Wearing baseball caps, watching Wes Anderson films, driving a Prius and listening to Dave Mathews Band don’t count as “culture”?
Look, I didn’t get to grow up in the Ghetto. We didn’t have block parties or drive Bentleys and Hummers with fancy rims. I can’t afford to spend every night in da club sipping Courvoisier. We didn’t have a lot of “bling” in our household. So I would appreciate it if the OP could show a bit more sensitivity to us White folk who didn’t have the opportunity to become a professional athlete, award winning rapper or respected gangsta pimp hustla.
It’s stupid to lump all “white people” together. Italian, Irish, German, Greek, Jewish, Russian, Polish - Americans all have different cuisines, customs and religious traditions. Anglo-Saxon Protestants from differing regions of the US also have different cultures. The culture of East Coast WASPs is totally different from that of Southern Baptists or Swedish-American Lutherans in Minnesota. There’s no monolithic “white culture”. I think everyone should learn about their heritage and be proud of it. Nobody likes to be told that they “don’t have a culture.” Or that they “don’t have soul.” Or that “white people can’t dance.” Every culture has its own dances and music and forms of “soul.” I realize that most of these remarks in this thread have been in jest, but I encounter this attitude, in earnest, in real life. Not from blacks or other minorities but from whites joking about how their own family backgrounds are so supposedly boring and bland. Well, if you’d just look into your family’s history a little bit, you’d find all sorts of interesting things you never knew about.
How dare you imply that whites[sup]1[/sup] exhibit cultural diversity. How. DARE. You.
[sub]1. Not including filthy Irish beggars.[/sub]
Thanks. I thought I was alone.
Google “being born white” does get quite a few whiners.
Whiners of both the ‘white race is dying’ type AND the ‘white people got it easy’ type. Also, white animals are cool, apparently.
Just data points, not drawing any conclusions about it.
You’re confusing race with ethnicity. Ethicity is culture. Race is just a macro-category. You can’t often tell someone’s ethicity just by looking at them, whereas you can easily assign a race (yes, I know, but read to the end of the post first). Where it gets confusing is that in the United States, “Black” is both an ethnicity AND a race, as until very recently almost all blacks in the United States had similar circumstances. White is also sort of an ethnicity: mainstream American culture is based on the culture of upper-class English-speaking Protestants, and to a greater or lesser extent “white” culture is now middle-class culture, and thus “American” ethnicity. Whites outnumber blacks by something like 7 to 1, and there has been a ton of white immigration in the last 200 years but nearly all black Americans’ “immigration” (i.e. kidnapping into slavery) was before that. Therefore, U.S. black cultures have traditionally been relatively more homogenous than white cultures.
Problems with the above: you don’t have to look black to be black. People who make assumptions about another’s “race” sometimes get it wrong. It is perfectly possible to be bicultural, and in fact most blacks have to be to some degree. Blacks and whites with the same regional identity may have more in common with each other, culturally, than with others of their “race.”
I’m all for being aware of ethnicity, but race is kind of a stupid category. I don’t see why we can’t grant ethnicity-based reparations to the descendants of slaves without getting into the whole Continent-of-Origin thing.
Eh. No credit on this assignment.
The thread as a whole is an example of the fallacy of false dilemma. It’s perfectly conceivable to believe that a word such as n----r is acceptable for everyone or acceptable for no one without consequently believing that whites are “less lucky” than blacks as a whole.
I think reparations for slavery is an ace of an idea. I think the money should come out of the pockets of the descendants of the African warlords and slave traders who sold them into slavery in the first place. They should track down the African tribes that sold their war captives to European slavers, and find the great great great grandchildren of THOSE guys, and the reparations can come out of their end.
Because there aren’t living slave owners from whom to draw the money, nor living slaves to give it to. The justification for reparations has been thin since it started in earnest about 15 years ago (or perhaps that’s when I became aware of it, I dunno), and with every generation of Americans it gets thinner. The shame of slavery is a mark on the soul of our country, one that will not be scrubbed away with piles of cash we don’t have.
I’m still waiting on my check from the Pharaoh. 
It is also a mark on the soul of Africa, which practiced slavery long before America existed and continued to practice slavery long after we abolished it - and yet blacks still honor this strange cult of pan-african nationalism, sporting medallions in the shape of Africa or the red, black and green colors of African flags. Their own people sold them into slavery in the first place, yet I don’t see them condemning those slavers, only the ones with English names.
Slavery is also a mark on the soul of the Islamic religion since Islam condoned the practice of slavery, Islam has passages in the Koran which claim those of black skin to be inferior, and a large number of the people involved in the African slave trade were Arab Muslims - yet that doesn’t stop blacks from converting en-masse to Islam, adopting Muslim names in lieu of “slave” names a-la Muhammed Ali (someone should tell him that the Muslims were just as keen on slavery as the American colonists.) But nope - again, their anger is directed solely upon he of the pale countenance.
If people are going to condemn slavery, as they ought to, then they should be consistent about it.
Yeah…most of those people are barely White. They are at best “Light Mexican”.
How many black people have you seen condemning slavery? It’s not exactly a widespread practice that needs to be stamped out immediately anymore.
Both my history textbook and the last movie I saw about slavery (Amistad) covered the complicity of other Africans with the slavers quite well.
So your idea of “consistency” is the following:
Wouldn’t consistency require reparations to come from all the beneficiaries of slavery and the slave trade? Or is consistency more relevant when it can be used to show how Africans did bad things to those they conquered?
Were any African nations at the time, or the religion of Islam founded on the principle “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”?
Sure, there’s plenty of blame to go around. But when it comes to accusing everyone else of hypocrisy, the US is at a bit of a disadvantage.
America abolished slavery.
As far as I know, many African and Islamic countries still practice slavery.
For just a moment, I’ll humor you and ignore that your answer isn’t relevant to my point.
Legal, government-endorsed slavery? Got a cite for that?
Did I say it was legal or government endorsed? They barely even have laws or governments in places like Somalia and Nigeria. Read a book on child soldiers or child sex slavery - it will break your heart.
Suddenly, I’m sad! I would write a plaintive folk song about it, but I have no point of reference and no traditional instruments.
You’ve strayed awfully far afield here. Sure, it’s better to be black in America than it is to be black in Somalia. It’s also better to be white in America than it is to be white in Somalia. In general, it’s better not to be in Somalia. How is that relevant to whether or not it’s better to be black than white in America, or that America’s shame in relation to the slave trade is exacerbated about 1000% by the principles of its founding?