Why is it okay to be racist?

Jump to Last Post 1-50 of 62 discussions (631 posts)
  1. Onusonus profile image78
    Onusonusposted 4 months ago

    I hate racism, I hate racist people, I think the Civil War was over slavery. I've seen this country embrace the self evident truth that all men are created equal, and the doctrine of Martin Luther King, until now.

    People get fired from their jobs and shunned from society (rightfully so) for spouting out racial epithets, except when it's against white people. So how is it that the New York times allows this double standard to prevail when they hire a known racist Sarah Jeong.

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-k2He9aGVvI8/W2PP3PtDIaI/AAAAAAAANAY/7pav_OqAWcMY2JQfvHhTr7eJ6MfMfDnBACLcBGAs/s1600/SarahJeongRacistTWEETS.jpg

    Liberals shouldn't get a free pass on racism. You are either for it or against it.

    1. profile image0
      ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      As liberals well know , you scream " RACISM " as a political tool for dividing ,     which is essentially the only viable  entity of racism presently alive and well in America .  Calling whites as racists and the mileage it can attain for the party advancement .

      Thank You Pres. Obama administration .

      1. Onusonus profile image78
        Onusonusposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        The word gets overused until it looses it's meaning, and you can be as racist as you want, as long as you are an expert in the art of virtue signaling.

        1. profile image0
          ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Well , of course we all have to realize that we are talking about THE party where" identity politics " has become the biggest "trigger" to political dialog of any kind ?

          Meaning , If democrats didn't signal " race " in order to include themselves into any political discussion  ,They would never have a political point TO make .

    2. Bored Student profile image88
      Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      There is a stark difference between putting white people down and racism against people of color. When white people are attacked on the grounds that they are white, it may arguably cause problem with divisiveness, but it is not racism because, ultimately, white people will not lose their power and privilege over it. It may make you feel hurt, which is still a problem, but it is most likely not going to systematically hurt you. Racism is a series of microaggressions as well as actual agressions that leave people of color powerless and impoverished at the feet of white people. The average twitter tirade against white people will not leave you impoverished at the foot of Sarah Jeong or any other person of color. It will probably just hurt your feelings, which is a totally separate issue from racism.

      I cannot speak for Sarah Jeong in particular, but white people are not usually attacked simply because they have white skin. White people are usually attacked because of a terrible colonialist history and because of a minimum effort at trying to rectify that history. I am not necessarily saying these attacks of proactive or productive. However, I would not put it in the same category as racism because racism usually requires hate, aggression, or attacks simply on the basis that someone comes from a different race. Most attacks against white people are usually based in frustration at how white people have left others powerless, in anger at how white people seem too anxious to engage in meaningful conversations about race, in disdain at how many white people do not even realize their privilege, or in sheer desperation at how people of color feel totally left behind.

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        This is absolutely the most outrageous statement ever made ! Well No ! But close to it .     Anyone of any color can be racist and if you don't think it's the same kind of hateful racism displayed against whites as has ever been displayed against blacks , reds, browns or yellow skins , then you do NOT know of what you speak.     Time to go back to detention kiddies , get out your homework and reread that chapter.

      2. GA Anderson profile image83
        GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Boredstudent, you offered an opinion, so I will offer one too.

        I think you are wrong because I don't think racism requires hate at all. And for you to say so indicates a specific perspective - one which is not as portrayed in your response as a rational explanation.

        GA

      3. Onusonus profile image78
        Onusonusposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Well I think your frustration stems out of the fact that white privilege is a myth, and only liberals buy into it.

        This idea of social justice which excuses bad behavior on the part of one group and not another is antithetical to the precept that we should be judged not by the color of our skin but the context of our character. Racist is racist no matter the color of your skin.

        This is the exact opposite of what Dr. King and the civil rights movement of the 1960s' was about, and quite literally favors segregation and subservience of races. To simply swing the gauntlet over to the favor of minorities nullifies the higher goal of equal rights for all.

        1. Bored Student profile image88
          Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          It's not the 1960s anymore. Racism has changed since then. I do want everyone to be judged based on their character, I also recognize that we are not there yet. If you can't see a power imbalance between white people and people of color, then I am not sure where you are looking.

          Racism means different things to different people and I am going by the sociological definition. To be sure, by other definitions, it can flow both ways, but the sociological definition can be used to defend certain types of behaviors, which is what I was doing.

          Also, I am curious to know why you think privilege is a myth. As a white person, I have experienced it and I recognize it.

          1. promisem profile image98
            promisemposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Yes, there is a power imbalance based on economic numbers and other ways of measuring it objectively, although those numbers are steadily improving.

            But do you think that imbalance is strictly the result of white racism? Or do other factors count?

            1. Bored Student profile image88
              Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              It's hard to measure things like unconscious bias, but plenty of studies seem to suggest that many white people are socialized to harbor bias that can, in theory, be playing a bigger role in power imbalances than we might think. I cannot discount these studies when trying to determine all the factors that play a role in racial disparities.

              People have argued that black culture is a part of the problem because black people see education, money, and success as something that is too white. I am not sure if this situation is strictly true, but I will admit that this type of attitude is definitely not helpful. However, I cannot help but recognize that this desire to distance oneself from whiteness only stems from years of developing a culture in a seriously racist environment. If black culture is part of the problem, then it is only because white people essentially created a monster by instituting things like slavery and Jim Crow.

              While, racism is probably not the only thing at play, I cannot deny that it is somewhat at play.

              1. promisem profile image98
                promisemposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                I have to say that you can't blame "slavery and Jim Crow" without also crediting the purpose of the Civil War, thousands of laws including the Civil Rights Act, trillions of dollars in social programs and many other attempts to correct the problem.

                By saying it's almost an entirely white problem, which your post above seems to indicate, you open yourself to the kind of angry backlash we see elsewhere in this thread and that I mentioned in another post. It's resentment by people who believe they aren't racist but think they are being accused of causing the problem.

                I can tell you are thoughtful and intelligent. But with all due respect, the post above does sound like reverse bias from a "guilty white liberal".

                1. Bored Student profile image88
                  Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  I assume you want me to hold back on the grounds that it will beneficial in the fight against racism? I'm not yet sure how willing I am to be apologetic. On the one hand, I don't want to alienate anyone from the movements I stand behind. On the other hand, I don't really want anyone to think they are exempt from this fight simply because they could be doing worse, simply because of "thousands of laws...and many other attempts to correct the problem". It has not yet been enough and everyone has to step up until it is.

                  I am happy to admit that there are good points in our history too, but you asked if racism was a major factor in racial disparities and I was simply giving examples as to why it is.

                  1. promisem profile image98
                    promisemposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    I'm not asking you to hold back. I assume you don't me to do so either. I recognize you were replying to my questions.

                    I'm trying to say that your answer comes across as blaming whites for the entire problem, even to the point of blaming black cultural issues on whites.

                    The most racist people and most loving people I have ever met are not white. Your answers and my long life experiences don't agree with each other.

                  2. Live to Learn profile image79
                    Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    There are enough laws in place to ensure that anyone who wants to has the opportunity to succeed. There is no racism holding anyone back. The primary thing holding people back is their belief. If you insist long enough that you aren't responsible for your own happiness, you eventually believe it.

                    It is my observation and has been my experience that this victim mentality cannot be appeased. Whatever done is never enough. Because a person who believes themself a victim does so by choice.

          2. tsadjatko profile image60
            tsadjatkoposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            So bored student, what is the sociological definition of racism or is that just something you made up? Because the only definition I find of racism is:
            1) belief in or doctrine asserting racial differences in character, intelligence, etc. and the superiority of one race over another or others: racist doctrine also, typically, seeks to maintain the supposed purity of a race or the races

            2) any program or practice of racial discrimination, segregation, etc., specif., such a program or practice that upholds the political or economic domination of one race over another or others

            3) feelings or actions of hatred and bigotry toward a person or persons because of their race

            What definition says racism isn’t racism if you are white and therefore aren’t affected by it? Is that what you call the siociological definition? Nice try but but your sociological definition is made up, it doesn’t exist. Is that what you do because you are bored? Make things up? According to you nobody is a racist unless the target of their racism “loses power or privilege.” If you don’t see how insane that is then the real racist is you.

            1. Bored Student profile image88
              Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              https://revisesociology.com/2016/10/31/ … sociology/

              Just another place for you to get your information.

              1. tsadjatko profile image60
                tsadjatkoposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                No surprise here. Ask a liberal a simple question, “what is your reference for your sociological definition of racism” and instead of a simple definition spelled out in a sentence or two like the actual definition of racism which is what everyone uses including sociologists the liberal has to refer you to pages of unrelated information none of which provide a “sociological” definition of racism any different from the dictionary definition. And the liberal ignores the fact that I demonstrated what he presented originally as the “sociological definition” requiring “loss of power or prestige” as the requisite result needed to label a person a racist is not a part of any definition of racism but just an excuse for him to practice racism and not call it what it is. See this is why it is impossible to reason with a liberal - they make things up to fit their world view and have no need for the truth.

                1. Bored Student profile image88
                  Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  You seem to think racism is simple and it's not.

                  You asked what the sociological definition of racism is and I gave you a sociology study page that sums racism up as power and prejudice. If you want to read actual sociology papers, then be my guest. There are plenty of them to go around, but I kind of assumed that you did not want to go through the turgid prose of an academic article.

                  If this definition is not good enough for you, then great. You don't have agree with it, but I'd love to know what your problem with this definition is. You are entitled to an opinion and I'd be happy to hear it.

                  What I'm not happy to hear is baseless attacks on liberals. You don't like baseless attacks on white men on the grounds that all white men are violent, racist, or something else. I don't like baseless attacks on liberals on the ground that all liberals make things up and fail to pursue the truth.I love to pursue the truth, which is why I like reading academic papers on sociology, statistics, science, and anything else, but my personal hobbies are neither here nor there. I simply ask that you disagree with a definition based on evidence and not based on some warped and generalized concept of the type of person who provided it for you.

                  1. tsadjatko profile image60
                    tsadjatkoposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    The big lie is your idea my accusations of liberals are baseless. Anyone except a liberal would not believe that because everything I have ever said about liberals has been said after laying out the basis which I have done in your case. Of course you being a liberal would have to say it’s baseless because you have no use for the truth if it disagrees with your opinion.

                    According to you no one is a racist unless they have the ability to or have taken power or prestige from the targeted race - your words, your definition, and it is illogical irrational and an insane excuse to be racist, which if any ideology is racist in practice it is YOU liberals.

                  2. promisem profile image98
                    promisemposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    Welcome to HubPage forums, Bored Student. It's a rough place to express an opinion.

                    But that which does not kill you makes you stronger.  wink

            2. Castlepaloma profile image76
              Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Disagree

              No Racism from Bored, I can spot. A well said, reasonable explanation.

      4. mrpopo profile image73
        mrpopoposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        What school/course taught you this perspective?

      5. promisem profile image98
        promisemposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        This country has spent trillions of dollars and passed thousands of laws trying to fix the slavery system introduced by the European colonial powers.

        We had a Civil War to end slavery that cost hundreds of thousands of white lives.

        Yes, we still have racism, and it flows both ways. But we have gone far beyond a "minimum effort" to solve it.

        1. Bored Student profile image88
          Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Obviously, we have a different opinion on what a minimum effort is. I am of the opinion that, in order to consider yourself an ally to a particular movement or group of people, you need to step up every single day. After all, racism is experienced every single day, so the fight against it exists every single day.

          1. promisem profile image98
            promisemposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Well said. I agree with you it's a daily battle and that we should ally ourselves with a movement -- in this case the opposition to racism.

            I also think allying ourselves with a group of people rather than a movement in an attempt to fix a racial problem may create more problems.

            Do we risk overcompensating and creating a backlash of resentment? Based on what I've seen and heard, I think the answer is yes.

            1. Bored Student profile image88
              Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              I absolutely agree. It is a tough balance to figure out when to align yourself with people and when not to. In politics especially, I prefer not to support candidates simply based on the grounds that a politician does not have white skin. It may be important to diversify politics a little bit, but I just do not think the country will benefit from politicians of color who have bad policies. Luckily, there are plenty of politicians of color who do have good policies and I end up casting my ballot for a diverse group of people.  Still, in general, I agree that it is better to support a movement than simply supporting a group of people.

      6. Readmikenow profile image95
        Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        I was at first shocked when I read this and then I saw college student and it all made sense.

        “it is not racism because, ultimately, white people will not lose their power and privilege over it”

        Huh?  What are you talking about?  Sorry, racism is not connected to losing “power and privilege.”


        “white people are not usually attacked simply because they have white skin. White people are usually attacked because of a terrible colonialist history and because of a minimum effort at trying to rectify that history.”

