# The Race Card and the Racist Card **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 20, 2011, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305 "2011-01-20T07:53:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/81 "2011-01-21T20:58:55Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > This is like pulling teeth. What specific charges are you laying, at whose feet, with what evidence, how does this relate go anybody but the guy in the article, and how is this transparency and full disclosure to be compelled and verified? And how does any if that have to do with whether America is a democratic nation or not? Will you answer my questions? If not please say so. ---
**Author:** ![newcomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/e5b9ba/32.png) [@newcomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newcomer)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/82 "2011-01-21T20:59:46Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Will you answer my questions? If not please say so. Let us see if we can define and agree, in conceptual terms, on the issue. Do you think that there are cases where political representation in US Government has been abused and fraud committed where an individual acting as an official of US Government worked either against US interests or put US interests as secondary without disclosing his or her intent? And, if agreed do you think it is something that should be criminally prosecuted? ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/83 "2011-01-21T21:13:13Z")
FYI, the term and concept “playing the race card” existed long before The Simpson trial as a Google Book search shows. [http://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1,cdr:1,cd\_min:Jan%201\_2%201800,cd\_max:Jun%2030\_2%201994&tbo=p&q="playing+the+race+card"&num=100](http://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1,cdr:1,cd_min:Jan%201_2%201800,cd_max:Jun%2030_2%201994&tbo=p&q=%22playing+the+race+card%22&num=100) William Follet’s _Modern American Usage_, from 1966, lists the phrase. > **[Modern American Usage](https://books.google.com/books?id=KgVpvTpFgU8C&pg=PA317&dq=%22playing%2Bthe%2Brace%2Bcard%22&hl=en&ei=TfY5TY2iMoPDgQec98TbCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBDhQ#v=onepage&q=%22playing%20the%20race%20card%22&f=false)** > > A classic since its first edition in 1966, Modern American Usage has been called a book that "every literate American ought to read." Now fully revised and brought up-to-date, this one-volume course in good writing brims with helpful answers—large... ---
**Author:** ![Capitaine\_Zombie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e95f7d/32.png) [@Capitaine\_Zombie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capitaine_Zombie)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/84 "2011-01-21T21:20:45Z")
> [@newcomer](#): > > So, it appears that you are okay with having a high-ranking elected or Senate confirmed official in US Government who looks after foreign country interests first. According to you, it happens all the time with people from various ethnic origins at all levels of US Government that maintain their country of origin interests ahead of those of US when dealing on behalf of US with said country. Furthermore, it is a necessity of a modern democracy (it would be great to see reasoning behind this). > > Incredulous, but fine. But, it would be fantastic to see people who engage in such activities declare that they intend to put US interests second when they are up for election or Senate confirmation. Something tells me if they declared their intentions they would never get elected or confirmed by Senate so, they are not disclosing that. Which means a fraud is committed. > > And you are okay with that. Fantastic! What I’m saying is that high-ranking officials can tend to be partial to foreign interests if they have a special bond to them. I wouldnt trust much an openly declared zionist that’d hold a crucial position in Mid East policy. Just being Jewish to warrant suspicion sounds a lot like antisemitic bullshit. The necessity I’m refering to is what usually constitutes conflict of interest. Western world was ok for a long time with people being in a position where such a conflict might arise, as long as nothing wrong was proven. Today this is not deemed to be enough and the mere possibility of such a conflict would normally lead to said individual not being given that position. It can happen with zionism, which by its very nature, has a lot more relays in other countries. But that doesnt mean in any way that Jews, in general, favor more Israel than the country to which they belong. It’s a charge and, contrary to what is happening in this thread, just accusing someone of conflict of interest doesnt magically make the case, you have to prove the situation. Jews dont have to constantly declare they’re not zionist, anymore than Muslims have an obligation to state they’re not Islamists. In both cases, if they declare themselves as being so, that’s another thing. More importantly it can and does happen with a lot of foreign interests beyond Israel. Several countries in the Middle East would qualify. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/85 "2011-01-21T21:26:25Z")
> [@newcomer](#): > > Let us see if we can define and agree, in conceptual terms, on the issue. > > Do you think that there are cases where political representation in US Government has been abused and fraud committed where an individual acting as an official of US Government worked either against US interests or put US interests as secondary without disclosing his or her intent? > > And, if agreed do you think it is something that should be criminally prosecuted? You seem to be making drastic leaps of logic based on an article about a man named Haim Saban who’s both an American and an Israeli citizen who’s not a government official and who has some influence due to his political donations, but not that much. The fact is, the US has numerous government officials, who were born outside the US who’ve had considerably more influence than Mr. Saban. For example, there are a number of elected Congressmen who were born in Cuba. Similarly, former Secretary of Labor Elaine Chou was born in Taiwan and the former Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, John Shalikashvili, was born in Georgia(then the Soviet Union). If you want to start looking at people with dual citizenship who have influence without holding any official position, well, then again there are tons of non-Israelis. For example, only a complete idiot would think that Haim Saban has remotely the kind of influence on the American political scene that the Australian-American Rupert Murdoch does. Frankly, I suspect that if we were to start counting up the number of powerful, influential American citizens who were born in Cuba versus those born in Israel(or even who hold Israeli citizenship) the former would utterly dwarf the latter. If you think I’m wrong, start listing powerful Israeli-Americans. