Racism is Rampant Today
There is proof everywhere you look…
For instance...
uh… uh….Nowhere is it more evident than among the fear mongers whose fame and livelihood depends on their ability to perpetuate dissension and sow discord. Nevertheless, prophetically it is a sign of the times, as "ethnos" shall rise against "ethnos". IMHO
"Nowhere is it more evident than among the fear mongers whose fame and livelihood depends on their ability to perpetuate dissension and sow discord."
Thank You!
Ethnos
Ethnos (in Greek: ἔθνος "nation") may refer to:
Ethnic group
... and this rising up is evident where?
middle east… not here in America.
We must be a unified people to fight the prophetic uprisings. IMHO we are still recovering from the horrible institution of slavery. We need to get past the past to be able to embrace the future...
when we will be called upon to subdue the TRUE enemy.
( whatever it is…)
"Rampant" is a strong word, racism has mutated into milder forms over the last generation or two. While it is still among us, it is not the impediment to achievement that it once was... Just 25 years ago, if someone would have told me that we would have a black president, I would have said that they were nuts.....
And that is exactly the point.
Racism is technically impossible today due to all the laws put into place!
Apparently, Morality had/has no effect on the matter what so ever.
And that is a sad commentary on the state of human affairs.
But, we are getting much much better. We really are. As morality increases...
TWISI
Proofs?No, no, racism is not impossible, It has taken a different tack that certainly is not as obvious as it once was. But believe me, it is still here, unfortunately.
To be honest, I think that we as a society are no more moral than in the past, we just have tools and technology to make it quicker and more efficient to exploit your neighbor. Much like the difference between a single shot musket and a 50 caliber submachine gun.... We have just become more efficient in doing the wrong thing.
I need "for instances…" (good writing always provides examples…)
I hear you, perhaps while I am checking, why do you think that society is more enlightened or moral?
I think we are a more feeling and conscious society. We have come a long way… For instance: When I am with my parents or my 83 year old neighbor across the street, I can't believe how petty they are... how self-oriented, how desperate they are to be in touch with or even express their true feelings.
I really think we, as a society, are more in touch with the love in our hearts and the ability to express it. I honor my parents generation… but, we so called boomers had a lot of work to do to overcome the mores of the times they ignorantly and unquestioningly followed, such as the application of racist customs, restrictions on women, restrictions on freedom of speech, on hair length, styles and music.. You know…all that forgotten stuff!
BTW They are a very long-lived generation. If we talk to them and listen to them we can deeply respect how they also paved a glorious way for all the following generations, as well.
What we see today are people questioning... honestly questioning. The BS is being torn up and torn apart.
We are torn and we are tearing, but what will come is a whole fabric… of common understanding and acceptance of truth.
As I Hope.I think we are a more feeling and conscious society. We have come a long way… For instance: When I am with my parents or my 83 year old neighbor across the street, I can't believe how petty they are... how self-oriented, how desperate they are to be in touch with or even express their true feelings.
How much of this has transferred into our national character or institutions? We still have endless war and conflict. I read articles of how people are routinely cheated out of the life savings by what used to institutions that had our bedrock of trust. We are all mechanized, computerized with the days of Norman Rockwell paintings long gone. My old auntie, who died in 1993 at the age of 94 once told me that during the Harding administration "Tea Pot Dome Scandal" they stole thousands, now, they steal millions!! Greed from pharmaceuticals, bankers, etc., using approaches and techniques not even conceived of even a generation ago.Very good examples. It is becoming a fire hose where it was a garden hose.
Yikes. What is IT?
What is the counter-balance?
IT against IT !
Is it love against non-love?
Is it love against fear?
love against greed?
love against self-righteousness?
love against power?
Does it come from FEAR?
or GREED?
- where in the world does greed come from? I think it comes from love of power...an abuse of power.
We all have power. Let us use it as we can... with harmonious intent, which would be love. Maybe it is not love AGAINST anything… maybe it is love WITH something… with power!
...thanks for letting me ramble on.All the negative is in opposition to love and love is losing. Its all of the above. Too many promote their own survival and prosperity at the expense of others abuse with what power that they have. There is nothing out there that indicates that this trend will change in the near future.
Can you give examples? By offering examples of how racism still manifests it enlightens us, by ISOLATING the difficulty. We can work on the solution only by knowing the problem. (This is a Montessori principle.)
Not plugging deliberately, but you asked me. I did an article( hub) about the outrageous exploitation of the minority community by major institutional banks in regard to mortgage loans (Wells Fargo). This reached the level of prosecution of these banks by the Federal Government. The institutions involved decided to settle out court while denying guilt. Saying that racism in America is not possible is an absolute and we are not there yet. A lot like calculating pi, more digits but do we ever get a definitive answer? Meanwhile, I can certainly work on other examples.
I am just one man and do not have all the answers and I look just as urgently as you would. You also need to tell me how all the laws we have make racism impossible, how are you that certain?
Racism use to be right out in the open for everybody to see. Because of those laws, I don't think it has diminished, it is just gone underground and Conservatives find more and subtler ways to discriminate.
Personally, I think overt racism is on the rise again in America, largely due to the recent Supreme Court decisions to weaken both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
A research paper I am just reading made this obvious claim - "Systemic racism is so embedded in systems that it often is assumed to reflect the natural, inevitable order of things." - I say "obvious" because it is obvious to the victims of such practice. But, it is invisible or denied by the perpetrators
"Slavery—explicitly supported by laws—endured for 250 years in the United States and was followed by almost 100 years of Jim Crow laws—often enforced by terror—that were deliberately designed to restrict the rights of African Americans, including the rights to vote, work, and get an education. ". This has been embedded in our culture for 350 years, all the way through the 1950s. WHY, would one think that it all of the sudden disappeared from American society?
(The Civil Rights Act of 1866 did what it was meant to - for less than 10 years. In that time, the Conservatives in the Southern States with the help of a sympathetic Supreme Court nullified that Act, along with the 14th and 15th Amendments.)
Here are some examples of modern day systemic racism:
"Political disenfranchisement and disempowerment through voter suppression and gerrymandering are an important historical and contemporary manifestation of systemic racism. " - THIS IS ALIVE and well in dozens of Conservative states.
"Widespread discriminatory public and private lending policies and practices are another salient instance of systemic racism and have created major obstacles to home ownership and wealth for people of color. " - THIS HAS not gone away, only diminished.
"Environmental injustice is systemic racism with direct health consequences. Racially segregated communities have often experienced the damaging health effects of environmental injustice. ... The Flint water crisis reflects a long history of segregation, disinvestment in infrastructure, and officials’ ignoring Black residents’ concerns, with devastating long-term health impacts."
"The stark racial patterning of incarceration also reflects pervasive discriminatory policing and sentencing practices. Although people of color represent 39 percent of the US population,23 they make up over 60 percent of incarcerated people." - That can only mean one of two things: 1) the unlikely possibilities that people of color are genetically predisposed to commit crimes than white people are or 2) the much more like reason - people of color of being discriminated against.
"police violence is a leading cause of death for young Black men in the United States. Approximately 1 in every 1,000 Black men is killed by police. Also, Black victims killed by police are more likely than White victims to have been unarmed, suggesting disparate treatment. Police killings of Black men have been associated with worse health of entire statewide Black populations." - You can read the sources in the linked article.
"The “school-to-prison pipeline” refers to the phenomenon in which children—mainly, but not exclusively, boys—of color are systematically disciplined more harshly (including suspension and expulsion from school) than other children for behavioral problems warranting counseling and support rather than punishment. Police are more likely to be called into schools to deal with misbehavior by students of color, and suspensions, expulsions, and police involvement greatly raise the risk for incarceration.29,30 This practice is not based on written policies but on pervasive, entrenched discriminatory beliefs and attitudes in the educational system that reflect systemic racism."