        Who taught you this?  What a pile of absolute nonsense.  Question for you.  How about someone like myself who has white skin, but has ancestors who didn't come to the United States until 1902 from eastern Europe?  My family had NOTHING to do with colonial America, the Civil War, slavery.  So, why is that put on me?  Not ALL white people who are here now were here then.  I have relatives who came over in the 1990s, are they responsible?  Guess what? I still have people of color make ALL sorts of references to my skin color.  So, your theory just doesn't hold water in the realm of reality.

        “racism usually requires hate, aggression, or attacks simply on the basis that someone comes from a different race,” yeah, when I read those tweets from Sarah Jeong I felt the love. Do you have any idea how ridiculous this sounds?

        It's obvious you've been fed too much intellectual nonsense.

        1. Bored Student profile image88
          Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          It's funny that you think power and privilege have nothing to do with racism. According to the sociological definition of racism, power and privilege are the two most important aspects of racism.

          My family came in the 1940s from Eastern Europe as well, but I am not talking about ancestral or family history. I am talking about the history of our people as a race.

          1. Readmikenow profile image95
            Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            You mean the race that created many inventions that changed the world?  The race that gave the world everything from the automobile, airplane to the radio as well as electricity, advanced civilizations, computers, space travel and so many advancements in the medical field, there are too many to mention. Lets not even discuss advancements in law, literature, philosophy, mathematics and more. I consider this the history of our people as a race. Racism, it is a  pendulum that swings both ways.  If you don't believe me, I'll take you to the old neighborhood where I was a kid.  Go onto the basketball court after dusk. I guarantee you will hear some rather harsh words about being white. There will be threats. All the alleged white privilege in the world won't help you avoid being robbed and experiencing physical harm if you can't run fast.  That is not a sociological definition, that is reality.

            1. Bored Student profile image88
              Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              I'm not sure I understand why white accomplishments are relevant. You can be proud of your race and still acknowledge that parts of its history were problematic.

      7. Castlepaloma profile image76
        Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Bored student

        Funny, you got about four response and they don't get what your saying.

        I get what your saying clearly from history and experience and kodos for you.

        1. Live to Learn profile image79
          Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Not getting something and disagreeing with the statement are not synonymous.

          I think what people fail to take into consideration is that simplistic attitudes deny obvious realities. You have to take into account all factors. If you deny the present, in order to find fault with the past you set yourself up for a resolution in the distant future.

          1. Castlepaloma profile image76
            Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            From studying Racism pass and envision the future. It's clear to see the non whites are changing reality quicker than whites.  I work these problems out by each time I simplifies, simplifies and simplifies

            1. Live to Learn profile image79
              Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              I agree. It does appear that you simplify, simplify, simplify. I see that as a problem.

              If we view a problem from one perspective, that is easy enough to do. However, the harder thing is to attempt to see from other perspectives, simultaneously. Solutions cannot be found by denying the value of all experiences. And, my observation has been that when you bow to the sensibilities of one particular group, they will never be satisfied. You cannot feed the monster of entitlement enough to sate its appetite. It only grows and grows.

              1. Castlepaloma profile image76
                Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                I would really like to see your methods of getting closer to Solving problems by complicating, complicating and complicating.

                From being white and half of my love ones are. How is possible my perspective gose against the 86℅ majority non whites, or whites. When my perspective is more in line with the majority overall.

                American Whites have been in the greatest denials throughout the world's greatest genocide of black salavery and American Natives destruction. Where Germany has done an excellent job of redemption.

                The most modern change has been blacks can vote and legalized interracial marriage in 1965. Don't worry non whites will change up alot more to come.

                1. Live to Learn profile image79
                  Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Hatred solves nothing. Historically, we can find a reason to claim persecution from any angle. As a woman, I could easily find my share of indignation. But, you know why I don't? It solves nothing to blame those not responsible. You,as a man, owe me no apology for the behavior of other men. You, as a man, owe me no apology for past patriarchal systems. I am thankful to live in a society which attempts to be inclusive. In a society which constantly critiques itself and corrects course where needed.

                  If you think hatred and vitriolic language will shield you from the consequences if your desired claims come to fruition, think again. Your light skin will be the thing you are judged by, when you hope for a return to a world where skin color is the litmus test used for anything.

                2. tsadjatko profile image60
                  tsadjatkoposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  “American Whites have been in the greatest denials throughout the world's greatest genocide of black salavery and American Natives destruction.”
                  So your position is that only American whites were involved in slavery when northern whites were actually the ones who liberated the slaves (while blacks in Africa were the ones who delivered black slaves to Americans) are still practicing black on black slavery there?

                  And American Indians were obliterating rival tribes throughout their known history even before whites came to America - this is a historical fact.

                  My point being that atrocities like you describe are not unique to whites but on the contrary a human condition the spans across all races.

    3. peterstreep profile image77
      peterstreepposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      It is not ok to say that you're a racists or a sexist for that matter. It has nothing to do with political views. That's just a lousy excuse.
      Anybody who makes a racist or sexist remark should be considered as a racists or sexist.
      A president who is tweeting racist and sexist text is a racist and a sexist. Nothing else, no excuse.
      Both racists and sexists want to dived people in us and them.
      We, white people against them black people. We Christians against them Muslims, we rich people against them poor people, we man against them women, we Americans against the rest of the world people. We Democrats against them Republicans. We Lefties against them Righties.

      It is us against them. We, the good guys against them the bad guys.
      This is not a healthy way of living. It builds hatred and mistrust. The more groups are separated, the more they become alienated from each other and the less easy it is to understand each other.
      For politics it's great though, as divided groups are better to rule. Divide and rule is a classic strategy. Promoting sexism and racism is a classic government strategy done in many countries.
      And because the government is behaving in a sexist or racist way, it does not mean it's ok.
      To be racist or sexist is foolish behaviour and it hurts not only the person who is discriminated but also the society.
      Racism and sexsim is a crime, and should be acted upon like it.
      Grabbing women by the pussy without consent is a crime. Nothing more nothing less.
      Not hiring a person because of their religious belief or colour of there skin is a crime. nothing less.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image76
        Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Yes! Peterstreep.
        When your against anything you join the problem. Being not for something is a better solution of harmless preference.

        1. peterstreep profile image77
          peterstreepposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Only an angry teenager is against anything, or grownups who never grew up.
          Anger is an emotion easily awakened and used often for political gain.
          It's quite obvious why the US has a racial problem, compared with for example the UK. The US was build on slavery (ad to the mix religious extremism and genocide) and you have a difficult start.
          The US never dealt with the segregation in the society. Only 50 years ago black people had to sit in the back of the bus, use different toilets or benches in the park.
          50 years, is not even a generation. No wonder lot's of people find it difficult to change there attitude towards Afro-Americans. They learned from their parents and the society that they were privileged.
          It's exactly this white privilege that Trump grew up with and that he promotes. A privilege that many people understand and want to be continued. Trump hates  Obama and many do, simply because he is black.
          Many will be afraid to admit that this deep down racism is the reason of their distrust against everything Obama did.
          Now they are pointing fingers to black people who also tweet or say racist things. Just to justify racist behaviour from white people.
          The big difference is. There are far more white people, and they are in the position of power, that tweet racist remarks then there are black people who do so.
          Neither is good, but one black person making a racists remark does not make a racist remark of a white person good. But it is clearly used in this way by white racists.

    4. Live to Learn profile image79
      Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I, too, hate racism. But everyone appears to have a different bar used to gauge it in others. Unfortunately, if your skin is classified as white you must be guilty, with no proof other than that light skin. So, a lot of lighter skinned people appear to be scrambling to clarify they can claim some affiliation to oppressed groups or they understand these claims of oppression so shouldn't be included in the wrong side of the witch hunts.

      We all know people whose personal experience lead them to making broad generalizations about specific groups, which plays as racism. Using the same measuring stick, no matter the color of the individual making the generalizations, leads me to label people racist when they display traits of nonacceptance, intimidation or a desire to minimize the value of the individual because of their skin color. As part of the light skinned group, that (I'm certain) will win me a racist label.

      1. peterstreep profile image77
        peterstreepposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Racism is no bound by color. You can be black and being a racists (like the racist tweets from example above shows) just as you can be white and be a racist.
        And the label racist is verry clear. The bar used to gauge it, as you say, is made vague with intension as to give racists more room to be explicit.
        You are not a racist because you are white live to learn. It almost looks as if you give yourself an excuse to be a racist. (Im white so people think im a racist anyway, so thats fine, ive got an excuse to be racist, as they expect it from me.) I dont think thats a good approach as there is no excuse for racesist behaviour.
        So if you label yourself a racist Live to Learn then I believe you, and I will dislike you for that a lot.
        If you label yourself a racist simply because you think of your white skin you must be a racist, don't think this way. You will give the wrong impression to people.
        You started the post with saying that you hated racism. And you label yourself as one. So what is it yes or no.
        I will say, yes you are a racist, and you just started the comment with a feel good sentence. Im sorry if I have the wrong impression, as I do not know you. But these are the consequences of what you wrote.

        1. Live to Learn profile image79
          Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I didn't say I was racist. I said I would be labeled that. I don't see myself as racist because I use the same measuring stick, across the board, to determine if comments or actions should be labeled such.

          Sadly, in our collective attempt to create inclusion we are causing exclusion. I don't think the fact that a particular group was discriminated against in the past is cause to discriminate today. And the subject of the OP should be labeled racist, and fired, since that is the treatment others are getting.

          The news media has done its part to fuel the flames. If you are white, and did something socially unacceptable, they immediately include the word racist. If you are any other segment of society and do likewise, it is difficult for the reader to discern anything. Since we are a predominantly white society it gives the impression the perpetrator is white, thus continuing the attempt at the illusion.  When the article does name a nonwhite race of a perpetrator there is always the accompanying attempt to justify the action.  As a proponent of fair play, I find the current climate deplorable.

          1. peterstreep profile image77
            peterstreepposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            I do not think you will be labelled a racist if you are not acting like one. So why would you label yourself. Or assume others will because you are white. Do not turbid the discussion. As I said that's what racists want.
            Racists want to delude the word racist for using it for everything, so if something really is racist, the word will have lost it's meaning. The same thing is done with the word socialist in the US. It's true meaning hijacked.  And the fascist also try to downplay the word fascism and only want to label it to what happened in the German Reich. But fascism means much more.
            I think people should talk clear. And racism or sexisim is not acceptable in the media. Not rightwing, nor leftwing. Not for white not for black journalists.
            And indeed the climate in the US and the world in general has become deplorable. And this word to is hijacked and almost given a crime status.

            Thanks for clearing that up Live to Learn. Don't worry to much about labels ;-) Labels are dangerous things...
            The world is better without them, as we wouldn't have a them and us kind of thing..

    5. promisem profile image98
      promisemposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I agree she got a free pass. I also strongly disagree with liberal media (as opposed to conservative or independent media) that is defending and rationalizing her Tweets.

    6. Don W profile image84
      Don Wposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      If you are asking why Jeong's comments are perceived differently by, for example, the New York Times, the answer is social context.

      On one side are comments that are rude and mean to white people, said as a form of mimicry in response to the racist, misogynistic comments Jeong receieved.

      https://hubstatic.com/14155858.jpg

      On the other is the systemic oppression and marginalization of people who are not white and not male (which racist, misogynistic comments form part of).

      Suggesting these are the same is false equivalence.

      I don't condone Jeong's comments, but I fully understand why these things are different.

      1. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        I'd like to see the chronology of the comments back and forth prior to an attempt to justify behavior.

        1. mrpopo profile image73
          mrpopoposted 4 months agoin reply to this
          1. Live to Learn profile image79
            Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Maybe I'm confused. I thought the defense for her tweets was that racist white guys were attacking her, and she was responding in kind.

            I didn't read everything in your link. It was a butt load of tweets but the only ones I saw were her racist statements. Did I miss the claimed attacks?

            1. mrpopo profile image73
              mrpopoposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              They're hidden in the oppressive systemic systems of structural institutions. Or something.

              1. Live to Learn profile image79
                Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                I think it says an incredible amount for those called white to attempt to continue to find ways to understand and forgive the injustices of this current climate. Hopefully, those called by other names will eventually learn a lesson and do the same.

        2. Don W profile image84
          Don Wposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Understanding behavior is not the same as justifying it.

          If justification is what you want though, I strongly suspect Twitter is not the only source of racism and misogyny Jeong has encountered as a woman of color. If so, I think it would be inconceivable for that not to have influenced her decision to post those comments, but I'm speculating. I haven't shared her lived experience, so I don't know.

          But even if she hadn't been harassed on Twitter, her comments would still be perceived differently because of social context. Being rude and mean about white men, or white people, is not equivalent to the systemic oppression and marginalisation of women of color.

          1. Onusonus profile image78
            Onusonusposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            You would first have to be able to prove that systematic oppression actually exists. And when you look at the data, it's easy to see that it does not.

            1. Don W profile image84
              Don Wposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Systemic, not systematic. They are different things.

              I'm not interested in your view of "the data". You asked: "...how is it that the New York times allows this double standard to prevail when they hire a known racist Sarah Jeong".