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/86 "2011-01-21T21:27:12Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > And historically, that process raises resentment and suspicions. And historically that has led to … bad things. Well, the obvious answer would be to suck at things. Strive for mediocrity. > [@](#): > > **Finn** ’s post puts forth the argument for defending against it in loud terms…I just find his approach to often end up being ineffective in achieving its desired end. /agree > [@](#): > > Back to my youthful fight - the racist may have also called a Black man a name, but his expectation would have been that a fight would have resulted which may have given him pause; Because all black guys instantly react to insult with violence? > [@](#): > > his expectation of me was to take it and he had no pause. Of course having those preconceptions is biased and prejudiced. But the preconceptions are what he holds and influenced his actions. Maybe next time he paused before saying “Kike” and “Jewboy”. I can only hope. So the goal is to create a violent reputation for Jews? I don’t get it? > [@](#): > > So seriously, how should we respond when we are in this damned if we do and damned if we don’t circumstance? What is the catch 22 that is so unique to Jews? > [@](#): > > Sorry **monstro** but that is just the nature of these forums. The times that individual posters end up getting someone to say: “Gee, you are right, I’ve been a fool. You’ve given me something to think about.” are very few indeed. I think people might do it a lot more if some people didn’t use these admissions of error as a weapon against them in future debates or in other aspects of the same debate “you were wrong about that so you are obviously wrong about THIS as well” and if some people were such assholes in their debating style. > [@](#): > > If we participate expecting that to happen then we will be very frustrated indeed. What we can hope for, I think, is to have achieved a little more clarity in our own positions by having them challenged, achieving some understanding of the thought process that someone else has that is different than our own, to have impacted a few of the thoughts of those lurking who are not yet sure what they think about the subject, and maybe getting a few to question that which they thought they knew by at least understanding our POV even if they still do not agree with it. I’ve had my position changed or altered on several subjects I have debated on this board. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/87 "2011-01-21T21:28:55Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > FYI, the term and concept “playing the race card” existed long before The Simpson trial as a Google Book search shows. > > ["playing the race card" - Google Search](http://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1,cdr:1,cd_min:Jan%201_2%201800,cd_max:Jun%2030_2%201994&tbo=p&q=%22playing+the+race+card%22&num=100) > > William Follet’s _Modern American Usage_, from 1966, lists the phrase. > > [Modern American Usage: A Guide - Wilson Follett - Google Books](http://books.google.com/books?id=KgVpvTpFgU8C&pg=PA317&dq=%22playing+the+race+card%22&hl=en&ei=TfY5TY2iMoPDgQec98TbCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBDhQ#v=onepage&q=%22playing%20the%20race%20card%22&f=false) Thanks for the correction. I don’t think I’d ever heard the term until Robert Shapiro used it. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/88 "2011-01-21T21:35:29Z")
> [@newcomer](#): > > […] So you refuse to answer my questions buy won’t say so, or why you’re refusing. Odd. in case you ever want to identify whatever it is you were trying to say, and what it’s implications are as you see it, let me know. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/89 "2011-01-21T22:23:46Z")
Oh, and > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > /agree Of course. You’ve gone on record as saying that you instinctively place any new information that you get into an anti-Israel narrative and have to struggle against that tendency, and that you blame me for your cognitive processes. How could you possibly come to the conclusion that calling such thought patterns out is better than letting them speak for themselves, if you are comfortable blaming the very existence of such ideas in people other than those who hold them? > [@](#): > > I think people might do it a lot more if some people didn’t use these admissions of error as a weapon against them in future debates Intellectual integrity, just like a person’s thoughts, is not the responsibility of other people. An inability to admit error is totally the fault of the person unable to admit mistakes, although the reason they might blame others for their own failings is clear. Likewise, the best solution to the problem is to wait to speak on a subject until you know the facts. Surprisingly this solution seems more than a little difficult for some. Once one is shown to be wrong, however, they can admit it and learn from their error or attempt to blame those who pointed out their error. As for bringing up past errors (aside from the obvious point that if you avoid making errors you can’t have then pointed out to you), of course that can be relevant. Someone prone to making a certain type of error for a certain type of reason loses credibility on that issue. Again, the solution to such problems is to avoid making mistakes, by always speak v from a position if knowledge and reason, and to make sure that one’s powers of reason are applied properly. Again, for some this seems to be anything but simple, for some reason. Or folks can always get angry at those who prove them wrong and point out patterns that lead to errors. Probably not the most effective way to improve one’s self, however. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/90 "2011-01-21T22:37:58Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Well, the obvious answer would be to suck at things. Strive for mediocrity. Ah. Then we are parasites. Seriously we can’t win. > [@](#): > > Because all black guys instantly react to insult with violence? Do you really get that from what I wrote? Really? No, because the stereotype that is held is that and the stereotype that is held of Jews is not that that the Israelis would like create a new myth of. Yes those are stereotypes and bigoted. My Dad was a boxer with a short fuse and many Black men are wimps. But those who held prejudices treat people in accordance with them. And since the stereotype of the Jew is more Woody Allen than a inner city tough, behavior follows. Which is why the White lady crosses the street to avoid the scary looking Black man and not guy who looks Jewish (even though reality may be that the later is a rapist and the former a physics professor.) > [@](#): > > So the goal is to create a violent reputation for Jews? Certainly many Jews of Israels beginning days wanted to create that image. Sort of. The Jew who won’t get pushed around. The Jew who you want at your side if it comes to a fight. Not the Jew who tries so hard to get along and tries not to make trouble. Is that so hard to get? > [@](#): > > What is the catch 22 that is so unique to Jews? No catch 22. And I have no ability to declare it unique or not. Just a longer history of being “other” and more cycles of rinse repeat than most. > [@](#): > > I think people might do it a lot more if some people didn’t use these admissions of error as a weapon against them in future debates or in other aspects of the same debate “you were wrong about that so you are obviously wrong about THIS as well” and if some people were such assholes in their debating style. And you are free t think that. I have not experienced that myself. When I’ve admitted error and been convinced of anothers POV I have not ever found that used against me, and when I’ve seen others do it I’ve almost always seen it met with compliments for their honesty and willingness to acknowledge the points that others have made. I just don’t see it all that often. > [@](#): > > I’ve had my position changed or altered on several subjects I have debated on this board. Yea you! Like I said, I just don’t see it often. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/91 "2011-01-21T23:08:42Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > If one believes it is true then one does not see oneself as a hater. Even more creative is the argument seen in a recent thread here, that that merely stating one’s beliefs cannot constitute bigotry; one must commit bigoted _acts_ for that to be the case. For instance, ranting about the inferiority/evilness of a racial or ethnic group is not bigotry, firebombing their house _is_. Verbally stirring up hate, no biggie. I basically agree with the OP. Playing the “Oo, you’re calling me a _racist_” card is an annoying and ultimately self-defeating method of deflecting criticism. That also goes for its use as a pre-emptive strike - such as when a poster knows they’re about to use language and stereotypes that’ll anger members of the targeted group, but hopes to derail criticism and invoke sympathy for how unfairly the poor dear is about to be reviled. :rolleyes: P.S. I love the new handle, **DarkSeid**. Can we use that on the rare occasions when your patience with dipshits runs out and you let 'em have it? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2011, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/92 "2011-01-22T01:18:01Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Do you really get that from what I wrote? Really? No, because the stereotype that is held is that and the stereotype that is held of Jews is not that that the Israelis would like create a new myth of. Yes those are stereotypes and bigoted. My Dad was a boxer with a short fuse and many Black men are wimps. But those who held prejudices treat people in accordance with them. And since the stereotype of the Jew is more Woody Allen than a inner city tough, behavior follows. Which is why the White lady crosses the street to avoid the scary looking Black man and not guy who looks Jewish (even though reality may be that the later is a rapist and the former a physics professor.) > [@](#): > > I find the perception the black people will beat you up just for calling them a name to be highly insulting. It’s exploiting the stereotype of the “angry, brutish negro.” The perception might protect individuals who are already built like football players from minor acts of dickishness. But it doesn’t stop things like church burnings or James Byrd or racial discrimination at the job place. Those are things that matter to me. Not mere name-calling. **monstro,** I absolutely understand your offense at the idea that blacks are impulsive and violent individuals who will resort to physical blows at the calling of a name. And I myself, when I brought this up, wasn’t even saying that it was true - just that people _think_ it is. As I said before, an unfair reputation is still a reputation. And the idea of “yeah, why don’t you go down to [insert tough black neighborhood here] and try saying that” is so firmly ingrained in our popular culture that, yes, it was even part of _Die Hard 3._ The Jews are a culture that actually has jokes about it along the lines of, “nice Jewish boys don’t do ”, with inevitably being some “tough” or “masculine” thing: playing hockey, joining the military, getting into fights, etc. Now obviously there _are_ actually Jewish boys doing these things, or else the jokes about it wouldn’t exist. But the _perception_ being joked about is the idea that Jews are not “man enough” to do these various things, and this is a perception that has existed for hundreds of years. Is there _any_ other ethnic group on the planet that has this stereotype about them? I don’t think so. There are a hell of a lot of groups who are stereotyped as dumb, and a few that at times in history have been stereotyped as outright evil, but I don’t believe there’s any other people who have been stereotyped as cowardly, weak, and lacking in the ability to physically assert themselves. Nobody wants to be thought of as weak. _Nobody._ But I bet there _are_ a lot of people out there who wouldn’t mind being thought of as the kind of person who will kick your ass if you insult him, even if that carries the connotations that the individual is impulsive or even a “brute.” When the proverbial shit hits the fan, I’d rather be a brute. And I’d rather that people _think_ I’m a brute if that means it’d prevent them from trying to push me around. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2011, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/93 "2011-01-22T02:12:19Z")