Yes, even today, racism is Rampant.
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.13 … 2021.01394You can add this to it.
"Former President Donald Trump has said there is “definite anti-white feeling” sweeping the US — and warned “that can’t be allowed.”
Trump, 77, was asked during a wide-ranging interview with Time magazine published Tuesday about polls showing most of his supporters think “anti-white racism now represents a greater problem in the country than anti-black racism.”
“Oh, I think that there is a lot to be said about that,” the 45th president responded. “If you look at the Biden administration, they’re sort of against anybody depending on certain views.
“They’re against Catholics. They’re against a lot of different people,” Trump continued. “They actually don’t even know what they’re against, but they’re against a lot. But no, I think there is a definite anti-white feeling in this country and that can’t be allowed either.”
When asked how he would “address” that, the presumptive Republican nominee answered: “I don’t think it would be a very tough thing to address, frankly. But I think the laws are very unfair right now. And education is being very unfair, and it’s being stifled. But I don’t think it’s going to be a big problem at all.
“But if you look right now, there’s absolutely a bias against white and that’s a problem.”
-------
Would any man have the nerve to embrace ideas only coddled by the racist right wing and bring them into the mainstream as a presidential candidate?
This is the stuff that runs the Trump juggernaut, bigotry in our society that has never really gone away but has just been concealed, he feeds the resentment by telling them all what they want to hear. It is the only explanation as to how an inept clown like Donald Trump is so powerful politically. Because in America racism is a powerful theme and he knows how to tap the mother lode.And it will cost lives as LYING TRUMP emboldens MAGA to become violent again.
Cred, In addressing the perception among his supporters regarding the prevalence of anti-white racism compared to anti-black racism in the United States, Trump's viewpoint, in my view, reflects a sentiment that resonates with certain segments of society today. While it's crucial to acknowledge the complex nature of racial dynamics and the historical context behind systemic racism, there are instances where anti-white sentiments are indeed observed, albeit yes, to a lesser extent than anti-black racism. Trump's acknowledgment of this perspective doesn't negate the reality of racial inequality or diminish the importance of combating all forms of discrimination. Rather, it underscores the need for nuanced discussions about race relations and the diverse experiences of different racial groups in contemporary society. By acknowledging the concerns of his supporters, Trump highlights a dimension of racial discourse that warrants attention and dialogue alongside broader efforts to address systemic racism and promote equality for all.
I think one needed to read what he actually said in te Time Magazine interview. It has been misrepresented by media.
Source Time Magazine Transcript. https://time.com/6972022/donald-trump-t … -election/
Question --"So you have spoken a lot about “woke-ism” on college campuses. Polls show a majority of your supporters have expressed the belief that anti-white racism now represents a greater problem in the country than anti-Black racism. Do you agree?"
Trump: "Oh, I think that there is a lot to be said about that.
If you look at the Biden Administration, they're sort of against anybody depending on certain views. They're against Catholics. They're against a lot of different people. They actually don't even know what they're against, but they're against a lot. But no, I think there is a definite anti-white feeling in this country, and that CAN"T BE ALLOWED EITHER"
Question - "How would you address that as President? "
Trump: "I don't think it would be a very tough thing to address, frankly. But I think the laws are very unfair right now. And education is being very unfair, and it's being stifled. But I don't think it's going to be a big problem at all. But if you look right now, there's absolutely a bias against white and that's a problem. " (Trump fully appeared to answer the question. I can see where one might have appreciated if he had addressed systemic racism. But, is this not a given?)
( note the interviewer moved on ) I want to get to your thoughts on China. Do you think the U.S. should defend Taiwan if China invades?
This entire interview was well done by the interviewer, they were very much pulled out pretty much all one might want to know about the agenda Trump is offering. He was asked pertinent important questions, and he answered with transparency, offering views that certainly were his own, he did not pander. I think it is fair to ask others here to read the interview if they are interested in hearing Trump, in his own words in full.First of all, kudos to you to treading where lions fear. Your conservative friends scurry under the floorboards when this kind of light are turned on.
This has been confirmed by his comments at Chancellorsville and controversy during much of his term, the man has confirmed that he is a racist. The concept of antiwhite racism as some sort of threat is ridiculous and feeds into a racist theme that is part of the anti-woke thing.
So,what does Trump propose? Unraveling all Civil Rights Legislation and with the support of a rightwing tribunal Supreme Court, he will take us 100 years into the past.
Meanwhile I am overwhelmed by UncleT*ms, apologists, accommodationists, those that reduce this all to just politics, fence sitters, a timid press that should be bringing this stuff to people's attention.
So it is not about race, huh? Of course it is about race. Out of all the GOP contenders the bigoted GOP supporters knew that only Trump would have the nerve to unravel the Civil Rights movement out of sheer spite and resentment. And yet our group is to consider Trump seriously? I highly doubt it.
You are good with eloquent oratory, but that does not change the substance of what he had said, and the fact that he did say it, so it cannot be spun as meaning something else.
My job continues to be as the late James Baldwin coined it "Go tell it on the Mountain".""Oh, I think that there is a lot to be said about that." - WHICH translates to "Yes, anti-white racism IS more problematic than anti-Black racism. He then follows that with a bunch of lies about Biden.
In you next example, Trump gives a non-answer to the question but nevertheless doubles down on saying anti-white bias is the biggest problem.
He total feeds into the false narrative that there is systemic racism against whites in America. He conflates protecting minorities FROM racism as BEING racist to Whites which, of course, is baloney.I respectfully disagree with your perspective. In my opinion, throughout the interview, Trump expressed his views authentically, without any attempt to cater to others. He tackled each question directly, even without relying on flashcards – quite a feat!
I encourage others to read the Time magazine interview to gain insight into Trump's viewpoints and agenda. While I acknowledge your stance, I don't feel inclined to delve into a point-by-point rebuttal of your criticisms. I simply don't agree with the limited perspective you've presented.I don't get it, Trump said what he said and is was quite offensive, what is there to parse through regarding his remarks? Are you denying that he did not say what I said that he had said? Unless you, too, actually believe the content of his comments?
I have not in any respect denied he said what he said. I quoted the statement as you did... Yet, you seem to be somewhat dissatisfied with the way he answered the question regarding polls that have shown what his supporters feel about expressing the belief that anti-white racism now represents a greater problem in the country than anti-Black racism. I guess we came away with a different view of the context of his statement.
Trump's response strongly suggests his concern about the issue, indicating that he perceives a problem and believes that neither anti-white nor anti-black sentiments should be tolerated. He pointed out a perceived pattern within the Biden Administration of being against certain groups, including Catholics, without clear understanding.
Trump emphasized that there is an undeniable anti-white sentiment in the country that should not be overlooked. The use of "either" suggests a parallel between anti-white and anti-black sentiments. From the context of his words, it appears that Trump is addressing both issues. While some may interpret his remarks differently, I personally don't view Trump as racist, and I believe the context of the interview allowed him to share his views on the subject matter, despite the varied interpretations individuals may have. Overall, the interview provided an opportunity for Trump to express his opinions on challenging topics."Yet, you seem to be somewhat dissatisfied with the way he answered the question regarding polls that have shown what his supporters feel about expressing the belief that anti-white racism now represents a greater problem in the country than anti-Black racism..."
