Define What Racism Really Is

Great Debates
1

Exactly what is racism to the urban of us? I’m not asking for a dictionary definition, I’m asking what has racism become.

To me, it’s becoming an excuse to play off the human tendancy to over-compensate for mistakes we’ve made. To me it’s just another way to enact revenge on the children of the fathers who did the real damage.

I mean, come on, how many times do I have to be sitting in class and my teacher calls on a minority student and he replies with “This is all because I’m black”. No, he’s not trying to be funny.

How many times do I have to get into an arguement with one of them because they made some ass-end-up comment about how decades upon decades upon decades (so on and so forth) my people enslaved his? Honestly.

And let’s not forget the racism everyday, in JET magazine, BET, and similair forms of… err, entertainment. If you ask me, that’s complete bull.

Try to start CLOUD magazine or WET, Jesse Jackson will knock down your front door personally.

And what’s this with affirmative action? Honestly.

I guess what I’m asking is, what has the world come to? Am I ignorant or justified? Most of all, what is up with affirmative action?

I think justice really is blind.

2

Wow, what a sticky thread. I’ll bite, though.

Racism, as you point out, is sometimes used as a crutch, and sometimes exploited for personal gain or profit. In general, these aspects are even worse that real racism, as they cheaped the concept and result in resentment and positions such as yours.

Back in college, I got in an argument in class. We were discussing racism, and I brought up a point. Someone asked me, “what do you know about racism?”, probably because my skin is white. I replied that I got beat up by the white gangs for being half-hispanic, and by the Hispanic gangs for being not Hispanic enough, and asked if the questioner had ever been physically assaulted because of race. Well, that question was a mistake, to say the least, and almost the entire class tore into me. But I think that is indicative of the status of racism in America today.

As far as Affirmative Action goes… well, frankly, I’m against it, because first of all, it enhances the concept of preferential treatment based on race, and second (but most importantly) because it does not address the issues at hand - it just supports tokenism and makes the statistics balance out so the white folk can feel warm and fuzzy that they are practicing equality, and universities can preach about their “diversity.” The real problem is one of classism, and can only be solved at the root - in this case, with better lower-class (specifically, in the urban setting) educational support.

As far as BET and such go, yea, that is right, but there is one important difference - they are selling the culture more than the race. Keep in mind, there are also Hispanic television stations that broadcast in the US. Most of this is from a desire to get out of the “white folk” things like “Friends” or “Everybody Loves Raymond” that absolutely cover the airwaves. I would go so far as to equate BET with TechTV being for nerds, or MTV for teenagers. I watch BET on occasion.

I think most of it is a problem of cultural identity - but the minority (no pun intended) of people who use it as a crutch undermine the importance of the issue.

3

::: sigh ::: Aren’t these threads supposed to be started in February?

The OP is just a bit over broad. There are, indeed, people who use their perceived race as a crutch to explain everything about their lives that they feel is “against” them. (There is a whole web site devoted to that sort of attitude from which we had a number of recent visitors from the National Alliance.)

There are also genuine problems that have been created in our society that continue to be perpetuated against people who are not descended of primarily European heritage. Our society has made a number of efforts to redress those grievances, some of which have been quite successful and some of which have been complete failures. Any person who considers themselves to be currently oppressed is liable to see the failures (and the resistance to the successful efforts) as indications of their continued oppression. The kid who whines in class that he is being singled out for discrimination because he did not complete a homework assignment is, obviously, trying to blame his incompetence or lack of effort behind a socially recognized crutch. On the other hand, the person who is never called back for a job interview because the interviewer will only talk to white people has actually suffered harm.
I have no idea how often you have to get into arguments. Perhaps if you and your opponents would take the time to learn genuine history, they might be less likely to make sweeping statements that were too broad to be true and you would be less likely to dismiss the truth of their position. Without specifics, I cannot tell why you are getting in these arguments. (I have worked with and gone to school with blacks for over 40 years (and East Asians for over 20 years) and I have never found myself in the arguments you (vaguely) describe.

