Understandably, we are all sensitive, at this time in history, about race, and racism. Some Blacks are so sensitive that they see racism in everything. Some Whites are so nervous that they pander to Blacks and Hispanics. Nobody is ready yet to start speaking the truth. I think it’s time. I think we are all mature enough to face it. I think the truth is healthy, for all races.
There is a difference between racism and culturalism. One is okay and one is not. Racism is not okay, but culturalism should be allowed, and even encouraged.
Racism is prejudice or animosity against people who belong to other races, and/or the belief that people of different races have different qualities and abilities, and that some races are inherently superior or inferior.
Culturalism, however, is the belief that some cultures are better than others. Different races can share a similar culture, or the opposite—different cultures can be shared by a single race. Racism is based on genetics, on how people look, on the color of their skin, on the shape of their eyes, on their hair, and so on. It can also be an assumption of traits or stereotypes for a given race. For example, that Whites are racists, or Blacks are lazy, or Jews are greedy.
One area of perceived racism, I believe, does ignore the truth. There are some physical differences among the races, and we are not allowed to say this. White Men Can’t Jump is based on a nugget of truth. While it’s not true in all cases, African-American musculature for its elite athletes does seem to give them an advantage with speed and jumping ability. It’s not a coincidence that African-Americans dominate the NBA, the speed positions on professional football teams, and the 100-meter dash.
The problem comes, I think, when you make the leap into behavior. You assume, for instance, as was done in the past, that Blacks cannot play quarterback, because they don’t have the mental capacity to think on their feet and see the complex dynamics of an ever-changing offense versus an ever-changing defense. Many Warren Moon’s later, this theory has been laid to rest, as have the assumptions that Black’s could not coach or manage or play golf or chess, or anything else that requires mental acuity, like head a corporation successfully. Blacks can do anything any other race can do. Still, percentage-wise, they maintain an advantage in running and jumping, and we ought to be allowed to say this. I’ve just said it. Again, though, don’t make the leap into generalizing about intelligence, morals, industry, or any other mental or spiritual ability. Here, you are being racist.
Culturalism is another matter. Some cultures are better than others, and we ought to be allowed to say so. Culture may be associated with race at certain points in history, but it is not determined by race. A culture that has outlawed slavery is superior to a culture that has not. A culture that has banished cannibalism is superior to a culture that has not. A culture that honors females is superior to a culture that treats females as second-class citizens. A culture that protects innocents is superior to a culture that slaughters them. A culture that allows its citizens to adapt to the modern world is superior to a culture that keeps its citizens mired in 14th-century barbarism.
Beyond this, judging which cultures are better than others gets dicey. Here, subjectivity and relativity do start to play their role.
Which culture is better—African-American or Anglo-American? For this question, I don’t think there is a clear answer. For one thing, there are several African-American cultures, not one, and the same goes for Anglo-Americans. There are, for example, African-American blueblood cultures where all the children go on to Harvard and belong to exclusive polo societies. And, there are the opposite, African-American cultures that seem stuck on welfare. There are Anglo-American cultures where the children are malformed because of inbreeding. Or, the opposite, Anglo-American cultures where the offspring usually become important members of society.
Real African-Americans, and here I am going to get in trouble, those who come from Africa as immigrants, are superior in some ways to some American-born African-Americans, in one sense. They enter this country without a chip on their shoulders. They have no pre-conceived notions about prejudice against Blacks. They arrive with a good attitude, study, work hard, and, as a result, usually do well in America. Economically, though they are clearly Black, sometimes even darker than American Blacks, they achieve more on average because they just do what successful people do everywhere–study, work hard, develop good relationships with their coworkers, smile, have good senses of humor, and keep on plugging. This is the formula for success, regardless of race.
Of course, in America, a lot has to do with family, family values, education, money, class, and opportunities. I realize this.
Still, considering all this, if you make a blanket statement about African-American culture versus Anglo-American culture, then you probably are entering into racist territory. Your judgments are most likely stereotypes based solely on race, and not on the facts.
Where you can make comments safely, though, is when you get back to true culturalism (as in comparing African-Americans from Africa versus native-born African-Americans). You can critique movements, or leadership. You can talk about the Black Panther movement. You can discuss the Ku Klux Klan. You can judge Jesse Jackson, or Martin Luther King, or Malcolm X, or Gandhi, or Al Sharpton, or George Bush, or George Allen. These are fair game.
You don’t have to be brave to enter this territory. It is time, however, for Blacks and Whites to be brave. We need to be honest in every area that is allowed. Then, we must expand what is allowed, in the interest of peace and racial harmony.
It should never be allowed to be racist. It should be permitted to be culturalist, though.
Let me end with an example I use as a personal litmus test for intelligence and objectivity. This is an example that will illustrate what ought to be allowed. If it is not, then we will not advance as a nation in the area of race-relations.
