachia, likely received an awful education, if any. They need a leg up.

If the poor white kid does not get the leg up, how is that in any way fair? How does that in any way further the goal of making black people whole again? The answer is it does not. I suggest all it does is let the rich black kid get an undeserved leg up at the cost of denying some poor white kid a means to get out and improve their life. It also serves as an obvious vehicle t0 piss off white people who had nothing to do with slavery. And, these same white people likely were not racist to begin with. But, when they get fukced over like this, they are going to hate black people on some level.

Note - I am in no way saying that racism does not exist, etc. I am just saying that advantage should be given where it is needed, which is to the poor as opposed to the selectively determined race. More people truly deserving of help will get it under my plan and the racial "you vs. me" mentality is obviated

As for racism, feeling inferior, etc., that you touched on - the current system does not really do anything to prevent or cure that line of thought. The govt. cannot really do that.

[David]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

As for racism, feeling inferior, etc., that you touched on - the current system does not really do anything to prevent or cure that line of thought. The govt. cannot really do that.

I support affirmative action for only one minority group.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by David

I support affirmative action for only one minority group.

aging California musicians?

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

Well, speaking of ****-stirring... are you implying that racism simply vanished upon enactment of the Civil Rights Act and that blacks are no longer a "suspect class" subject to hostile treatment by society at large? Although I think blacks in America have made great strides over the past few decades, I think that we are far from being a post-racial society, even despite the appointment of an African-American president. It will take generations before we have sorted out fully the wrongdoings and poverty imposed by a racist/segregationist society, and we are still barely a generation into the Civil Rights Era. This is going to take a looong time... probably not within our lifetimes.

Racism is going to end when the wealth gets spread around enough that people of color can't use racism as an excuse. Right now, I think racism is getting to the point of salem witch craft trials, where people are accused of racism and convicted and punished, but no one actually committed a crime. Race baiting is a form of power.

[nailatixela]

I saw an Asian woman at the Fleetwood Mac philly show. I was a little surprised - simply because the majority of people there are white. Also, I'm only 17 so someone might be surprised to see me at a Fleetwood Mac show. I'm understanding of this since like Asian women, teenagers are not part of Fleetwood Mac's main demographic. And it's cool when the minorities (in terms of a mac show) come to represent. I feel proud, at least, to show that there are young people who like the band too!

[David]

I've heard that Stevie is super popular with Orthodox Jews in the age demographic of 18 to 26.

To them, she is the modern-day Tamar (who was once offered a goat in arrears). It all goes back to a close reading of Genesis.

[jannieC]

I was trying to make friends with one of the security guards (black-female) at a SYW show and the look on her face when Mick did his drum solo was priceless. She was so obviously perplexed- lol.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by jannieC

I was trying to make friends with one of the security guards (black-female) at a SYW show and the look on her face when Mick did his drum solo was priceless. She was so obviously perplexed- lol.

LMAO - she likely was "who is this white fool strutting around like a chicken!"

Actually and interestingly, Mick's vesturbation is very tribal in execution. So, what are ya gonna do

[jannieC]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

LMAO - she likely was "who is this white fool strutting around like a chicken!"

Actually and interestingly, Mick's vesturbation is very tribal in execution. So, what are ya gonna do

I absolutely LOVE Michelle Obama's expression. I crack up every time I look at that!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by jannieC

I absolutely LOVE Michelle Obama's expression. I crack up every time I look at that!

I know - though Hillary's expression is my fav. Alas, a relative oldie but a goodie.