[Seamus]

[delete]

[Smitty]

(03-13-2012 07:20 PM)jariel Wrote:  

However, racism has to do with power. A Black American or Mexican or Dominican or insert other nationality can't do anything to impede the White American way of life in this country, therefore, they can not be racist.

I want to respond to this statement, but it would be kind of like responding to someone saying "french fries are good for you because you put them in a bowl and roll them around the lake."

You can't respond to something that makes absolutely no sense.

[jariel]

(03-13-2012 08:17 PM)Smitty Wrote:  

I want to respond to this statement, but it would be kind of like responding to someone saying "french fries are good for you because you put them in a bowl and roll them around the lake."

You can't respond to something that makes absolutely no sense.

You can't refute my statement, so you come up with an incredibly ridiculous analogy?

[jariel]

(03-13-2012 08:15 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

The idea that minorities can't be racist is one of the single dumbest lines of thinking I've ever heard, and unfortunately it gets parroted around quite a bit by otherwise intelligent people. The whole idea behind it is to downplay the racism (not prejudice, racism with a capital R) of a certain group and to keep the focus on racism of the so-called oppressor class (i.e. whites) so as to further a personal agenda.

So-called?

I think you'll have a hard time getting reasonable people to agree with you on that one.

There's nothing so-called about it.

[jariel]

(03-13-2012 08:09 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  

You're kidding me right? This is why I don't like these race threads. I get sucked into them out of curiosity. Then I see that it is the usual one sided slamming of white people being racist, when in fact, the blade cuts both ways.

You don't like race threads because a lot of information gets put out there that doesn't feed into your world view, especially as it pertains to the society that you've been programmed to believe is fair, just, and equal for all.

I didn't call White people racists.

I just explained that while non-whites can be prejudice, and in fact are -- and have good reason for being so -- they can't be called racists.

Yes, there are plenty of bigots out there -- mostly due to social programming -- I think that's about all I'd be willing to agree upon from the viewpoints that have been expressed thus far.

[Smitty]

(03-13-2012 08:25 PM)jariel Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 08:17 PM)Smitty Wrote:  

I want to respond to this statement, but it would be kind of like responding to someone saying "french fries are good for you because you put them in a bowl and roll them around the lake."

You can't respond to something that makes absolutely no sense.

You can't refute my statement, so you come up with an incredibly ridiculous analogy?

racist: : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

Saying that a minority cannot refute the white person's way of life therefore means they can't be a racist make absolutely no sense. So no one can refute your statement because it's a senseless statement. I'm surprised we have a race troll on this forum with 600+ posts. Pretty impressive.

[jariel]

(03-13-2012 08:36 PM)Smitty Wrote:  

racist: : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

Saying that a minority cannot refute the white person's way of life therefore means they can't be a racist make absolutely no sense. So no one can refute your statement because it's a senseless statement. I'm surprised we have a race troll on this forum with 600+ posts. Pretty impressive.

I didn't use the word "refute".

I said impede.

Are Mexicans a threat to your way of life?

Blacks have proven to not be.

So am I wrong?

I didn't start this thread, and I damn sure didn't troll it.

I made a very specific post relevant to the thread.

When people are getting it handed to them, all the personal attacks and diversions come out of nowhere.

[Seamus]

(03-13-2012 08:28 PM)jariel Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 08:15 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

The idea that minorities can't be racist is one of the single dumbest lines of thinking I've ever heard, and unfortunately it gets parroted around quite a bit by otherwise intelligent people. The whole idea behind it is to downplay the racism (not prejudice, racism with a capital R) of a certain group and to keep the focus on racism of the so-called oppressor class (i.e. whites) so as to further a personal agenda.

So-called?

I think you'll have a hard time getting reasonable people to agree with you on that one.

There's nothing so-called about it.

I used that expression for two reasons.

1) Broadly labeling any group of people (whites, blacks, Catholics, whatever) as "oppressors" is always going to be self-defeating, building up barriers to rational conversation.

