Racism

Post by 240140

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by MyTie

You know, I think that you use the same definition of racism that the rest of us do, Elura. However, I think you excuse racists who are oppressed. Racism is wrong, no matter who is racist. If some dude spits on me for the color of my skin, and he is oppressed, or some dude spits on me for the color of my skin, and he is not oppressed, the racist action is equally abhorrent to me, and both of actions are equally racist.

Post by 240140

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by MyTie

It seems to me that, by your understanding, racism is just racial discrimination enacted by a person who belongs to a race with a history of oppression.

The problem with that, is that every race has a history of oppression. Every race has owned slaves of different races. This isn't a problem that "white people" have, and to insist that it is, and say that some races are incapable of having this problem, is wildly blind to the history of Earth. This is a human problem. I think that's what bothers so many people in this thread about your views. Your views are racist, in that you attribute a problem to ONLY CERTAIN races. You discriminate, and say "this race is capable of this evil, but this other race isn't". Ryja is right. This is an individual problem, and can be a problem for any human, no matter the color of their skin.Here's the thing. A black man having racial prejudice against a white man sucks. A white man having racial prejudice sucks BUT it is also dangerous.Here's the thing. White people in Africa have been threatened, beaten, and even murdered, with the approval of the local government, for the crime of owning a farm while white.

If I were to walk into a predominately black neighborhood in Detroit, or Jackson Mississippi, I'd stand a good chance of physical harm caused to me because I am white.

So, explain to me if you still stand by that statement.

Post by 240140

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by MyTie

we're not going to see eye to eye

This shouldn't be your goal. I consider most of our conversation, and really, all debate conversations, to be for the benefit of the onlooker, and I never ever have the goal of actually changing the mind of the person with whom I am engaging.

Post by 240140

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by MyTie

You see why I'm leaving then?

Yep. You have accomplished your goal. Well done.

Post by Gone

Racism is defined as prejudice or discrimination of any kind based on the thought that members of a specific race have inherent qualities specific to their race. It happens on both a societal and individual level. I think the better word for what you're talking about, Elura, is oppression.

See this is where it's clear that we use different definitions as I don't think it's racism if it is simply individual prejudice.
If oppression between the races was not a thing at all, maybe I'd be okay with your definition but maybe then we wouldn't even need a specific word for it.
The thing is though, most of the examples of white privilege that you listed are a result of individual racism, rather than racism at a societal level.

If a black man is passed over for a job in favor of a white man, then that's because the person who does the hiring is racist, not because the company itself has racist policies. If a black man is wrongly convicted of a crime because of his race, then that's because the jury was racist, not because the courts hold a higher standard of proof for whites than for blacks.

And believe me if the man who was doing the hiring admitted he used race as a criteria, he would be immediately fired. And if anybody on that jury so much as hinted that they convicted the man because he was black, that conviction would be overturned.

I guess the one example that I would say is on a societal accepted level is racial profiling. And really that's just based on numbers. Statistically more street level crimes are committed by blacks than by whites, so that's who the police look for. On the same hand most serial killers are white men, so when the FBI puts together a profile for one of these people, they're usually looking for a white guy. Same deal with child molestation. When a child goes missing, and they rule our parental kidnapping, they usually look for a white guy. They don't racially profile shoplifters as much, but if they did they would be looking for middle aged white women. Really racial profiling is neutral.

You see why I'm leaving then?

Yep. You have accomplished your goal. Well done.

Don't be antagonistic.

Post by MyTie

You see why I'm leaving then?

Yep. You have accomplished your goal. Well done.

Don't be antagonistic.

I was trying to be stoic, actually. I actually wanted to dissect her last post, but that would have antagonized her, so I just left that reply, in hopes of not instigating anything. It's like, the 5th post of hers in the last 2 days that I have let stand without feeling the flames of cross examination. I guess tone didn't come through that well.

Post by MrMojoRisin

Even if there is a case of this, black people no longer benefit from it. If white people were slaves 8000 years ago, then racism against white people was possible. Guess what? We live in the presence.

So 8000 years ago is the past, but 150 years ago is the "presence"?

