You want to get rid of racism? Just ignore race. No race-based organizations. No hate crimes related to race. No affirmative action. No NAACP. I’m not saying that things are bad, or that they do not help in many ways; I’m saying that as long as you have them you will have racism. You cannot have a racism-free society as long as you have policies and organizations that exist based on race.
This idea may make for a bit bumpier road in the short term, but I think it the only way to actually reach MLK’s dream.
This is silly. Do you really think that crime rates are equal in each part of a city? Ask any cop, the black and Hispanic (and white trash) parts of town are where the action is.
Now, I would be among the first to grant that this crime is largely the result of economic factors originally created and exacerbated now by racially biased income possibilities, and while that can certainly be an explanation for why there is greater crime in minority and poor communities, we still have to prosecute and punish (i.e., imprison) the members of those communities who choose to engage in crime.
The ultimate answer to crime in the disadvantaged areas is to create an economy that is strong enough and booming enough that it will create opportunities for people living in those areas to boost their incomes to more affluent levels, and to eliminate racist attitudes among the population as a whole.
We’re making pretty good progress on the second front.
But as long as we have a government preaching to people in minority communities that the rich are taking all the money and they need government to take that money away and give it to them, and that the only way they’ll ever have anything is for the government to give it to them, and as long as we defend and champion destructive lifestyle choices like street talk and gangsta rap and baggy clothes and tattoos everywhere and lionize recording “artists” based on the number of scars from the bullet wounds they got during their drug-dealing days, and make excuses for that drug-dealing and other criminal activity, higher crime rates in minority areas are just going to be a fact of life.
It really goes to what Paleface said above and what Bill Cosby has said as well. If you want to get ahead in a country’s society, economically or careerwise or whatever, the average person who doesn’t hit the lottery and become a movie star or recording artist, you are gonna have virtually no chance if you choose to behave in a way that “reflects negatively on your race” – and we as a country are going to get nowhere fast in terms of racism as long as making these perfectly obvious and truthful observations are regarded as racist, such as MizTina’s response to Paleface’s post seems to imply.
Do you have a citation for the governmernt “preaching” this message"?
Speaking of silly. I agree that lionizing criminals, (an ancient American tradition encompassing Jesse James, Black Bart, Al Capone, Bonnie and Clyde, John Dillinger, and a host of others), is destructive. On the other hand, claiming that baggy pants, tattoos, slang, and forms of music are “self-destructive” is little more than a denial of your claim that we are making headway against racism. Your list of fashions that have nothing to do with productivity, thrift, or “self-destruction” conveniently ignores big hair, too-tight shield shirts, mullets, wife-beaters, and endless songs of infidelity that are embraced by a population that is often as financially-disadvantaged and -inept as the group you attempted to highlight.
Gambling, alcohol and drugs, unstable (or non-existent) marriages, poor financial choices, and other characteristics of the poor are self-destructive and need to be addressed. Worrying about how tight or loose some person’s clothing fits is nothing more than a distraction based on arbitrary lines of prejudice–and when it is limited to only a specific ethnic group in a larger economic class, it further detracts from any serious message.
Uh-huh. Except getting rid of programs that explicitly address racial inequality won’t get rid of racism; racism will continue to be a factor, it would just be less recognized. In fact, getting doing with such programs might exacerbate socioeconomic inequality. And since that’s connected to racial inequality, you could end up increasing that, too.
But this is a digression from the debate at hand.
The first question in the OP is an abstract, and I was hoping that people would consider the points I made in the body of the OP and respond accordingly.
The second question concerns strategies and tactics to defeat racism and race-baiting in discussions of public policy. Not getting extirpating racism per se.
I disagree with your take, sleeping. Magellan’s argument is compelling in a sort of “fake it till you make it” kind of way. Why couldn’t racism as we know it fade away “organically” over time? Other kinds of bigotry have (e.g. racism in Brazil, bigotry against various European ethnic groups in the the U.S.), so there is precedent.