              I've told you it's probably because the New York Times does not perceive Jeong's comments as racist due to social context. The fact you deny that context exists is not something I believe I can help you with.

              1. Onusonus profile image78
                Onusonusposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                Well as long as people such as yourself are willing to allow the double standard to prevail there will always be a division among races. Which is what gives more power to politicians rather than the groups they claim to defend.

                You were born with a certain color of skin. No one should feel guilt or pride in that.

                1. Don W profile image84
                  Don Wposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  We perceive and respond to behaviour differently based on social context all the time. I'd say that selectively not doing that is the double standard.

                  Why would I feel pride or guilt? As a rational person I can acknowledge that I benefit from various forms of social inequality, but have no control over the social group I was born into. At the same time I can understand why some groups affected by social inequality might want to celebrate their attributes and achievements, without it making me feel threatened or upset. I can even join in those celebrations! No pride or guilt needed on my part. Just basic human empathy and common sense.

          2. Live to Learn profile image79
            Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            So, can we say you would hold some people to a lower standard of conduct? Do you think them incapable?

            1. Don W profile image84
              Don Wposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              I'm not applying a "lower standard" of conduct. I'm applying the relevant standard of conduct, based on the social context.

      2. Onusonus profile image78
        Onusonusposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        I see no difference between the two. I would make no excuse for the people who provoked her, and the same goes for her. Both parties took the low road, and are equally racist. The fact that you don't recognize it is racist.

        1. wilderness profile image98
          wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          You mean it isn't OK to be racist as a response to a racist?  Isn't that kind of like maintaining ethical standards in the face of unethical behavior, remaining calm when greeted with vitriol and refusing to revert to childhood when dealing with childish actions?  Isn't that a rather quaint notion? big_smile

          1. Onusonus profile image78
            Onusonusposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Apparently it is depending on how many intersectionality points you can muster during a debate.

            1. wilderness profile image98
              wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Naw.  All that really matters is if the listener shares the same brand of racism as the speaker.  If so they can mutually declare themselves as non-racist (no dissenting voice, and no honesty, either).

              1. Onusonus profile image78
                Onusonusposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                So create a society where it is socially acceptable to vilify one race, or "scapegoat" in this case, in order to further a political agenda. Sounds vaguely familiar...

      3. Readmikenow profile image95
        Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        You need to read an article from the New York Times titled "The Asian Advantage," and wonder what she has to be upset about. 

        https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/opin … ntage.html

        1. Don W profile image84
          Don Wposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I strongly suspect one NYT article will not be enough to counteract Jeong's own lived experience, and every other example of racism and misogyny she has seen, heard, or knows something about, but I can't be certain.

          You could ask her if it does. She is on Twitter I believe.

          1. Readmikenow profile image95
            Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            This is a very typical liberal response.  Conservatives are all racists, if some idiotic liberal is a racist, you can rationalize it and defend it.  I believe the concept of double standards and hypocrisy are things the liberal mind cannot comprehend.  I would no longer talk to her than a black person would walk up to a member of the KKK burning a cross and ask to discuss race relations. Your response on many levels is to be expected but is still unreal.  Now is the time to bring out your reference to the Ukraine, which is a favorite way for you to respond to things.  Go ahead, I can take it.

            1. Don W profile image84
              Don Wposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              I think it's the typical response from someone capable of recognizing social context.

              Conservatives and liberals? Are those races now? That's new.

              Nope, a woman of color saying mean things about white people on Twitter is not the same as the KKK burning a cross. I checked in the liberal handbook, source of all liberal truth and knowledge. No, definitely not the same.

              Ukraine? You've lost me. I've not discussed Ukraine with you. You must have me confused with someone else. It could have been one of my liberal colleagues. It's very difficult to tell us apart.

    7. Readmikenow profile image95
      Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      https://hubstatic.com/14158584_f1024.jpg

    8. peterstreep profile image77
      peterstreepposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      The problem of this post is that it does not say anything about the context of the posts.
      I doubt it Onusonus has collected these tweets himself . I guess he copied the picture from a article on a web page.
      On first sight the tweets looks incredible racist. Until you know that Jeong was a subject of online harassment by trolls.  As a reaction toward the posts and tweets of her trolls she decided to use the same rhetoric as her harassers.
      If you know this, the tweets should be read completely differently. And can not be seen as racism but more as a reaction on the language used to discredit her.
      The question you can ask is: Is it the right way to fight trolling?
      Apparently not as this forum discussion is merely feeding the trolls discussion.
      In this respect the picture of her tweets above is misinformation as it does not tell the whole story.
      Jeong said in an interview that she sees her error in the way she handled trolls as it only "feed the vitriol that we too often see on social media."

      1. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        Calling people trolls for opening a dialogue is rather trollish. If the subject of the OP insists it wasn't racism but more in line with responding in kind it would be helpful to present the evidence.

        Claiming bigoted statements are the correct response to bigoted statements is fine only if that behavior is accepted across the board. I see no evidence of that being true, either.

        1. peterstreep profile image77
          peterstreepposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          Dear Live to Learn, I did not call people trolls. I was talking about feeding trolls, not being trolls themselves.
          I said the tweets made by Jeong were a reaction to trolling. And therefore must be seen in a different light. Please read my post carefully.
          And nobody claimed that bigoted statements are the correct response.

          1. Live to Learn profile image79
            Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

            So, you agree that Jeong's statements were bigoted in nature? And, although you are correct that you didn't single anyone out as being a troll, I do take exception to the statement. Pretty much anything feeds trolls. I think the onus asked a fair question.

            The bottom line is...does the desire for social justice allow for the cessation of a desire for overall justice? When does hypocrisy get labeled, as such?

            1. peterstreep profile image77
              peterstreepposted 3 months agoin reply to this

              Yes Jeong’s statements were wrong, I said that before. But it has to be seen in the correct context. And this context was not given by Onusonus. And so many people gave an answer to this question without knowing what was behind the story.
              And so you can question if the tweets of Jeong were truely racist or more a parody on racist behaviour.

              1. Live to Learn profile image79
                Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                Since I searched the web and only found excuses, without any real body of evidence supporting her claim of responding in kind; I cannot support your conclusions. Nor can I see enough support for her statements. If it were presented, I might be able to see this in a different light. As it stands it appears to me she may be standing behind a lie.

              2. Kathryn L Hill profile image77
                Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                Sarah J fought back internet bullying by posting in a spirit of revenge. If she intends to develop and maintain a good reputation, she showed bad judgment, bad example and immaturity.  (Her literary creativity got the better of her.)

                In fact, she apologized.
                We can safely give her a second chance, I would say.


                How should we deal with internet bullying?




                "In sum, it can be difficult to hold bullies accountable for their actions (for both adolescents and adults).  In a country such as ours that values free speech so highly, many people genuinely believe they can say whatever they want, to whomever they want.  We know that is not true, but it isn’t clear where exactly the line is.  And just because we *can* say certain things, doesn’t mean we should.  It’s no wonder that many teens are wrestling with this problem—they see the adults in their lives saying mean and nasty things to others on a regular basis.  Do your part to model appropriate behavior and address any hurtful language when it comes up.  The kids (and other adults) in your life will hopefully see it, remember it, and act in the right ways."

                FROM
                https://cyberbullying.org/advice-for-ad … erbullying

      2. Onusonus profile image78
        Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        So based on the context and your reasoning, if I were being attacked on line and used the same language about black people you'd be okay with it?

        1. Don W profile image84
          Don Wposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          You still haven't provided any proof that full racial equality exists, in practice, across all significant social structures and institutions. Based on your reasoning, we can now safely assume you have no proof, and that such equality doesn't exist. Do you see any faults with that reasoning?

          And is social context important to the way we perceive and respond to comments/ behaviour, in your view, or not?  You started by implying it's not. Then demonstrated that it is. Now seem unable to decide either way.

          1. Onusonus profile image78
            Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

            Depends on the context. If there is racism it can be fought against in court and corrected. Of course racism exists, I'm refuting the idea of undetectable systemic racism.

            1. Don W profile image84
              Don Wposted 3 months agoin reply to this

              You still haven't provided proof that full systemic racial equality exists, in practice, across all significant social structures and institutions, which is what you are asserting.

              So, in your view, are there any instances at all where social context is important to the way we perceive comments/ behavior?

              1. Onusonus profile image78
                Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                Point to a rule in any industry that is in place that is racist.

                1. Don W profile image84
                  Don Wposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                  That relates to racial equality in theory. I have asked for "proof that full systemic racial equality exists, in practice, across all significant social structures and institutions", because that is what you are asserting.

                  And again, in your view, are there any instances at all where social context is important to the way we perceive comments/ behavior?

                  1. Onusonus profile image78
                    Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                    No I didn't. It's on a case by case basis.

        2. peterstreep profile image77
          peterstreepposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          Again context Onusonus. There is a difference when a black person uses racial language as a reaction towards white suprematism compared with a white peson using the same laguage to defend against a black extremism.
          You can not always say if A does something to B it has the same value as if B does something to A.
          When a man makes a sexist remark it has a different impact then when a women makes a sexist remark or when a homosexual makes a sexist remark towards a hetrosexual it has not the same effect as a hetrosexual calls a homosexual by names.
          Everything must be seen in the context it is said. If you dont, if you leave context out of the quotation the sentence does not have meaning, or worse changes meaning or becomes a lie.  Dont you think?

          1. Onusonus profile image78
            Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

            What are you talking about? Suprematism is a crappy art form based on simple geometry.

            Also I agree that everything has to be seen in context. Just not social context. Because that's a BS word.

            1. peterstreep profile image77
              peterstreepposted 3 months agoin reply to this

              Typo as you probably understood. I ment supremacism.
              And what is wrong with a British Standard word?

    9. kiylahskies profile image84
      kiylahskiesposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      Racism isn't okay ever obviously but that isn't racism, the system has to be working against you for it to be racism, you have to be a minority - white people aren't minorities this is just prejudice not racism

      1. Onusonus profile image78
        Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

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

      2. Don W profile image84
        Don Wposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        As you have seen, some people are so shocked the meaning of a word can change over time, they fail to note the point you are making.

        I acknowledge your point.

        Within the current social context, personal prejudice by white people against black people, can affect the rights of black people in ways that personal prejudice by black people against white people simply cannot.

        So although racial prejudice by a person of color against white people can be just as rude or insulting on a personal level, it is not equivalent.

        Some people are hung up on the idea that both are the same because they meet the same definition.

        But firing a gun at someone and giving someone a noogie both meet the definition of violence. No sensible person would suggest those actions are equivalent though.

        Yet here we are, with people insisting that just because two comments meet the definition of racial prejudice, or racism (as it's commonly defined) that those comments are equivalent, and should be treated the same.

        They aren't and they shouldn't.

        1. Onusonus profile image78
          Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          Again, racism is a belief. Argue with a dictionary.

          1. Don W profile image84
            Don Wposted 3 months agoin reply to this

            Dictionaries (eventually) reflect words and usage. They don't determine them.

            All new usage exists before it enters a dictionary. It's included in a dictionary precisely because people are using it.

            If words and usage were rejected on the grounds they are not already in a dictionary, no new words or usage could exist.

            So you are wrong to imply kiylahskies' usage of "racism" (racist belief combined with power) is somehow invalid because it's not currently in a dictionary.

            The most you can reasonably say is that this usage has not met the required frequency and breadth of use necessary for inclusion in a dictionary (yet).

            If you choose not to accept it on those grounds, that's your choice, but that doesn't change the fault in reasoning kiylahskies (and others) have highlighted: just because two things meet the same definition, that doesn't make them equivalent.

            And you still haven't produced any evidence that systemic equality exists. Are you planning to, or have you given up? Presumably your belief in systemic equality is based on something. If it's not based on evidence, what's it based on?

            1. Onusonus profile image78
              Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

              So not only do you believe in guilty until proven innocent, but now you get to change the meaning of words at will.

              1. Don W profile image84
                Don Wposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                Misrepresenting my comments won't help you.

                It doesn't change the fact that just because two things meet the same definition, that doesn't make them equivalent.

                It doesn't change the fact that you have not provided proof that systemic equality exists, even though you think beliefs must be based on evidence, otherwise they are merely assumptions.

                When your own belief fails your own test of reasoning, that says something about either your belief, your reasoning, or both. I'll leave you to decide which.

                1. Onusonus profile image78
                  Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                  I pretty much summed up exactly what you believe. I just did it without all the sugar coating.

                  I'm sure you would like nothing more than to change this nations constitution to reflect that sentiment. Fortunately for the rest of us it remains in tact.

                  1. Don W profile image84
                    Don Wposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                    I believe the burden of proof lies with the person claiming something exists, not the person denying it, which is a widely understood, and uncontroversial convention.

                    You summarized that as: "you believe in guilty until proven innocent".

                    That's misrepresentation.