O.J. Simpson—guilty or not? I say this. Black or White, if you don’t see that O.J. is guilty, then you are either stupid, or blinded by feeling. Can Whites be stupid? Yes. This is not a racist opinion. Can Blacks be stupid? Yes. Can intelligent Whites be stupid in one area, or about one thing? Yes. Ditto with Blacks.
I repeat. If you think O.J. is innocent, then you are either stupid, or blinded by feelings. These feelings might be based on paranoia, or racism, or a rage against the system, whatever. They are clouding your thinking, and you ought to examine this.
For you Whites, if you know that O.J. is guilty, and you are afraid to say so, because you want to be seen as nice guys or girls and you don’t want to be considered racists—you are cowards. You are not helping Blacks by this. You are not furthering race relations. You are pandering. You are wrong if you think that Blacks even want this. Honest, intelligent Blacks want to be treated as your equals. They want a legitimate debate and sincere feedback.
Here is the truth about a few things, as I see them. O.J. is guilty. Poverty pimps are abominable. Racism still exists, but with Blacks and Hispanics as well as Whites. Racism against Blacks in America is at an all-time low. Our country has evolved into a pretty decent place with regard to this issue. Racism against Whites, on the other hand, is on the rise, and qualifies as a real problem.
Most Republicans are not racists. Most Whites are not racists.
Yes, as opposed to my generalizations, I know there are parts of the country where race is still a serious problem for Blacks. For this, I am deeply sorry. Anything I can do to help eliminate this, I want to do. To my African-American friends, I am at your service on this problem. What I ask of you, is stop seeing racism everywhere. Stop blaming all your problems on racism. Life is tough, for all of us. Plus, please help me fight racism of all kinds, including against Hispanics, and against Whites.
The worst thing you can be called in America at this time is a racist, which is, in fact, evidence that our country is not racist. There is no racism in our media anymore. So, the charge now is that racism is “covert.” This is absurd. There are some public figures who are racist, but they are not White. Blaming Katrina responses on racism, for example, is racist—against Whites. We’ll get into this in another post, where I’ll address the racist Spike Lee.
Enough food for thought? Bring it on.
18 comments:
Rock wrote: Racism against Blacks in America is at an all-time low. Our country has evolved into a pretty decent place with regard to this issue. Racism against Whites, on the other hand, is on the rise, and qualifies as a real problem.
Rock, I would appreciate some factual evidence to back up these statements that you've offered. Racism is NOT at an all-time low and I am unable to locate any information that would lead you this conclusion.
Also, there are many public figures who are racist, including white Americans.....I'll start off with the illustrious white Supremicist "leader" David Duke for starters.
Now for the Katrina disaster: The disaster response for Hurricane Katrina in 2005 was the direct responsible of local emergency management agency in New Orleans AND New Orleans Mayor Nagin. Next-in-line for additional responsibility was the State of Louisiana's emergency management agency and the Governnor of Louisia, Kathleen Blanco. Immediate response was NOT NOT NOT the responsibility of FEMA. FEMA is NOT an emergency responder. This has nothing to do with race, racism, the Deep South, blah blah blah.....
NAGIN. BLANCO. Two people who were NOT qualified to manage disaster emergencies. Nagin and Blanco did NOT delegate responsibilities. Both Nagin and Blanco were unable to make clear decisions and both Nagin and Blanco made poor choices when they DID make decisions after the Hurricane was over. Neither of these individuals performed well.
During and after Katrina struck, the local and regional emergency management agencies failed because they were unprepared and not well-versed in true emergency disaster management. Even a large portion of the police force fled New Orleans....Panic struck the city, pandemonium took place.
Pointing blame was evident right after Hurricane Katrina was re-defined as a Category 5 hurricane. Blame was coming .... Nagin and Blanco were not going down for this botched job, and they KNEW they failed the city of New Orleans. Their poor judgement and lack of leadership cost lives in New Orleans.
And look at the racial cosmetics: Nagin is black; Blanco is white. The events that followed the lack of emergency response had nothing to do with racism but everything to do with ego, job security, and the basic psychology of people who are unable to assume and accept personal responsibility for gross errors.
I am a past employee of FEMA. Disasters in the south portion of Louisiana are VERY common. New Orleans is a residential nightmare due to its proximity to the Gulf coast, the Delta, and the topographical position being at or below sea level. The residents of Louisiana were seasoned FEMA disaster-victims, accustomed to their hurricane and flood benefits paid on-the-average of two times per year.
And the so-called leaders of New Orleans were also accustomed to seasonal hurricanes and flooding as well. Nagin was not ignorant to the problems that a Category 5 hurricane would bring New Orleans. He was not qualified to make the emergency decisions that he was responsible for. And since he refused to delve into the well-known truths that the city's walls previously made by the Corps of Engineers were completely inadequate, the city paid for his enormous mistake.
Blanco had the opportunity to pass control onward to receive Federal assistance. This is NOT the fault of racism or of FEMA. Kathleen Blanco let the ball drop in her own court, so FEMA arrived several days after Katrina struck.