I get what you’re saying, **Argent** , and can kinda sympathize. Perhaps it’s a guy thing to want to be “tough”. But I’m not only a woman, but also one who prides herself on being brainy. The whole brute thing goes against what I value the most in myself. Brutes, by definition, are not smart. I don’t want to be perceived like that, and in my day-to-day life, my intellect is all I have. All I care about, really. Not about scaring some punk kid who wants to call me out of my name. If you’re smart, it really doesn’t matter if you’re physically weak IMHO. Smarts (in my mind) equate to success, wealth, and power. Being physically tough is good if you’re in a fight or doing manual labor…or for scaring the bejesus out of people. But scaring people gets your ass thrown in jail unfairly or shot 44 times. Give me “weak but smart” any day! Perhaps I’m biased because I’m an ectomorphic nerd who can’t even punch herself out of a paperbag. So it would sting me if someone were to assume that I was stronger than I was smart, just because I’m black. And I guess I still don’t see how that perception protects me or other black people from anything other than individual acts of racial bullying. Except, that’s not even true. At the height of lynching, black people were portrayed as wild and brutish animals just as they are now (except maybe without the hip hop, inner-city edginess). That still didn’t stop 100,000 black folks from being strung up. So…I guess I’m still not quite understanding the full argument ya’ll are making. Though I certainly understand how belonging to a group that’s portrayed as weak would affect an individual’s psyche negatively. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2011, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/94 "2011-01-22T16:15:55Z")
To be fair **monstro** on balance Jews get a good hand in the stereotype card deal; being pegged smart nebbishes who control the world is more empowering than it is a hit on our psyches. The times I’ve called a “kike” and a “Jewboy” is exactly one. The subtle benefits of positive stereotyping? Probably throughout my life. You may be interested in the book that was reviewed by _Science_ [here](http://www.sciencemag.org/content/329/5998/1469.1.full?sid=0d09139d-797b-4620-bd87-9c40063c2706). > [@](#): > > As a reader of Science, you probably regard yourself as intellectually curious and nonviolent. But what if others didn’t see you that way? What if people doubted your intellectual capacity and were visibly anxious in your presence? How would you cope with this situation and what effect might it have on you? This is the problem that Brent Staples faced as a young African-American graduate student, when he noticed that people were afraid of him as he passed them on the street at night in Chicago’s Hyde Park. Staples learned to escape this stereotype by whistling Vivaldi, a strategy that put passersby at ease and inspired the title of Claude Steele’s new book on how stereotypes affect us. > > In Whistling Vivaldi, Steele (a social psychologist at Columbia University) describes the groundbreaking work that he and his colleagues conducted over the past 20 years on stereotype threat, the psychological threat of confirming or being reduced to a negative stereotype. Empirical work on this topic began when Steele and Steve Spencer found that they could dramatically improve women’s math scores simply by telling them that the test they were about to take shows no gender differences in performance [research described in (1)]. Steele and Joshua Aronson then went on to show that the performance of black students could be similarly improved if they were told that a test was not a measure of intellectual achievement (2). Indeed, Steele and Aronson also found that African Americans performed more poorly on a challenging verbal test if they were first asked to indicate their race, thereby highlighting their stereotyped identity. This result was later extended by Margaret Shih and her colleagues, who found that Asian-American women did worse on a math test after indicating their gender but better after indicating their race (3). > > As Steele takes pains to note, two surprising facts about stereotype threat are that members of any group can experience it and that there need not be a prejudiced perpetrator to cause it. Rather, it can be set off by subtle environmental cues, such as seeing very few members of one’s own group in a performance setting… Do you have any comments on my post #58 btw? Specifically I am most interested in whether you have an answer to how we Jews should respond to that sort of “evidence”, which is indeed present for each of those potential theses of Jewish agendas. Calling it out as anti-Semitic (playing the card) doesn’t work too well. Politely debating risks elevating the crazy and how do you answer when indeed Jews are there disproportionately, in almost any of those political movements, in all of those fields? Should we teach our children to strive for mediocrity? If I was an academic German Jew in the 1930’s what could I have done differently than those who were there to alter the events, not just to know to leave and to protect myself, but to combat the rise of the Jew hating as the German economy went sour and it became time, yet again, to blame the handy “other”? What would I do if that _did_ start happening today? How would/will I want my children and future grandchildren to respond? I honestly struggle with these questions and have no good answer myself. I respond in my way and **Finn** in his, but I think we both respond from the same place. Yes, it has a parallel with the experience of Black Americans today but they are different enough that the answers are not necessarily the same. Any suggestions you have will be appreciated. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2011, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/95 "2011-01-22T18:09:12Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Calling it out as anti-Semitic (playing the card) doesn’t work too well. Politely debating risks elevating the crazy and how do you answer when indeed Jews are there disproportionately, in almost any of those political movements, in all of those fields? In many ways, it’s a catch 22. Call it out and you have people constructing a narrative (even if the accusations of anti-Semitism are true, as evinced by rhetoric in this and the other thread) in which Jews are hypersensitive crybabies or nasty bullies who use the label of anti-Semitism as a cudgel. Discuss it and it legitimates the topic as a reasonable issue to be debated, with the truth perhaps lying somewhere in between both sides and the involvement of Jews, in and of itself, being used to show how reasonable the topic is to discuss and Just Ask Questions about. Ignore it and it may very well still flourish. Fuck knows if there’s a perfect or even a workable solution. But I do agree, our responses are different paths that start out from the same place and aim at getting to the same destination. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2011, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/96 "2011-01-22T18:11:36Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Personally, I pause one step before that. I ask, “Why is the question of average IQ of sub-groups so important to you?” My personal take in those discussions has been to simultaneously look at the arguments made with an open and critical eye and to wonder, aloud, why the question matters. If the answer is to be open to the concept that not differences in outcomes must be the result of discrimination, then fine. I’d accept that statement as a matter of course: statistical differences are not necessarily the result of either nature or nurture. But the answer is usually the inverse - any difference in outcome is held by these people to be proof of biologic differences, and that therefore there must be no discrimination that matters. Oh yes, the intention behind the question always matters. There’s not one scientist out there who is completely 100% pure in his or her objectively…it’s simply impossible. However, let’s say the intention behind the question was not nefarious. A group of researchers may be interested in finding out why (and I’m just pulling this out of my ass, reader, so don’t take this as anything more than a hypothetical) black schizophrenics tend to have poorer outcomes than white schizophrenics, even correcting for family dynamics, socioeconomics, and clinical treatment. It is known that intelligence acts as a protective buffer against psychosis (this part is true). IQ, as far as I know, is the standard metric used for assessing intelligence. Let’s say the reasearchers have the hypothesis that black schizophrenics lack the buffering capacity that white schizophrenics have because of deficits in intellect, therefore explaining why their prognosis tends to be worse (again, I’m making this all up!) So they may design a study where they take black and white schizophrenics and black and white healthy controls, all matched for age, gender, attained educational level, length of illness, drug treatments, etc., and give them all IQ tests. They will also want to give a standard test for schizotypy to all groups, so that they can test for statistical relationships between intelligence level (probably parsed by various categories such as verbal ability and concrete reasoning) and schizotypy scores. Let’s say the results of their study reveals that blacks, whether sick or not, have significantly lower IQ scores than their white counterparts, and that IQ is also negatively correlated with degrees of schizotypy (as predicted). Thereby, supporting the hypothesis that black schizophrenics tend to have a poorer prognosis than their white counterparts because of their inferior intellect. I do not see the question, nor the intent behind the question, as automatically nefarious. If it’s an observation that the researchers have routinely seen, then why not study the underlying causes? The problem that I see is suspecting nefarious intention without any proof of such. Yes, the researchers of the hypothetical may actually be racist individuals who want to prove black inferiority through a round-a-bout approach. That is true…and one will tend to think so if they automatically think any question regarding race and intellect is racist. But if you think about it, their findings could result in better treatments not just blacks, but for a general subgroup of schizophrenics–those with average or below average IQs. Squashing their research because of its implications could prevent improvements in how patients are treated. As I said, the results of the study would definitely pain me (particularly since I’ve been diagnosed as being on the Sx Spectrum), but I would hope that the scientist in me would not automatically reject the findings based on how it made me feel. > [@](#): > > The question isn’t off-limits (and I have been part of many of those discussions) but the fact that it is so important to some to demonstrate its “truth” is the result I believe, of its usefulness in justifying other actions and beliefs, beliefs that are, to my way of thinking, unfair and wrongheaded. Out of all the questions in the world to be fixated on, that one is chosen by some for some reason. I agree. That this is an obsession of many throughout time and the present has definitely poisoned the well and justifies the suspicion of any study, however innocent, that can be used as justification for black inferiority. > [@](#): > > And I’d ask you to ask yourself: why, out of all the tens of thousands of conspiracy theories about, from Templars, to hidden information about UFOs, to an international conspiracy to cause children harm with vaccines that has now gone so far as to pretend that Wakefield had committed fraud in order to discredit him, do you find a particular first glance crazy idea worth considering that maybe it could be true? As a scientist you know that science is not a completely objective beast: we choose our questions for reasons, we choose them in the context of the beliefs of our times and in context of what we think may be true. I never said a “first glance” would convince me of _anything_. The documentary I linked to in the other thread did not convince me of a Jewish conspiracy. But yes, I have to admit it did make me raise my eyebrows in some places. And to be honest, **DSeid** , no one has yet to debunk, with solid evidence, those “uncomfortable questions” the filmmaker asked in regards to the ADL and pro-Israel lobbying groups. The filmmaker may not have persuaded me, but the arguments put forth in that other thread did not either. > [@](#): > > Honestly, I find your willingness to consider the statement “Jews are …” doing _anything_, and to hold that to be something that could have evidence to be presented about, to be quite discomfiting. (No, I am NOT calling you a racist.) It implies an assumption that there is a group of Jews that has an agenda. It sets up providing “evidence” that will usually be found: > > Thesis - Jews are part of the Communist plot to take over the world. A very common one in the 50’s. Evidence? Many of the founders of Communism were Jewish. Marx Jewish. Sure his parent’s both converted and he was baptized, but … Trotsky Jewish. The list goes on. And many of the members of the American Communist Party and many Hollywood writers writing scripts that clearly promoting “communist” ideals … Jewish. > > Thesis - Jews are part of the capitalist plot to oppress all the workers of the world. Well lots of Jews in positions of corporate power then and now. Over-represented in banking. Jews are far over-represented in the field of economics (and thereby have manipulated policy