On another thread about a student blacking his face at a masquerate, cainxinth wrote
This illustrates a situation where a Black group chose to focus on a rather mild racial insult. The question for debate is, should Blacks seek to focus on racial incidents? That is, should they specifically look for racial incidents to focus on?
Reasons to do so:[ol][]These racial insults may not be minor to those suffering from them. E.g., here’s a NJ SC case where a single racial insult had a profound impact on a person. []Focusing on minor racial insults is a way to discourage major acts of racism. []There is often a payoff. E.g., in the case on the other thread, the BSU may succeed in getting an African-American Greek council established. In other cases, pressure from an incident of racism has resulted in organizations agreeing to hire or promote more Black employees. []The focus on insults may encourage more effort by Blacks.[/ol]OTOH arguments against include [ol][]It’s “race-hustling,” and it reduces the moral stature of the civil rights movement according to civil-rights supporter David Horowitz. []It may not be he most effective way to achieve advancement. []It encourages Blacks to emulate race hustlers, like Jesse Jackson, rather than people of real scientific, cultural or business achievement, like David Blackwell. []It promotes a backlash of negative feeling. (E.g., Governor Davis of California has endorsed slavery reparations. This position may hurt him with non-Black voters.) [/ol]My own feeling is that this approach was useful for a long time, but its usefulness is waning. However, the media, certain politicians, and certain organizations are well-served by race-hustling, so I suspect the practice will continue, even though it may be doing more harm than good for African-Americans in general.
I feel the most important point is “raising awareness”. I have known people, hell I’ve done it, who have made offensive comments with no ill intention.
Some even discriminate without realising it. Example: I work in a technical field, at one point I had a female supervisor on my job- I also had several female coworkers. When she was replaced by a male supervisor our new hires were suddenly all male. I don’t believe this was concious discrimination, but that without thinking about it he felt more comfortable around men.
I think that having some focus on “minor” racial insults helps well meaning people realise “hey, maybe dressing up in black face would offend some people”.
Another point about the specific case you mentioned is that while I believe the offense was unintentional to some people it was extremely hurtful. I think it was a reminder that no matter what heights you reach, you are always a “black man” in some eyes. Tiger Woods is incredibly famous and the only distinguishing factor these guys noticed about him was his skin color.
What makes you think “Blacks” specifically look for racial incidents?
Are we talking about organizations (like black student unions) or are we talking about individuals? In other words, can I not get fired up if someone calls me a racial slur just because it falls low on the Grand Scale of Racial Oppression?
What are racial incidents? If someone overhears a president of a major university call black people “n**ers”, is this a racial incident? How about a Rodney King kind of situation where the role of racism is more implicit but potentially much more powerful?
If one (or a group) draws attention to a “minor racial insult”, does that preclude them from going after more important issues at the same time?
Who decides what’s “minor” and “major”? A student dressing up like Tiger Woods is minor–to be sure–but what if his intentions had been more sinister? Would it still be minor? As minor?
Major racial incidents may be an accumulation of “minor” stuff that has been overlooked. So wouldn’t it seem appropriate to nip major stuff in the bud by making a big deal about the minor stuff?
You make it sound as if all African-Americans are trolling around and devoting their lives to these insults.
I don’t think that is what happens. Usually what happens is one person sees something that is insulting to them and takes some sort of action. If you saw something insulting to you, you would probably personally take action as well. This sort of thing happens every day, in many contexts, on a one to one basis.
Sometimes it is picked up by the media, which always enjoys something they think will cause a sensation. When things like this hit the media suddenly everyone has to have an opinion on it. Then others have to act in outrage at those opinions. Everything gets way out of proportion, a quiet simple resolution becomes out of the question as the institutions involved feel the need to act in a way that sends a public messege, and you start thinking that “African-Americas are focusing on minor insults”.
Well, to tell the truth though, it does seem that African-Americans focus on trivial racial elements. Stupid little things that make other people go ‘Huh? How was that racist?’ (such as when Jesse Jackson went on a tirade because the Green Bay Packers fired Ray Rhodes). I think that tends to hurt the movement a great deal, because people lose respect for it, if they simply go after trivial things.
Being on a college campus, I can tell you that the Black Student Union here is laughed at by non-black students (including other minorities) because of the foolish, trivial things they focus on.
As long as there are people willing to drum up support that colouring your face black is a racial insult regardless of the context, even people like you december will buy into it. You did claim it was a minor racial insult. Having been exposed to the thread you referenced, I can no longer justify allowing myself to caricaturize Tiger Woods for the next Halloween party, simply because the innocence of the act has now been compromised.
Having said that, I am somewhat resentful that such a big deal has been made of this. The vast majority of ordinary people will roll their eyes inside their head, and the more empathetic among us will add another self-imposed restriction on our freedom of speech and expression .
But the African-Americans who are objecting are hurting themselves and other African-Americans, by providing an additional target for which the racists can aim at.
I recall when I was a kid in Ontario, that my Dutch-Canadian parents were not impressed by common portrayals of the Dutch in the early fifties as fish wives wearing wooden shoes. But they did not wallow in indignation or victimization, and today I look back in amusement at that common but false characterization of my Dutch relatives footwear.
ISTM there are many relatively minor incidents that have been blown up. E.g., I recall Jesse Jackson making a huge fuss over 3 high school kids in Illinois who were expelled or suspended for good reasons. There was great fuss over Francis Lawrence’s comment at Rutgers a few years ago. The NAACP has waged an enormous campaign against the Confederate flag.