But to blame responses on racism is simply incorrect. Michael Brown was essentially forced to resign from FEMA due to proported public pressures. Brown became The Fall Guy for the Katrina disaster. He was not a good leader for FEMA by any stretch, but FEMA has a history of Directors who are not-good-leaders.
Lynn S.,
Thank you again for coming back and commenting on my site. You are a great commenter, even when I disagree with you, and you would add a lot to any site or discussion.
Rock, I would appreciate some factual evidence to back up these statements that you've offered. Racism is NOT at an all-time low and I am unable to locate any information that would lead you this conclusion.
You have to use not just statistics, which are all over the place, but logic as well. Evidence is rampant.
For example, there is no racism on any of the media, as there used to be, or it is attacked immediately, including by noble whites like you and I.
Black faces are on almost all TV shows, and on the political talk shows, including Fox.
The charge then, as I said, becomes, "No, but the racism is now covert." What nonsense. If it's covert, then that means that there is overt pressure against it--which proves my point. The media is fair with all races at this point in history, except with whites, who are still demonized.
The racial component of all levels of government, including the federal government, at this time, is more than representative of the percentage of blacks in the population. Bush's own cabinet is diverse. If there are any racists here, it's the people who have the gall to say that Condi Rice is not a "true black," that Colin Powell is an Uncle Tom, ditto with Clarence Thomas.
Black home ownership is at an all-time high. Black membership in the middle-class is at an all-time high. Ditto with those that have completed their college educations.
I can go on and on. If you don't see this, you are brainwashed.
Thank you for your comments on Katrina, some welcome rationality.
As far as David Duke being a well-known public figure who is racist, what happened to him? It just proves my point. He was ostracized and rejected by White America. Even the demonized Republican Party rejected him. No, David Duke only shows how good most white Americans really are. Does the same thing happen with black racists, like Louis Farrakhan? No. Get your act together, Black America, and condemn this bigot! Just like we condemn David Duke.
White America, at this time in history, are good people, mostly not racists, who really believe in equality and liberty for all.
Taking all of your comments into consideration, would you explain then why all of the media was, um, coerced to stop showing the New Orleans "after effects" of Hurricane Katrina?
There is one simple solution: White America, saw that Black America was downright UGLY in New Orleans. White America was MAD about the whole situation, and a high proportion of White America thought that New Orleans residents (read: poor or poverty-level blacks) "deserved" what happened.
White America, at this time in history, are good people, mostly not racists, who really believe in equality and liberty for all
Much too over-simplified, much too opinionated. You need to take a walk out of your California spot and visit real America, Rock. The Confederate flag is a belief-system and, sadly, racism is alive.
Making statements like "black home ownership is at an all-time high" is just silly. About 50 years ago, ownership was at an all-time high, too. And in the year 1870, I'll bet it was at an all-time high. The black population is now at a steady rate where it had been increasing since Census records were taken in the 1790s and forward.
Unless I research the numbers, I can't comment on middle-class data or educational backgrounds. I am not brainwashed at all, I am a realist and rely on factual evidence, not by looking down the street limiting myself to my 'neighborhood'.
Rock,
In my midwestern city, Springfield, Missouri, we used to have a thriving black community of hardworking people, shopkeepers, doctors, lawyers, etc. After a lynching on the public square in 1906, many blacks fled and the population has included a very small percentage of blacks to this day. I regret to say that many of the conservative Republicans(mostly men) I know are admitted racists and homophobes. It's one of the things that really turns me off about your party. Most of them think the Republican policies will always favor straight, white interests over minority interests, and that is one of the main reasons they vote Republican--truth be told. They know Condi, Colin Powell and Clarence Thomas will never represent the interests of the average black person, and don't feel threatened by them-- even though they are chagrined to see them in high ranking Republican positions.
One of my family members married a black man, and I see the struggles of her dark-skinned children (who are very beautiful, by the way) against racist discrimination in this town. They will have to be twice as good and have great inner strength to make it in this town. If I were them, I would move far away and never look back.
It's easy for white guys who have had every advantage to yammer on about the race card, but quite frankly, until you've been spit on because of the color of your skin, you have not experienced discrimination.
I know that our town is not so different from others, and probably better than many in its race relations. The largest and most active branch of the KKK is just 90 minutes away in Harrison, AR. A sorry state of affairs.
Betty
Betty,
I'm sorry that you have witnessed and continue to witness this kind of thing in the area where you live. I've lived in five different states and saw this kind of situation in one of the five. In the other four, my experience was different.
The more accurate picture of race relations continues to be what is presented on the media. Plus, the state of California is a bellwether on the issue. This is, if not the future, the present state of race relations.
You demonize white people in your comment, and the Republican Party, assuming that what you've seen in your area is the norm. It isn't. You pooh-pooh Condi Rice, Colin Powell and Clarence Thomas again, in effect, as not "real blacks," people, you say, who don't look out for black people. How insulting.