to their own ends). Rothschild and on and on. > > Thesis - Jews are elite liberals who work to drive this country away from its traditional values and excessively dovish. Lord knows you can find lots of elite liberal Jews in positions of power and influence. Anti-war movements often have Jews heavily involved. > > Thesis - Jews are conspiring to drive us into wars and are the driving forces behind the neocon movement. Yup lots of Jews there. I understand your feelings. But listen, I’m not naive to think any group is above doing ANYTHING nefarious. And when I say “group”, I don’t mean all members of a group. Just like when I say that this country has a long history of racist activities committed by whites…I’m not implicating ALL whites. Just whites who did the racist activities. I know the pro-Zionist/Jewish Americans-taking-over-the-government conspiracy sounds very similar to all the nutjob conspiracies out there that have been generated about Jews through the centuries. Again, I’m not naive about that either. However, I do recognize that just because what was said in the past was a lie does not mean that everything else said must ALWAYS be a lie too. And I feel I must assert this just in case you misunderstand me–I _don’t_ believe in a Jewish global conspiracy. I just don’t think that, on it’s face, the notion is a lie or that one has to be anti-Semitic to even ponder the question. Because we do have certain truths to contend with: 1. Israel is our ally. Not for military reasons or economic reasons, as far as I know. But because Israel is a democractic friend amonst hostile nations. 2. Jewish Americans, though small in number, are disproportionately represented in powerful institutions–government or otherwise (and to that, I say good for them). 3. Jewish Americans tend to have an affinity towards Israel, as both a cultural homeland and a spiritual one. 4. Our loyalty to Israel has placed us on the map for radical Islamic terrorist groups, conceivably putting us in more harm than would be if we were not involved. 5. (More questionably…but I’m beginning to think that it’s true) Americans, especially gentiles, who openly question why we are so vested in Israel’s interests are often stigmitized as being anti-Semitic. I know that any sympathy given for Palestinians on the Straight Dope is greeted by lots of hostility..so much so that I think most of us would rather not even speak about it lest we get blasted with scary Walls of Text[sup]TM[/sup]. Not speaking for all black people or Native Americans or any other stigmized group, but I know many of us, in particular, don’t like this at all. When we see one group having such overwhelming control over another group, so that the latter is penalized just for being _where they have always lived_, it makes us think of the Very Bad Things of the past. Furthermore, when one dares to draw analogies to the Very Bad Things of the past to present-day observations and they are met with scorn and accusations of racism, then that just makes people feel even _more_ vindicated in their beliefs. Perhaps that’s wrong, but I think it’s human nature. So, taken as a whole, I think there are plenty of reasons why it is not nefarious or bigoted to merely suspect something fishy COULD going on, even though it is a conspiracy and Jews have always been linked to conspiracy. I don’t think people should believe any claim based on gut instinct. Guts are often wrong. But likewise I don’t think people should _reject_ claims based on gut instinct either, especially if there is supportive proof. Now we can argue whether the supportive proof is good or not…that makes for a substantial debate. But to throw out the question before one can even look at the evidence, merely because the question makes us uncomfortable…well, I can’t get with that. I again go back to COINTEPROL. Your average American wouldn’t have believed all the things the FBI did to besmirch the reputations of black leaders during the 60s and 70s, and would have called out anyone accusing the government of such activity as being unpatriotic. But if one had objectively examined the historical realities and truths on the ground at the time (the history of racism in the country, the history of truth-distortion by governments in general, the fact that black activism wasn’t nearly as violent or scary as what was made out to be, the fact that J. Edgar Hoover was a racist), then we can see that it isn’t irrational paranoia to wonder about the existence of COINTEPROL. > [@](#): > > Your father was right: Jews are everywhere. And whatever the thesis, no matter how contradictory the theses are, there is “evidence” that Jews are secretly, or not so secretly, “in control”. I don’t think Jews are everwhere, like my father does (bless his wackjob heart). I just don’t think individuals or groups of Jewish people are beyond reproach. I just don’t think that the claim that there are groups of Jewish Americans doing things on behalf of Israel, damned the consequences to the US, to be all that improbable. I would feel that way for any ethnic group with a homeland supported, in part, by American tax dollars. And I sincerely hope that you believe me when I say this. > [@](#): > > How do Jews defend against that sort of evidence? After all it is true that Jews are there, everywhere, €outside our numbers. Hollywood. Publishing. Business. Medicine. Economics. Law. Science. (Boy talk about over-representation, look at that Nobel Prize winning list.) Literature. Communists. Socialists. Conservatives. Civil Rights activists. Human Rights Activists. Racists. Capitalists. Banking. Comics. To be honest, I don’t know. And it’s an excellent question! Perhaps we need another “Moorish” documentary to deconstruct the idea and disprove every element of it. For those who are already true believers, it wouldn’t effective. But for people like me who aren’t bending one way or the other, it would at least be a starting point. Otherwise, the other voices are going to be the ones who are listened to and believed. Sorry for not addressing your questions earlier. I didn’t know how to respond to them when I first read them, but I’ve decided to take a stab at them at your request. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2011, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/97 "2011-01-22T19:09:59Z")