Understood, but what does HE believe, Sharlee?I cant imagine a contender in a major political party uttering clear falsehood and distractions, not far above what I was hearing from the Klan, white Nationalists or the Nazi, that white people are being put upon by racism. The group with most of the wealth and power in America. Why would any responsible person say such things? He babbles on incoherently about Biden and Catholics, while anti-white racism, if he took the trouble to define what that is, can't be allowed. What antiwhite sentiment? Trump uses race baiting to stir up his race resentful base. He may very well not truly believe what he has said. But I hold people responsible for
what they say.
His lies within those comments stoke racial division and MY tribe is paying attention.
We may have to agree to disagree, in my opinion he is a despicable man, but again that is just my opinion.There is a lot of facts to from which to draw you conclusion.
Eight years later, I would say "rampant" is an apt term today, it is a step down from ubiquitous which, prior to 1964, was what blacks and other minorities faced in America.
While reduced, no matter what institution you look at, racism is still prevalent. It is just not worn on the sleeve like it was in the 1950s.
Van Jones made a good point that even the black cops who killed Nickols were acting out from a racist environment that permeated the squad they belonged to.Trump opened a Pandora's box of the worst, much that 8 years ago was not on the radar. I would not say that we moved backwards more than Trump has given permission for the worse elements in our society to stand tall and take center stage. That was not true 8 years ago.
It is a product of the face value society we have today. The first thing we notice is how a person appears. Our fears and experiences govern our response to others and with all the walls we throw up it is often the wrong first impression we get from strangers. How often do we have a deep discussion with our friends and acquaintances without fear of offending them or exposing our inner selves. It is not a popular and more over a risky exposure to say the least. Sometimes I am amazed at the distortions and or snap judgment's that come out of people I thought I had known very well. Why is it that we are this divided and still so vulnerable?
Someone just told me, in jail, there is the worst racism. Thats where it is rampant… I guess. Couldn't tell you…but according to this guy I was talking to…
I can't even say more.The anger of these people that are in jail feeds many emotional and physical actions. I think that these problems came in with them and manifest themselves with the only things they know to express themselves. I don't know what could be done to change that as they have to pay for their transgressions inside before doing something about it on the outside.
- yes. They must work on their attitudes. Before they went in they were already in a self-consrtucted jail of negative feelings/emotions.
anger
self-pity
depression
hatred
inability to forgive
revenge
desperation
hopelessness
lying
stealing,
drug abuse
In general... a downward spiral.
What maintains an upward spiral?
(BTW I no longer speak of race/color. We are all people made in the same way with spirits and nervous systems. If your eye be single, (sense of intuition,) your whole body will be perceived as light...and the bodies of all others, as well. No matter what your situation in life, in America, every citizen has equal opportunity.)I agree on the inside there are so many human emotions that bind us all together. On the outside there are cultural either generationally developed by good or bad influences that seems to draw the distinction. Is it bad to have cultural differences? I don't think so. It is like the old adage "If all the flowers were the same, what a boring garden it would make".
of course… what is bad is to let anything rob us of opportunities which rightfully exist for all.
What will each of us do with the freedom we have been granted by our forefathers? What will we do to make sure we can keep these opportunities for posterity.
Don W posted
"...ignorance results in people not accepting that racism is woven into the fabric of society (a legal system that is racially biased is an example of exactly that). And it's not "alleged" that black males get up to 20% longer sentences than whites for the same crime. They do. Sentencing data is freely available. And no it's not something that should be dismissed as you do. It's an absolute travesty. Same for the other instances cited."
(The "other instances" were references to want ads regarding black employment rates, websites of white supremacists and institutional racism.)
"Institutional racism is any system of inequality based on race. It can occur in institutions such as public government bodies, private business corporations (such as media outlets), and universities (public and private). The term was introduced by Black Power activists Stokely Carmichael and Charles V. Hamilton in the late 1960s.
The definition given by William Macpherson within the report looking into the death of Stephen Lawrence was “the collective failure of an organization to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin." Wikipedia
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/123808? … ost2622695I still say "room for improvement" is not "racial creep."
"Civil Rights Act of 1866:
This is the law that declared all people born in the United States are legally citizens. This means they could rent, hold, sell and buy property. This law was meant to help former slaves, and those who refused to grant these new rights to slaves were guilty and punishable under law. The penalty was a fine of $1000 or a maximum of one year in jail.
Fair Housing Act of 1968: (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968)
Extends the protection to color, religion, sex and national origin.
The New York State Human Rights Law:
Extends the protection to marital status and age, aimed to prevent non-racial discrimination.
Section 236 and 237 of the New York State Property Law:
Further extends the protection to include dwellings with children and mobile home parks. This is meant to protect renters and sellers from discriminating based on number of children in a family. Currently the Fair Housing Act protects against discrimination of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, and disability. The law applies to all types of housing, rental homes, apartments, condos and houses. The only exception to the act is when an owner of a small rental building lives in the same building he rents to. Since he owns the building and also resides there, he can decide who lives there."Do you think that in the century after 1866, that the spirit of that law was adhered to?
We had reconstruction and Jim Crow. JFK said in 1963, that in the century after the Emancipation Proclamation, black folks were not yet free.Mores:
mores |ˈmôrˌāz| plural noun
the essential or characteristic customs and conventions of a community: Dictionary
Mores (generally pronounced /ˈmɔreɪz/, and often /ˈmɔriːz/; from Latin mōrēs, [ˈmoːreːs], grammatically plural: "habit"; singular form: mōs) is a term introduced into English by William Graham Sumner (1840–1910), an early U.S. sociologist, to refer to norms that are more widely observed and have greater moral significance than others. Mores include an aversion for societal taboos, such as incest or pederasty. Consequently, the values and mores of a society predicates legislation prohibiting their taboos. Wikipedia
These do not go away OVERNIGHT, obviously.I said, "What we see today are people questioning... honestly questioning. The BS is being torn up and torn apart."
For Instance: Atheism is a reflection of this honest questioning. People do not want to blindly believe… they want Reality. For instance, atheists claim that morals do not originate out of religion, they originate from the perception of what is right. What is Right is what we are coming to terms with. It is a valid search and the results of that search are worth waiting for.
I feel that people are very sincere in general. However and unfortunately, on the internet, where people are expressing themselves freely in an anonymous way, freedom of speech is actually being abused and I don't like to see insincere points of view. Eventually, even that abuse will cease as others call them on it.
Perhaps, calling on what is wrong... is the key.
So go ahead and isolate the difficulties, the injustices, the restrictions of the human spirit.
Read Abraham Lincoln.
Truth will prevail… I think.
Because as some one said, the truth sets you free.
"The Civil Rights Act of 1968 also enacted 18 U.S.C. § 245(b), which permits federal prosecution of anyone who "willingly injures, intimidates or interferes with another person, or attempts to do so, by force because of the other person's race, color, religion or national origin" because of the victim's attempt to engage in one of six types of federally protected activities, such as attending school, patronizing a public place/facility, applying for employment, acting as a juror in a state court or voting.