What you are doing to whites and to the Republican Party is what you accuse them of doing to minorities. You are painting them with a broad brush. At the same time, you totally ignore what you see with your own eyes, on the media, in the news, and with the government of this administration.
Race relations will never improve in this country until people like you give credit where credit is due. If you continue to speak poorly of people who are good, and doing their best on this issue--you will give Blacks the feeling that they live in a hostile world. The world is hostile, I guess, in many ways, but it needn't be made more so by painting it worse than it is. You don't help Blacks with this attitude. You hurt them.
To my African American friends, if you have personally experienced racial discrimination, then I am sorry. To all my friends, yes, I have personally experienced racial discrimination. Please don't dismiss this by saying it's nothing compared with 50's stuff, and the stuff that Blacks undergo every day. Racial discrimination is bad, period. You liberals do not make yourselves better people by pointing out how bad things are for Blacks. You don't help Blacks by doing this. You help when you say and report the truth. If the truth is bad, say it. But if it's improving, say that too. And, if it's good, say that.
You won't do that, though, will you? You think that you are better people by continuing, no matter the evidence, to enable Black people to think they live in a world that doesn't want them. I want them. Millions of my fellow Republicans want them. Millions of my fellow Whites want them. We are not in the minority. Shame on those who do not see this. They are the problem.
Sorry Betty for being so hard on you, but I truly believe that you and people like you are the reason that race relations do not advance at this time in history. Open yourself up to the possibility that what you see in your area is not the norm.
I apologize for saying anything that makes you feel bad. I know you are a good person, well-intentioned. You don't speak for me, though, nor for the Republican Party, nor for the millions of Whites who feel like me. We are good people who want good things for everyone.
This is an example why people like me don't stand up for the truth. We get dismissed as "just some white guy." We get attacked as naive, or racist. The liberals are great name-callers. Well, I've made a decision to tell the truth no matter what reaction I get for it. Believe me, it does take courage--as I like to be thought of as a good guy too.
Part of the truth is to tell you, and all of America and the world, that the liberal mantras are untrue. This is one of those mantras, that America is racist. It is not. Not now. It was, but it's not anymore. At least, with regard to Blacks. New racisms will take the place of old ones, though, if we are not careful. So, let's all go the way of the Republican Party and become advocates for all people--and let's give credit where it is due--or we will perpetuate the myth that will keep people down. The liberal myth that America is racist will keep Black people down. Re-examine that myth, for the sake of your Black friends.
I'll shut up now.
I want to make a general comment about responses to this post. First, no conservatives are commenting. Second, the liberals who have commented have ignored all the major points of the post. Nobody will say whether they believe O.J. is guilty or not, and so on. This just proves my point. Liberals want only one thing. They want everyone to think they are good guys. They will sacrifice the truth for this. They will sacrifice anything for this. Even when the truth, in fact, is the only thing that will help African-Americans. Even when the truth will, as they say, set us free.
If you really want to be good guys, Liberals, say the truth, even when it makes you unpopular. Say the truth to help the people you supposedly say you love. I'm looking for courageous, honest people. This includes people who can be honest with themselves.
Still, if you really believe your Liberal mantras, continue to say them. That is your truth, and I will honor you for saying them. Don't let my critiques stop you from seeing what you see, believing what you believe. Just open your mind and try to see reality, that's all I ask.
I want some courageous conservatives to speak too, though. Why do you let yourselves be smeared like this? Yeah, I know, it's tough to take the heat. Liberals are great name-callers. The only solution for this, though, is to keep telling the truth, regardless of the name-calling. Persist. Don't remain silent.
Good grief, Rock. You are digging yourself deeper and deeper here.
Since Betty B. and Lynn S. are the only 2 commenters on this thread, and you have decided to lop me into the "liberal" category, I am going to have to speak up (again) and speak out (again) and tell you to pay attention to what I write or I am out of here faster than you can load your front-page.
Are you actually whining because people are not addressing the OJ trial? You know, I did not watch the trial. I am not a television person and for years, didn't even own a television. I did hear some of the blurbs on a radio show here and there, and from the little bits that I have gleaned in the news, it appeared that OJ was lying under oath and that he was guilt of murder. Sorry, but that sort of Hollywood hype is just not my cup-of-tea and I did not follow it. Does not answering that tiny buried question make me a liberal? Again, you have taken another quantum leap with me. What is up with you?
Smarten up here, Rock! I am NOT a liberal. I seek truth and have even challenged you on it so stop stirring your little pot and calling names. You yourself said that you do not appreciate name-calling, but here you are doing it.
Your only come-back when I challenged you for data was "You have to use not just statistics, which are all over the place, but logic as well. Evidence is rampant.
This was such alame answer that I couldn't believe you wrote it. This is expected of a person who is not knowledgeable of what he/she presents. Does this statement make you one of those persons on this subject?