2) I'd argue that if you're looking for an oppressor class, you're much better off looking at socioeconomic distinctions than pigmentation.

And this is all ignoring the fact that you cherry-picked one phrase of my argument without in any way responding to its content.

[jariel]

(03-13-2012 08:40 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

1) Broadly labeling any group of people (whites, blacks, Catholics, whatever) as "oppressors" is always going to be self-defeating, building up barriers to rational conversation.

2) I'd argue that if you're looking for an oppressor class, you're much better off looking at socioeconomic distinctions than pigmentation.

And this is all ignoring the fact that you cherry-picked one phrase of my argument without in any way responding to its content.

The problem with using a term like "so-called", is that it implies there's no validity to the subject in any way, shape, or form.

As to your points:

1. I didn't label anybody as oppressors.

2. Socioeconomics and pigmentation go hand-in-hand in the U.S.

[Enfant_Terrible]

(03-13-2012 07:20 PM)jariel Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 06:40 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  

How are black people and Mexicans not as racist or prejudice as white people?

Racism and prejudice are not interchangeable terms.

Everyone is prejudice about something and/or someone, and we can't really do anything about that.

However, racism has to do with power. A Black American or Mexican or Dominican or insert other nationality can't do anything to impede the White American way of life in this country, therefore, they can not be racist.

jariel, way off.

You need to get out of your cave, I've encountered many non-whites who've had perceived notions of superiority over other races and have power to impede their upward mobility.

I can easily refute your "___ can't be racist" argument by using your statement "racism has to do with power" (which is sometimes accurate):

A black girl (a non-white person) can easily block any other man access to her pussy (which shows power) other than black men because she thinks they're the greatest thing (showing reverence to their "superiority") in all aspects of life even though she's had little interaction with other types of men to inform her preference.

[jariel]

(03-13-2012 08:51 PM)Enfant_Terrible Wrote:  

jariel, way off.

You need to get out of your cave, I've encountered many non-whites who've had perceived notions of superiority over other races and have power to impede their upward mobility.

I can easily refute your "___ can't be racist" argument by using your statement "racism has to do with power" (which is sometimes accurate):

A black girl (a non-white person) can easily block any other man access to her pussy (which shows power) other than a preferred ethnicity because she thinks they're the greatest thing (showing reverence to their "superiority").

Let's be clear.

I'm way off because you believe I am, not because I actually am.

You're way off comparing pussy to standards of living.

[Seamus]

(03-13-2012 08:46 PM)jariel Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 08:40 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

1) Broadly labeling any group of people (whites, blacks, Catholics, whatever) as "oppressors" is always going to be self-defeating, building up barriers to rational conversation.

2) I'd argue that if you're looking for an oppressor class, you're much better off looking at socioeconomic distinctions than pigmentation.

And this is all ignoring the fact that you cherry-picked one phrase of my argument without in any way responding to its content.

The problem with using a term like "so-called", is that it implies there's no validity to the subject in any way, shape, or form.

As to your points:

1. I didn't label anybody as oppressors.

2. Socioeconomics and pigmentation go hand-in-hand in the U.S.

1. True, you never labeled anybody as oppressors. You just criticized me for refusing to do so.

2. I completely agree, to a certain extent (although Occupy Wall St. was one pasty protest).

My argument wasn't that minorities don't experience discrimination, because of course they do. My argument was that being white isn't a prerequisite for being racist, and that re-defining a word to further your own ideology is silly and disingenuous. But it seems we've been side-tracked by a straw-man...

[Enfant_Terrible]

(03-13-2012 08:53 PM)jariel Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 08:51 PM)Enfant_Terrible Wrote:  

jariel, way off.

You need to get out of your cave, I've encountered many non-whites who've had perceived notions of superiority over other races and have power to impede their upward mobility.