                    I could "summarize" your comments in a similar way. I won't though because it's dishonest and unproductive. Do me the same courtesy.

                    Unfortunately (for you) misrepresenting people's views won't help with the issues in your reasoning.

                    Again, have you given up trying to prove systemic equality exists, or is there some evidence you'd like me to review? If you've given up and accept you can't prove the claim, do you now reject the idea systemic equality exists as per your own reasoning? If not, why not?

                    Likewise, do you believe two things that meet the same definition are necessarily equivalent? If not, why are you suggesting they are? Would a dictionary definition of the word "equivalent" help you? I know how much you like dictionary definitions.

    10. erorantes profile image54
      erorantesposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      Good morning mister Onusonus. The majority of people want to benefit from public services. When the government see or they get a report of someone not doing their job right that it is when they get fire. Also, people sing contracts for many years, and corporations are not allow to hire them again because that it is their rules on their company. Racism is rare. Their is always an explanation to someone act to the affected person. The affected person knows it too. They do not want to tell the truth of the matter.

  2. hard sun profile image90
    hard sunposted 4 months ago

    ", it may arguably cause problem with divisiveness, but it is not racism because, ultimately, white people will not lose their power and privilege over it."

    What about whites that have zero power and privilege. This is the type of rhetoric that helped lead us to the clown in office today. It's not productive for anyone.

    1. Bored Student profile image88
      Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Yes, if you already have zero privilege, you aren't going to lose it. I thought it was clear that those who face the threat of losing power are those that started out with it. White people in power will not lose it from most of these attacks. Maybe, next time, I'll be more clear.

    2. Castlepaloma profile image76
      Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      The majority of White people are loosing their empire. In which, the white people today are being out strategizes by the 86℅ non-white population of the world. America has more non-whites being born than whites. Most win strategy in war are by sheer greater numbers of people. The only obstacles to take down is the white secret societies that are running as paper tigers. Then equality will come closer to a reality slowly.

      1. mrpopo profile image73
        mrpopoposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        The non-whites are strategizing against the whites to topple their empires and win the war in the name of equality. What wonderful, unifying rhetoric.

    3. kiylahskies profile image84
      kiylahskiesposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      They're white, that's their privilege - if you're white you can't possibly say you have no privilege. Sure lots of white people have hard lives harder than other people of colour, you can have a hard life and be white but your life can never be hard because you're white

  3. Kathryn L Hill profile image77
    Kathryn L Hillposted 4 months ago

    In what way do white people have power and privilege, I ask?
    Those who have moral boundaries, respect for others, and live by the golden rule have power and privilege. Power and privilege can be had by all in this country. This is the ideal which we must fight for and focus on. We have laws toward this end. They must be followed. They must be enforced.

    1. kiylahskies profile image84
      kiylahskiesposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      Your ancestors weren't enslaved, you have a higher chance of getting a job even with a criminal record than a black person. You probably will never feel afraid of the police, so yes white people have privealage

      1. kiylahskies profile image84
        kiylahskiesposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        privilege*

      2. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        You have absolutely no idea whose ancestors were enslaved, or were not. And your belief that white people can't have a hard life, simply because they are white, is so naive as to be ludicrous.

  4. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Racism didn't originate with government ,   apologists of the left primarily blame every human fault on government because "government" is easy to blame , Stop it , that is the easy way out of a debate , it's lame , it's bogus and it just pushes all of our societal problems down the road for someone else to solve.

  5. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Absolutely correct LtoL ,  the use in and of "racism " in our media , by bigoted activists , by generalizing and sensationalizing media pundits unfortunately has diminished the sanctity of all solutions to racism .

    White people , and I'm sure so many minorities too, shake their heads every day when we see the blatant misuse of any terminology. Racism is a particularly sensitive issue because for so long so many people not only sacrificed but educated themselves and even their children to this cause .

    So be it in the use of this false accusatory charge.  it does however prove without one doubt that there are many, many intellectual racists who  still haven't learned the lessons of history .  Perhaps one day  the lessons from the streets will rise to the occasion and teach academia's ivory towered hearts that they are filled with bigotry and racism too  and perhaps moreso .

    1. Live to Learn profile image79
      Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I will say that railing against the white man seems blind, to me. All you have to do is observe what has happened in the African sub continent during recent years (South Africa playing that out, today), the Middle East, etc. Order and progress is a major part of the legacy of Western civilization. Western values are what have given us the freedom to have these conversations, the technology to converse globally and the wealth to do it in comfort.

      If we blame the big bad white man we should, in the same breath, give him kudos.

  6. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    I have been reading up on the opinions of racism and reverse racism ,     there are those who say there's no such thing as the reverse of racism ,   No I guess there isn't .   However , there is probably a larger percentage of minorities who are racist towards whites than whites by percentage towards others . We'll never truthfully know because we have a media driven to the bias of the  politically correct .

  7. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Trump should pass a law making the very word illegal with stiff fines and repercussions for using it especially falsely !  I for one am sick to death of those who know nothing of racism throwing the word around in accusatory fashion as if they knew ,..... as if they knew !

    Say Racism - Pay a ten thousand dollar fine .

  8. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Today's news- yesterday's cause ,we really have to ask  Why is it okay to for racism to be used by the democratic activists as a tool ?    The charge is thrown around like fresh wet snow- balls the morning after a storm every single election cycle ?

    Most of the young activists and parrots using the term today can't tell you when slavery actually happened , why or in what proportions America participated.   What 5 % of slave traffic came to north America ? It  Seems , other than easy victimology , we should be celebrating the progress and not the negative .

    It's just "Tool box" terminology.

  9. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    We have to give "students " a little leeway , they know nothing but what they are fed  by the Bill Ayers of modern academia ,  No one alive today the slave holder or the slave .  But hey , That's just facts and has nothing to do with TODAY'S racism  , Today it's about "white privilege "  ,  My problem is just where the heck that exists , I seem to have a ton of  trouble joining up with mine.

  10. Live to Learn profile image79
    Live to Learnposted 4 months ago

    With what just happened to Candace Owens, I think we can all agree that the term 'racist' is synonymous with conservative to the left. Agree with the left, or you're racist.

    1. profile image0
      ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      absolutely , Funny isn't it pools show more  blacks sliding over and cozying up to Trump more now than before .

      1. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Probably self preservative. Soon, the democrats will be eating their own.

        1. profile image0
          ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          ;-]

        2. mrpopo profile image73
          mrpopoposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          The Ouroboros has been active for some time now.

    2. Don W profile image84
      Don Wposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      From what I have read Candace Owens was banned from Twitter for posting comments by Sarah Jeong, replacing the word "white" with "black".

      Some people criticized the ban, saying she was only posting those comments to make a point. Twitter have apparently reversed it.

      Can I assume those who consider Jeong's comments racist, also consider Owens' altered versions racist and support her being banned from Twitter? Or does the social context of a comment suddenly matter now?

      1. mrpopo profile image73
        mrpopoposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        lol at least two years' worth of unqualified, unprompted racist Tweets vs. a single Tweet that was explicitly crafted to make a point.

        No need to hand-wave social context, regular context explains it just fine.

      2. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Sorry for the confusion. No. I wasn't talking about the Twitter story. I saw she was harassed outside of a restaurant by antifa. A black woman, being protected by black police and white protesters calling them racist. Because she is a conservative who expected a quiet breakfast, was the only explanation anyone could figure.

    3. Bored Student profile image88
      Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I love it when people just assume that they understand an entire group of people. You don't like the left for generalizing the right as racist. Please don't generalize the left either. No single political party is going to be monolithic. I know you aren't the only one who has ever done this and I apologize for calling out this comment and not any other comment (whether it was a comment directed as the right or the left). As a member of the left, I just felt that I had to stand up for myself here.

      1. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        You are certainly welcome to (and should) stand up for yourself. Unfortunately, reading your comments in this thread, you would fall into the category.

        The problem with blame is...there is enough to go around. For everyone. Solutions have to work...for everyone. Whether a proponent of one side recognizes it,or not. There are always valid arguments against and for. That is the nature of human interaction. In order to blame, you have to focus only on negatives and ignore positives. You cannot expect other parties to follow suit.

        We have to accept that 'the West' and 'white' are synonymous. We have to take into account the strides society had made in the attempt to continuously broaden full participation in the concept of individual freedom. And, we cannot turn a blind eye to the accountability of the individual.

        Does society have a ways to go? You betcha. Has progress stagnated? No. You can't make progress in inclusiveness by attempting to ostracize.

        1. Bored Student profile image88
          Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I'm not sure what about your comment is something you think I'd seriously disagree with. I would just add that, while historically the west and white are synonymous, the west/white people need to be making an active effort at inclusion, or else what exactly is the west good for if not for true egalitarianism? We may simply disagree with what those efforts should be.

          The only comments in this thread that I really made is about language choice. I simply said terms such as "racism", "privilege", and "power" mean something very specific. I'm not sure when I ostracized anyone and I'm sorry about that. I agree that alienation is not a solution. I also don't think careful language choice is necessarily a solution either. Admittedly, I would say that political correctness is important, but I don't currently have a strict definition of political correctness, so I would say to avoid things like racial slurs and you're probably good.

          1. Live to Learn profile image79
            Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            I would contend that vast amounts of effort have already been put forth and that our country (barring Neanderthal hold outs) remains firmly committed to the ideals of a color blind society. But, being who I am,I'm not going to be bashed for crimes committed prior to my introduction into the world or the actions of other individuals.

            I actually refused to allow my son to be in close proximity to one of his grandparents because of my firm disapproval of ethnic slurs.  But, I challenge anyone to say the west hasn't made great strides in inclusiveness. America, specifically. But, we are so much more diverse than many other countries in the west and had open immigration policies for quite a while. I don't see anyone as not open to conversation but race baiting seems to be acceptable from any non white party and I see many whites virtue signal in a mad rush to distance themselves from the attacks on that particular skin color.

            My family led the charge for integration in their time. We were raised to respect all individuals. This was not the norm back then. We have made great strides, as a nation. We certainly have room for improvement but I am not a fan of the current climate of social media mobs and double standards. That is not progress.

            And, I do see white privilege as a myth. Maybe, middle class and upper class privilege. There are many factors involved in how we perceive and react to one another. I don't know that skin tone is a deal breaker in the vast majority of encounters. I need much more info than a one sided sound bite to come to a judgment on most of the things I see presented as reason for outrage.

            1. Bored Student profile image88
              Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              I'm not surprised that we disagree on what the solutions should be. I would say everyone needs to hold themselves accountable because studies have shown that unconscious bias is extremely prevalent. I remember Harvard ran a test about generalizations that showed white people tend to accidentally make detrimental stereotypes with regard to people of color. I remember Scientific America ran an article about implicit bias. There was also a study about how "black-sounding" and "Latinx-sounding" names on a resume would hurt a person's ability to get a job. There are many other similar studies as well. Therefore, you may not be intentionally causing problems, but there is a high chance that some of the smaller things you do are actually making the situation worse. Again, if you think you are making an effort every single day to try to improve yourself, then you are doing what I think you have to do.

              I also do not think white privilege is a myth. First of all, class privilege is closely tied to white privilege. When the economic disparity between whites and nonwhite is so huge and so consistent, you have to acknowledge an individual black community that is doing poorly does not exist in a vacuum. Likewise, one case of a black person being followed by a security guard in a store is not an isolated incident. I know that there are plenty of poor white people, but not per capita. Furthermore, black people are the victims of more hate crimes than anyone else, even though they make up 12% of the population, which just shows that black people have to live with a certain amount of fear with which white people do not have to live. The ability to walk outside and be relatively certain that you will not be a victim of a hate crime or some other type of serious bias is a privilege that black people do not usually have. You admitted to the Neanderthal holdouts and I just think we have to acknowledge how much of a difference those holdouts make in the lives of a person of color.

              1. Live to Learn profile image79
                Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                Of course we need to be individually responsible. All parties. Individually responsible does not include my being guilty of the actions of an individual across the country or that of society prior to my participating in it. Now, if I as an individual did not speak out when witnessing inappropriate actions of another then, yes, I bear responsibility on several levels.  But, again, the same holds true across the board. If I see race baiting I have as much a responsibility to stand up for a white person as I do for any other individual. As should everyone.

                1. Bored Student profile image88
                  Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Feel free to stand up for white people. Stand against bullies as much as you want. Just recognize "reverse racism" or whatever we want to call it these days is starkly different from racism against people of color.

                  Additionally, I would never condone guilt. In fact, most liberals take serious issue with what is generally known as "white guilt". Guilt is not productive. Action is. Of course, I cannot speak for all liberals, but I think most people would agree that action is better than guilt is.

                  1. Live to Learn profile image79
                    Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    The problem is that one has to expand the definition of racism in order to have it fit your reasoning. Society has not agreed on this expanded definition. You will continuously encounter push back when insisting on muddying the waters in order to attempt to gain the upper hand in the discussion.