Unable to subscribe to your weird, illogical methodology, I did take the time this morning to gather some information since you would not do this for your own blog and your own opinion. Factual EVIDENCE is how one approaches any hypothesis. You say you are college-trained in a science field. You should know this.
Just because I believe that Black America is still coping with "less-than-equal" does not give you the license to call me "liberal". I am NOT a liberal, and I don't vote Democrat, don't support Democrats. But I am about the truth. If THE TRUTH aligns with the Democratic platform, they win the argument. It's that simple. The truth will set you free.
Here is what I collated for this blog entry. You can choose to admit you were wrong about most everything in this thread any time you wish. Or you can keep your head in the sand, belief your form of "logic", and wonder why no one will continue discussions with you.....Your call.
Check out this link on racial inequality (many fun-facts and eye-openers):
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/race/economics/vital.html
Middle class and middle-income are two different categories. The terminology “middle class” is different for White America than it is for Black America simply because values and culture are different.
Middle-income and education for Black America and White America show significant differences. I found some statistics and a number of articles, so here are a few things to discuss.
One article that I located, “Progress of the Black Middle Class” (link posted below) points out explicitly that the initial growth of education for Black America was increasing dramatically but is now experiencing a significant slow-down. College attainment by Blacks grew by 91% during the 70s. By the 80s and 90s, the rate slowed to 35%.
This article was seemingly without bias and was written in 2005 The article had a number of statistics to cite:
17% of Black Americans hold a 4-year college degree.
28% of White Americans hold a 4-year college degree.
Blacks are 24% less likely to enroll in college than whites. And Blacks who enroll in college are about 50% as likely as Whites to graduate.
25% Blacks are employed in professional or managerial positions.
Whites are 41% more likely than non-Whites to work in professional or managerial positions.
$30,000 Median income for Black households
$48,000 Median income for White households
And this section was too good to paraphrase. In entirety:
“The trends in African American households’ movement into the middle class also reflect a
period of fast growth up into the 1970s, followed by two decades of stagnation. The percentage of African-American-headed households falling into a middle-income range income range of $35,000-$74,999 (in inflation-adjusted dollars) grew to about twenty percent in 1967 and to twenty-five percent in 1972. African-American middle incomes then entered a twenty-
year period of slow to no growth, budging one percentage point by 1982 and stalling there until 1992. Middle incomes actually declined slightly for next several years. Today about thirty-percent of Black households fall into this middle income range.“
Source: http://www.demos.org/pubs/progress.pdf
Excellent article worth reading is “The Rise of the Black Middle Class. Although it is dated and I’m unsure who the publisher is, the article does have some good data to springboard from and presents an excellent overview on a number of issues.
Source: http://www.worldandi.com/public/1999/February/middle.cfm
And lastly, posted on Frontline is “Economic and Social Statistics on Black America”. Be sure to check out the class divisions: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/race/economics/sam.html
And lastly, posted on Frontline is “Economic and Social Statistics on Black America”. Refer to the class divisions: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/race/economics/sam.html
PLEASE read this article on Black middle class:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/race/economics/analysis.html
Lynn,
I notice that your name no longer leads to your site, and I have misplace your site's address. So, I have no way of contacting you except through my comments. I was wondering if you would be okay with my using your "lost" comment as your first post on my site. I think it brings up some thought-provoking ideas. It is a rather conservative viewpoint. I see you hold both liberal and conservative ideas, basically looking for the truth, which is my stance. Anyway, if you feel comfortable with this as a post, let me know. Otherwise, we'll post something else you like, and I'll put this comment back in comments. Let me know.
Rock
Rock, somewhere in your comments, I wrote that you can use any or all of a comment I've submitted here. (Actually, I think it's your property once submitted, but you might want to check.)
It is a rather conservative viewpoint. I see you hold both liberal and conservative ideas, basically looking for the truth,
Like I just said in the submitted comment, if the truth turns out to be of a liberal mindset, c'est la vie.....I am not a liberal, but I'm painfully truthful.
Lynn,
My work week is full so I can't do justice to comments like yours Monday through Friday usually. I'll try to comment later tonight when I get home. In the meantime, I'm sorry if I mischaracterized you, and it's good to know more completely where you stand. Yes, I suppose I could have noticed this earlier, and I'll try to pay closer attention in the future. I know how it feels to be misunderstood.
Anyway, good comments as usual, and I'll try to get back on them as soon as possible.
Hell, after reading all that, my comments seem a bit out of place- as I was writing them in the midst of the back and forth- oh well here it is anyway....
WOW, what a discussion- where to begin.....