I agree with this. If we want to end racism, the lines between the races need to be dissolved, not fortified.
Look at affirmative action - I think in the short term it may have done some good, but it is not a long term solution, and IMO has set race relations back. It creates another opportunity to define an “us” vs. “them” situation. Same with NAACP, BET, or any other organization that defines itself by race.
So are manner of speech, posture, attitude and the appearance of idolizing and emulating criminals.
People who dress and talk and act like I described above are going to find themselves virtually unemployable. Thus, they end up turning to lives of crime and therefore disproportionately populate the nation’s prison system.
It’s amazing to me that on this board, where spelling and punctuation and grammar are given such weight, and where people readily acknowledge that the only employment opportunities likely to be available for people with poor language and writing skills are those that typically include “You want fries with that?”, either defend or turn a blind eye to the damage done to a person’s employment and income opportunities if he looks, dresses, talks and acts like a ghetto drug dealer or gang member.
Again, crime is going to go on disproportionately among minority populations as long as those minority populations are disadvantaged financially, and deliberately doing things that virtually eliminate you from the employment pool and alienate you from the rest of society needlessly exacerbates that problem.
This is just common sense. If you (the general ‘you’, not you Shodan or you tomndebb) owned a liquor store or auto parts store or bookstore or restaurant or whatever, are you gonna be stocking it with employees who look, dress and act like gang members or 50 Cent wannabes?
It’s absolutely astounding to me that intelligent, well-educated people such as those that can be found around here seem to find it impossible to see the negative and destructive consequences of people adopting that lifestyle, and then hurl accusations of racism at anyone who dares point them out.
Good question lets see if I can summarize what we have so far…
“Don’t want to be called a Nigger then don’t act like a Nigger” - Paleface
Get rid of “race-based organizations,” “hate crimes related to race,” “affirmative action” and the “NAACP.” (not saying that they are bad or that they don’t help) - magellan01
a) Stop defending/championing/lionizing/excusing “destructive lifestyle choices like street talk and gangsta rap and baggy clothes and tattoos everywhere,” recording “artists” based on the number of scars from the bullet wounds they got during their drug-dealing days," “drug-dealing and other criminal activity, higher crime rates in minority areas”
b) Double what Paleface said, in that you shouldn’t “choose to behave in a way that reflects negatively on your race”
c) Stop regarding “perfectly obvious and truthful observations…(snip) as racist” - Starving Artist
Double what magellan01 said. Stop the “NAACP, BET, or any other organization that defines itself by race.” - horhay_achoa
Hmmm it seems that blacks (in particular “their” actions, organizations) and hate crime legislation (those that are related to race) are really the driving force behind racism. Is there any other things (maybe besides the NAACP) which contribute to racism?
To put it mildly, we need to get past race as an issue for ANYTHING.
Racial hate crimes are crimes, period. Racial profiling exists (for a reason) I don’t really give a shit what the reason is but if it is valid then it’s ok in my book. Validity would be established by the majority morality.
A representative republic of morals.
I see that this issue has been covered already.
Why is there an inequality of white folks in the NBA? NFL? But we have established working guidelines to hiring practices in the public and private business?
This is silly. Of course blacks are not the ‘driving force’ behind racism. But there are certainly elements within the black and Hispanic communities that are making the elimination of racism much more difficult than it would otherwise be. They are also the reason why minorites show up in disproportionate numbers in the nation’s prisons.
Neither of these things are good or defensible. (Perhaps that’s why you don’t try to defend them, other than to attack the motives of those who bring them up.)
But I did not. I noted that specific fashion statements were the explicit indicators claimed as self-destructive behavior. That was silly, although I am sure you agree with the claim as long as only certain ethnic groups’ fashions are indicated.
Why? I never made a claim that they were.