              2. Credence2 profile image78
                Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

                Gee, BoredStudent, what are you, a Rhodes Scholar?

                I been saying much of the same thing for quite awhile, but it has more than often fallen
                upon deaf ears.

                1. Bored Student profile image88
                  Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  I feel like most of what people are saying in this thread is falling on deaf ears.

                  1. Castlepaloma profile image76
                    Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    Same here. Been called a reverse racist, which makes no sense to me. Just a world citizen.

  11. The Old Guard profile image69
    The Old Guardposted 4 months ago

    Ahhh-  the north won the Civil War, hence the north writes the history.
    If you read any intelligent discussion of the Civil War, it was not about slavery.
    If it was, why did Lincoln only outlaw slavery in the Confederate States, but not the northern states?
    Because if he had outlawed it in the Northern States, he would have been shot a lot sooner. He would never have lasted as president if he had outlawed slavery in the north.

    1. Live to Learn profile image79
      Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      That was almost 160 years ago. Whatever the reasons for the war thankfully the abolition of a terrible institution was one of the outcomes.

    2. Onusonus profile image78
      Onusonusposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I guess you never read the secession letters. Because it's fairly obvious that the Southern States were pretty obsessed with preserving their "peculiar institution" of slavery.

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Democrats are like that .

  12. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    I think that a majority of Americans are fatigued with any "dialog " about racism , I say dialog but today it's really a monologue ,  Accusatory racism , systematic , systemic ,  white privilege ,   white guilt ,  .............enough , the causes ,the implementation , the act,  the result , .......................almost the entire story of racism , slavery and  at this point , the aftermath  are all experiences that very few people alive today  either caused , experienced or cured .

    Slavery  and indentured labor ,    I wish some college professor somewhere in America would do a study on just how many white immigrants came into America  from other countries under the guise of indentured servants ,   in studying the issue anyone would be surprised just how many places in small town  or big city America you can still find written records of indentured laborers , I for one in studying family genealogy find these often hand written notes in town clerks or administrators offices . 

    Yet in the P.C. culture of today in America ;     All we hear about is one ethnicity ,  one color , one victimology  while in these records you'll find the Irish , Scottish , English , Italians ,  Franco - Americans ,   eastern European nationalities .............the minorities of every country in the melting pot that America is , have been "enslaved " by yes the  wealthy but also  working class farms , factories and basic households , even towns and cities had indentured servants made up of primarily poor ,  indebted immigrants .      Usually all of them getting only "food , room and board "   and sometimes a small weekly stipend .


    Americans need to reign in their focusing  primarily on P.C images of  only black people picking cotton under the hot sun and look at the larger pictures of what once was a primarily  agrarian  culture , an economy of widespread poverty ,working class people and  almost an entire civilization of  farm dwelling  people where about  everybody worked in the fields at one time in America .

  13. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Would you then blame the discrepancies in such cultural acts and facts as crime , abortions ,  black on black crimes and gang activities on white privilege and racism?   What about single family homes , fatherless children   ,  "fatherless children ".........what a term huh,don't all kids have a father ?


    https://hubstatic.com/14159073.png


    https://hubstatic.com/14159074_f1024.jpg


    https://hubstatic.com/14159077.jpg


    https://hubstatic.com/14159078.jpg


    https://hubstatic.com/14159079.jpg

    These charts came from one googling .
    How does one explain that traditionally not only do African Americans by a majority vote liberal , live in liberally managed  inner cities and similar enclaves BUT that the democratic  party continues to maintain the bull-- horn  over the charges of racism , institutional racism , white privilege etc...........while controlling the very poverty OR privilege of blacks in these places  for up to a century ?

    1. Bored Student profile image88
      Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I am going to completely disregard the fact that I have no way of verifying these graphs since your source was google images. I will take you at your word and assume these graphs are accurate and address the fact that we are very clearly on totally different wavelengths.

      You show me some graph about how black people usually grow up without a father and assume that means there is a problem with black culture. Maybe there is. I actually made a comment on this thread about black culture and why certain attitudes from black people are not always productive. However, to me, the fact that so many black people grow up without a father is just a sign that black people start out at a disadvantage. This disadvantage simply cycles and spirals, but I think we can trace its origins back to something like slavery or Jim Crow. The fact that this disadvantage seems to exist goes back to my whole point about privilege. Obviously, however, you see this graph as some sort of sign that black people are worse people or something.

      I think we face a similar problem with opposing wavelengths around your graphs about incarceration and violent crimes. In the numbers between the amount of black and white violent criminals, I see a discrepancy factor of maybe five or ten. In the incarceration graph, I see a factor of about twenty. Therefore, even though more black people are committing crimes, there is still a disproportionate amount of them who are punished for it. Of course, you only covered violent crimes. I don't have the statistics handy, but I assume more white people commit white collar crimes. There are more black people living in violent areas and more white people in white collar businesses. Therefore, it actually makes sense that white people are more likely to commit white collar crimes and more black people will commit violent crimes.

      The final chart you gave me was circle chart about abortions. I feel like now would be a bad time to get into a fight with you about morality and legality of abortions. It's really besides the point. However, I will say that study after study has shown that abortion rates go up with poor sex ed. Since, as you say, black people are often from inner cities, black people are more likely to have a subpar education. Additionally, many people of color feel uncomfortable trusting adoption agencies because kids of color tend to do much worse in orphanages and foster care. Therefore, they often opt for abortion in place of adoption.

      Lastly, thank you for calling out the Democratic Party for having problems with managing race issues in the inner cities. I am glad that you see that people in power are often somewhat racist. After all, power often plays a big role in racism. Blowing the racism bullhorn does not exonerate anyone, whether you are a democrat or a republican. Democrats blow this horn, which is definitely a start, but I will never believe it is enough until it is actually enough. I will gladly hold my own party accountable. I hope you do the same for yours.

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        For once  a liberal that when handed the truth actually sounds reasonable ?  I don't quite know what to say .   Reality check , we all live in modern day America , not 1890 for instance .   There are neither ex- slaves nor ex slaveholders  in our midsts ,

        Our news media , and I say ours with many ,many reservations , is distorting the very meaning of the word racism in modern America , with the inclusion of a very friendly democratic party  they have rather hysterically sensationalized something that is neither productive ,one , And is extremely distorted and entirely divisive on the other hand . When we accuse by false narrative and wave false media flags inciting violence to that end  -We accomplish nothing in solutions. This has been an agenda of the left , not the right . 

        Furthermore ,No. It is NOT okay to be racist !    But the media and ideologically created entity of victimology has to take a hard inner look at the genuinity and  agenda of the party that mostly keeps "racism " alive and breathing strong .   

        I will always blame Pres. Obama for inciting his administration,  media , academia ,and ideological war against whites , against figures of authority in law enforcement ,  against the long and dedicated  flow of  racial healing in America . Reopening wounds with a combination P.C. salve made up of salt and vinegar .

        1. Bored Student profile image88
          Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          While there are no ex-slaves, nothing exists in a historical vacuum. It's 2018 and I was hoping that, by now, the term "color blind" wouldn't be so contentious, but it is because we still have a long way to go. You seem to think liberals are at fault for whatever progress we have not yet achieved, but I simply disagree. To be sure, everyone may play a role in racial disparities, but I think it was people of color who incited the recent cries of racism. I think they were experiencing racism and they complained about it. Liberals have sensationalized and politicized these complaints, which may have caused divisiveness in the name of making democrats the guardians of equality. The solution is not to simply disparage democrats. The solution is to take a long hard look at why people of color seem to be experiencing hate. Many of these people are not the types to be convinced by the media that their experiences are functions of racism, especially Latinx individuals who -- according to my Argentinian grandfather -- rarely follow politics. Once we understand the source of this hate, we can try to dismantle it. Again, I would not blame the liberal media alone. I would blame a number of different institutions.

          You also blame Obama and I am willing to believe that Obama was one of the people of color who cried racism. I think he did it because his constituents included more people of color than any other president. He wanted their continued support and racism was something that they cared about it. White people may not have seen it because insufficient light had been shed on the issue in the past. I am pleased that this light is no longer insufficient. Hopefully, thrusting racism into the spotlight may actually make it possible for this country to achieve progress.

  14. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Bored Student , We HAVE TO ALSO acknowledge that there is a falsism of some extent to today's media generated rhetoric , in other words ,what percentage of this  rhetoric is actually positive ?  When false cause is used in ANY issue then only false solutions can emerge .

    For instance , A couple days ago I watched part of a Ken Burns documentary about slave trafficking , In that film a map showing  about 5 % of slave ships  traveled all the way  to the US ,    I found that number "encouraging " in one way and disappointing in another .    Does the news media tell us this silent little fact ? No. Do "reparations experts " tell us that ? No.   Negative aspects of this  dialog  unfortunately outweigh sometimes the positive , I blame the news media for this .

    Negative dialog equals  negative results and  there is where we must us great caution .  The media needs to be more responsible .

    1. Bored Student profile image88
      Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Sure, hold the media accountable for misinformation or a misleading agenda, but not primarily responsible for racism. I still contend that racists are primarily responsible and I don't think you're going to convince me otherwise.

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        My point is that racism accused ; If done falsely and , sensationally , is racism in itself  .   Anyone that thinks that racism can't come the people accusing doesn't fully understand the meaning OF  racism  nor the humanity that is capable of such hypocrisy itself.

        1. Bored Student profile image88
          Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I'm guessing we have a different barometer for what counts as a false accusation, but I would agree.

          1. profile image0
            ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            I can live with that .     Kind of like the Obama ," Beer Summit "  Barometer ?

            https://hubstatic.com/14159215_f1024.jpg

  15. Credence2 profile image78
    Credence2posted 4 months ago

    No, it is not OK to be racist. We do seem to revisit this theme often. To provide a general response to all with the “Student” and Promisem in mind, here it goes.

    I can’t blame whites for the entire problem because that would be dishonest, but they, if not individuals, but culture, share a large portion of it. In America, whites always knew that if they had the ability and applied themselves, they had a reasonable expectation of success. Before 1960, for Black people, that was not true. We had just had a landmark decision 6 years before outlawing legalized segregation, and we all knew that separate meant unequal. So, a century after the Emancipation Proclamation, the law says  that We were now no longer “second class citizens”, well, what do you know? The right to vote in much of the South was still being denied. How do you control your future in a democracy and elect people that are not going to put more obstacles before you without having the right to vote? With the possible exception of the military and the federal employment, there was no equal opportunity. There was no fair housing, fair lending or anything like this. This was true across the country, not just the South.  So, when you had so many obstacles keeping you from benefitting from your innate ability and hard work, is the outcome so much a surprise?

    So, yes, we are behind, but you have been “free” since the inception of this country, we have been for only 60 odd years.  I get pi$$ed when I think of how much loss potential there was, we could never have had an equivalent to a JD Rockefeller, or J.P Morgan. Structural American racism would have made that impossible.

    With the combination of the CRM and favorable court decisions, some of the shroud was lifted for my dad’s generation during the late 1960s and early 1970’s, and subsequently, for me as well. But wealth takes time to accumulate, and is the product of generations and experience handling resources that we simply did not have. This is why most black families are not aware of the concept of inheritance that virtually every white person I know receives in one form or another.

    As for us, where do we contribute the problem? I criticize my own for failing to develop the self-discipline and self control needed to overcome so many structural disadvantages. We cannot compete with people who have had advantageous circumstances over centuries without it. Growing up in a Black neighborhood, I always wondered why the disciplinary problems in a mixed school were the Black kids.  Their medium was in entertainment and sports, and those that broke that following were labeled as “acting white”. Where did this come from? In later years, I asked a “young blood” or two why the attitude, somewhat surprised that I did not already know. They reveal a profound distrust for the system, afraid that the opportunity was false and that the “man” had a banana peel waiting for them, in some form of racist expression that would short circuit their efforts along the way. It reminded me of the “Peanuts” characters, Charlie Brown and Lucy. Each football season Lucy would invite Charlie Brown to run and punt a football that she was holding. Charlie knew that each year, Lucy would pull the football away and Charlie Brown would fall and land on that perfectly spherical head of his.  She reassures him that “that” was not going to happen this time, so he runs for it. But, again she pulls the ball away at the crucial time and he lands on his head.

    As a result, the “brothers” prefer making their money in areas where they can maintain a relative control of the outcome, entertainment and sports. Thus, they circumvent the “system”.

    Racism in the American culture envelopes us all as does the atmosphere and it works on many subconsciously, even when it is not deliberate.  It is like gravity, your every act makes account for it even when you are not thinking about it. It is in the body language, eye contact any number of things that all conscious human beings are cognizant. It was only when I travelled abroad to Europe, did I see much of those ever present cues disappear.

    It is these suspicions and fears that keep us apart, our distrust of you and the system and whatever corresponding fears you have of us. These are areas that cannot be codified in any manner; it is going to require a change of minds and hearts that I cannot see coming any time soon. Racism is just another form of imposing power over others. That power is associated with the accumulation of wealth and resources for oneself rather than shared with others. When the strife associated with this power and those who wield it disappears, maybe then, we can confer more comfortably.