Ummmmm, Katrina- since the Gulf Coast is set to receive another big storm this year (and the Army Corps. is ALREADY saying that the levees aren't strong enough) let's start there. Here's my take on the catastrophe from a year ago: governmental ineptitude, social complacency, poverty and racism combined contributed to the problems in N.O. If Beverly Hills had been flooded stranding thousands of people on their rooftop, do you think it would have taken the government (local, state, AND federal) FOUR DAYS to act on it? NO of course not. The anger that was aimed at the government would have been tenfold because people with money (and power) would have been affected and their voices would have been heard monetarily, not as a lost wailing baby on CNN. I've heard MANY people say that these folks deserved what they got. That certainly wasn't said about all the folks who died in NY...
"Reverse" racism:
Hogwash! Racism is racism. The reverse of racism is complete tolerance and we KNOW that isn't quite the case. Again Rock, you make it sound as if there is a systemic problem that is keeping White people oppressed, which ALSO isn't the case. Are there people racist against White people? Yes. Are White people discriminated against? No doubt. But saying:
"You have to use not just statistics, which are all over the place, but logic as well. Evidence is rampant."
does not provide ANY evidence to support your claim that "most" racism is geared towards Whites and that Whites are demonized. In order for us to take your point into consideration, we need something concrete, which you're normally good at doing, but on this issue those details are lacking.
Racism at an "all time low":
I would have to agree with Lynn a bit on this one. You may not see the burning crosses and weekly lynchings that you saw in the past, BUT I would not say it's at an all time low. There have been GREAT strides since the days of Jim Crow- that can't be disputed, however, it's the mentality that hasn't changed. People don't SAY what they think because of the backlash they'd receive (ala David Duke)- that doesn't mean they aren't racist or the numbers of people who are racists are lower. Racism in media is still there, but subtle. I've mentioned it before that the mere fact that the terms "Asian-American author", "Latino congressman" or "Black doctor" are used prevalently show that the "minorities" aren't thought of on equal footing (i.e. inferior) with Whites- the very root of racist thought. It's a distiction that no one wants but the MEDIA continues to push. Do people say "That nigger doctor on tv..." in public, NO- it's not proper ettiquette, but they might think it.
paz, as with Lynn, I have to say that during the week I'm am now pressed for time, but I'll try to comment tonight on your great comments. You seem reasonable on this issue, and that's all I ask. I appreciate it.
By the way, unfortunately, one of the reasons my posts and comments are low on research and facts lately is that I am so busy now with my new job. I'll try to keep up as much as I can, though.
I do believe, though, that statistics can lie. Logic is often more powerful. To me, the media are a powerful "statistic," which I'll get into when I have more time.
Talk to you later. Have a great day.
One need only look at Hillary's "Gandhi ran a gas station in East St. Louis", the Robert Byrd "N-word" episode, the New Black Panther Party friends of Cynthia McKinney shouting "m-f'ing crackers" and "kick your Jew ass", let alone McKinney's own comments through the years... coupled with Juan Williams and Bill Cosby getting lambasted for using clear, concise logic and facts to outline the problems with blacks today... then remind yourself that some black "leaders" claim that only whites can be racist, because they have "all" the power...
It's "Newspeak", plain and simple. Orwell would be proud.
I despise supremacists, no matter what color they wear - I see no difference between the hatred spewed by Louis Farrakhan, and that of the most rabid "White Power" spokescreature. IMO, they're both morons.
One need only look at Hillary's "Gandhi ran a gas station in East St. Louis", the Robert Byrd "N-word" episode, the New Black Panther Party friends of Cynthia McKinney shouting "m-f'ing crackers" and "kick your Jew ass", let alone McKinney's own comments through the years... coupled with Juan Williams and Bill Cosby getting lambasted for using clear, concise logic and facts to outline the problems with blacks today... then remind yourself that some black "leaders" claim that only whites can be racist, because they have "all" the power...
It's "Newspeak", plain and simple. Orwell would be proud.
I despise supremacists, no matter what color they wear - I see no difference between the hatred spewed by Louis Farrakhan, and that of the most rabid "White Power" spokescreature. IMO, they're both morons.
Thank God, a rational man. Finally someone to back me up. I was wondering where all the conservatives were, and libertarians.
You are to be congratulated. You are an example of the really good people in our society, who, unfortunately, remain silent too much. We need more to speak the truth.
Racism is bad, period. All children need to learn this lesson. Racism against whites, blacks, Asians, Hispanics, whomever. It's all bad. And it all exists. Unfortunately, it's human nature.
Where I live, it's racism against whites. Where Betty lives, it's racism against blacks. Where paz lives, maybe it's against blacks. It's all bad. Fight it.
Before you can fight it, though, you must pronounce it. Speak it. Say the truth. Don't fool yourselves, America, into thinking that reverse racism is the answer to racism. No racism is the answer. Hating whitey is not the answer. The answer is, instead, loving everyone.
Thank you Libertarian Guy. God bless.
Lynn,
Your work in backing up your assertions is impressive, but you do ignore most of my arguments when I present them. These arguments are based on logic. Statistics are not just things you get from studies and books. It is a statistic that you don't need a study for that there is no overt racism on TV in the 21st century. If I'm wrong about this, you prove it--because you can't. I'm right. So, you resort to what I said--the idea of covert racism.
