Did you read my entire post? I think not if you find that I said there were no remnants.
Okay, but that didn’t answer my first question. But I’m glad we agree there are remnants. Roughly what percentage of black Americans are affected by those remnants, would you estimate? Based on my reading and experience, it’s close to 100%. All other things being equal, a black person in America is likely to face more obstacles on their way to success than a white person.
Again with the specifics iiandyiii, you think its 100%, good for you! I do not think it’s remotely close to that. When did what end? Racism? I already said it hasn’t, but I do not believe it is nearly as big an issue as you do.
From this and many previous discussions, we will likely never agree:
- that is happens on the level you think it does
- That nothing less than Congress can solve it
- Where/ and to what level fault lies
I am not ignoring you, but I will most likely ignore the litany of questions that you ask if they aren’t directly associated with the discussion I am having
No – when did America stop being “a racist nation of laws that keep the downtrodden black population down”? Or do you think it was never such a country?
I have answered that question, specifically for you, in other threads.
It was a work in progress, but as far back or as soon as 50 years ago, we got really really close to it NOT being one.
Can’t object to any of that. It would be hard to get to, but they are admirable goals.
I’d added subsidized child care so we can pay those who take care of preschool children decently and maybe get some enrichment in.
I worked for companies with mandatory diversity training for years. I never felt slammed.
You see the difference between making this all about you versus all about society? Are you voting for candidates who want to make things better or candidates who think things are fine as they are? You personally don’t put your knee on the neck of anyone - do you think that is all you need to do?
Consider rich people. In dealing with income inequality, they don’t have to give up all their money. Some say they don’t have to do anything, some spend their money so that they will get more (by buying up congressmen, say) and some will spend some of their money on making things better. Your position seems to be that the person doing nothing is justified because he can say that he can’t be expected to give up all his money, and so won’t give up even part of it.
I wouldn’t have answered, because I don’t know specifically how black people are treated, nor that all are treated the same. I am white. Now, I understand that is probably why Elliot put in the phrase “in general”, but if she has to add that, then she will only get general answers, and might even be tempted to use them to draw a specific conclusion from them. I would prefer not to be a party to that, and let me illustrate why: it now is a given in some circles that George Floyd was murdered by a racist cop, even despite the fact that no evidence of racism has shown to have been involved in his death. That is not to say it is not possible, but just that it has not been shown. But a general idea that this was the case has led to a false certainty. This does not help us to have an honest and informed discussion about racial issues in this country. Do not get the idea that I think all of us are treated equally. Of course we are not. But Elliot’s method is not the way to address the issue.
No, you didn’t answer the question. Read the OP. It simply asks if any white person “would be happy to treated as this society, in general, treats our black citizens.”
The meaning of “society in general” does not mean “someone exactly like me”. It does not mean like Tiger Woods or Will Smith specifically. It means would you be comfortable spinning the wheel of chance and getting treated like a random black person instead of whoever you are now.
That’s the question, as written. You are repeatedly showing a terror of answering the question as written. I wonder why that is.
Ms. Elliott:
- How many black students did you ever teach?
- How many black co-teachers did you ever have?
- Did you work under any black principals?
- How did your schools student body racial makeup change during de-segregation and beyond?
- Have you ever taught or worked in an all or majority black school?
- What other racial minorities or ethnic groups did you have in your classroom?
- Did you do your blue eye/brown eye lesson with any minority children in the room?
- Why do you think so many schools where the majority of the students are black or minority are failing?
That’s all I can think of for now. What would you ask her?
“How do you feel about people “gish galloping” instead of directly addressing the issues you raise?”
On brand.
Ok, have it your way.
If she looked at me directly and asked me “would you change places with a random black person?” I’d probably say “no” then she would go on telling me I’m a racist because I know all the bad things that happen to black people and that I have “white privilege”. I would answer back (of course she doesnt allow people to answer back) No, I’m NOT a racist and that I have worked hard for where I am at and since 15% of the US population lives in poverty, no. Oh maybe if I felt up to it I might say “yes if I could be Tiger Woods or the millions of other successful black people out there” if I felt trapped by the question.
However my questions come from watching her over the past 30 since I first saw “A Class Divided” which they showed us in college in my Sociology course.
The problem with imaginary conversations is that, in real life, the other person tends not to stick to your script.
Do you think maybe, for one second, it might be educational just to answer honestly without acting like the whole thing is a setup to prove that you, personally, are a racist?
Do you think it’s conceivable that this is just a question to a group of people about an obvious social issue, and that it was not constructed to be all about you?
Arguments based entirely on what you imagine might happen aren’t very persuasive.
What do you think she would say if you answered yes? She might quiz you on the disparities. She might tell you about the different incarceration rates, the different unemployment rates, the different pay rates.
To answer yes one would have to be either clueless or racist in the sense of saying that Blacks are treated just the same as whites and it is only deficiencies in Black culture/genetics/what have you that account for the disparity.
That’s what you wouldn’t be saying.
So, if you think she would call you racist for saying no, then you think she’d be calling everyone racist.
Being born with white privilege is not inherently racist. Denying it, maybe.
So, given that she wouldn’t call you racist, but might ask what you’d do so you could answer yes without being absurd, what would you answer?
Right back at ya. Show the evidence, and then maybe we can discuss it. Good idea?
Why do you assume answers are not honest?
If you asked me if I wanted to be a random black guy, my answer is no. If you asked me if I wanted to be some random white, yellow, purple, or orange guy, my answer would also be no, which is why I find the question meaningless.
That’s fine, but I don’t think that’s the most reasonable interpretation of the question. “Would you be happy to receive the same treatment that our black citizens do in this society” is not the same as “would you trade places with a random black person” - it’s closer to “would you be happy changing your skin colour to black and otherwise keeping your life as it is”. I believe you have indicated that you would have no problem with this as you believe you would likely receive the same treatment if you were black as if you were white (post #381), but urbanredneck2 has not really responded substantially to it (post #358 is probably the closest, where he thinks that “There have been times in my life if I was a black person with the same talents and academics I have I know I could have gotten a better job” - but not stating whether there are any situations where he thinks having black skin could possibly result in worse outcomes.
The thing is, I think it’s not unreasonable to believe that most people treat black people relatively fairly, or even the same as they treat white people. But even if it’s just a minority of people that are biased against black people, it is highly likely that almost every black person in the country will have experienced racism on a regular basis. Think about how many hundreds of people you interact with every month (well maybe not during this current pandemic, but during normal times). If even 10% of these people exhibit some kind of bias against black people, you’d likely experience dozens of racist interactions every month - maybe a few overt ones, but many of them would be subtle. If just one person who was in a position of authority over you in your past didn’t like you because of the colour of your skin (whether that was a teacher, boss, hiring manager, cop, etc.) they could negatively impact your life pretty significantly at no fault of your own.
That’s what Jane Elliott is trying to get people to recognize - not that you, personally, are racist, or even that most people in society are racist - but that there is enough racism out there that overall, black people are treated worse than white people in society. Do you agree with this sentiment, or do you still disagree?