    1. Bored Student profile image88
      Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      This comment was well said. To add to it, since you mentioned JP Morgan and the likes, statistically, those with the money tend to just keep getting richer because of various economic realities. With good money circulation, these riches only sometimes reach the poor and, when they do, they usually reach the poor in much smaller numbers. Therefore, on a purely economic level, richer white people will improve their situation exponentially, while poorer people of color can only improve their situation in a way that looks much more linear (at least at the moment), which only increases economic racial disparities.

      1. wilderness profile image98
        wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        What do richer "colored" people or poorer white people do?  The same as any other rich or poor people do?

        1. Bored Student profile image88
          Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Money does not care about the color of your skin. A poor white person is going to face the similar problems with economic growth as any other poor person. There are simply more poor people of color per capita than there are poor white people per capita.

          1. Castlepaloma profile image76
            Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Easy to understand.

          2. wilderness profile image98
            wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            And are you then willing to state that it is the fault of the Caucasian that that happens?  Is it the fault of the rich, black, white, brown or red?  Or does the fault lie to a considerable degree with the poor?

            1. Castlepaloma profile image76
              Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              The white secret societies and power to be are the worst form of crime. For example.

              There is more evidence indicating that white-collar crime is more serious than street crime. Occupationally crimes, they go unpunished. When prisoners have grown 10 times greater in the pass 40 years. Then Corperation bids on these prisoners for cheapest labour. This is like lynching after the civil war. Who reporting this on the news?

              1. profile image0
                ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                That's right , what is reverse racism ?
                When its just simple fake racism .

              2. wilderness profile image98
                wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                "The white secret societies and power to be are the worst form of crime."

                Absolutely!  Worse than being raped, being tortured and murdered.  Worse by far than the man near me that abused a 6 year old for years and when the boy was to weak to walk, took him to a canal, filled his pockets with rocks and threw him in.  Worse than lynching folks, worse than politicians allowing the pollution of resources to the point people die from it. 

                But they're secret, so no one knows about them or their deeds, right?

                1. Castlepaloma profile image76
                  Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  These white powers to be, create the bankers, nukes, wars, poverty, pollution,  toxic buildings, food weapons, legal drugs that kill us greater than illegal drugs yet the users are most locked up.
                  The whole offensive snytheic world that continues to get worst.l

                  1. wilderness profile image98
                    wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, so a secret white cabal creating nukes, weapons of food and useful chemicals isn't much in my playbook.

                    (Did you consider that maybe illegal drugs don't kill more people is because they are illegal?  It IS a deterrent, after all, and if you're locked up the drug isn't killing you!)

            2. Bored Student profile image88
              Bored Studentposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Why would I blame all rich people for the existence of poor people? Why would I blame poor people for it? I'm saying that simple economics is the reason that it's happening. Economics isn't a person; it's just the way our money is going to circulate. I'm contending that all the lower income communities of color are going to have trouble getting of the ground and you can't start blaming things like "black culture" or "victim mentality" alone as some people seem to blame.

  16. Readmikenow profile image95
    Readmikenowposted 4 months ago

    https://hubstatic.com/14160080.jpg

    1. Castlepaloma profile image76
      Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      That is an intolerant person. Unless she is screaming at an extremists KKK or Trump.

      1. wilderness profile image98
        wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        It's not OK to be that way...unless it is screaming at someone you don't like either?  Sounds intolerant either way to me!

        1. Castlepaloma profile image76
          Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          There is alot better method than screaming at anyone.

          Let me change that up some. If the your entire poor brown family is being killed by US troops, signed by Trump. Then I can understand screaming is in order when you loose it.

          1. wilderness profile image98
            wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            And if your poor white country is glassed over by nukes from "people of color" the you can scream, too? 

            I mean, if you're going to make things up, might as well do it right!

            1. Castlepaloma profile image76
              Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              No other Country of people of color have ever nuclear bombed another country.

              In predominate white America case, they nuked twice.

              1. profile image0
                ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                And thankfully so or you would be speaking German and doing artwork with Japanese sand art .

                1. Castlepaloma profile image76
                  Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  English language has never been under threat. Because it"s bussiness language and most don't want to learn even more complicated language like Chinese. You seen the truck tire size dictionary books they read????

                  1. profile image0
                    ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    I guess you lost my point ,  The US is about to invade Japan in 45 , costing 300,000 to 400,000 US troops lives alone in WWII combined ,  I wished they had dropped enough bombs to have saved those US , lives , don't you ?

  17. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Fact ;  No one in the modern political world who naively screams RACIST at other people is ever going to convince those people who are  NOT racists ,...................That they actually are racists !

    It just makes sense.

    1. Castlepaloma profile image76
      Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I just think screamers are NUT!!!!

      Not really racist.

  18. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    https://hubstatic.com/14162662.jpg

    Racism exists equally in the mind of any man ,  be they black , white , brown or purple AND It's beneath intelligent to suggest it is or isn't possible for it exist inside any color or skin .

  19. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    https://hubstatic.com/14162746.jpg


    The attempt to divide hate into unequal proportions is preposterous  , Racism is racism , hate is hate ,  Do all of you really believe that genuine hate from two different races can be defined as  anything  less than equal amounts ?

    You're all overthinking again . That's the biggest problem of being intellectual without the presence of common sense !

    1. Don W profile image84
      Don Wposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      There is no attempt to "divide hate into unequal portions". Only an acknowledgement of the imbalance in political and economic power between different social groups.

      That imbalance of power means that personal prejudice by white people against black people, can affect the rights of black people in a way that personal prejudice by black people against white people simply can't.

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Hate is hate Don , racism is racism ,no matter the origin  of color.    What imbalance of power and where?

        1. Castlepaloma profile image76
          Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I would love to experiment on horse. I can do professional makeup art. I would paint horse skin black, then give him an Afro hair. Then send him out into white nabougrhoods to live for a year.

          If he survived, he would come back screaming for his white privilegevles to be return back to the rightful owner, whites.

          1. profile image0
            ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            "White privilege "?.........Well  I don't know ,perhaps throw in a little affirmative action any any other social reengineering  benefits availed  one of color today ?   Maybe I wouldn't have been raised in  rural American poverty too ?

            Let me think about it .

  20. Castlepaloma profile image76
    Castlepalomaposted 4 months ago

    What war did America ever win?

    US claims to have won the world war 2, coming into the war really late. They lost 416,000 compare to 80 million killed, I don't think so

    Not the 1812 war against Canada.
    Maybe the Mexican-American War, which arguably is the only war that the US won completely by itself. Starting in 1846.

    Then Base on Racism the US tries the 1936 Mexican drug called marijuana wars. Still locking up millions of people today, heavy fighting along the border. Cartel, Gangs and lawyers only ones winning big money in these wars the rest of us lose. Have US won against Mexican?, still 60 million Mexican living there.

    All the middle eastern countries and other Muslims countries still carrying on. Not counting white secret societies(they are not on the books). No win there, just mostly millions of innocent poor people killed.

    Alot people don't know.  Hitler wanted to stop the Jewish banking system that was ruining and driving people into a depression like in the US.  It is starting all over again with the Centro banking today. The Countries who are being attacked, do not accept their Centro banking.
    Those poor trillionaires are challenged again, and war solves nothing again for the rest of us.


    Bankers could could clothes, home and feed everyone on earth. Rather than us being owned by them, and living in a debtors world rather than gains.

    Take them down, is the only answer.

  21. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    "The imbalance of political and economic between different social groups ............."  That I can except but when we're saying "racial disparities exist" , I think we have to look at the democratic party social programming and reengineering by way of  Affirmative Action and multiple welfare programs create as much racial disparity as it ever  cures .   Look to the party screaming "racism" the loudest and ask  ." If so they why create and maintain it all ?"

    Maybe racial disparities is a much better term than racism ?

  22. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Castle , I have a rule about letting people experiment with me ..............first they have to be able to spell ........:-]

  23. Live to Learn profile image79
    Live to Learnposted 4 months ago

    I'm going to throw a question out there that will cause some grief, but it is something that bothers me in this whole discussion. Racism is all about putting people into classes by color. I don't think anyone can argue that many black people have a tendency to do this. It's all over places such as You Tube and other sites where we share ideas and opinions. I've seen many. Things like 'what white people need to know' 'dear white people' 'how white people cook chicken' etc. These are all about how blacks are different.

    So, these proponents want us all to recognize the differences in people based on color and culture. They are full of negative judgements, based on skin color. But, any attempt to comment without it being considered racist in nature are impossible.

    I've heard complaints by black leaders that it is racism to be offended by foul language and ethnic slurs used by some. It's 'part of the culture'. We should understand that, the leaders say.

    If a group is going to argue that they are different, that they should be seen as different, treated differently....should it be any surprise that our collective ability to move toward a more colorblind society is going backwards?

    Even BLM. Which started with a fair attempt to bring to light police brutality. This devolved into a demand that white people will their wealth to blacks.

    Asking to be in a position to judge and not be judged, to receive and not give back, are recipes for disappointment.

    We all love the image of the societal salad bowl but the truth is the melting pot is the better image. A diverse group coming together through shared values. Where the things we have in common bind us as one people who can celebrate their differences. Not where we use our differences as cause to demand everyone, but us, must change.

    1. profile image0
      ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      LTO L , excellent  post by the way yet ,If we in America call this a "Melting Pot " by doing so we are then  eliminating  the possibility that one group can be highlighted , be treated special in any way  or be singled out for special treatment .

      That will never fit well with the left ,  there has to be cause  for collective outrage and to attain outrage there has to be victimhood and in recognising this there is then  a reason for parties  growth by the emoting  of all political policy . Emotionalism in politics is alive and well on the left  even at the cost of truth .

      1. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        That is definitely one argument against the melting pot analogy. But it doesn't have to be so. We add particular ingredients to a stew because of their original flavor.  Celebrating the value of each ingredient doesn't have to be done at the expense of all others.

    2. Castlepaloma profile image76
      Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      From my experience living in Canada and the US. Canada has a better system in dealing with Racism.

      Canada is like a mosaic of cultures with many multi cultural celebration going on. You can be Muslims first and Canadian second, yet most choose Canadian.

      US is like an international airport with money being the melting pot.
      It won't work with top leaders being Phycopath , and bankers being your God.

      1. Credence2 profile image78
        Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

        "From my experience living in Canada and the US. Canada has a better system in dealing with Racism"

        Castle, I can relate. Canada deals with it better because its past is not covered with the ugliness of the history of race relations associated with life for ethnic minorities in the United States. I have never seen the Canadians tolerate people lynching or intimidating ethnic minorities to anywhere near the same extent. I like the generally law abiding nature of the people. Perhaps, you can tell me why?

        While Canada and Europe generally does has its problems, I never got the impression that my entire identity and reactions to me by others was exclusively defined by subtle realities of racism and custom that was always "all encompassing".

        It felt different, particularly in Europe, like I was walking around in a space suit on Waikiki. Finally free to shuck so much psychological and emotional baggage, and cutting loose an elephant you have been dragging around for a lifetime. But, having naturally adapted to that reality based on the reality of the American cultural environment.

        That is shroud behind race relations that needs to be cleared up and who knows how long it will take?


        I like the Canadian idea of "a patchwork quilt" over the idea of "a melting pot" as one indicative of a more advanced society. The former indicates an unconditional acceptance of people as they are and the other says you are accepted based on some amalgamation based standard oddly defined and not attainable by anyone "American norm".

        In spite of her faults, this is still MY country, so the "love it or leave" attitude will not work, instead we are going to change it, regardless of the time it continues to take. Besides, we, my wife and I, hail from tropical climes, and Canada is a bit too cold.

        1. Castlepaloma profile image76
          Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Not many blacks take to winter sports. Lol

          I am moving to Colombia because the overall mess that keeps growing in North America. Been to USSR, it feels America is going down that old path. Wail Russia and the BRICS are going down a better path. Meaning world war conflict. About  93℅ of the world's war weapons are north of the equator. Race won't matter much then, survival will.

          1. Onusonus profile image78
            Onusonusposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            You should try Venezuela. I hear they have socialism in full effect going on right now. You should love it.

            1. Castlepaloma profile image76
              Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              If that is a plane ticket to go to Venezuela, as a gift from you.

              I would return it to i's rightful owner_you. Same if the ticket was to North Korea, US, Israel and Saudi Arabia. For a lack of freedom and individualism.

              1. Onusonus profile image78
                Onusonusposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                So basically you don't want to go to a country that bears all the earmarks of a socialist hell hole. Sounds like you prefer a free market. Good for you my friend.

      2. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Sorry. You aren't a natural citizen and haven't lived there long, according to your comments on this site. You are in a position to see what you want to see. I'm happy that,somewhere in your life, you've found a position not to negatively judge.