I can easily refute your "___ can't be racist" argument by using your statement "racism has to do with power" (which is sometimes accurate):

A black girl (a non-white person) can easily block any other man access to her pussy (which shows power) other than a preferred ethnicity because she thinks they're the greatest thing (showing reverence to their "superiority").

Let's be clear.

I'm way off because you believe I am, not because I actually am.

You're way off comparing pussy to standards of living.

My belief was informed by my numerous real life experiences which easily disprove your claim.

Power is power whether you hold the pussy or purse strings.

And you're way off when you think I'm comparing pussy to standards of living. I'm not comparing, I'm applying your concept to a different domain where racism can manifest itself.

Racism is a social issue, and sex is a social act where a person has power to choose who they can give pleasure to so it's fine to use sex as an example to refute your argument about "non-whites who cannot be racist"

[jariel]

(03-13-2012 09:05 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

My argument wasn't that minorities don't experience discrimination, because of course they do. My argument was that being white isn't a prerequisite for being racist, and that re-defining a word to further your own ideology is silly and disingenuous. But it seems we've been side-tracked by a straw-man...

That appears to be the case, and I'll exit stage left on this:

Blacks, Latinos, and other minorities in this country don't really own and/or control anything, and that's where you get the absence of power, and with that absence of power, they can't implement a system such as racism that impedes the way of life for others.

[Seamus]

(03-13-2012 09:11 PM)jariel Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 09:05 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

My argument wasn't that minorities don't experience discrimination, because of course they do. My argument was that being white isn't a prerequisite for being racist, and that re-defining a word to further your own ideology is silly and disingenuous. But it seems we've been side-tracked by a straw-man...

That appears to be the case, and I'll exit stage left on this:

Blacks, Latinos, and other minorities in this country don't really own and/or control anything, and that's where you get the absence of power, and with that absence of power, they can't implement a system such as racism that impedes the way of life for others.

That's what you don't seem to understand. Racism isn't a system, it's a belief or mindset. And this isn't a case of agree to disagree. This is a case of agree to pick up a dictionary.

[speakeasy]

(03-13-2012 08:09 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  

Either way, I won't say anything else on this thread because I'm obviously detracting from the oh so productive point of this thread. Being, poor white men from the south are scary racists who could possibly be violent too!

When I said it was scary, the racial beliefs were only one component. It's also their asinine beliefs that religions should be intertwined with the government and the economy and their foolishness in thinking that a party that serves the wealthy is in the best interest of the poorest state in the county. There's got to be something seriously wrong with you if your teeth are literally falling out yet you would oppose any help from the government in getting dental care while corporations get billions in aid packages. I think these "values voters" are a scary and deluded lot.

[speakeasy]

(03-13-2012 08:34 PM)jariel Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 08:09 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  

You're kidding me right? This is why I don't like these race threads. I get sucked into them out of curiosity. Then I see that it is the usual one sided slamming of white people being racist, when in fact, the blade cuts both ways.

You don't like race threads because a lot of information gets put out there that doesn't feed into your world view, especially as it pertains to the society that you've been programmed to believe is fair, just, and equal for all.

I didn't call White people racists.

I just explained that while non-whites can be prejudice, and in fact are -- and have good reason for being so -- they can't be called racists.

Yes, there are plenty of bigots out there -- mostly due to social programming -- I think that's about all I'd be willing to agree upon from the viewpoints that have been expressed thus far.

Jariel I have to disagree with you on this and agree somewhat with the white guys here. Blacks of course CAN be racists at the individual level. As can Asians and Latinos and any other group. If a group of black guys beat a white guy within an inch of his life for dating a black woman(this was a news story back east somewhere I read), they are racists. There's no if/and/or but about it. And they would be every bit as racist as any skinhead that beat up a black dude for dating a white girl. Minorities are often even racist to each other such as blacks terrorizing Koreans or Mexicans fucking with blacks(as happened to me in high school).