Covert racism, if it exists, which I don't believe it does, is better, in any case, than overt racism. So what if a dumbass is thinking "I hate blacks," but he is saying instead, "I love black people." Let him think what he wants. Let his actions be kind, and who cares about his thoughts. Do you care what this dumbass thinks anyway? I don't.
The only way that this dumbass's thoughts could hurt anyone, is if that thinking leads to actions that hurt people. Then, it becomes overt racism, and you've got him.
What are you going to do, hire the Thought Police? Or, the Minority Report of future crimes? Racism needs to be overt before we worry about it. You can't control how people think.
The fact is, overt racism does not exist in the media today, and that is progress! It's the only kind of progress you can measure with any kind of statistic.
Besides, all of your statistics just prove my points, in my opinion.
Today about thirty-percent of Black households fall into this middle income range.
Thirty-percent! That's huge. Do you know how far Blacks have come to get to this point? Good for them! Good for America! Good for White America!
This means, according to your statistic, that 1 out of every 3 Black families will make the middle class, at least. Sounds hopeful to me. Study hard, work hard, develop good relationships, and you'll make it. Get that chip off your shoulder.
Here's a statistic. Take one person, Larry Elder, a statistic of one. He grew up in Watts. He is Black. His father was a janitor. His mother a seamstress. He worked hard. He developed a sense of humor. He studied. He believed in himself. He knew there was racism, but he didn't let it bother him. Guess what happened? He's in that 1/3 of the middle class Blacks. He's not just there, he's in the top 1% of all Americans.
Can a person like Larry Elder fail in America? I doubt it. His color is meaningless. He would have succeeded if he were a purple Martian. Show me anyone in America, regardless of race or color or creed, who behaves like Larry Elder who can't make it. You can't.
Did he have any advantages? No. His parents weren't educated. He came from the hood. He had no money. He had no privilege. He was just going to succeed, no matter what.
He is a statistic. A statistic of one. You don't need to read a book to understand what happened with him.
In case you do want to read a book, though, you'll find his books full of statistics, which back up all my assertions. Read Larry Elder and/or Thomas Sowell, two brilliant black conservatives who refused to let life get them down, who don't buy the "racism is everywhere, and is keeping me down" theories.
Instead, what is keeping blacks down are all the enablers in the liberal community, who teach them that they can't get ahead without affirmative action, and can't succeed in a white man's world. They teach Blacks that the Man is against them, that the "system" has it in for them, and that racism will stop them from attaining their dreams. Nonsense. It's the liberals that are keeping them down.
Rock wrote: Your work in backing up your assertions is impressive, but you do ignore most of my arguments when I present them. These arguments are based on logic. Statistics are not just things you get from studies and books. It is a statistic that you don't need a study for that there is no overt racism on TV in the 21st century. If I'm wrong about this, you prove it--because you can't. I'm right. So, you resort to what I said--the idea of covert racism.
Rock, Just because I don't list a point for every one of your paragraphs does not entitle you to say that I ignore most of oury arguments when I present them. This isn't my blog and I ain't making a dime off of this site. You- get-what-you-get and I keep this type of activity in perspective. If I were composing an editorial, I'd spend more time on it. If I were writing a research paper, ditto. But this blog? The best I will do at this point is to collect some facts or offer my opinion.
I was completely unaware that I ignore most of your arguments. LOL.... For the author of a blog, you get viewer comments if and when they come. If you want true, actual dialogue, you should probably enlist in a Forum for more appropriate, more timely dialog. Blog comments are much more cumbersome to write, both editorially and compositionally. But I really don't believe that any one of your viewers will address every point and every argument that you make. You are just diverting here....
I must say that I am beyond disappointed in your continuing need to twist my words and my "logic" into your spin. I'm not buying it and anyone who is reading what I write, sees it as well as I do. Quite frankly, from what you have demonstrated, I am witnessing the exact opposite of what your blog title is stating about 'the no spin' zone. In fact, I have had to bring this problem up on a number of your blogs because you keep attempting to spin me into something I am not.
Many of the concluding statements that come from your line of what-you-call "logic" are misleading and incorrect. For example, this blog statement: The worst thing you can be called in America at this time is a racist, which is, in fact, evidence that our country is not racist. There is no racism in our media anymore.
How does this "logic" of yours achieve such a statement? You wrote: No racist name-calling in America EQUALS America is not racist.
THOSE ARE YOUR WORDS and I have placed those words into a logical equation. Your concluding remark? "There is no racism in our media anymore."
HUH?????? Hang your head, Rock. Where is this "logical" ? This is not only illogical, it is incorrect. And how in the world can you honestly say that OJ Simpson's guilt or innocence is, as you wrote " a personal litmus test for intelligence and objectivity"?