I do not see public campaigns like this over comparable insults to other minority groups.
I’m talking about organized efforts by organizations.
Obviously it is. Of course, if that ever happened, the president would be immediately fired. OTOH a French diplomat referred to Israel as “That shitty little country” at a dinner party. (Some diplomat :rolleyes: ) He was not sanctioned.
That’s a racial incident, too.
Yes, it sometimes does. E.g, I was a member of the NAACP for 25 years, but I don’t like where they are today. They’re making a huge fuss ove the Confederate Flag, but ignoring inner-city education, which I consider much more important.
To me, the key to the magnitude is the degree of harm or benefit the incident could bring to African-Americans. If the intention had been sinister, then it would have been a lot more significant IMHO. For one thing, intent would suggest that it was likely to be repeated.
There was a time when the US had a lot of anti-Semitism. Jews couldn’t get jobs in some industries (like insurance, where I work), couldn’t live in certain neighborhoods, belong to certain clubs, etc. Jew have overcome most all of this, but progress didn’t come from complaining about insults. As the story goes, Jews weren’t allowed into Miami, so they bought Miami Beach.
Sure, anyone or any group have a right to complain about anything they want to. However, a civil rights organization may have more effective means to promote its members’ welfare.
How did Jesse Jackson become synonomous with “blacks”?
Though you would obviously disagree with the fuss made over Francis Lawrences comment, I think there was just cause for outrage. He basically said that blacks and Latinos low SAT scores are due to genetics. As a NJ taxpayer, a graduate student at Rutgers, and a person with so-called “inferior” genes, I think I and people like me have a right to voice a complaint. It’s not like we’re talking about something the cafeteria lady said. He was the freakin’ president!
The Confederate Flag–IMHO–is the similar to the Swastika in its historical connotations and should not be waving on state-funded property. Are you telling me Jews wouldn’t and shouldn’t make a fuss if New York decided to adopt the Swastika as the state flag?
Cite?
But that doesn’t mean they didn’t complain, december, or that complaining is the ONLY thing black people have done. Also could it be that Jewish people in this country–gasp!–haven’t faced the same horrible history as black people, so comparing the two groups is like comparing apples and oranges?
Racists were “aiming” at black people way before there was a Jesse Jackson or the NAACP. And if racist are such a small minority of the population (which everyone here generally insists they are), why should black people care about the image they present to them?
December, I’m on your end of the political spectrum, and I’m a transplanted Southerner, and I’m white, but I completely agree with the NAACP that the Confederate flag is to be suppressed. A state organization flying the Confederate flag is implicitly supporting what was a fundamentally evil regime, at least in its treatment towards blacks, which was of course the entire basis of its economy - I think the whole country is now virtually agreed that this was wrong. It’s not a minor deal.
Also, it’s the flag of a conquered country, for corn’s sake. Everyone should be opposed to its display by govt. orgs. - it amounts to open rebellion.
Let’s see, a group of people who are publicly insulted should brush it off and vote for the SOB who made the insult because his election (or retention at his/her powerful job) will not hurt said group. Bullshit. Racists make decisions irrationally, and certainly against the interests of the people they deride.
How about closet racists who use code words? Such as Ronald Reagan used to rant about “welfare queens”, which was thinly veiled code for black single mothers. Just because some boss or politician is not stupid enough to be an open racist, doesn’t mean that people of the race he or she hates should ignore their racist tendencies. They should vote against such policies with the same determination in their mind that the person in question hates them and will be their enemy in office.
Since when are people supposed to ignore dangers that they perceive to their own interests?
And I agree with Guin, but more so. The heritage represented by the Stars and Bars (the Confederate Naval Battle Flag) is a heritage of treason, hatred, slavery, prejudice and bigotry. You (the generalized you) mark yourself well when you display it.
Whether we like it or not, if people were asked,* “Which one person most represents African-Americans?”* Jackson would be the choice of many.
I don’t blame you for how you feel. However, a separate question is whether promoting that outrage is an effective way to promote Black interests. Consider the things said to and done to Jackie Robinson during his first major league season. No doubt he had just cause for outrage. But, it was more powerful to succeed by excelling at what he did. I suspect Bill Cosby, Oprah Winfrey, Marian Anderson did more for African-Americans by their outstanding performances than Rutgers students did by making a fuss about Lawrence’s comments.
I agree with you about the Confederate flag, but so what? Should Jews make a fuss about a swastika somewhere? I think that’s way down on the list. If fact, I quit the Anti-Defamation League because I thought they were blowing up minor problems in a way that benefited the ADL more than it did Jewish people.
Which is more important, Guinistasia – [ul][li]getting South Carolina to drop the Confederate flag?[] having inner city students not be 4 years behind the norm in school? []Lowering the rate at which crimes are committed against residents of the inner city? [/ul] [/li][quote]
Cite? [re NAACP making more fuss over the Confederate flag than education.]
[/quote]
The NAACP has promoted a boycott on traveling to South Carolina because of the flag. It’s their most visible public action right now. They didn’t recommend a boycott of states with bad minority education. And, they oppose education vouchers, which most inner city residents support.
All the more reason for African-Americans to pursue advancement by the most effective means possible.
Black people are affected by the image they present to everyone, including themselves. If the Black Student Union made a fuss over mathematician David Blackwell, they would encourage Black students to excel in technical areas. By making a fuss over a minor slight, they encourage Black students to be sensitive to slights.