Your complaints against JET Magazine and B.E.T., however, are completely without foundation. They are not racist–they are marketing decisions. If someone wanted to start a magazine or television network that targeted a white audience (sort of like ABC, CBS, or NBC or People?) they would be perfectly free to do so. Now, just as JET and B.E.T. are required to include white writers and technicians and managers, the white magazine or network that they started would be prohibited from discriminating against black employees, but there would be no rules requiring the network to broadcast The Jeffersons or the Cosby Show any more than there were rules prohibiting B.E.T. from broadcasting Bonanza. Your claim for racism is baseless. There was a market for entertainment that appealed to (primarily) black audiences and someone took advantage of that market (that was not being served by any other company) and made some money doing it. That is the American way.

Affirmative Action is an issue that has been debated endlessly on this board. Do a search on “affirmative AND action” and you will find a lot of threads discussing it. Some AA is (in my opinion) clearly counterproductive and unfair (such as when quotas are established and entry requirements are substantially lowered) and some AA is healthy (such as outreach programs to find minority candidates for jobs or housing that allows those people to informed of opportunities of which they might not be aware–after which they must compete on the same level as any other applicant. Other people have other views on the topic that have been exhaustively discussed in other threads and should probably not be bundled up in this little vaguely expressed generalized complaint.

4

Crutches exist; nobody on Earth has a dearth of scapegoats for their problems. Why is the racism crutch always placed in a special category and talked about to death? The point is, shutup about it for the 800 googleplexed time.

5

I think the definition of racism is changing; common usage of the term spans a variety of definitions, so ‘the’ definition, if there is one, is currently in flux.

Personally I adhere to the old school ‘its when you think someone is superior/inferior because of the perceived race they belong to’. As if humans came in various sub-species.

But I think more and more that ethnic descrimination is becoming the definition of racism. Saying things like ‘He welshed on the bet’ or ‘Of course he drinks, hes Irish’ are commonly considered racist, even though the Welsh and Irish are not races.

Or one could get literal and say that, since races in the traditonal sense of the term really dont even exist, there can be no such thing as racism.

As to the rest of your post, it just sounds like whining. The mistake you seem to be making is in considering black publications as ‘racial’ publications, when they are ethnic in nature.

There are plenty of publications equivalent to JET; theres Irish Roots Magazine, German Life, Latina Magazine, Swedish Heritage Magazine, etc etc etc.

6

Racism is much more covert than it was a long time ago. And that’s the only difference.

So racism is an excuse? If I call someone a racist, I mean they’re “an excuse to play off the human tendancy to overcompensate for mistakes we’ve made”? I’m just trying to follow your incoherent argument here. If racism is becoming something, what was it before?

What is the “this” that you’re referring to you? And why would a teacher call on only the minority student?

Whites did enslave black people for decades upon decades upon decades. Actually, centuries is a much simpler way of saying it. Why are you arguing with them over this? Why are their comments “ass-end-up”?

You may not consider “whites” to be your people. If this is the case, then how are you distinguishing yourself from “them”?

I thought you said racism nowadays was “an excuse to play off the human tendancy to over-compensate for mistakes we’ve made.” How does BET fit this convoluted definition?

Is Telemundo racist? How about the various “ethnic” shows that appear on public access channels all the time.

There are white supremacist magazines. There are even white supremacists websites. And Jesse Jackson has left them alone.

Are you Jerry Seinfield? If you have a beef with AA, articulate your opinions in an intelligent manner. Simply saying “what’s this” does not say much about what’s between your brains.

If you are so troubled by AA, you should be able to expound on this. Come on. Give us something to work with!

I don’t know what you mean by this. Please elaborate.

7

I’m not entirely sure the OP intended this (how 'bout a clarification?) but the premise only discusses percieved manipulation of the term ‘racist’ by blacks, as though he thinks racism as traditionally defined no longer exists in the United States. If the OP really believes this, he need only search this forum back to February or so, or visit the Stormfront message board, to be reminded that this is not so.

In any event, the definition implied by the OP is too restrictive, IMO.

