Interesting Article on Racism. - Page 3

So, the Americans that the Tea Party insists are "fed up", who never attend a Tea Party rally, never put up a sign, and never stand on the street saying "we're fed up" are in fact, by your reasoning, NOT fed up, as there is nothing quantifiable to apply to them? Or at least, that there is no reason to care if they are or not? By a percentage of the population, Tea Party activists are actually a very, very insignificant portion of the nations people.

So group statistics such as citing household income averages and unemployment by race as evidence of racism is not racist, but linking it to measurable educational scoring mechanisms is racist... yeah, no.

Either group statistics can be used or they can't be used. You can't use them as evidence to support your argument, and when they no longer do, then reject them as racist.

And yes, I agree that every individual should be treated as an individual, and firmly support the California Civil Rights Initiative that prohibits considering race, sex, or ethnicity and would like to see that included in the Texas constitution as well.

For those that insist that racism is rampant, it is also not unreasonable to ask for at least some kind of tangible evidence of it. Cite some laws that are prejudice, show a number of successful discrimination lawsuits, show some kind of institutionalized practice that shows bigotry, show signs like in Japan that bar people from entering clubs/restaurants of a certain race, show something and at least attempt to show how widespread it is, otherwise the opinion is completely unsupported.

PS: To your second response; Yes, Tea Party activists are a very insignificant portion of the nation's people, correct. If you wish to create a thread saying that those with Libertarian ideals or general supporters of the Tea Party movement are insignificant, I can cite polls and public support for leaders such as Ron Paul, considered the father of the Tea Party movement. That is tangible evidence, perhaps up for debate, but at least not completely unfounded such as claims that racism is rampant in America.

Racism isn't statistics...it's hate.

See above.

You do realize that numerous schools in California whose test results you herald in that opinion have been caught...get this; cheating on their tests, right?

Many of which, in fact, WERE linked earlier, and you ignored. Also included were racially motivated murders and recent cross burnings.
Ah, I see. So, the polls and public statements from Tea Party supporters is sufficient for you, but the statements of victims and witnesses of racism are not. Wanting all your cake, are you?

This was covered previously, but polls are useful when they are large, randomized, and from trusted polling agencies as they are used to estimate results on a much larger scale. Citing five or six examples out of the 300+ million people in the United States as evidence that something is rampant on the other hand is, uhm, not exactly accepted practice to say the least. You can find that many examples of incest, but that doesn't make incest rampant, it just means it exists.

You seem like an intelligent guy and I know you realize the difference, so it seems like you're just grasping at straws now to be honest.

There are quite useful when used as intended, such as making statements along the lines of "x number of x group thinks x". When the racists get hold of that same data and claim it says "x group thinks x because they are x group", then they've turned it into something else.

You've posted dozens of instances of racist hiring practices at corporate and institutional levels yourself. Are you recanting?

And why do you keep moving the goal posts? You asked for "some", but when you got it, it suddenly became not enough. Sounds a bit desperate, actually.

I care because, if someone is racist, he'll teach his kids to be racist, and will get together with his racist friends and they'll all agree that their hateful ways/views are correct, and the more socially acceptable they start to feel that their views are, the more likely it becomes that one of them will, eventually, act on that hatred. Yeah, thoughts lead to action.

Being prejudiced against religion is different from being prejudiced against individuals of a particular race. Hatred directed toward an institution is not the same as hatred toward an individual. Unless you hate religious people as well as the religion, it's just not the same.

Fair enough, but I don't think there is any argument that racism at present is socially unacceptable, which added to the lack of evidence supporting the idea that racism is rampant is evidence itself that racism is not prevalent.

If someone only hangs around with people who think the same way they do, then their views become socially acceptable, at least in their social circle. And I'm not really sure where you live that you see so little racism. I've been to Texas. . .and most of the people didn't seem especially tolerant to me. But it's a big state, maybe your area is different.

But you agree that as a whole, racism is not socially acceptable. If racism were widespread, then by your own logic it would be acceptable.

Take a recent example, Alexandra Wallace:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNuyDZevKrU

She was insensitive and mocking in her rant, but it wasn't even that bad. Was it socially acceptable? The video instantly went viral, and her information was spread around the web. She issued a public apology. People found out where she lived, what her and her parent's phonel numbers were, what classes she was taking, and more. She issued a second apology, but that didn't stop the death threats reported to the UC police, and she was ultimately forced to drop out of school a week later. At our company, its likely she could even lose her job over it if she worked here.