Thank you for the answer. Again, if all the process here accomplishes is a better understanding of another’s POV it is still accomplishing something, even if no opinions are changed. As to the IQ issue - sure, if that was the answer to my question “why do you ask?” then, to some degree, fine. Although I would be the critical consumer of information and remind the researchers that hypothetically demonstrating a biologic predisposition to have less protective intellectual reserve would not preclude the possibility that access to and quality of mental health care resources was not also a factor. Or that different biologic responses to the medications was not a factor. Or that having enough Black Americans included in trials of treatment protocols that they may not respond to in exactly the same way was not also a factor. And I’d be interested in seeing that they looked at how much variance about the mean there was as well, and how much of a factor that may or may not play. IF they were thinking that demonstrating such a circumstance was enough to disprove the role of other cultural, societal, and environmental factors, and that therefore those would need not be considered as remediable factors contributing to disparate outcomes, I’d argue with them quite a bit. Hypothetically. I will engage a bit further to point out that you numbered truths are mostly debatable assertions to some degree. 1. There are historical reasons and geopolitical ones that the US is allied with Israel. Being a fellow democracy has only a very little to do with it. If you’d like whole discussion covering why the US has backed Israel for reasons of Realpolitik, different ones as the years progress, I’d be happy to have it, but it may need its own thread. 2. Granted. Again, it _is_ true that Jews are everywhere. There are even more Jews in the Pro-Palestinian anti-Israel movement than our numbers would suggest. Each Jew may have a different idea of what “Justice” is, but we all had it beat into us from very early on that we should work to achieve it … which then has some of us working very hard against each other! 3. Statistically speaking granted. For a variety of reasons. 4. I really do not think so. After all various EU countries historically friendly to the Palestinian cause are on the map too. The West is targeted for the same reason that Israel is targeted: it serves various sub-group interests to have a demonized other. Those who oppress their own can keep their distracted by the outside threat. Those who want to draw the Arab world back away from becoming integrated in the world’s community of communities and into a more insular fundamentalism also need an outside threat to evoke. You may or may not agree with that analysis, but it is at least a debate, not an established truth. 5. I am glad that you see it as questionable. _Rarely_ are people here accused of anti-Semitism for merely having Pro-Palestinian, Pro-Arab, or anti-Israel positions. Among the posters here who are usually pegged as “Pro-Israel” not a one has not criticized various decisions by various Israeli administrations. Yes, that includes **Finn**. The accusation of the disloyal Jew get under many a craw, I’ll grant that, and I think by now you can understand why. Especially when even a Jewish sounding name is enough to declare someone as not to be trusted. As to the rest of you comment of whose is being punished by whom and for what … it would be another long thread to discuss how I see things a bit differently than how you’ve presented it, and that digression would take up more time than I think either of us wants to spend! Thank you again for your response. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2011, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/98 "2011-01-22T19:38:47Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > Because we do have certain truths to contend with: > > 1. Israel is our ally. Not for military reasons or economic reasons, as far as I know. But because Israel is a democractic friend amonst hostile nations. Actually Israel become our ally, in fact more than name, after the 1967 war when it became clear that we could use Israel as a counterweight to the soviet-dominated Arab states. Israel also offers us the benefits of a potential port in the middle east and potential staging grounds should we have to deploy in force there. We also get the (debatable) benefit of access to Israel’s intelligence services. > [@monstro](#): > > 1. Our loyalty to Israel has placed us on the map for radical Islamic terrorist groups, conceivably putting us in more harm than would be if we were not involved. Bin Laden’s objections, for instance, also included massive anger over our troops being stationed in Saudi Arabia. There is a massive petrodollar influence on American politics, and the Saudis in particular has significant political impact (and were advising that we attack Iran, for example). > [@monstro](#): > > 1. (More questionably…but I’m beginning to think that it’s true) Americans, especially gentiles, who openly question why we are so vested in Israel’s interests are often stigmitized as being anti-Semitic. _Some_ are. And that’s because some _are_. The only thing more absurd than the notion that _everybody_ who criticizes our nation’s relationship with Israel is called an anti-Semite is that _nobody_ who criticizes our relationship with Israel is an anti-Semite. And doesn’t that make sense? If someone is a racist against Jews, would they really be all that unlikely to attack American Jews and the Jewish state? And _of course_ there are valid reasons for criticism. > [@monstro](#): > > I know that any sympathy given for Palestinians on the Straight Dope is greeted by lots of hostility You sure? Can you cite all the hostility that the following was greeted with? > [@Compare pictures from Holocaust with Gaza-pictures in a mail ?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/compare-pictures-from-holocaust-with-gaza-pictures-in-a-mail/482298/222): > > I’m well aware that there are numerous legitimate grievances among the Palestinian people, among but not limited to those in the West Bank and Gaza. > > There are legitimate concerns about racism and discrimination even for Arabs in Israel, but the courts have consistently come down against such actions. There are problems for those Palestinians who live in refugee camps in other countries, many of which have adopted laws designed to keep them living in the camps, and even made it illegal for them to find work outside of the camps. Other nations, like Lebanon, have a history of treating them very roughly and just a couple years ago, the Lebanese army shelled the hell out of refugee camp. IIRC they weren’t using surgical strikes either. Palestinians in the West Bank do not have freedom of movement even within the West Bank itself. Many have family/friends in Jordan but are unable to visit them most of the time due to the Jordanian border policies. There are valid demands that they have increased water rights, that Gazans have increased fishing rights. Fatah