Persons violating this law face a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both. If bodily injury results or if such acts of intimidation involve the use of firearms, explosives or fire, individuals can receive prison terms of up to 10 years, while crimes involving kidnapping, sexual assault, or murder can be punishable by life in prison or the death penalty."More evidence of room for improvement according to Wikipedia:
"Violations of the Fair Housing Act
There are an estimated 2 million cases of housing discrimination each year according to HUD. The National Fair Housing Alliance, the largest fair housing non-profit in the country, estimates that number to be closer to 4 million per year, excluding instances of discrimination due to disability or familial status.[20] The actual number of Fair Housing Act violations is likely much higher than 4 million annually. However, between the years of 1989 and 1992 only 17 of these went to court nationwide. Redlining is still a major problem despite the legislation passed making it illegal. Studies and investigations have shown that minorities who apply for mortgages are rejected 3 times as much as Caucasians. According to one Federal Reserve Board study, among higher income applicants, the denial rates were as follows:
African-Americans: 21.4%
Latinos: 15.8%
Asians: 11.2%
Whites: 8.5%
Housing projects have also come under fire by researchers and NGOs alike. Housing advocates Elizabeth Julian and Michael Daniel state:
'in addition to the inequality in the actual housing provided to low-income African-American families under the federal programs, the neighborhoods in which they receive assistance are usually subject to various adverse conditions not found in the neighborhoods surrounding the housing units in which whites receive the same assistance. These conditions include inferior city-provided facilities and services, little or no new or newer residential housing, large numbers of seriously substandard structures, noxious environmental conditions, substandard or completely absent neighborhood service facilities, high crime rates, inadequate access to job centers, and little or no investment of new capital in the area by public and private entities.'
Thus, this discrimination goes beyond being poor because white housing projects receive more attention and public investment, making housing discrimination overall a racial problem.
Although several legal measures have been taken to protect all kinds of people against housing discrimination in the U.S., still the most commonly targeted and largest victims are African-Americans."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964Interesting opinions from two years ago:
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/82359And then there is this topic:
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/85781I have decided it is morally wrong to call out and pinpoint the color of a man's skin or his genetic heritage. We are all equal under the law as long as our constitution is in place. It is a matter of common decency to honor all citizens and each other as Americans. And all that entails. Even in Jail, guys.
Discrimination exists on so many levels.
Discrimination: "1 the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, esp. on the grounds of race, age, or sex:" Dictionary
One could add "class."
"3 social division, social stratum, rank, level, echelon, group, grouping, income group; social status; estate; condition."
Maybe what we have is an issue of class discrimination.
What has contributed to the CREATION of this class?
This "lower" class?
This class apparently stuck in poverty with no way out... to the point they blame others?
Could it have been created way back in 1966? with the attempt to legislate morality?
Why, in a basically Christian nation, were we so evil that morality had to be legislated?
Confused.I have discovered it is an US vs THEM class.
Legislating morality caused some Americans to identify with helplessness, weakness and victimhood.
Perhaps?Is racism rampant or only the expression of an economic crisis? Is racism rampant or was it sleeping? What can we expect from a society that had its roots in colonialism?
Racism is rampant when there is no morality.
I think all of those are a component to the divide. What is funny is that those who are doing well forget the past as their lives are set on the future. Those who are not faring so well have time for retrospect and what contributed to their condition. The two different factions in this have a hard time relating to each others fortunes or plight.
But, I just discovered that racism is actually kind of a problem in public schools! I was so surprised after a google search!
I have never seen it in the schools where I substitute teach.
Very disheartening.
http://blackagendareport.com/content/pu … nal-racismAn excerpt from the article: News, Analysis and Commentary From The Black Left:
"Disparate educational standards are the rule in present day America, broken down by way of race and income. These inequities are more race-based than they are class-based. For example, even so-called “well to do American-born Africans” that reside within predominately white suburban communities, are strongly persuaded to worship white supremacists, slaveholders, and murderers like George Washington (owned over 300 African slaves), Andrew Jackson (murdered countless of Seminoles) and Christopher Columbus (murdered tens of thousands of indigenous people of the Western Hemisphere). These students must learn to accept and admire repugnant white historical figures, regardless of the pain and damage they inflicted upon enslaved Africans and indigenous people. This is nothing short of white supremacy in the raw."
Black Agenda Report
What are we to make of this type of rhetoric?If this was what was said, it is a bit over the top. The race conflict is just a skirmish in larger war of haves verses have not. I recognize contributions of these White historical figures in balance, acknowledging the good and the bad. Where on earth is aggression not the rule of the day, in past centuries or today?
Eight years later and the PROOF keeps pouring in - this time from the Tennessee Republican legislature.
In response for being silenced from talking about the massacre of three nine-year olds and three adults at a Christian school there, three Democrats did the unthinkable - they protested on the floor of the House. And for that time honored protest, two of the three participants were expelled from the House. The racist Republicans showed who they really are by expelling the two Black demonstrators while retaining the White woman.
They are in-your-face Racist.
nothttps://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/08/opinions/tennessee-three-expulsion-redeemers-tisby/index.html)
The ironic thing is, one for sure and probably the other will be right back in their seats after they are selected by the local committee to be acting legislators until the special election is held. In retaliation, these racist Republicans say they will defund city project on the books.I suppose if it was the woman you would be on here telling us it was misogyny?
Only a woke racist would fail to understand that this was not a racial issue and would feel the need to pull the "race card". The truth is that those people supported those protestors and the Repulicans used a page from January 6 to remove opposition. Was it fair? No, I dont think so. Was it racist because they did not expel the woman from the state congress. Definitely not, but I am sure you and CNN think so.I have been really looking into this report. My main question is --- Did the woman become disruptive in regard to becoming loud and disruptive? I have watched any videos I could find, and pretty much shows her just standing with the two men, and not being overly loud or doing much of anything. The town men were expelled due to breaking House rules of decorum.
It looks as if the media is making this a racist act. I don't feel she did anything that broke house rules.
Sad to see this, but very accustomed to seeing media stir racial discord.Yes, that is what I have seen too. She even stated during her testimony that she did not speak, just stood there to give moral support. Of course, the woke racists want to claim that this is racism.
This kind of mindset is a very big part of the problem. How can we ever come together, when we have a segment of our society always working to make it worse? We have gone backward. The media is stoking a racial divide.
I agree, MAGA has sucked us backward to the 1870s.
Racism? She kept her position by the grand total of 1 vote!
Yeah, I cant wait to see the HBO documentary where they use selected and carefully censored clips from the security cams to prove that this was institutional racism.
The twisting context works well. I mean it is very apparent it works very well on part of our society. I mean to make this current issue racial, it defies rational thinking.
Then we have a whole lot of people in America who aren't rational because they clearly see why it is racist. Only the MAGA types do not.
I agree, we do have a lot of citizens that are not thinking rationally. I saw a woman that did not break any form of rules on the House floor. I saw two men that were yelling into a megaphone, disrupting the business of the House, and breaking those rules in regard to being civil. I saw a woman that removed herself from the two and did not speak to the crowd. She did not become loud in any respect.
But the one black who participated about the same way she did gets canned. The person on the ground (her) thought it was racist and said so - strongly.
"Woke racist" is an oxymoron used by ....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKPbrZMqxCg&t=679s
The speaker is an associate professor of linguistics at Colombia.
Please show me where the media is calling this a racist act. I haven't seen it.
Here is the way Rep Johnson saw it:
"In response she said, "Well, I think it's pretty clear. I'm a 60-year-old white woman and they are two young Black men. In listening to the questions, and the way they were questioned, and the way they were talked to… I was talked down to as a woman, mansplained to, but it was completely different from the questioning they got. And this whole idea that [...] you have to almost assimilate into this body to be like us." She added that she felt the two Black men were spoken to in a "demeaning way" and told "if you're going to come into this body, you're going to have to act like this body."
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/glori … use-white/
What I saw from the pictures is only one of the men used a bullhorn trying to get the attention of the deaf and dumb Republicans. The other black man and the white woman look to be standing around in support. Why did BOTH black men get expelled?
Forgotten in the defense of these white politicians is the reason the protest happened in the first place. The Republicans REFUSED to let ANY discussion about the massacre of the three 9 year olds and three adults at a Christian school. Clearly, that is of no concern to these Republican lawmakers and others.
I understand "woke" to mean cognizant of social justice. So, if that is the actual definition, then I am proud to be "woke" and those who aren't are probably racists.