Now where I think the difference comes is in institutional racism. There are black people who are racists, but there is no institutional racism against white people. You'll never see a situation where some majority black corporation is underpaying whites, or where whites are being given the death penalty more often than blacks, or whites being sentenced more for cocaine than blacks are for crack...to give a few examples. Whites can almost completely avoid blacks if they so choose and survive just fine. Blacks that want to thrive in American CANNOT avoid whites and must learn their culture and ways and play by their rules to survive. The reverse is not true at all. Think about the Ivy League whites Athlone is talking about in this thread. It would make no difference if any of them had no blacks friends, lived nowhere near blacks and never spoke to one. But do you think Athlone can survive by playing the same rule but in reverse. Hell no. So that's why we say that the power behind the racism is not the same, although of course anyone can be racist at the individual level.

[Deluge]

(03-14-2012 03:41 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

Now where I think the difference comes is in institutional racism. There are black people who are racists, but there is no institutional racism against white people. You'll never see a situation where some majority black corporation is underpaying whites, or where whites are being given the death penalty more often than blacks, or whites being sentenced more for cocaine than blacks are for crack...to give a few examples. Whites can almost completely avoid blacks if they so choose and survive just fine. Blacks that want to thrive in American CANNOT avoid whites and must learn their culture and ways and play by their rules to survive. The reverse is not true at all. Think about the Ivy League whites Athlone is talking about in this thread. It would make no difference if any of them had no blacks friends, lived nowhere near blacks and never spoke to one. But do you think Athlone can survive by playing the same rule but in reverse. Hell no. So that's why we say that the power behind the racism is not the same, although of course anyone can be racist at the individual level.

Great post. Couldn't have said it better myself. Pardon the allusion to feminist views on rape, but (institutional racism is about power.

Case in point, Apartheid South Africa vs modern South Africa. In the former the Whites dominated the country and perpetrated Apartheid. In modern South Africa, the blacks dominate the country and as such the farm killings of white Boer farmers take place (albeit on a far smaller scale than the apartheid).

[Hencredible Casanova]

(03-14-2012 03:41 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 08:34 PM)jariel Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 08:09 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  

You're kidding me right? This is why I don't like these race threads. I get sucked into them out of curiosity. Then I see that it is the usual one sided slamming of white people being racist, when in fact, the blade cuts both ways.

You don't like race threads because a lot of information gets put out there that doesn't feed into your world view, especially as it pertains to the society that you've been programmed to believe is fair, just, and equal for all.

I didn't call White people racists.

I just explained that while non-whites can be prejudice, and in fact are -- and have good reason for being so -- they can't be called racists.

Yes, there are plenty of bigots out there -- mostly due to social programming -- I think that's about all I'd be willing to agree upon from the viewpoints that have been expressed thus far.

Jariel I have to disagree with you on this and agree somewhat with the white guys here. Blacks of course CAN be racists at the individual level. As can Asians and Latinos and any other group. If a group of black guys beat a white guy within an inch of his life for dating a black woman(this was a news story back east somewhere I read), they are racists. There's no if/and/or but about it. And they would be every bit as racist as any skinhead that beat up a black dude for dating a white girl. Minorities are often even racist to each other such as blacks terrorizing Koreans or Mexicans fucking with blacks(as happened to me in high school).

Now where I think the difference comes is in institutional racism. There are black people who are racists, but there is no institutional racism against white people. You'll never see a situation where some majority black corporation is underpaying whites, or where whites are being given the death penalty more often than blacks, or whites being sentenced more for cocaine than blacks are for crack...to give a few examples. Whites can almost completely avoid blacks if they so choose and survive just fine. Blacks that want to thrive in American CANNOT avoid whites and must learn their culture and ways and play by their rules to survive. The reverse is not true at all. Think about the Ivy League whites Athlone is talking about in this thread. It would make no difference if any of them had no blacks friends, lived nowhere near blacks and never spoke to one. But do you think Athlone can survive by playing the same rule but in reverse. Hell no. So that's why we say that the power behind the racism is not the same, although of course anyone can be racist at the individual level.