If mixed-race couples don't feel safe/welcome somewhere, that's racism. If a neighborhood takes up a petition to stop a non-white family from moving onto the block (or if someone corners the realtor and makes it clear she shouldn't be showing "those people" the house), that's racism. It's not a rare occurance (but also not documented for "proof").

I can probably find some "proof" of racism against Native Americans in this state. . .I'll look around. It's pretty bad for them.

My skin color would affect my logic or ability to backup a claim with something remotely tangible? Or do you mean if I were a minority, like I was when I lived in a country where 1.9% of the population was white? Ever listen to black celebrities like Bill Cosby, Morgan Freeman, or Shelby Steele, who more or less share my opinions to a T? Morgan Freeman is strongly opposed to things like black history month and has said repeatedly that racism is far too hyped up and it does nothing but create division and people just need to "stop talking about it". Sorry to burst your preconceptions of racial unity outweighing individual opinions.
As they say, perception is reality. Heidi Klum realistically probably got a lot of strange looks with Seal too at first, and not because he's black. And not that it matters at all to the point, but I've only dated two white girls in my life btw, and never had any major issues as I prefer dark hair latina/east-asian types physically in general. There are places in Houston I would not be safe visiting on foot most hours of the day by myself, and surely you can agree that interracial violence is a measurable statistic. On that note, I find it very interesting that you find factual information is "propaganda", but unsupported claims of rampant racism with no evidence of it is "real".
Uhm, no that is not inherently racism, that can simply be hypersensitivity and false perception, and Yosemite is an individual and not a statistic to gauge the whole of America by. And if a neighborhood takes up a petition to stop a non-white family from moving onto the block (I've never been consulted about anyone purchasing a home in my neighborhood or ever even heard of such a thing btw), how could you instantly assume its because they are non-white? And what evidence of such petitions do you have to show such a thing is widespread? Considering how lucrative discrimination lawsuits are, I find the idea that this is common and unchecked in 2011 pretty ludicrous.

So far we have seen nothing tangible that racism is rampant in America.

What's your definition of racism? If someone is hypersensitive and has false perceptions based on someone else's race, isn't that racism?

Um, because usually the people who are circulating the petition or "advising" the realtor say so?
Note: I haven't heard of any petitions in 2011. But it definitely used to happen, and there are still some neighborhoods that I wouldn't be surprised to hear about it now. When an Indian (not Native. From India) family moved into my parents' neighborhood, one of the neighbors went knocking on doors trying to "do something about it". And they were doctors, so don't claim "undesirable element"! But that was a few years ago. If he had found others who were sympathetic to his ideas (which he might have in a different neighborhood), something very bad could have happened.

I'm pretty sure that regular individuals (and groups of individuals) can't be sued for discrimination. Only corporations/business owners/etc.

So, If myself and a friend, who is asian walk through Harlem, and feel uncomfortable and unsafe, it's racism? If a mixed couple walk through my neighborhood and feel uncomfortable and unsafe it is racism?

No. I feel uncomfortable and unsafe in harlem, not because of the color of my skin or my friends, but because it is a horribly high crime neighborhood. If anyone walks through my neighborhood and feels unsafe, because of their skin color, they need to take a reality check.

I think Ducman has a point, hypersensitivity is coming into play here. Yosemite, do you think of yourself as a couple? Or do you think of yourself as a MIXED couple? Perhaps the fact that your SO is of a different skin tone is on your mind, and you are reading a bit too much into looks from people.

If it could be forgotten that people are different only in skin tone and hair texture, then perhaps we could just move on instead of perpetuating the hate. Life is short. Too darned short to worry about what people think about who you are with and what color their skin is.

It shocks me that anyone would argue that racism isn't prevalent in the USA. I lived in areas where it was rare, but where I live now, it's obvioiusly prevalent.

I have heard people wisper behind the backs of mixed couples and use the "N" word too many times. If that isn't racism, what do you call it?

I call it jackassery, personally.

Racism is just a breed of jackassery that's directed at a specific group of people.