There is no race card here, they canned two black men for a very minor offense. Hell, the Republicans gave a sexual predator a committee chairmanship. (https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/p … 535383002/)
It is common sense that when white men expel the two Black men but not the white woman who did the same thing, that is pure racism no matter what way you cut it.
Now, had the episode been serious and the white woman just standing there with them, then no, I would conclude it was an overt racist act.
I don't know what CNN thinks, they haven't commented on whether it was or it wasn't as far as I know.The woman did not do the same thing.
You are trying to support CNNs false narrative. They were black, and they were expelled. That is very different than being expelled because they were black.
Woke racists are racists, they support the idea that anything that happens has a racial reason. That isno better than saying that someone only got the job because he was black, etc. Instead of just fomenting hate and division it would be a good idea to think about that."It is common sense that when white men expel the two Black men but not the white woman who did the same thing, that is pure racism no matter what way you cut it."
Is it that cut and dry? If a black man does something in regards to breaking a rule does he just get a pass due to being black? In my view that is not an example of common sense. The "white women" did not do the same thing. She stood by and did not raise her voice or take up a megaphone. She did not break house rules.
IMO, you are doing blacks a disservice by pushing the narrative that this issue was
racist. We have systemic racism, and I would think it not wise to point out an issue being racist when it truely appears not to be.
Nice to have you back, ESO.
In the short time that you have been absent Hubpages Central chased away Colton, a strong and critical voice within the debate.
I see the penalty is harsh and vindictive, and one that will backfire on Republicans, putting them that much more at odds with the black community and turning off much of the youth vote, that they are so desperate to muzzle.Are you sure Colton was banned? I did note that for the past few days, I did not see posts from Colton. I have not seen anything that should have gotten this user banned.
So, do you feel the explosion of the two men was a racist act?Well, Sharlee, I believe that the penalty was unduly harsh and from that standpoint I would say that there are racial components.
The men and woman should be punished for the outburst, censure or what have you. But, when I find out that in the 160 years since the Civil War, not one person has ever been expelled from the Tennessee legislature, I have to seriously wonder what would actually rise to that level? So all of these legislators have remain inoffensive for 160 years? I doubt it. There have been many in that time accused of irregularities: violation of campaign finance laws as well as sexual harassment.I have shared I feel the punishment was harsh, and that I hope they are reinstated quickly. These men were voted into their jobs... I believe in free speech, and the right to protest. I also believe in rules. Perhaps, these men went overboard due to feeling like all of us --- something needs to be done to stop the mass shootings. Perhaps they felt they needed to be drastic and break some rules to really be heard.
I don't feel that was racial. Or maybe I just don't want to think we are sliding backward... I am very sad about this issue. My God, it would seem we are hell-bent on destroying one another, one way or the other.
Good to be back. Who is Colton?
Hopefully, it will motivate blacks to go to the polls (something we are having a very hard time doing here in Florida) and, at least at the state level, make some changes. TN is so gerrymandered that it is impossible for Democrats to gain any ground. 51%, according to Pew, of Tennesseans have no lean or lean Democratic. Yet, 75% of the TN house is Republican - how is that fair?You missed him. A great forum fellow and a pleasure to have covering your back. He rose and fell while you were out. Check some of the other threads you will find him there.
I am confident that Republicans will have to go rash to contain demographic changes that will work against sooner rather than later. When they get radically desperate and despotic that is the time to smack them down. I am waiting for that desperation to drive them into "getting out of line".
I don't know, we have had record participation in the last contest or two. And where we lost, it was against insurmountable odds. We have to be reminded not to give ground to the enemy without their even having to fire a shot.
Racism.
I guess it depends on when you entered the battle against it. I remember segregation. I remember being waited on at the post office ahead of the elderly black woman in line ahead of me. I remember the tree in the town square remembered because a black man was hung there by a mob of white men without benefit of a trial after being accused of a crime.
Most people today didn't live through all that.
I can say without reservation that times are better today than they were when I was a young woman. But is that good enough? No.
Those in the majority will always want to hang on to their power. And things don't tend to change until that majority gets watered down by the emergence of diverse groups.
The fact that racism even gets called out - is progress.
The fact that changes are made when it happens - is progress.
The fact that the majority is dwindling - is progress.
The real test is who will be prejudiced against when a new group of people make up the majority of us?
Is racism just a part of the human condition?"Is racism just a part of the human condition?"
Yes, I believe it is part of the human condition. We are wired to differentiate ourselves from others who are not like us. It is part of our survival mechanism.
We are also wired to form groups to protect ourselves from the "others". This hold true not only at the primal level, but also politically, even today. That said, we also have the capacity to come together if there is a direct threat to our existence.
WWII was a great example of this. I believe if we were attacked by aliens from outer space, the whole human race would come together to protect mankind.
The challenge is being mindful of when we are being racists and try to have empathy for the "others". These forums are a great example of how challenging that is to do with democrats, republicans, liberals, and conservatives..I agree. with your sentiments.
These words are very profound, in my view.
"The challenge is being mindful of when we are being racists and try to have empathy for the "others". These forums are a great example of how challenging that is to do with democrats, republicans, liberals, and conservatives.."Like Sharlee, I agree with this. I like to think that we can, with vigilance and effort, eliminate (or at least come close to eliminating) that problem from our own actions, but also feel that if we do it is a thin veneer, easily broken through with a loud voice and rant from something akin to BLM.
Personally, I would replace BLM with White Supremist who are the real threat in America. I don't see BLM, who are fighting for their lives, as being a problem. As much as some would like us to believe, 100% of BLM is not terrorist and hoodlums. Maybe, on a bad day, 1%,
But turn your attention to the Proud Boy, 3%ers, American Nazis, and their ilk, you will find that most of them are terrorists or wanna-be terrorist and hoodlums.,
I have to disagree with the first part of what you propose. I don't think human beings are born racist, I think they are taught to be racist.
This is a good article that discusses how kids become racist. https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/06/health/k … index.html
Babies do not have a natural instinct to hate those that don't look like them. They do, however, at about three months start to recognize features about others and to group them into sets that look/act like them and those that don't. Studies show that those children tend to be afraid of those who don't belong to their group UNTIL, they get to know them. Different areas of the brain are activated depending on whether it is a "friendly" face of somebody they recognize or a scary face of somebody they don't.
While white kids may not react well to a strange black kid, that is not racism - they don't hate the group, they are just fearful of that individual.
The hating of the group comes later as it is drilled into them by parents and friends. There is a reason why, as a general rule, liberal areas of the country are less racist as a group and conservative areas (based on a Google study of racial slurs). Not surprisingly, the most racist areas are the the South and the rural parts of the Northeast. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won … to-google/
Racism begats racism.
I also read a study where racist leaders bring out the worst in those they rule. The example that I remember is about Bosnia-Herzegovina. There were three major ethnic/religious groups, if I recall correctly: Serb, Muslim, and Croat factions. The study showed that under non-racist leadership, the factions got along well for liberally decades. That all came to a crashing halt with nationalistic Serbs gained power and tried to form a purely Servian society. The Orthodox Christian Serbs turned against the Muslims and the Catholic Croats in Bosnia. Each side followed their leaders into one of the most barbaric "race" wars in history.
Other studies prove out the rest of your thoughts. In today's society, you have to work at not being a racist and teaching your kids not to be. Unfortunately, that is very hard to do.
There are people who use racism as a ruse. They are the ones who are in dire socioeconomic straits due to their own volition. They are the passive aggressives. They whine about racism-seeing racism in almost every circumstances. They lead negative lives but expect positive outcomes. They also have the crab in the barrel mentality. They don't want to improve themselves & hate those in the same group who strive to improve themselves. They are also self-destructive.