When were white people oppressed by another race in modern history? When were white people slaves to another race? Please do tell.

Christian white slaves to Islamic masters even. I guess that would justify Islamophobia for you?

Post by Gone

So 8000 years ago is the past, but 150 years ago is the "presence"?

You really can't see the difference there?

Post by MrMojoRisin

Post by Hyperspacerebel

There's a distinction that needs to be made here. Arguing that past slavery is a historical cause of a current situation is not the same as arguing that past slavery is a moral justification of a current situation, and it seems like that latter is being set up as a strawman of the former.

Post by Gone

So 8000 years ago is the past, but 150 years ago is the "presence"?

You really can't see the difference there?

Not in the context of the argument, no. Slavery has been abolished in America long enough that it is History. You cannot exclude one part of history, and include another, just because only one part helps your argument.

White slaves were also very common during the same time as African slavery. Where is the outcry from the Irish?

First of all there is massive outcry from the Irish in regards to the atrocities committed against them by the British Empire for hundreds of years. Believe me, half of my family was born in Ireland, we still make visits, and even today there is still a lot of resentment over there regarding the very type of thing you listed as an example. The fact that the African slave trade is more well known is due to America having more of a global presence than Ireland, largely thanks to the media, and because it happened on a much wider scale.

Second, the slave trade in America had ramifications that still echo through history, to our current lives today. It's not the same as slavery that happened thousands of years ago in cultures that no longer exist. It happened 150 years ago in the very country many of us debating here still live in. And blacks weren't granted their full legal rights until about a hundred years after that. The civil rights movement was only about 50 years ago.

Finally, nobody is using slavery as a justification for minorities getting special consideration, as you seem to be suggesting. The only point made was that slavery has had socioeconomic ramifications for the black community that are still very present today.

For the record I don't think that minorities should be given special consideration due to the past. I'm a very big proponent of personal responsibility. If you grow up in a ghetto and you get into the gang life, then that's on you, don't blame society. But the arguments you're making are kind of stupid.

Post by MrMojoRisin

Believe me, half of my family was born in Ireland, we still make visits, and even today there is still a lot of resentment over there regarding the very type of thing you listed as an example.

But yet Ireland kept Catholic women by the thousands as "unpaid labor" (slavery?) at recently as 1996.

It seems to me, that reading here, you have to look pretty hard to find any culture that does not have some history with slavery. I am starting to think that this

This is a human problem.

is the most relevant quote to this whole debate.

Post by Adamsm

You'd be hard pressed to find a human civilization that didn't practice slavery at some point in their history.

Post by Skreeran

For the record I don't think that minorities should be given special consideration due to the past. I'm a very big proponent of personal responsibility. If you grow up in a ghetto and you get into the gang life, then that's on you, don't blame society. But the arguments you're making are kind of stupid.I don't think anyone should be given special consideration because of the circumstances of their ancestors either, but I think society is very much a factor in the gang culture that has risen out of urban poverty.

In prison, joining a gang is almost a necessity if you don't want to be beaten up or killed, and then once you're in, it's very, very hard to get out. As I understand it, urban gangs are much the same way. You're not really offered a choice: it's join a gang or be preyed upon by gangs.

Post by Hyperspacerebel

In case you didn't know, recently three ladies were rescued after having been missing for several year. And man named Charles Ramsey, a black man, is the one who broke them out of the house they were being held in. During an interview afterwards he had this to say:

I knew something was wrong when a little pretty white girl ran into a black man's arms. Something is wrong here. Dead giveaway.

I have a couple questions about this. Is that statement, as he said it, racist? If a white person had said it, would that have been racist? With this story and quote circulating the news everywhere, is it helpful or harmful to people's perceptions of black people?

Post by MyTie

I have a couple questions about this. Is that statement, as he said it, racist? If a white person had said it, would that have been racist? With this story and quote circulating the news everywhere, is it helpful or harmful to people's perceptions of black people?

His statement is accurate. I would say that it is unusual for a "pretty little girl" of any color to run into a stranger's arms, of any color. I imagine he sees a lot of things through the prism of racism, as so many black people in this country do, and white people for that matter.

Racism

Post Reply