jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (60 posts)

How Do We Help White People Get Over Slavery and Empire?

  1. Will Apse profile image90
    Will Apseposted 4 months ago

    Causing suffering to others is not an easy thing to do. Very few people are born without empathy and most understand other people's suffering on a visceral level.

    To be able to systematically abuse, exploit and enslave other people requires serious damage to the soul/psyche (whichever term you prefer).

    Trauma of the kind that combat typically results in, can be a constant companion for veterans and the suffering is often visited on family and communities.

    It can take generations for the wounds to a family to heal if a father is lost or a father returns home with uncontrollable feelings of rage and despair and fear. Many returning men cannot be the fathers that they would like to be.

    In the same way, there is no doubt that the emotional damage inflicted on white people during earlier times is still with us.

    Many were obliged to mistreat or kill others during the colonial period, slavery and the countless wars since, simply to put food on the table for their families.

    How do we deal with the coarsening of values, brutality, rage and simple loss of humanity that our history gifts us?

    1. Credence2 profile image85
      Credence2posted 4 months ago in reply to this

      I am not white and I don't hold the peculiar institution that was abolished over 150 years ago against anyone living today.

      I am opposed to those that deny the effects of history on the current situation.

      There always is a need to carefully delineate problems within our community that are within our purview to solve and those that stem from structural racism within our society. BOTH are factors.

      People that continue to say that the cause is either all one or the other are in error. And, there are crowds on both sides that do.

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 4 months ago in reply to this

        "I am opposed to those that deny the effects of history on the current situation."

        Agreed.  I am also opposed to those that deny the negative effects of unending charity and legal racism (this is history as well) on the current situation.  The first has had almost zero positives and the second, while a little better, has not accomplished much positive while promoting more racism and hatred.

        1. Credence2 profile image85
          Credence2posted 4 months ago in reply to this

          What is legal racism from your perspective? Are you really one of those Trump people, living in the la-la land of racial resentment that believe that blacks enjoy any real advantage in the hiring process?

          Does it do me any good to acquire statistics that prove the contrary of your belief so that you can dismiss it and say that was not the personal experience of your first cousin?

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 4 months ago in reply to this

            Forcing companies to hire based on skin color comes to mind.  So does college admissions based on skin color.

            Produce all the statistics that you want - to those that were denied a job or admission because they weren't black it won't matter one iota.

      2. mrpopo profile image87
        mrpopoposted 4 months ago in reply to this

        "There always is a need to carefully delineate problems within our community that are within our purview to solve and those that stem from structural racism within our society. BOTH are factors."

        How can you determine which is your responsibility and which stems from structural racism of the past? And how does that change your approach to solving the problem?

        1. Credence2 profile image85
          Credence2posted 4 months ago in reply to this

          No need for a drawn out philosophical based
          Interchange here, Mr. P

          Those elements of life involving family, management of resources, you know, things that I can control as an individual.

          The other is composed of equality in treatment by public institutions within this society, availability of equal opportunity in education, employment. Equal treatment under law enforcement and criminal justice systems. This includes both patent and LATENT violations.

          1. mrpopo profile image87
            mrpopoposted 4 months ago in reply to this

            Not trying to engage in a philosophical debate. You said that the effects of history are still being felt to this day. I was wondering how that fact would change your approach to solving the problems in the black community.

            1. Credence2 profile image85
              Credence2posted 4 months ago in reply to this

              Well, Mr. P,  I can only speak for myself. But if I could do it because the 'effects' were of adverse nature, we as a group must work harder than the typical white guy on the street to acquire any sort parity.

              You are only allowed to enter the marathon only after others have had an essential head start. This history of structural disadvantage is no fault of our own. We have going have to run harder, with a greater sense of purpose and allowing for fewer distractions.

              That is the basic outline, I have discussed this concern in a hub written 4 years, if you really want to know and care to look.

              http://hubpages.com/politics/One-Progre … ca-Part-II

    2. ahorseback profile image47
      ahorsebackposted 4 months ago in reply to this

      My suggestion , Get over the fact that slavery   affected  no one alive today , either as a slave owner  nor as a slave .   I truly believe that threads like this one are nothing more than " baiting  calls "  for liberal apologists , controversy  birthers and  immature  attention seekers .

  2. mrpopo profile image87
    mrpopoposted 4 months ago

    The first step is to stop acting as if slavery, empire and war have only been done by white people. Every other race and nearly every ancient civilization have participated in these actions. That way you won't feel the need to single out whites as if they are the only race who have damaged their "soul" or "psyche."

    The second step is to realize that white nations were the first to abolish slavery and whites risked their lives enforcing the abolition of slavery. That way you'll realize that your "soul" or "psyche" isn't as damaged as you think it is.

    The third step is to stop blaming yourselves for crimes committed by your ancestors. It's foolish to think the sins of the father pass down to the son. It's an antiquated and religious meme that has no bearing on your actual "soul." Or if you're going to do that, why stop at Europeans and Americans? Why not go further to helping Egyptian descendants get over slavery and empire? Or helping humans get over our ancestors' extinction of Neanderthals? Or the extinction of countless other species that our ancestors had a hand in killing off?