I agree that there are some people who misuse the label racist and racism - such as applying to other people who care about social justice.
I don't see the connection between ones socioeconomic striates and being a racist other than the correlation between the lack of education and the propensity to be a racist.
Have you ever seen a person who CHOOSES to lead a negative life because that makes them happy? I haven't. I have seen many negative people, of all socioeconomic classes, mainly those who are defensive by nature.
I am sure there are a quarter to one percent of people who "don't want to improve themselves & hate those in the same group who strive to improve themselves. They are also self-destructive." As miniscule as that is, I would put Trump in that category.gm; Your reply is a classic example of prejudice more so than racism. You have used racism to describe a certain group of people who you think have the same equal opportunity and choice as to how they lead their lives based on how you view them, not facts and reality.
I agree with Eso. There is probably a very small percentage that fits your description of them.
If you use empathy to put yourself in their place, their ancestors didn't even have a choice to come to this country. They were enslaved. When Lincoln freed them, they were supposed to have the same equal rights as any white person. But that never happened, because of racism.
Today, they are supposed to have equal rights and opportunities. There are those who think racism is a thing of the past. But the facts and actions do not bare that out. BLM is a cry to understand that black lives matter as much as other lives. The quote of all lives matter is just a distraction to take away the value of BLMNO, I don't have empathy. People love to use excuses. People refuse to take accountability & responsibility for their negative actions. I am Black. I know Black people. Many Black people love to use excuses such as racism for their failures. They CHOOSE their dire predicament. They whine about their circumstances but they put themselves in those circumstances.
I have EXTENDED family members in Wellford, SC who refuse to be self-sufficient. They have been supported by other relatives for THREE generations. I am so sick & tired of the racism song. The problem is that there are Black people who refuse to better themselves. They believe that the man, the system, &/or whatever powers that be should save & uplift them. They whine but prefer to be where they are.
No I don't have empathy. My rule is that no one owes anyone anything. If one wants something, work for it or starve & do without. There are so many people, including Blacks, who are quite comfortable living a good life on other people's dime. Stop whining & start working for what one want. My money is mine, each tub sits on its own bottom. Can't do- starve!gm; I read your about page and I applaud your accomplishments. However, I should be applauded as well for being empathetic to black peoples causes and treatment by law enforcement.
I spent fourteen months in the deep south while I was in the Air Force, Nine months in Biloxi Mississippi and five months in Valdosta Georgia 1955 to 1960. So I know what discrimination and prejudice looks like.
I am first generation Italian and they even discriminated against me as well as being from Southern California. The saying was," only hot rods and queers come out of Southern California, but I don't see any tail pipes coming out of your behind".
I also spent a year on a remote radar site in Japan. There I saw a white person and a black person who became very best friends. We were all going to be stationed in Valdosta Georgia. The black person was of a higher rank than the white person and they were very concerned as to how they were going to behave when in Valdosta.
It turns out, the black person had a Chevy convertible. When they were on base, the black person drove the car. However when they were off base, the black person sat in the back seat while the white person drove the car to appease the townspeople.
I was 19 years old and had never been exposed to discrimination with white and black toilets, drinking fountains, and riding in the back of the bus. On the radio, they would always identify a black person who committed a crime as being black.
I was there when Emmitt till was murdered. The standing joke was, What is the fastest thing in Mississippi? Emmitt Till riding a bicycle across town.
Have a great day.
While racism is not as debilating a feature of this society as it once was, it is still among us. It reveals itself under situations of stress, either political or economic when it is time for the majority to find a scapegoat.
Rightwing generated groups with a racist foundation and incidents have increased in the last 3or 4 years, rather that decreased in a way that I would have expected from an ever more enlightened society.
So, racism is not just an experience but it is defined, based on race. It is just that those on the lower ends of the socio-economic ladder will experience it more intensely. In the face of such an onslaught, money is always a helpful insulator.
It is an interesting question, though. I beli ve racism is taught and reinforced by society in both a conscious and sub-conscious manner.
Looking at the history of this country, I can find no explanation for the savagery subjected by one group of people over another merely because they are different,
The right wing bible thumpers always want to impose their Christianity on your very life, but fail to appreciate fundamental tenets, all men are created equal and do to others as you would have them do unto to you.
The past is prologue, generations of wealth and opportunity were stolen by racism,
both systemic and by custom. Catching up always remains difficult.I thought I would add to this old forum because the title fits nicely with an article I just read.
The true claim was made nine years ago that Racism (in American society) is Rampant Today (2015).
The claim, I think, is even more true in 2024. There is racist practices everywhere you look. But there is a new twist by racists - when something is done by the government to prevent racism, that is called racist be the racists.
This guy Blum is a good example of that. Who is Blum? He is the force behind the conservative Supreme Court overturning yet another precedent (which is what the Roberts' Court is now known for - activist judges) - using race in the admission processes of American colleges to overcome the provably racial bias woven in to standard college admissions.
Prior to the first affirmative action ruling decades ago, blacks getting into college was very problematic. Why? Because of institutional racism built into the admission process by white administrators. In some cases this was intentional but in most cases it wasn't "on purpose" but present nevertheless.
Blum was successful in returning college admissions to the good ole' days when being black kept you out of college - i.e. institutional racism. Doing so, he made a major leap forward of reinstituting racism back into the admissions process.
"“Americans of all races wholly understand that Dr. King’s most enduring line from his ‘I Have a Dream’ speech means that an individual’s skin color should not be used to help, or harm, them in their life’s endeavors,” Blum told CNN."
I will give Blum the benefit of the doubt of not knowing what he was doing was actually racist in effect.
Sure, it would be "nice" if "an individual’s skin color should not be used to help, or harm, them in their life’s endeavors,", but that isn't real life. In almost all aspects of life, being black is a hinderance to getting ahead. Affirmative action was a way to prevent people from being outright racist or inadvertently racist. But people like Blum want to put those barriers back up. Without such policies racism will blossom once again.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/14/us/marti … index.htmlFor most conservatives, Dr. King's renown statements and comments are used as just platitudes and slogans always taken out of context.
There is little that we can do as a country that is more racist than the legalized, mandated racism of affirmative action. To deny someone something based on the color of their skin, as a law from our highest government, is nothing else.
In this specific case - college admissions - it has ended up in the Supreme Court because one race (Asian) was being discriminated against, contrary to all the work and desires of generations of people that have worked hard to end racism in our country.
"Without such policies racism will blossom once again."
And I would reply that with such policies (affirmative action) racism has blossomed again - were it not so the case in the court would never have happened. We have had 3 generations of that racist legal maneuvering and, while I feel it did do considerable good, it is past time to end legal racism in this country. It is not about "equality" (measured in numbers of individuals); it is about "equity". When our goal is equality of numbers rather than best qualified (as in college admissions) we do a great disservice to all, regardless of their race.Agree and add
This racist therory I believe only sets more gas on the fire, that shouldn't be. When I have discussion with a black person , it rarely comes up that I'm white and he is black. Most of base of the crimes in the black community is fatherless children. Outside of that, all races in North America have human rights.It is far more complicated than your having a conservation a black person and your not sensing any friction. I do that with whites every day, it does not need to "come up"
Denial of opportunity, discrimination and similar concepts set the larger stage from where you can say comfortably and unfortunately, misleadingly, "there are no differences"Maybe in Canada, but human rights for blacks and other minorities is going backwards with the conservative push to return to the way it was in 1894.
"When our goal is equality of numbers rather than best qualified (as in college admissions) we do a great disservice to all, regardless of their race."