Well said man. There's also class which is equally as potent a factor as race in the US. They often go hand in hand, but not always (i.e. minorities in the Ivy League are often from the upper economic tier of their respective racial groups). There are indeed wealthy and powerful people of color who can easily become, or just naturally are, racist or discriminatory, especially those who own their own businesses and choose to hire, promote, and fire people purely for discriminatory, even racist, factors. These are people with power and can use it to perpetuate racism.

Also, to your point about minorities being racist towards each other, what I just said points to that as well, but I'll never forget experiencing flat out discrimination by a black barista at a coffee shop I went to in Berkeley, California.

She was a young teenage girl who apparently was a relative of the owner. He probably let her work there during summer to save up some money. From the moment I entered she had a nasty attitude. I asked her if the coffee shop had wifi. She said, "yes but you need to buy something." I said sure, no problem. There were two people in line in front of me though and the tables were somewhat crowded so I wanted to snag one by putting my bag down and then returning to the line to make my order. As soon as she saw me making my way over to the table she said, "HEY! You need to buy something!" I said I know but that I was securing a table first. She then immediately turned her attention to the white man in line and said "what can I get for you, baby?" Unbelievable.

I then told her I didn't like her attitude. She said, "well, you can always leave." I just smiled. She then just snapped and told me to get out or she's calling the police. That's when I went off.

I ridiculed her in front of the entire establishment and then told her to call the police. I called her bluff. Then some man who was apparently a fixture of the establishment had entered and she knew him and apparently he was her "uncle." He was a cool older man and told me to just relax and speak with the owner when he comes in. He gave me his number, etc.

I spoke with the owner, and this brother was a disappointment. Keep in mind I'm a smartly dressed, educated black man and this guy tells me "well I'm sorry what happened to you. I can get you free coffee or w/e you want but keep in mind we get a lot of homeless people in this coffee shop and they do crazy things so she was probably shook." I became indignant. I asked him do I look homeless? Absolutely not.

It was the worst customer service experience of my life. I immediately yelped that business and gave a terrible review based on what happened.

So I completely agree. Minorities certainly can be racist. Too many examples to cite....

[speakeasy]

^^^ Damn, HC, that's a crazy story!

[Smitty]

(03-14-2012 03:41 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

Now where I think the difference comes is in institutional racism. There are black people who are racists, but there is no institutional racism against white people. You'll never see a situation where some majority black corporation is underpaying whites, or where whites are being given the death penalty more often than blacks, or whites being sentenced more for cocaine than blacks are for crack...to give a few examples. Whites can almost completely avoid blacks if they so choose and survive just fine. Blacks that want to thrive in American CANNOT avoid whites and must learn their culture and ways and play by their rules to survive. The reverse is not true at all. Think about the Ivy League whites Athlone is talking about in this thread. It would make no difference if any of them had no blacks friends, lived nowhere near blacks and never spoke to one. But do you think Athlone can survive by playing the same rule but in reverse. Hell no. So that's why we say that the power behind the racism is not the same, although of course anyone can be racist at the individual level.

Ha, you've never worked for the United States government, have you? If you want to work in a system that is set up to advance people of color and women, then go work for the government. And after you're done, come back here and tell me there is no institutional racism against whites.

What do you mean when you say blacks must play by white rules to survive. Give me specific examples of these rules.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(03-14-2012 05:02 AM)Smitty Wrote:  

(03-14-2012 03:41 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

Now where I think the difference comes is in institutional racism. There are black people who are racists, but there is no institutional racism against white people. You'll never see a situation where some majority black corporation is underpaying whites, or where whites are being given the death penalty more often than blacks, or whites being sentenced more for cocaine than blacks are for crack...to give a few examples. Whites can almost completely avoid blacks if they so choose and survive just fine. Blacks that want to thrive in American CANNOT avoid whites and must learn their culture and ways and play by their rules to survive. The reverse is not true at all. Think about the Ivy League whites Athlone is talking about in this thread. It would make no difference if any of them had no blacks friends, lived nowhere near blacks and never spoke to one. But do you think Athlone can survive by playing the same rule but in reverse. Hell no. So that's why we say that the power behind the racism is not the same, although of course anyone can be racist at the individual level.