    3. Credence2 profile image78
      Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      If you have a brother and he called you twinkletoes, you could accept that address from your brother, because you know him. You would not welcome being addressed by a pet name by a stranger. The racial slurs are insults from Whites because of the history of the word and the oppression that is associated with it.  The word is used AMONG US as a sign of camaraderie and understanding that we come from the SAME struggle. Even though among our group it is not used in polite company.

      The true test of an advanced society is can people be different, yet their differences be accepted as part of the general whole as to how they are treated in society? There is no such thing as a "melting pot", what is the ideal standard? It is adherence to the white male culture and if you are not that, you are not a "real American". Is that not what Sarah Palin alludes to? I should be a "Real American" whether or not my wife wears a burka or not. Righties are always talking about a fear of destroying  American culture, what is an American culture?

      So, there is no grief....

      1. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Well, maybe the term polite society is debatable. I hear foul language and racial slurs used frequently by blacks. I have to listen to it from music blaring in the car next to me. I have to trudge past it in Skype sessions for our team. I have to hear it from nearby tables,infrequently, while eating out. Where is polite society,in your opinion?

        And, a melting pot is a constantly changing mosaic. We, the people, are that pot. Not our politicians.

        1. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

          It is ill-mannered, but hardly universal... Better educated people tend to speak in a way free of colloquialisms and expletives. I can't speak for stand up comics. I am not necessarily justifying it, just explaining why the words are used and in what context.

          1. Live to Learn profile image79
            Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Hmm. Some of these people I work with are well educated. Try again.

            1. Credence2 profile image78
              Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Try again...

              Then they are ill-mannered. Part and parcel of a general societal trend to be less civil and more vulgar in discourse. We see that everywhere. That is not my way, but again, I am a relative oldster...

  24. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Don W , I'm actually surprised at you for posting of such a possibly biased origin as that .  Really though, we can all imagine such this but to promote it as a standard to measure against and  from you ?  Doesn't quite fit . And before you accuse me of being made uncomfortable by the video , It only makes me feel uncomfortable because of the probable , likely , agenda-ed set up behind it .

  25. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Americans , especially today , aren't very good at defining , asking and especially  answering in depth questions . This video is a prime example .So ,  How is a four year old "educated " in these probably adult inspired prejudices ?  It sure as heck isn't genetic ,  they weren't born with either feelings of being superior or inferior ,   I believe this video "study " is way , way preloaded with prejudice .

    What possibility is there in this example of racial disparity  being a factor without some kind of off camera coaching ?  Without some influence either intended or not of bias training ?  Either a five year old learns self worth from their parents or they learn the opposite . IF they are learning the opposite , you cannot then blame something like" white privilege" .

    I swear to God ,   If leftist didn't pollute the integrity of any issue, like race relations, with their own twisted value system ,  their own  prejudice of thought , they would have no reasonable sense of value in dialog at all .  This video is a prime example , "Here let us watch five years old define the meaning of an adult issue."?

  26. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    While I believe TODAY's systemic racism an overblown accusation , not  any of it which anyone alive today caused or cured -- except for the democratic strategies of using "racism "as a political tool to both accuse the right of negatively in politics and to attain and maintain media party attention .

    I believe a question people of ALL colors need to ask and extremely loudly is  "WHY has the party of the left kept 'racism' alive in the media for so many years for political purposes and in all of their activism , seemingly not one legislative accomplishment to advance these "systemic racism "  causes for the good of any colored people , be they for blacks or any color ?"

    What are these legislative advances  since the Clinton , Bush or Obama era ? Nothing ? My point , Isn't it just false flag politics conveniently reopened just during election cycles ?

  27. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    America IS a melting pot .   It is in the ingredients of this "salad "  that certain people will not give in to the natural mixing , Be they white , black , native or heck, chinese .   Americans gather in their groups  feeling comforts that are more often than not addictive to the souls , while as onesey or twosey's move around to other neighborhoods most people feel comforts within their own .

    Guess what ?     The prejudices , biases and  abuses come from within ALL  cultures ,colors and nationalities . Today the US news media focuses for the benefit of democratic party  election cycles on blacks --Nov. is coming !   All of us need to ask ourselves ,Just why after Nov mid trms these issues will return to  their original place on the "back burners "  , Come December  democrats will once again forget  their crayons on the way to work at congress ,
    The news media will move on to the latest oil spill , third world  insurgency , or natural disaster .

    "Systemic Racism " will be once again out of the media camera focus until the next round of elections .

    1. Credence2 profile image78
      Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      " It is in the ingredients of this "salad "  that certain people will not give in to the natural mixing"

      What is "natural mixing"?

      As for November, we will see...

  28. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    OH WE  ACKNOWLEDGE RACISM , ....   It comes from all sectors of our society our culture , including  minorities .   Anyone who can't accept that "racism is wide enough spread to include ALL " is just blind .

    Blind !

  29. Credence2 profile image78
    Credence2posted 3 months ago

    I could not help to note that the originator of this thread touches on sensitive topics when clearly he is about as much of the "problem" as the "theme", itself.

    While he banters around cryptic codes and plays semantic games, it is obvious that he is just like the late Lee Atwater.

    He and people like him, spend more time trying to convince us that the elephant in the room is not there, and distracts us all in the activity of chasing gnats, instead.

    They are the true race baiters, knowing full well how the "system" operates and has been operating, having every malevolent intent in regards to maintaining it.  But,  it is more important for them that we are to be made ignorant of this rather than acknowledging racism's existence as the beginning of taking the path toward making corrections. 

    This thread and the course of discussion is most illuminating, allowing me to sort the wheat from the chaff....

    Most interesting, all of that can't be hidden among complaints of Socialism and the impending "communist menace".

    1. Onusonus profile image78
      Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      As your dance instructor I feel it is my duty to say that you have missed the entire point of having a dialectic discussion.

      1. Credence2 profile image78
        Credence2posted 3 months agoin reply to this

        More B.S.? For many of us, these matters are too serious for you to be playing games. You say dialectic, I say excuses and diversion when you and your "reasoning" are both cornered like a trapped animal.

        Therefore, it must be paramount to defeat the rightwinger and all he or she stands for....

        You disappoint me, I really expected more of a debate from you.

        1. Onusonus profile image78
          Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          The way you talk it seems like you're playing some kind of video game. "Paramount to defeat the right winger"? "Trapped like an animal"??? Or are you still playing dance dance revolution?

  30. Kathryn L Hill profile image77
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago

    We are all mysterious creations of nature. Nature in all it's forms and ways is beautiful. The soul and essence of every single man/woman/child is divine. Jesus said, "Know ye not that ye are gods?"

    No. We are not self-realized as such ...

      but we could be.

    1. Onusonus profile image78
      Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      That was very poetic. Also, I have no idea what you are talking about.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image77
        Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        We are equal in our beauty in that God created each and every one of us.

        Racist attitudes comes from ignorance of this FACT.

        I was just saying, (poetically, I guess), that it is not okay to be racist.


        I agree: The New York Times shouldn't have hired, "a known racist, Sarah Jeong,"... no matter who she hates.

  31. Kathryn L Hill profile image77
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago

    Why would the Times hire a known racist?

    Where is the public outrage?

    Your question is completely valid.

    I can think of no obvious answer.

  32. Kathryn L Hill profile image77
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago

    PS ... what is it to her whether we burn up in the sun or not?

  33. Kathryn L Hill profile image77
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago

    "Wells Fargo & Co., the nation's largest mortgage lender, will pay at least $175 million to settle allegations that the company discriminated against black and Hispanic borrowers.

    The settlement announced by the Justice Department Thursday involves at least 34,000 minority borrowers who were charged higher fees or were steered into risky subprime mortgages when they could have qualified for a prime mortgage, ones offered to borrowers with the best credit."



    https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424 … %3Darticle

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image77
      Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      Is this racism? It is wrong whatever you call it. Salespeople prey on people by offering hope. Hope is very tempting.

      Realistically, however, the responsibility is on the buyer/borrower who should have known it was too good to be true. Blacks and Hispanics have as much brains as anyone else.

      Wells Fargo, by the way, denies the allegations. They were only avoiding a costly legal battle by agreeing to pay the 175 mil.

      I'm sure white borrowers were also involved.

      1. Credence2 profile image78
        Credence2posted 3 months agoin reply to this

        ---------------------------------------
        "Is this racism? It is wrong whatever you call it. Salespeople prey on people by offering hope. Hope is very tempting."

        What makes it racism is that the fraud was perpetrated on primarily Black and Hispanic mortgage holders.  If not, why then did not Wells Fargo engage in such fraudulent activity with anybody and everybody?
        Obviously, the salepeople did not offer such “hope” to white people in the same way...



        ------------------------------------------------
        "Realistically, however, the responsibility is on the buyer/borrower who should have known it was too good to be true. Blacks and Hispanics have as much brains as anyone else."

        That is BS, Kathryn, and as the late George Carlin once stated, “it’s bad for you”. Go see the PBS documentary program, Frontline”, specifically, an installment entitled, “The Retirement Gamble”.

        Millions of Americans have been and are defrauded, inundated with fees and surcharges by 401 K managers. The industry fought against demands that they provide disclosure to the clients as to the nature of the fees and the arithmetic that starkly diminishes their anticipated returns over time. I guess these hapless millions should have known that this was all “too good to be true”? Is it my responsibility to know that beef merchants are mixing horsemeat in the product they sell me at the market? That is why EVERYTHING is labeled as required by law and I like that. Because, you know what, I don‘t have my own home bio-chemistry lab, alas.... So, I say Wells Fargo took advantage of people based on their superior knowledge and they did it out of malice and racism, focusing on Black and Hispanic mortgage applicants. Otherwise, why not share the con with all? All of your excuses cannot change that.
        ------------------------------
        "Wells Fargo, by the way, denies the allegations. They were only avoiding a costly legal battle by agreeing to pay the 175 mil."


        Wells Fargo got caught with their britches down. Who is going to believe that a powerful entity like Wells Fargo could not access the most competent of attorneys to make their case on their behalf if they were in fact innocent? So, I don’t care if they say that they were innocent, they don’t behave as if they were. As far as I am concerned, they are guilty as charged and simply bought their way out through paying the damages. Any other explanation is just another excuse, Kathryn.
        ---------------------------------
        "I'm sure white borrowers were also involved."

        Your statement about “white borrowers” is just conjecture on your part and is not supported by any of the articles that have reported on the topic. So, where do you get the idea and why should I lend that any credibility?



        https://www.reuters.com/article/us-well … V220120712

  34. Kathryn L Hill profile image77
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago

    The real question is how can Sarah J get hired to write for this prominent news paper?? She has created a reputation for herself of basically hating whites. Maybe her anger against whites is racist, maybe it isn't. But there it is on the internet.

    She has abused freedom of speech. Yet she is hired thanks to freedom of speech.

    I agree it is not right. If she is hired because she is provocative and will attract readership, that says a lot about the way things are in this country.

    It's not pretty.

    I say: Hold the New York Times accountable. Watch what she says. If she abuses her position and writes with disrespect and/or worse, let the New York Times know you will not be buying the paper until she is gone.

  35. Castlepaloma profile image76
    Castlepalomaposted 3 months ago

    It is less dangerous for Sarah to speak out about racism than an Asian not out to speak about racism. Considering yellow Asians and whites are about the most racist group about other race colours on earth.

    A black comedian said. White people are always talking about blacks complaining about white racist. Then  the comedian pointed out, - you look at the native American,  they say nothing.

    The British and whites wipedout North America natives down to 2℅ of their population using illnesses, con jobs, fork tongue, broken treaties and everything below the board.

    The Spanish conquerer used against the natives a cut throat systems to the top. Still leaving many more natives population in Centro and South America. Their corruption is above board, where I can understand it better. The top white secret societies corruption aggressions has gone way too far below the board again. Soon most everyone will be on to them, this time.

  36. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    https://hubstatic.com/14178695.jpg

  37. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    I'd love someone to prove a reasonable existence of systemic racism to begin with ,    To date .............Nothing !

  38. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    I do know how to ask the hard questions required of a progressing society ; Why is systemic racism more evident and accepted WITHIN the black culture than without it ?

  39. Castlepaloma profile image76
    Castlepalomaposted 3 months ago

    Blacks have 13℅ of the US population. With 2.7 ℅ of the US wealth.

    1. Live to Learn profile image79
      Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      I'm white with -1% of the wealth. What's your point?

      1. Castlepaloma profile image76
        Castlepalomaposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        The Top 10 percent of White Families Own Almost Everything” stating “White families hold 90 percent of the national wealth. Hispanic families hold 2.3 percent of the national wealth. Black families hold 2.7 percent of the national wealth.

        That is why a white famiy makes 10 times that of an adverage black family.

        Right now US Non- white babies out number white babies being born. Within 20 years the majority will be non whites. Already 86℅ of the world population is non white. Equality is coming, like it or not.