Let's review the definitions of RACISM and PREJUDICE, shall we? From the online Free Dictionary:
racist
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.
prejudice
1.a. An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.
1.b. A preconceived preference or idea.
2. The act or state of holding unreasonable preconceived judgments or convictions.
3. Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion.
4. Detriment or injury caused to a person by the preconceived, unfavorable conviction of another or others.
This entire blog entry "Racism versus Culturalism" is very prejudiced, Rock. But let's examine this one section at a time so that you can see just how prejudice works. And I am limiting myself to your blog-entry at this time, NOT your comments.
Recall the definitions I posted to see that prejudicial and/or
racist remarks are indeed found within this blog are:
1. Some Blacks are so sensitive that they see racism in everything.
2. Some Whites are so nervous that they pander to Blacks and Hispanics.
3. Nobody is ready yet to start speaking the truth.
4. Real African-Americans, and here I am going to get in trouble, those who come from Africa as immigrants, are superior in some ways to some American-born African-Americans, in one sense.
5. They have no pre-conceived notions about prejudice against Blacks.
6. If you think O.J. is innocent, then you are either stupid, or blinded by feelings. These feelings might be based on paranoia, or racism, or a rage against the system, whatever. They are clouding your thinking, and you ought to examine this.
7. For you Whites, if you know that O.J. is guilty, and you are afraid to say so, because you want to be seen as nice guys or girls and you don’t want to be considered racists—you are cowards.
8. Racism against Blacks in America is at an all-time low.
9. Most Republicans are not racists.
10. Most Whites are not racists.
You know that old saying, "Call a spade a spade" ? Yeah, I remember it, too.
Truthful Lynn, The Conservative
Lynn,
I don't think you're going to hang in here much longer, because I'm going to continue to call things as I see them. I'm sorry if you don't see things the way I do, but I don't. My logic is different from yours. I think it's perfectly obvious that my statements are true. You don't. I think you want me to prove a negative. You want me to prove that whites aren't racist. Why should I have to prove this? It's like saying, "Prove to me you aren't a wife beater." The operative words are innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
When you make blanket statements about a whole race, you need to prove your point of view. I don't need to prove that you are wrong. It's an ugly attitude to think that a whole race, or most of them, or even a lot of them, are prejudiced. Prove it. You haven't proven it to me. I hope you haven't proven it to America, or the world.
I believe you are wrong. I know, I'm probably mischaracterizing what you assert again, right? Sorry, I do the best I can. You seem to be saying, quite clearly, that racism is alive. I believe you even said this directly. Who are the racists? Whites, right?
I can agree that racism is alive. There are white, black, and Hispanic racists. Most whites, though, are not racist, as opposed to your view, as I see it.
I'm not going to jump through hoops Lynn to satisfy you. I run this blog as I see fit. I write what I write in full awareness. If I thought facts would convince you, I'd give them. You seem, like our friends the liberals, to have your mind made up on the issue, regardless of my impeccable logic, and facts. So, God bless you. These are your opinions. I have my opinions. Stop attacking me and my blog. Just say your opinions and let me have mine.
My goal is not to convince you, or anyone else. I find this futile. My goal is to add to the messages that get out into the world about these issues. To give another side to them. The liberal media are sending out lies every day. I am sending out the truth. You don't have to see it that way. Just say your truth.
I repeat. I don't think you'll be around much longer. You don't seem like you can handle the truth. And I'm going to continue to speak it.
Rock,
I have known a couple of Republicans who were fiscal conservatives, social liberals, smaller government advocates whose philosophy made sense to me. I think nowadays we call most of them Democrats, and they would be grouped into that segment labelled Liberal--the new N****word
That leaves 99% of them, who, when their prime motivators are uncovered, are predjudiced, homophobic, anti-semitic and racist regardless of religious leaning. When you add the religion factor, to the above prejudices, then you get the ones who have become the majority of office holders in our state and local government in Missouri. I see them as very clever wolves in sheeps clothing. The public persona is quite different from the private persona.
I think I could be a Republican, if the moderate Republican party of the past still existed. I would still disagree with the hawkish approach to foreign relations, and I would want workers to have living wages and adequate health care.
As to your problem with the broad brush stroke for my Republican friends/acquaintances, I say "if the Foo shits, wear it". When I answer the question raised in the book titled What's The Matter With Kansas?, I would have to say the majority vote against their self-interest because they are racist, anti-semitic and homophobic, and they respond to the non-stop affirmation of those beliefs on 24-hour Republican supported radio stations which spout nothing but hate, hate, hate.
On the OJ trial, I though he was guilty, my Mom thought he was innocent. I think the racist Mark Fuhrman and the infamous glove that didn't fit was probably the tipping point that caused the jury to find reasonable doubt. The Bronco chase as I recall was not admitted as evidence, it's been too long for me to remember all the details, but I was inclined to see him guilty at that point and never changed my mind.
Betty B.
Post a Comment