    1. Will Apse profile image90
      Will Apseposted 4 months ago in reply to this

      I wouldn't disagree with any of that. But the question I was asking was how do we deal with the fallout from slavery and colonialism among white people (which means primarily in the US and Europe).

      I would be delighted if you start a thread about the fallout of the Egyptian empire.

      Or are are you simply trying to avoid dealing with stuff that is a little too close for comfort?

      I find it hard to understand the importance of 'victimhood' in US culture. It has a resonance well beyond the actual meaning of the word.

      Perhaps it is just too difficult to bear other people's suffering, if only for a moment?

      I'm open to suggestions.

      1. mrpopo profile image87
        mrpopoposted 4 months ago in reply to this

        You were asking how to deal with the "emotional damage, coarsening of values, brutality, rage and simple loss of humanity" that is part of white history. I gave you a 3-step process on how to do just that:

        1) stop thinking whites were the only race to engage in such actions (avoids resentment, relieves collective guilt)
        2) take some pride in some of the more noble actions your ancestors took (relieves collective guilt, restores collective pride)
        3) stop blaming white descendants for the crimes of their white ancestors (stops guilt entirely)

        What part are you having trouble with?

        Yes, I'm aware you're focusing on whites in the US and Europe. Why stop there? Why focus on whites in the US and Europe? Why focus on whites specifically?

        I don't feel the need to make a thread about the fallout of the Egyptian empire. If you're so inclined, you could copy and paste your speech and replace "whites" with "Egyptians." Or "Asians." Or "Africans." Or "Arabs." Or "Polynesians." Or "Native Indians." See the pattern?

        I'm not sure why you think I'm avoiding anything. I've given you a simple 3-step process for you to follow and you chose to ignore it. If you're open to suggestions, my suggestion is for you to stop ignoring that process.

        Personally, none of this is too close to me. I've never participated in the enslavement, mistreatment or killing of others. Or are you suggesting I should feel guilty or emotionally damaged for the potential crimes of my ancestors in some undefined moment in the past?

        I don't have a problem bearing other people's suffering, but whose suffering are you talking about here? We are not in colonial times. Slavery in the US and Europe ended centuries ago. Maybe you should be making a thread about the slavery currently going on in certain Asian, Arab and African countries?

        1. Will Apse profile image90
          Will Apseposted 4 months ago in reply to this

          I really don't see why it is a problem to focus on white people in the US and America. I think we are on safer ground when it comes to knowing what we are talking about.

          I asked the original question for a variety of reasons but mainly because it is obvious there are massive continuing issues with real life consequences.

          A lot of people still seem to think it is excusable for police to kill disproportionate numbers of black people, for example.

          Many believe that it is reasonable for police to identify black people as especially dangerous and in need of greater control and a more violent response.

          When black people establish a democratic movement to challenge these perceptions it is immediately denounced as a terrorist group by many whites.

          When you come across staggeringly irrational assertions, like this, there is no choice but to start digging into history and also people's psyches to get a sense of what is going on.

          Why do white people feel under attack when the facts tell a completely different story?

          I doubt anyone has a complete answer.

          Personally, I suspect that the whole 'get over it' attitude is central to understanding  the strangeness of what is going on. And at the core of that is a desperate rejection of reality because it is painful for one reason or another.

          1. mrpopo profile image87
            mrpopoposted 4 months ago in reply to this

            The real problem isn't on focusing on the historical damages of white people in the US or Europe (however, it is curious that the only race that is ever scrutinized in this manner is whites). The problem is focusing on the historical damages of any race, anywhere. Nobody alive is responsible for the crimes of their ancestors. How do we deal with the coarsening of values, brutality, rage and simple loss of humanity that our history gifts us? We stop acting as if we're responsible for our racial histories.

            I'm glad you brought up rejection of reality. I'm all for accurate interpretations of reality, so let's take this one claim at a time. We'll start with this one:

            A lot of people still seem to think it is excusable for police to kill disproportionate numbers of black people, for example.

            Do you have evidence that the police are actually unlawfully killing disproportionate numbers of black people?

            1. Will Apse profile image90
              Will Apseposted 4 months ago in reply to this

              The Guardian was the first to start collecting data on cop killings in the US. Includes all ethnicities with comparisons.

              http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-i … s-database

              Many of those killed were unarmed, worth digging through.

              This mentally ill guy was killed in his own home:

              http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/18/us/da … man-video/

              Living in a nice suburban home is no protection.

              1. mrpopo profile image87
                mrpopoposted 4 months ago in reply to this

                So you haven't actually gone through the numbers to determine disproportionality in shootings. You just think it's disproportional.