is corrupt and Hamas are theocratic thuggish genocidal lunatics. Much of the aid/money which is sent never get into the hands of the people. Unemployment is massive and they are unable to import/export freely. Ironically as well, one of their main trading partners has always been Israel, and due to security restrictions they are unable to travel and work in Israel without great difficulty and delay. Even ambulances have trouble traveling freely, largely due to the fact that there is a history of ambulances being used to smuggle weapons/bombs/terrorists. > > Etc, etc, etc. That’s just a smattering off the top of my head. > > Of course they have valid demands. They want a sovereign state with viable agricultural and water rights, with open borders so that they can travel to see family in Jordan or Egypt, Israel or wherever, or simply vacation. They want open airspace and a national airline. They want the ability to send fishing boats as deep into international waters as they see fit. They want a decent standard of living and a viable economy. They want the ability to visit their holy sites and don’t want security checkpoints on their land or, for that matter, to have to be treated as possible enemy combatants at every checkpoint in Israel proper. They want to have sovereign control and ownership over the land they are living on now. Which, of course, has legal but not necessarily pragmatic problems. For roughly 400 years, the vast majority of land in the region was Miri or waste land, that is, land which could not be privately owned and which tenants could only ‘rent’ by continuously cultivating it. This system was kept by both the British and Jordanians when they were the sovereign powers in control of the land. So legal claims to property rights fall short, but it is obvious that a pragmatic solution must be reached. I have gone on record, numerous times in the last week or two unless I miss my guess, as stating that Clinton’s Bridging Proposal would be a very good goal to shoot for (with modifications in Final Status negotiations), as after land swaps and periods of increasingly scaled back Israeli control to guarantee a smooth transition, it gave (what would become) a sovereign PA roughly 97% of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. I’ve gone on record as saying that the US should apply its economic influence to attempt to get all settlement expansion stopped. I’ve gone on record as stating that there is a pragmatic necessity to provide funds Palestinians who were dispossessed, largely because any Palestinian territory itself must have viable social services as soon as possible, but also because it would be a good gesture to settle bad blood and the Final Status of the refugees. I believe that it would have to be negotiated because, as pointed out above many didn’t even own the land they were living on. A unilateral decision of how much they were owed would be silly, and most evenhanded folks recognize that. Israel no more gets to determine what the refugees should get than does Abbas or Haniyah, or the Saudis or whoever. But a negotiated settlement allows an agreed upon value to be set and paid rather than simply declared by fiat. > […] > I want there to be a viable two state solution with peace security, prosperity and a high standard of living for both sides. And I want it ASAP. > […] > I have seen (some) good signs from Fatah in the West Bank however, as they recently controlled their populace and didn’t permit violent protests to develop ‘a stone’s throw’ away from Israeli troops. Although that in and of itself has produced resentment, it does seem that Fatah is actually interested in a peaceful government with sovereignty. Oh, to be sure, it still spews the same rhetoric. But while Hamas’ rejectionist position is proven by its actions, Fatah’s rejectionist rhetoric (might be) falsified by its willingness to achieve domestic calm so as to be a viable negotiating partner for Israel. Even children who are radicals would have a hard time continuing in that vein if their home was peaceful and prosperous and, especially, if the PA was active in cracking down on terrorism and genocidal incitement. > > I believe that the best way to marginalize Hamas is to have a sovereign West Bank which can demonstrate to them the ‘carrot’ of peaceful relations, and provide a glaring object lesson as to what path works, and what leads to misery and bloodshed for both nations. I believe that the sooner we get a viable two state solution, the sooner the citizens in Gaza will start slitting some Hamas throats. And the sooner there is a viable pair of states who can coexist in peace and prosperity, the revenue from tourism alone will help the Palestinians’ economic and social interests immensely. > > I’m not unaware of the complexities of the situation, I just find myself having to debunk counter-factual claims much more often than talking about Where We Go From Here. Anybody can check out, for instance, my disagreements with **DSeid**. He and I disagree on some fundamental points, like the effectiveness of his ‘snapping turtle’ strategy of defense. But I have never known him to be anything other than scrupulously honest and accurate, and he mythbusts both traditional Zionist and anti-Zionist positions that aren’t factual. Because he’s able to see nuance and keep his position grounded in fact rather than myth, he and I can disagree (and even contradict each other on factual points with valid cites and see those points conceded) . I’d be more than happy to discuss pragmatic solutions to this conflict which has gone on far too long. But that is hampered by constant myth busting, or people who simply argue to support their agenda, or who distort the facts to score rhetorical points, or what have you. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2011, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/99 "2011-01-22T20:30:35Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Nor do those who “just ask” if Jews being over-represented in media companies as writers, directors, and producers, isn’t proof of a Jewish “good old boy” network there that discriminates against non-Jews. If I was Jewish I might be reluctant to point this out, but Jews are “over-represented” in any field that requires superior intelligence. This is because the average IQ for Ashkenazic Jews is 112. It is not because of a Jewish conspiracy. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2011, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305/100 "2011-01-23T05:55:15Z")
I guess we’ll end the thread on that cheerful note? Alrighty then! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-card-and-the-racist-card/568305.md?page=6)