        1. Onusonus profile image78
          Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          So because the top ten billionaires in America are white means the average white family gets $171,000.00? Give me a break...

          1. Castlepaloma profile image76
            Castlepalomaposted 3 months agoin reply to this

            Why do you think all these predominately white empires like British, America and Russian ruled for so long. You have the gold, you make the rules and stacked the deck in everyway.

            Out of 560 American billionaire less than Ten are black and most of them under 2 billion.

            When you have the 1℅ owning more than the bottom 90℅, you have a serious problem of equality. Especially when America is a paper tiger with nothing to back it up. The majority of rest of the worlds will not want Americans printed from thin air dollars or petro dollars anymore.

            1. profile image0
              ahorsebackposted 3 months agoin reply to this

              Your anti-wealth party line keeps getting repeated to eternity and  you like your party would rather attain entitlement from uncle sam than to earn your own .
              Pretty simply put ,   If you want to be in the top ten percent bracket you have to earn your way there , there is no freer sense of accomplishment than to earn one's own living !   Democrats ,especially younger ones , want it all delivered to them on a silver platter .

              1. Castlepaloma profile image76
                Castlepalomaposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                Most of you here protect the State,
                White Wealthy Corperation and bankers. The loopsidedness of poor including whites poor vs wealthy makes Americans unhappy. From different surveys makes America ranking from 18th to 42nd happiest countries in the world. Finances unbalance of equality, I contribute most of these problems.

                The US has one of the highest rates of obesity and antidepressant use in the world a sign of unhappy.
                I worked in the US and 30 years I was the top 10℅ incomers. Then I lowered my income then added balance then became much happier for it.

                One way or another the 90℅ bottom Americans will have to face their problems of the 1℅ whites who own most of the wealth. If not,  another deep depression will get worst then
                civil war and world war will force the outcome.

                1. Live to Learn profile image79
                  Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                  Just because you were miserable while living here doesn't mean anyone else is. You can,at the least, be thankful we are a free society and you had the liberty to move out.  I know I'm thankful you could.

                  1. Castlepaloma profile image76
                    Castlepalomaposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                    I feel sorry you can't move out kitty. even if you bunt your passport. They won't let go without paying your national debt, bankers made sure of that. In Canada you could move out and your welcome to stay.

                    When I lived on and off in the US from 1973 to 2004. From world traveling, I thought US was the freest country in the world. Until one day I went dancing with black woman in a black bar. In Canada most every bars are mixed. The looks and comment I got in that black bar were really scary. Bartender told me to leave without the black woman or I will get hurt. I date mostly non-white women, see the freedom problem, they are still segregated like the late 60s and 70s for most things.

                    The United States prides itself on upholding freedom, but recent research indicates America is not as free as many countries.

                    The US freedom ranking country was worst than their happiness ranking. US today, reminds me of my travels In old USSR. Now Russia is moving in a better direction than the US. Still all three countries are not ranked well enough for freedom, happiness and for my health than Colombia.  Plus north of the equator will be far more dangerous and polluted.

            2. Onusonus profile image78
              Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

              When you speak of income inequality, all you are saying is that you want the poor to be poorer. Income redistribution doesn't work.

              1. Castlepaloma profile image76
                Castlepalomaposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                I'm sure the system will not change a positive thing, they have the worst unstoppable disease called greed. They will give out crumbs handouts, yet will not teach you how to fish for your individual dependency. They can keep the cheese, I want out of the traps.

                The postive change comes from small grassroot groups that works it's way up to 80℅ of the consciousness of the people.

                1. Onusonus profile image78
                  Onusonusposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                  Give a man a fish and feed him for a day.
                  Don't teach a man to fish... and feed yourself.
                  He's a grown man, Fishing's not that hard. Except when government bureaucrats prevent you from fishing.

                  1. Castlepaloma profile image76
                    Castlepalomaposted 3 months agoin reply to this

                    I was the first fulltime professionals sand and snow sculptor. By sharing how to fish, now there is 1000s of professional doing it. The train got too competitive and over crowded, not as unique.

                    The new unique thing is Self substainable tiny house villages. It is the next big industry, just can't legally do it in North America anymore. It is much more challenging to do than entertaining people in a performing art..

        2. Live to Learn profile image79
          Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          Wealth is an interesting point for you to happen on. I'd ask where it came from because, looking at a chart on Forbes, the average 'wealth' of a white is pretty low. That would equate to the equity in a home plus meager savings.  Definitely not enough to provide any type of financial independence or be classified as wealth, by common standards and definitely not enough to claim it was acquired through inheritance.

          My figures may be off, but a quick Google search shows the illegal Latino population at 8 million. Latino immigrant in America at 19.5 million. It being difficult for an illegal to build documentable wealth would skew Hispanic numbers, considerably.

          I have no idea why the number for blacks is so low. That would be speculation. But, judging by the amount of 'wealth' shown in the groups who had the most, since it was readily attributed to funds saved within a single lifetime on even a modest income coupled with home ownership, I don't think your broader point holds water.

  40. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    Everybody today just loves to hate the white guy huh , Look to wealth , the majority of poverty in America are white , look to the incarcerated majority , white .  Look to majority of  lower working class , white .

    Yet , our glamourous news media would have everyone believe that America is a white castle on a hill inhabited by white colonists , reigning as lords over the dominated minority masses ,    How lame  is our news media , how lame is an academia that is teaching the same message to YOUR youth , BUT how much more lame a society that believes this incredible news media bias .

  41. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    When I think of learned Racism ..........I'm reminded of a story I read on Breitbart News today that  " A group of children in Kent Co. Michigan this week fabricated  a story that they observed a older white neighborhood handyman urinating on and calling a five year old black girl racial epitaphs ,  Later these children had to tell the truth and admit  that they had "Made up the story to get themselves out of other trouble "................Charges dropped!

    Here's what you ALL have to think about  ........How did these kids come up with this "idea " and especially with the knowledge that this incident would be looked at as sensational , if false racial rhetoric isn't being taught TO THEM either at home , in school or in their friend circles?

    1. Live to Learn profile image79
      Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      And on tv, you tube and social media. That's why this conversation can never end. At least, not in my lifetime.

  42. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    Let's take it from the birth of an innocent white child in America circa 1980 , 1950 ,1945 or 1910, first day of school he begins being questioned why he enjoys white privilege  , Why he is is part of an inherent racist society when he may very well have never even met a black person ,  why he doesn't support systematic handicapping like affirmative action of the first black man he encounters in college .

    Now neither one of these children in their environs were anywhere near related to slaves or slave owners , yet one experiences absolute media criticism while one benefits from that critiquing . This should be Interesting to all of us .  This  should be dissected by our media rather than promoted for divisive ideologies .

    This thread ; The question on the other side of the mirror should be  Why is it okay to be anything but honest with ourselves as a society ? Why does deceit , deception and political correctness have so much to do with the direction we take into the future of  all human relations in America ?

  43. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    You're wrong !    The first and latest form of prejudiced in America was against  white who were poor , I'm white and I can attest to having copies of my ancestors as "indentured servants " papers  as late as the 1930's ,In fact my ancestors arrived here AS an indentured people . so don't give us your shallow  definition of slavery , racism and prejudice from a modern "school book" mentality .

    The variations in the treatments towards those who were black "slaves " varies as widely as do our melting pots of American cultures today .I fact , I do believe the first slave owners and many of them ,in America may very well have been blacks themselves not unlike the slave traffickers too .

    So for you to come on here and point fingers is rather crass , "White Privilege" is as shallow and non-existing state of being as  you can make out of anything today .  Just as if you or anyone can begin understand what anything of real life was like in reality two hundred years ago.

  44. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    Young people , white or black , today should have been around in the sixties during  the US's 60's Social revolution ,  Cops targeted white kids where I grew up  believe me ,  If  I ,as a "long hair ", was walking in my hometown after nine or ten at night , I would very likely-- and many many times was-- "stopped and frisked 'or  whether in my parents or my own vehicle late at night  , Cops called it a "Routine Stop ", get out of the car , they searched for booze or drugs  and let you go on your way .

    Today - It's all about entitlement and civil rights .  What a bunch of whiners  I 'm reading here as some are saying ,........." You don't know what it's like to be black or enslaved ".,,,,,,,,,,,Jeees ! ................No , I don't .....But then NO ALIVE TODAY does .

    1. Credence2 profile image78
      Credence2posted 3 months agoin reply to this

      Gee, all you folks had to do was get a hair cut and clean up. I wish it had been that simple for us....

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        Right....... but no , You're still suffering !

        Pleeeease !

      2. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        LOL. So a poor downtrodden white person has only himself to blame and a poor downtrodden minority gets to blame everyone else. Is that the definition of white privilege?

        1. profile image0
          ahorsebackposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
          I was just having a heart to heart with my wife opening up about growing up as a child of the fifties and sixties in rural Northern New England , government surplus food ,  the long cold winters in an hundred year old farm house , no furnace but wood heat , , there were no "food stamps "  Wik* blanket social programs , subsidized rents , low rent  projects ,  free cell phones ,  The free lunches in schools  for the underprivileged meant that you "brown bagged it "........................

          Yet we are all supposed to listen to these Demobratic RANTS  about such things as  "white privilege " ?  Really ?  I am so sick of privileged whiners of ANY color crying about the kinds of " discrimination" that they have actually NO clue whatsoever about and never will .

        2. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 3 months agoin reply to this

          I know that there is more to this than that, the comment was made in jest.

          1. profile image0
            ahorsebackposted 3 months agoin reply to this

            One word , Sickening !

  45. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    This Thread should have been Named ;
    "Why It's Okay To Be Racist With No Experience "

  46. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    "Why it's Okay To Be Racist and From a Minority  "

  47. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    Don W , For all our sakes , please explain how personal prejudice by whites against blacks can affect the rights of blacks that the same by blacks against whites cannot ?

    This should be interesting .

    1. Live to Learn profile image79
      Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      Haven't you figured it out yet? They don't have to explain. The claim is all that counts. No proof necessary.

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        It must seemwonderful for them to have such media bias working in favor of their party causes.   Without the media bias and the P.C. factor ,  America would return to normal again.

        1. Live to Learn profile image79
          Live to Learnposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          And the fact that they get to reinvent the meaning of words. Comes in very handy.

    2. Don W profile image84
      Don Wposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      As I've already said: 

      ". . . because one social group has more social, economic, political power than the other".

  48. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    Don W , "* Because one social group has more  social ,economic , political power than the other ......."  It all depends on how you define "power ".

    *Of course they do Don , by the existence of population percentages ,  If say 77 % of America is say caucasian , why should that percentage have less, say corporate ownership , wealth, real estate or stock funds . Federal jobs , authoritative positions or whatever property ?   Where is the systemic racism if say, bank loan officers or stock brokers , or cops , country  attorney's , judges or whoever 's percentages follow the same  racial percentage in  numbers?   

    We cannot ,for instance ,  re -engineer percentages of blacks , hispanics or whites for that matter to assume positions of authority based on job placement , What do we do legislate that stock brokers for instance  have to be 13.7 percent black if blacks only CHOSE That profession by 5 % ,  or cops in small towns be 17.8 % hispanic in Maine if hispanics by national average don't immigrate to maine by only 3 % ,    If by personal choice only say  .003 % of blacks run  for president , do we then by  Affirmative Action  demand that more blacks run for president ?    Do we demand or legislate that  more white people move to Detroit ,  do we "buss " more hispanics to the Alaskan oil fields , what about demanding that  77%  of caucasians  be forced to take performing jobs in Hip Hop music  industry ?  I don't think ANYONE is   PROVING  any kind of systemic racism exists  , at least in numbers affecting  any significant racial disparity . At least not here .

    1. Credence2 profile image78
      Credence2posted 3 months agoin reply to this

      Since we are on the topic, Horse, check out the article and its links as most interesting when on the subject the largest racial segment of the population naturally having the larger share of the country's assets. I would say that that would fair but the statistics show that one group having more than another is about more than just the number of bodies...

      https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 … tions.html

  49. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    Credence , I can't get that link without subscribing now for some reason .   So how does a society reengineer wealth ?  The same way we might attempt that with poverty ?  In the same sense , How do we re-engineer good looks or intelligence ?   Do we ?   

    Affirmative Action was designed to" level the playing field "and understandably so , we have had to and deserved to move away from the disparities of the past .       Is this about wealth redistribution ?    Do we or can we litigate intelligence or social standing ? 

    Just maybe ,  we are attempting the defining wealth by population , entrepreneurial ability by color ?   What would you have be done in wealth disparities seriously ?

  50. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 months ago

    Prove or disprove that an an actual idea of racism exists within BECAUSE one is born of the color white , Seems to me to be a problem from the beginning .   Being born of one color and then having to assume the presence of inherent racism ?  We as white men and women are then doomed from the beginning .

    But ,That is what today's media driven P.C ,Wants us all to believe.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)