I was obviously speaking of the perceptions of the couple that "feels" racist looks directed towards them or "feels" unsafe and the like, as their perception may not at all be based on reality. Consider it the equivelent of a white woman that clutches her purse when a black man enters the elevator with her. Because she feels unsafe, does that mean there is any real tangible danger, or does she just have an unrealistic perception of her environment? Hopefully that clears up what I was talking about.
Exactly, and it sounds even better when you can hear Morgan Freeman say that, because anything he says sounds powerful and deep (yes, even the ingredients on a cereal box).

I've lived in a few states within this country. My experience is that the more an area denies racism (or doesn't acknowledge it), the more likely it exists in that area. Those that accept non-discrimination laws seem to live more comfortably with mixed races within their neighborhoods.

The worst place I lived where racism was (unspokenly) rampant was Houston. My husband's company of 1200 people had exactly 6 minorities - all of them were janitorial or worked in the cafeteria. My company was a little better with 5% minorities, most of them were janitorial or worked in the cafeteria. When we purchased a home in the country and I used to mow my own lawn occasionally, I was told by the neighbors that I should "get a Mexican". I was disgracing the neighborhood by being the only white woman that mowed the lawn. It was barely OK that DH mowed it most the time. Everyone else had "Mexicans". The going rate was $25 a day (and hey, if you get one that isn't lazy, they'll mow and weed whip for that price). So, mowing a lawn is strictly for minorities? A woman at my company who grew up in small town Louisiana told me about how the blacks were expected to get off the sidewalk when a white person was walking on that same sidewalk. This was in the 1990's. We never once attended a party, wedding, or any social gathering where there were other races invited, yet Houston is only slightly over 50% white. Yet racism wasn't acknowledged for what it was, and we fled the city relieved to be rid of it. Granted, this was in the early 1990's and things may have changed since then, but seeing how slowly cultural change occurs in this country, I doubt that it is a lot better.

Racism is a state of mind and there will never be any specific statistics on how rampant it is in our nation.

This is so true. Having lived in Houston since 1996, I can verify how bad it is here. There are Klan rallies at most churches on Sundays, and black people are expected to use the back entrance after paying their bus fair. My neighbor across the street owns a cotton plantation, and when he saw me mowing my lawn he told me I could borrow some of his negros since it was so hot outside. It is truly horrible, but at night I pick up black families ten at a time and try to smuggle them out of state to the North to freedom.

Should we call you "Harry"?

Do you really think whites don't have to deal with racism from blacks?

I hear it constantly. It's now the black house, you know, and now the black man is in charge, and blah blah blah. I didn't vote for Obama because he's black, yanno. (I didn't vote for Obama because he's a democrat)
Honestly, my girlfriend was confronted the night after the elections by a black man who told her that now things will change, and she's going to have to work for her money.

She already holds 2 jobs, and supports her disabled husband and son. I'm sure things have changed now.

I am proud to be what I am because my parents were good people, and I was raised to have pride for who I am. My father was in a concentration camp for most of his childhood. He came here and worked like a dog for every penny he had. He learned the language, and took any work he could get. I was raised wearing my older cousins hand me downs. He's a BOY. I take exception to people who tell me how easy my life is because I'm white. No, my life is pretty good because I am intelligent, and well educated, and made sure I had a college degree (I paid every penny myself) and a job before getting married and having children. My husband did the same.

Is that because we are white?

It's makes you far LESS clear, because you have just used the racist mindset, which you earlier deemed irrelevant, in your example.

But it's all just things you hear, no criminal action is being taken against you due to racism. And according to Ducman, that makes everything you say unquantifiable, and therefore, irrelevant.

Bzzt, wrong, resqchick has provided a personal experience that demonstrates that whites are not immune from racism directed towards them, and is not using that for broad claims extended to the nation as a whole to demonstrate how prevalent (or not) racism is or using it as a scapegoat which would naturally need to be substantiated. And btw, that is not "according to Ducman" as I can recall:
*crickets chirping*

No one has argued that racism does not exist. This population of the United States is enormous after all, but that does not mean it is socially-acceptable or rampant.

So then you discount all personal experiences that do not agree with your presumptions, and herald those that do.

Denial is an ugly thing.

You have argued that any racism that does not manifest into a violent act or attitude is unquantifiable and irrelevant. That means that you either (a) have a blindness to it for one reason or another, (b) are in willful denial of it, or (c) you don't understand it.