Ha, you've never worked for the United States government, have you? If you want to work in a system that is set up to advance people of color and women, then go work for the government. And after you're done, come back here and tell me there is no institutional racism against whites.

What do you mean when you say blacks must play by white rules to survive. Give me specific examples of these rules.

Good point about the US government. That is true.


I think he means that in order for a black person to "succeed," he has to be unlike a "stereotypical black man."

However, I would disagree with that. A black man has to be professional. I don't think that being professional is "white rules." I think the suggestion that it does highlights a fundamental dysfunctional thinking in segments of the African-American community.

Anglo-saxon work ethic applies to everyone. Our economy is built on those values. Cultures that mirror that work ethic and also value education tend to do well in the US, even blacks. Black men from the Caribbean and Africa, as well as particular communities within the African-American community, succeed for those same reasons. There are many white people in the US who don't succeed as a result of not following that precept, which only become more important as competition from all over the world increases.

[Smitty]

(03-14-2012 05:10 AM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

Good point about the US government. That is true.

I think he means that in order for a black person to "succeed," he has to be unlike a "stereotypical black man."

However, I would disagree with that. A black man has to be professional. I don't think that being professional is "white rules." Anglo-saxon work ethic applies to everyone. Our economy is built on those values. Cultures that mirror that work ethic and also value education tend to do well in the US, even blacks. Black men from the Caribbean and Africa, as well as particular communities within the African-American community, succeed for those same reasons. There are many white people in the US who don't succeed for not following that precept, which only become more important as competition from all over increases.

Thanks for the reply, HC. As always, well-written and makes sense.

[speakeasy]

(03-14-2012 05:02 AM)Smitty Wrote:  

Ha, you've never worked for the United States government, have you? If you want to work in a system that is set up to advance people of color and women, then go work for the government. And after you're done, come back here and tell me there is no institutional racism against whites.

What are you talking about? Paper pushers and low level clerks and bureaucrats? No dude, go where the power is. Look out over the floor of congress and it's a sea of white male faces. 99% of the Supreme Court justices in American history have been white males. As have ALL the presidents up until 2008.

Quote:

What do you mean when you say blacks must play by white rules to survive. Give me specific examples of these rules.

Look at Obama for instance. He can't be seen as ever taking up for a black person even if it's appropriate in any instance to do so or else he'll be considered "anti-white" by conservative media. Look at the Henry Louis Gates issue. All he said is that the cops acted stupidly for arresting a man that was proven to be innocent and inside his home. And whites went nuts. Then he had to go and have a beer with the arresting officer just to assuage white America's paranoia that he was Malcolm X reincarnate for simply stating the obvious. You think that shit would've happened in reverse? What if a black officer arrested Rush Limbaugh in his own home under the same circumstances and a conservative white president said the officer acted stupidly, you think whites would've been up in arms about it? You think he would be forced to have a beer with arresting black officer? HELL NO. If he appoints a minority to any position(such as Sotomayor), he is accused of practicing affirmative action and being racist against whites. He had to release a damn birth certificate to PROVE he's American because a huge swath of white America thinks he's a Muslim born in Africa. What white president has ever had to release their birth certificate while in office just to shut up half the country that doesn't think you're a "real" American? And we can guess what they mean by real American.

[Deluge]

(03-14-2012 06:28 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

He had to release a damn birth certificate to PROVE he's American because a huge swath of white America thinks he's a Muslim born in Africa. What white president has ever had to release their birth certificate while in office just to shut up half the country that doesn't think you're a "real" American? And we can guess what they mean by real American.

speakeasy speaks the truth, as always. I love the bit quoted especially.