8

What affirmative action means to me is that, yes, to a certain extent it is fair to use different standards for different groups.
Why?
In some cases locally, the bright kids in the worst schools have never had a chance to show what they can do. The truancy rates are up to 1/3 out at all times, the teaching staff is 1/2 substitutes, which by law must either be rotated every 30 days or made permanent. Thus there is no normal learning environment for these students.
So state law allows for the top students in each school to qualify for college, whether or not they are in the top group statewide.
This is not specifically based on race, but on the status of their schools, yet of course it results in a racial difference.

To me, though, this is fair because the state has let these students down for all their lives so far.

9
  1. RACISM: The act of discriminating against a person or group of persons, with the only criteria for that discrimination being racial or ethnic.

Ex.: “Jim Crow laws were racist, because they denied black people the rights and priveliges enjoyed by white people.”

  1. RACISM: Discrimination practiced by white people against nonwhite people.

Ex.: “No, no, no. The United Negro College Fund is to help disadvantaged persons disenfranchised by a racist society get ahead in life, therefore white persons are not eligible. The idea of a United White College Fund, on the other hand, is just racist by definition.”

10

White persons aren’t elgible for what? What are you picking on United Negro College Fund for when you don’t even know anything about it?

11

Oh, piffle.

There are plenty of scholarships limited to white folks.

Now, there are some people who do, indeed, agree with the second definition. However, there are fringe elements at the extremes of any discussion and a serious discussion should be able to identify and ignore those fringe elements.
(Otherwise, discussions of the “war on terror” degenerate into screaming contests between those who believe that the U.S. should simply nuke the Middle East and those who believe the U.S. should nuke itself; discussions on church/state relationships degenerate into screaming contests between those who would eliminate all houses of worship and those who would impose laws declaring the U.S. a “Christian” country; and discussions of race could only allow participants from the Nation of Islam and the Aryan Nation.)

If someone posts item number 2 as their own belief, have at them (and I will join the opposition to them). Until then, that is a straw man in this discussion.

12

Really? I was not aware of any scholarships limited to white folks only. Don’t outfits like the NAACP and ACLU just about go medieval on these folks?

I was not bashing the United Negro College Fund, by the way. I personally am in favor of ANY outfit that gives away money so kids can go to college. Seems like a productive sort of thing.

I agree completely. However, some of these folks are not easily ignored. In fact, some of them are currently teaching seminars on racism and on multiculturalism… based on the assumption that only white people and white culture CAN be racist. Discrimination practiced against white people by nonwhite people is not only NOT racism, but is entirely justified, based on history.

I’m there wit’cha, bud. I just felt that the second definition is widespread enough that it should be known. Forewarned is forearmed, after all.

13

MWK: I was not aware of any scholarships limited to white folks only.

Well, I think what tom was talking about is the wide array of scholarships provided by white ethnic/national groups such as German-Americans, Irish-Americans, Hungarian-Americans, Jewish Americans, etc., for students who share their ethnicity. It’s certainly possible that someone with some non-white ancestry could qualify for such a scholarship, but AFAIK the vast majority of recipients of such scholarships are in fact racially categorized as white.

Ppm: *To me it’s just another way to enact revenge on the children of the fathers who did the real damage. *

I’m against “enacting revenge” on any innocent people, and I despise opportunistic, manipulative “playing the race card”. But I think it’s rather naive to believe that modern “children” of racist “fathers” of earlier generations are completely separate from racism.

For one thing, white discrimination and prejudice against racial minorities still does exist to a significant extent in the US, as we’ve discussed in a couple of different threads recently. For another, even the most non-racist white people are the indirect and inadvertent beneficiaries of racism.

Past and present racial discrimination mean that racial minorities on average come from poorer family backgrounds, have less education and privilege in their family histories, and have a more difficult time getting jobs or loans or decent housing. All of us who are not racial minorities thereby get a significant socioeconomic advantage, on average, by comparison.

I’m not saying we deserve to be blamed or resented for that, and I’m sure (well, I hope and trust) that most of us would be willing to renounce that advantage for the sake of fairness, if we had the choice. But the fact is that racism still constitutes a very real boost for white people vis-a-vis the general population. (Which is one of the reasons why, as tom points out, it still makes sense to use some forms of affirmative action for minorities to balance out that advantage.)