I feel this is true in much of the job world, and many other aspects.Conservatives semantically change the goal posts to "equality of numbers" when it was never that, it was always equity.
Conservatives were always happy leaving the disparity in college admissions due to racism alone. There is nothing wrong with that disparity if that is the social order God intended (so says Russell Kirk).
The conservative mantra is Diversity - BAD, Equity - BAD, Inclusion - BADWhen our goal is equality of numbers rather than best qualified we do a great disservice to our society, regardless of their race.
When your goal is to keep an oppressed people oppressed, that is a great disservice to out society, regardless of their race.
To do nothing, which is the conservative's solution to most things, to correct the results of overt and covert racism is, in my mind, an insult to society.While it's essential to address issues of oppression and racism, it's important to consider differing perspectives on how to achieve positive change. Being a conservative I argue that a focus on individual responsibility and limited government intervention can lead to a more equitable society. I believe that empowering individuals to overcome challenges through personal initiative and reducing government interference allows for greater freedom and self-determination.
From my viewpoint, I emphasized fostering a culture of self-reliance and minimizing reliance on government interventions to correct societal issues, including racism. (Give a man a fish---- or teach him to fish.)
"There is little that we can do as a country that is more racist than the legalized, mandated racism of affirmative action. " - AND THERE is the Crux, isn't it. DO NOTHING to mitigate systemic racism - that is the conservative answer. Keep the blacks in their place by doing nothing, that's the ticket, isn't it.
It may surprise you, but the goal of affirmative action is "Equity", by eliminating racist admissions practices. But no, conservatives wrongly claim that eliminating racist admissions practices is racist itself.
I bet there were plenty of conservatives in the 1800s and today that say the 13th Amendment was racist.Sorry Eso, but the goal of university affirmative action is to get more blacks into college, at the expense of equally or better qualified people of other races. Skin color matters more than qualifications.
That isn't "equity"; it is purely an effort to make the numbers look good. "Equality" in numbers, not equity.No, Wilderness. The goal is to correct the racism that KEPT blacks out of college.
Apparently Haley knows as little about American history as Trump does. First, Haley implies Slavery was not the cause of our Civil War and now -
Haley says US has ‘never been a racist country’
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/16/politics … index.htmlI liked this sentiment she shared --- really put Reid in her place. Which does not take much to do.
"I mean, yes, I’m a brown girl that grew up in a small rural town in South Carolina who became the first female minority governor in history, who became an UN ambassador and who is now running for president. If that’s not the American dream, I don’t know what is,” she said, a day after she came in third in the Iowa Republican caucuses. “You can sit there and give me all the reasons why you think I can’t do this. I will continue to defy everybody on why we can do this. And we will get it done.”
I appreciate her character, no blame game, no whining. Such a great example to all.The point she misses is it doesn't make any difference whatsoever what her "individual" story is. I am happy she made in such a racist state as South Carolina, but that says nothing about the state of racism in America, in the past or now.
What is important is whether a race as a group was oppressed. In America the Whites as a group have always oppressed the blacks. Throughout our history Presidents down to the local redneck has sought to limit the opportunity of Blacks in America to succeed.
It certainly isn't as prevalent today as it was 100 years ago, but it exists in virtually every facet of society. And, if you are a black women, it is even worse because women, as a gender, must try harder to succeed than their white male counterparts.
You can always find the supermen and superwomen that succeed like Haley has, but they are rare and it is not the norm.
America has progressed, no doubt. When we started "all men are equal" only applied to landed white males who were Protestant. With Andrew Jackson in 1835, that expanded to simply white males, you didn't need to own land any more.
The next big break was in 1865 with the ratification of the 13th Amendment which make the institution of slavery illegal (but didn't address slavery-adjacent practices by the conservative South). Then the 14th Amendment in 1868 which said the states much abide by the provisions Bill of Rights (and laying the groundwork to keep insurrectionists out of elected office). Finally, in 1870, almost 100 years after America's founding, the 15th Amendment was ratified. This amendment "technically" gave Blacks the right to vote. But any student of history knows that the conservative South found many ways to prevent that from happening. Finally, in 1965, Congress passed laws to make it much harder for conservatives to prevent Blacks from voting.
In the decades that followed, Conservatives have been chipping away at the Voting Rights Act. In 1980, the Rehnquist Court began the gutting of the VRA and made it much harder for Black votes to count. In 2013, the Roberts' Court gutted the VRA even further after which Conservative States started passing law after racist law to deny Blacks the vote.
Several Conservative States have challenged the last working vestige of the Act that gave Blacks the right to vote. For some inexplicable reason, a couple of Conservatives were not quite ready to let fellow conservatives put the final roadblocks into place. I don't know if Credence will agree with me but it seems to me that Blacks today have about the same ability to vote as they did in 1960.
Shift targets. It took white males about 130 years to allow women to vote. The campaign against women's rights throughout our history is no less racist than it has been against Blacks. Instead of skin color being the target of racism, gender was. Fortunately, for women, the Conservative Courts have not had as much success in putting women back in their place - until 2022. In the last couple of decades the Courts have made it harder for women to seek justice, but they have not toyed with women's right to vote - yet. Then in 2022, the Conservatives took away a woman's Right to Privacy. They put a straight-jacket on her ability to control her own body in states that still probably think of women as chattel.
So, yes Nikki Haley, America is a very racist country, just not quite as much as it once was.“I don't know if Credence will agree with me but it seems to me that Blacks today have about the same ability to vote as they did in 1960.”
I would not say that it is THAT bad. People were getting their homes bombed, civil rights workers coming into the South from the North to register Blacks to vote risked being murdered. The struggle between 1960 and 1965 was abysmal. It is not like that today, our opponents are much more surreptitious and subtle, while having the same ultimate objective of disenfranchisement of as much of the Black community as possible, they conceal themselves behind a semi-legal ruse.
I had recently read that the Nazis sent people to the United States in the 1930s to educate themselves on the principle of Jim Crow, since from their perspectives we were the experts of applying principles of racial exclusion under the cover of the law. Hitler was anxious to apply similar principles to torment Jews and other undesirables within the Third Reich. Does Governor Haley need to acquire a brisk refresher in American History? Sounds pretty “racist” to me.Another theory I was musing over.
The idea of tokenism being a prime factor within the Republican Party. In exchange for a certain amount of prestige and power, with the caveat of their accepting a glass ceiling with no real access to the brass ring, minority and female candidates staying with the MAGA script denying the existence of sexism and racism can do relatively well.
Haley bent over backwards to accommodate the MAGA crowd, kissing Trump's arse, not taking the MAGA out its comfort zones by denying time honored truth about the cause of Civil War or structural racism. She pampers that crowd with fables and folklore which is reflected in their penchant for book burning and bans, while they rewrite American history to providing the comforting lies that they so crave.
She is playing a game and so is Tim Scott. Even Scott's "girl friend" is probably phony. I would have a hard time looking into the mirror, forcing myself to accommodate and embrace that which you know is not true. She and Scott should know better, but that 30 pieces of silver is irresistible.
Republicans need tokens as they are of inestimable value to them, giving a false impression of diversity within the party. I have never seen Biden or the Democrats needing to pay people conveniently located near the speaker with signs saying "Blacks for Biden" or "Women for Biden"...
"What is important is whether a race as a group was oppressed. In America the Whites as a group have always oppressed the blacks. Throughout our history Presidents down to the local redneck has sought to limit the opportunity of Blacks in America to succeed. "
While it's essential to recognize historical injustices and the impact they've had on various communities, it's also crucial to approach any discussion about it with nuance. Your statement "Whites as a group have always oppressed Blacks" may oversimplify a complex history.