                This recent study claims that police are more likely to shoot whites than blacks, and 20% less likely to shoot a black suspect when lethal force might have been justified: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upsho … hone-share

                This is despite the fact that blacks are more likely to commit violent crimes than other demographics: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/20 … s/table-43

                And perhaps more pertinently, the fact that 40% of police officer homicides are done by blacks: https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2011/officers … sly-killed

                Note that the study also did not take into account how compliant blacks are when dealing with law enforcement. If you are non-compliant with the officer's instructions, for instance by refusing to exit your vehicle, you can be arrested for obstruction. If you resist that arrest, you will be further escalating the use of force. That alone might explain the 15-20% disparity in use of force by police. However, as previously mentioned, the disparity in shootings is actually favoring blacks in that they are shot less often compared to whites.

                One thing worth noting with the unarmed category found in data like The Guardian's. Unarmed means the suspect did not have a weapon during the altercation. Incidents where the suspect takes control of the officer's weapon, fashions a weapon out of another instrument or simply beats the officer with his fists are all considered "unarmed." There are also unarmed incidents where the suspect drives off in his vehicle and prompts a high-speed car chase. All of these scenarios can be reasonably justified uses of lethal force, yet they are included under the unarmed category.

                1. Live to Learn profile image81
                  Live to Learnposted 4 months ago in reply to this

                  Out of curiosity, why do you think all the videos we see where it strongly suggests excessive use of force features black males being mishandled by the police? Everyone these days has a cell phone and appears eager to video tape these things. It seems strange to me, if whites are more likely to have lethal force used against them wouldn't we have some evidence of this?

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 4 months ago in reply to this

                    Because it's not newsworthy?
                    Because it's primarily blacks taking the videos and they don't care if a white is being mistreated?
                    Because no big names/movement is pushing White Lives Matter?
                    Because whites neither expect nor receive special treatment when they misbehave?

                    Just thinking "out loud", trying to figure out why what's happening is happening.  Because there really ARE more whites that have lethal force used against them.

                  2. mrpopo profile image87
                    mrpopoposted 4 months ago in reply to this

                    It has less to do with video not being recorded and more to do with what's newsworthy. How often do you hear about a white suspect being shot in the media? How long does that coverage last? Now compare that to something like Michael Brown's shooting or Trayvon Martin's, both of which do not have video footage of the shootings as far as I'm aware. The media doesn't care to cover white victims of police shootings because it's not newsworthy and most white people won't raise an eyebrow.

                    Now that I think about it, what about the coverage of police officers who died doing their jobs? I don't know any of their names and media coverage is sparse. The only significant coverage was the recent deliberate targeting of police officers in Dallas, which is extraordinary enough to merit coverage. But overall we don't see or expect significant coverage when police officers die, it's just accepted.

                    Heaven forbid, however, a police officer using his gun to stop a perpetrator who was beating him and trying to take control of his weapon. That merits month-long coverage across several networks and city riots. Why? Because the 'victim' was black.

                    The reality is that most police shootings are justified: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/invest … nder-fire/

                    In 74 percent of all fatal police shootings, the individuals had already fired shots, brandished a gun or attacked a person with a weapon or their bare hands, according to an analysis of actions immediately preceding the shootings, which draws on reports from law enforcement agencies and local media coverage. These 595 cases include fatal shootings that followed a wide range of violent crimes, including shootouts, stabbings, hostage situations, carjackings and assaults.

                    Another 16 percent of the shootings came after incidents that did not involve firearms or active attacks but featured other potentially dangerous threats. These shootings were most commonly of individuals who brandished knives and refused to drop them.

                    The 5 percent of cases that are often second-guessed include individuals who police said failed to follow their orders, made sudden movements or were accidentally shot. In another 4 percent of cases, The Post was unable to determine the circumstances of the shootings because of limited information or ongoing investigations.


                    This entire narrative is built on the 5% that are second-guessed judgements made up of accidents, failures to comply and sudden movements.

                    Accidental shootings are, well, accidental. They will happen but are not based on racial prejudice.

                    As I alluded to earlier, failure to comply with officer commands can lead to an escalation of force. Depending on the circumstances, this escalation of force can be justified or not.

                    I didn't mention sudden movements, but here is a video that highlights why it is absolutely justified to react with lethal force to a sudden or suspicious movement (this is not graphic but it is highly unsettling): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIQ75B_04sM

                    There's plenty of video footage like the above of police officers getting shot or killed in the line of duty, but we don't see them. Why? It's not newsworthy or the public doesn't particularly care. For that reason we shouldn't limit ourselves strictly to video evidence of the events because they're not equally distributed or available. Fortunately there's other means of evidence.

                    On that subject, it would be immensely helpful to have body cams on all police officers. It would protect innocent civilians from police brutality, and it would exculpate law-abiding police officers from accusations of excessive force or inappropriate conduct. I can't think of any significant drawbacks to this implementation.

  3. Live to Learn profile image81
    Live to Learnposted 4 months ago

    I would say stop thinking the sins of others are somehow your sins?

  4. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 4 months ago

    Someone freed the slaves but they didn't really want to.
    Empapthy is given to a chosen few saints.

 
working