Instead, I made a rather different point that among groups of financially disadvantafged people in the U.S., Starving Artist singled out the fashions of one group while ignoring the fashions of a different group while claiming that the fashions, themselves, were “self-destructive.” It seemed and odd claim, but your implied support for that position does not surprise me…
I suppose that you might have had a point if you had bothered to actually think it out and elaborate upon it, but your first claim was simply dismissal based on your own prejudices about fashions.
It is clearly true that a kid who shambles into a business wearing clothing the owner or manager finds off-putting and who speaks only in non-Standard English during an interview is going to reduce his chances for employment. I have seen kids lose jobs for wearing a wife-beater or too tight jeans to deliver his application or for talking like an extra from Deliverance or imitating “Valley Girl” speech modes. But that is the point: there are fashions that are appropriate and inappropriate for any situation. Your statement implied that an entire group of people, (and only one group of people), has deliberately chosen to engage in specifc fashions at all times and in all places. The reality is that every group has members who can switch between appropriate fashions and get by quite well in whichever environment they are inhabiting at the moment and every group has members who are simply unaware of the need to switch fashions depending on circumstances. In general, the deeper in poverty one finds a group, the more likely one will find those who are clueless. The remarkable thing was that you singled out only one such group and then spoke as though only that group suffered from those issues.
Sorry but I disagree.
I have been the victim of disabilty hate crimes. (all that happened when I was in school, before college) The folks who are all " hate crime is just crime" don’t understand that hate crimes are TARGETED. In other words if it weren’t for the fact that the person was a skin/sexual/disabled/fill in the blank here with whatever minority, they would not have been the victim of violence/hate by the perpetrator.
Ok, so I asked Paleface to elaborate on what “N” behaviour entailed and did not receive an answer. I sounded a bit snarky and that was intentional, but I also had another reason for asking.
One of my grandsons is of mixed race, one of those races being what could be described by a person of poor manners and morals as “N”. So I really want to know what I can tell this still developing 4 year old what it is that he can do that can guarantee that he will never be called a “N”.
Because apparantly, this little fellow can forestall any racism by his actions and deeds. So please, let me know and I will let him know that you personally guarantee that by doing exactly what you tell him to do, he will never have to worry that he will be referred to as an “N”.
And I promise that I will never buy him saggy britches and I will smack his hand if he ever tries to scratch or adjust his junk.
First of all, thanks for giving me the opportunity to air one of my favorite expressions: “Stereotypes don’t form in a vacuum.”
Secondly, my posts to this thread have been intended to address two questions: One, how should we combat modern racism; and two, to explain why there is a disproportionate number of black and Hispanic people in the country’s prisons. I never said or implied that I knew of some magic type of behavior that would “guarantee” a black person would never get called the n-word.
However, with regard to what you could tell your grandson so as to minimize the possibility, I would suggest you have him read Hippy Hollow’s posts and study them and the qualities of the person who posts them. You could have him study the style and mannerisms of people such as Henry Louis Gates, who, despite his one-time front-porch tantrum, is a very intelligent, amusing, well-spoken person. (And once your grandson gets old enough you could have him start reading and learning from intelligent and well written black-oriented websites like the Root, which I discovered as a result of reading up on Gates. (I have it bookmarked and read there frequently myself.) Bill Cosby would be another good person for him to read up on, learn about, take lessons from and emulate.
I don’t think any of those people get called the n-word much, and it’s because of their style, education, well-spokenness and manner. When people project an image that engenders respect and admiration, that is what they get.
On the other hand, when they project an image of thuggery or sullenness, or dress and behave in ways that make it clear they want nothing to do with mainstream society, they will be perceived as threats or outsiders and will be much more likely to come in for discrimination and/or avoidance and exclusion from that mainstream society which they seem so contemptuous of.
So, do you see a pattern here? If your grandson can grow up to be nicely dressed, intelligent, personable and well-spoken, he is not only going to come in for much less discrimination (if any at all) and in all likelihood he will enjoy a much more prosperous and comfortable and rewarding life than if he grows up looking like a thug, a gangster, or a rap star wannabe.