There have indeed been instances of systemic racism and discrimination throughout American history. However, is it not important to acknowledge that not every individual within a racial group is responsible for the actions of a perhaps a minority. Painting an entire group with a broad brush can just lead to perpetuate stereotypes and hinder constructive dialogue.
It is more productive to center our efforts on actively promoting equality, fostering understanding, and systematically dismantling barriers. While recognizing past injustices remains crucial, nurturing unity and addressing challenges collectively can pave the way for a more inclusive and just society. Though significant progress has been made, there is still a journey ahead. Conclusively, viewing each other as human beings, without emphasizing differences, could alleviate the sense of being continuously singled out that minorities often experience.Let me point out, it is not just "historical", it is TODAY as well.
Also, history matters.
Let's say all blacks from 1796 to 1964 had a ball and chain around their ankle. That is not a metaphor as many literally many did for a good portion of American history. After 1984, it because unconstitutional to put a real ball and chain so instead conservatives put legal balls and chains on blacks (and other minorities).
Now suppose they are told to run a 150 year long race against whites. The obvious happens. The black race falls further and further behind because of what conservatives did (save for a very few superhuman blacks who were able to free themselves from the shackles). Now, in 1964, suddenly those ball and chains were removed and told to continue the race.
Conservatives do not see a problem with this situation and claim that all currently alive blacks have caught up in the race and have equal opportunity to succeed.
Liberals, on the other hand, understand the reality of the situation and know that without doing something, it will take blacks centuries, if ever, to catch up because they are so far behind. Because liberals care about their neighbor, they are willing to help those struggling to overcome conservative oppression.
You wrote "There have indeed been instances of systemic racism and discrimination throughout American history."
I ask, "why do you use such minimizing terminology when systemic racism exists today in most sectors of our lives?"
You wrote "Though significant progress has been made,"
I respond with "Yes, a lot of progress has been made for awhile. BUT, for the last few decades (starting with the Reagan administration) conservatives have been clawing back at an ever increasing rate that progress as they work toward turning back the clock to 1950 or thereabouts."
You wrote "Conclusively, viewing each other as human beings, without emphasizing differences, could alleviate the sense of being continuously singled out that minorities often experience."
I respond with "Doing nothing, which is what your comment implies, is a recipe for maintaining the status quo with the black race left in the dust."
One main reason that is true is that conservatives, as a group, will not view each other as human beings, without emphasizing differences. If you study conservative philosophy (see Russell Kirk and his 10 Principles of Conservatism) you will find that conservative philosophy says that their is a natural, god driven, hierarchy between human beings (in America's case that is whites being on top) and that hierarchy should not be disturbed.
For example:
Fifth, conservatives pay attention to the principle of variety. They feel affection for the proliferating intricacy of long-established social institutions and modes of life, as distinguished from the narrowing uniformity and deadening egalitarianism of radical systems. For the preservation of a healthy diversity in any civilization, there must survive orders and classes, differences in material condition, and many sorts of inequality.
Sixth, conservatives are chastened by their principle of imperfectability. ... Man being imperfect, no perfect social order ever can be created. ...To seek for utopia is to end in disaster, the conservative says: we are not made for perfect things. All that we reasonably can expect is a tolerably ordered, just, and free society, in which some evils, maladjustments, and suffering will continue to lurk.
He goes on to say that we should not upset this applecart by trying to improve people's lives except at the margin.
To me, most of his "principles" are repugnant to a civil and just society.
https://kirkcenter.org/conservatism/ten … rinciples/
Haley may well not be Presidential timber as she so easily sucks up to Trump and so easily spews standard Republican/Rightwing lies....
Racism is at the foundation of the American Creed. Haley is a "big girl" and should know that.
https://www.salon.com/2024/01/19/nikki- … te-on-her/Appreciate the article recommended, Cred! As said before I like the Salon. I think the articles as far as writing skills go is inspirational while I appreciate the supportive links they offer. Agree, racism stands out as a national issue and should.
However, I ask do you think that it is regional? Even breaking it down further, is it community? I say that because in a year I may see someone that is black three or four times a year. But, I see Hispanics/Latinos daily. Remember I live in San Diego County.
In my community, a mobile home park that is on the low spectrum of middle class the composition is probably 70% Hispanic/Latino, 25% white, and the rest mixed. As far as the city, Escondido, it is 52% Hispanic/Latino.
More can be found about Escondido from Data USA. I mention that only because possibly, if curious, you can find your city there. To see what they offer peek at the following link for Escondido.
https://datausa.io/profile/geo/escondido-ca/Hey, Tsmog, this is a great website find. I can find multiple great uses for it.
I don’t want to make a big deal about the issue, it is just when one so prominent blatantly lies about the truth, she is going to have my attention.
Churches get an unfair advantage of the rest of us. In the Title IX anti-discrimination regulations, churches are allowed to discriminate if the person they are attacking is a "messenger of the faith" making them subject to the "ministerial exemption".
In this case a man, who believes in God and Jesus, was fired from his job at a Catholic High School because he professed his love and intention of marrying his male partner. An appeals court upheld the decision.
I don't find fault with the court, but I do find fault with the law.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/09/us/appea … index.html"‘Shadow of segregation looms’ on 70th anniversary of Brown v. Board "
https://thehill.com/homenews/race-polit … gregation/After all of that, we get this:
"Over the weekend, Trump had offered some recycled claptrap about his supposed presidential legacy."
“There’s been no president since Abraham Lincoln that has done more for the Black individual in this country than President Donald J. Trump,” Trump told a National Rifle Association conference. “Not even close.”
"On MSNBC, Sharpton assailed the former president’s nomination of three white Supreme Court justices who voted to dismantle affirmative action in college admissions and overturn abortion rights protections."You forget, Trump also says Blacks are HIS people
Related Discussions
- 62
Is THIS institutional racism?
by Readmikenow 4 years ago
“Health officials announced last week residents must wear face coverings in public settings where they may come within six feet of another individual who is not from the same household.But people of color do not have to follow the new rule if they have “heightened concerns about racial profiling...
- 962
Racism, Institutional or Otherwise, in America
by Scott Belford 4 days ago
Three white men were recently convicted of chasing down and murdering a black man who had the audacity to appear in their neighborhood. A year ago or more they might have gotten away with it.Today there is a report of another white father and son team shooting at a black FedEx driver at least...
- 51
Ignorance Is Still Rampant In The U.S. Check This Out!!!
by Julianna 15 years ago
I was serfing the web and ran across a site that turned my stomach, I cannot believe that people are still so ignorant and even though I am a Christian they call themselves Christians. Why are we still talking about segragation in 2009? Do so many people not get the fact, there is not a pure white...
- 14
‘Reverse Racism’ - Is there such a thing?
by Anish Patel 12 years ago
‘Reverse Racism’ - Is there such a thing?If you are White, have you ever felt discriminated against by a person of another race or a person belonging to a ‘minority’ group.
- 43
Are Liberals Now Embracing the Racism They Accuse Conservatives Of?
by Dan Harmon 2 years ago
As Supreme Court Stephen Bryer prepares for retirement, President Biden is doubling down and repeating his campaign promise to put a black woman on the Supreme Court and his growing list of candidates reflects that.No males will be considered. No Caucasians, no Hispanics, no Asians, no...
- 26
Lincoln Freed The Slaves. Why do Blacks generally vote Democrat?
by Charles James 17 months ago
I am not an American, but what goes on in the USA is important to the world.Lincoln was a Republican and freed the slaves. One would expect black Americans to generally vote Republican. But they don't.How did this come about?