Internalized Racism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghideon

You seem dead set on making it very clear the racism is not the only oppression going on in the world or in the US. You are most certainly correct. No argument there either. And white people face all sorts of oppressions even though they are white. But you have also stated other things. You have written that "imperialism is dead" and that I should "get over it." You have written that "apartheid is over." You have stated that there "is no white power structure."

---

this is all i have time for. i will have to hold off addressing your "corporations are taking over the world and exploiting people of color" argument and for now will just roll my eyes.

regarding above, you continue to intimate that there is some grandiose structure - a global network of white power bent on oppressing blacks and it's simply not the case. i agreed that there are forms of discrimination, but not always directed toward groups or persons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghideon

So the general impression I get from your writing is that you do not see the United States or Great Britain or the whites in South Africa still actively exploiting,attacking,killing,people of color and entire nations of people of color. And I can not agree to that. Most studies that I have read recently state that we have moved from a world where the United States was one power amongst others to an Empire situation where the United States is very simply the dominant power. Now this does mean that certain aspects of imperialism are no longer occuring but this, in no way at all, implies that the foreign or domestic policy of an Empire are fair, just, humane or that the US is no longer exploiting, attacking, economically controlling many other nations and certainly many communites and countries of people of color.

---

well you need to stop reading your "most studies" then. i know, you're probably reading Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy, or maybe that's too neo-con for you. certainly you've perused The Nation and The Progressive, and i wouldn't be surprised if you subscribe to Dissent and Mother Jones. yeah i'm familiar with the "American Empire" babble. i'll write more on this later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghideon

Please try to keep in mind that how a person treats themselves and others around them, and their community is a direct reflection of how they feel about themselves and their condition and environment. The disgusting, filthy, bloody, drug infested endemic in the ghettos across the US is a direct reflection of the missery in the soul of black folk. This is not some high brow theory of mine. This is my best attempt at articulating the tears, broken lives, torn up families, and rage that many of my closest friends have tried talk to me about. I believe I owe them that much. Not out of any sense of guilt or obligation. Simply out of love. Actually, it is not them that I owe...it is me.[

---

i think it's wonderful you feel so strongly about improving the conditions of ghetto life. in addition to "articulating the tears, broken lives, torn up familes and rage that many of my closest friends have tried talk to me about..." you ought to do more, step up. you could start by donating some of your hard-earned money into organizations that were brought into existence to tackle the very problems you describe. put your money where your mouth is. you'll help them AND feel good about it, because that's what it's about for you, right? "it is not them that i owe...it is me...simply out of love." so, start loving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghideon

You have a serious misreading of Emerson. His paradigm, and the paradigm of Thoreau, Whitman and others of the Transcendentalists was not at all promoting some narrowing sense of ones 'I' ness...ones individual soul. No. The reason one could devote ones self to the immediate environment around them and to ones own self-development and reliance is because the essential nature of the 'I' is a 'We'. That the relationship between ones self and all of humanity, in fact, all of nature is so intimate that to focus on the 'I' in a deep, challenging, difficult but very profound way is to, at the very same time, love the world. You seem to make it sound like some literary version of Donald Trump. And you might try reading On Civil Disobedeince by Thoreau.

---

"paradigms"---there you go with that "system-think" again, as if everything consist in neat little boxes. the world's far more messy than you make it out to be. and with all due respect, your state-centric view of the world is becoming nauseating. i highly recommend one of my old prof's books: James N. Rosenau's Along The Domestic/Foreign Frontier: Exploring Governance In A Turbulent World" it'll change your life. :)

I've read civil disobedience but you fail to mention that thoreau refused to pay a tax and was arrested and jailed because he felt he shouldn't have to give to big brother if he didn't want to. and this is not my "interpretation" since he spells it out in the section, "philanthropy", in Walden. trust me, next time before you go blowing off your mouth about thoreau - whom you know nothing about, or at least you haven't demonstrated that knowledge here - i recommend you read him, slowly. as far as emerson, i'll take that up later. read your transcendentalism too pertaining to I and we---i recommend you start with Thoreau's Walking essay, then head on over to Emerson's Circles and Nature, then come back here and tell me Self-Reliance is about a "we." it's much much bigger than that.

"I am a transparent eyeball."
-RWE

"regarding above, you continue to intimate that there is some grandiose structure - a global network of white power bent on oppressing blacks and it's simply not the case. i agreed that there are forms of discrimination, but not always directed toward groups or persons. "

Ill have to agree with you here jon. there isnt one constant,official power structure in the world. It can all be rather objective.

1. Look...I actually do want to communicate in a forward moving direction here. That is, I want the dialouge to either teach me, inform me, affect me so that when I look back on the discussion it is seen as a positive, not always comfortable, but positive experience.

It is important to me that I communicate respect to you and that you communicate respect to me in the process. If I have disrespected you in my writings then I apologize. You do not deserve disrespect.

I hope you agree with what I have said above in terms of the goals of a discussion and the importance of mutual respect. This seems particularly important when dealing with an issue like racism which is certainly an explosive topic.

In an effort towards building a more respectful discussion I am going to try and make my position a bit more clear but also, I hope, less absolute.

In terms of corporations taking over the world. I did not mean to imply that there is a "grandiose" structure "a global network of white power bent on oppressing blacks." I will be a bit more specific. I do not imagine a cabal of white men who meet in dark rooms and talk about how they can keep the black man or black woman or black race down. I am sure there are some corporate folk that are that racist and might have conversations like that but I would doubt it is a common event. Rather, there are basically good, human beings in positions of power and they have a particular undestanding and perspective on what is in their best interest, what is in the corporations best interest, what is in the world's best interest etc... And that because of how they were raised, the communities they were brought up in, the colleges they attended etc their view on "best interest" is quite different then, for example, my view would be or many many other peoples idea of "what is best."

I do not think Bush is evil or Clinton good. I do not think that MLK was a better human being then anybody else. Not at core. There is just the simple assesment of a person's actions and how they affected people. Some actions have done enormous harm to people and other actions have been of enormous benefit.

I am not better or worse then anybody else, black or white, fascist or communist.

But when I look at the world today and I admit that how I look at the world may be very different then how you look at it...I read certain things, you read different things, I talk to certain people, you talk to different people.
Nevertheless, all I have to go on is what my experiences have taught me. And one thing that I feel relatively confident in is that there is a great great deal of poverty and suffering occuring all over this planet right now as we speak and that this has been true for a long time as well.

There are, ofcourse, many many different strategies and beliefs about suffering and how to aleviate it or end it. There are even different opinions on whether it should be dealt with at all. And clearly I can not expound on all perspectives that are possible. I simply have my perspectives.

Actually, I am going to stop here. I have a tendency to write on and on in an argumentative style and this has not seemed to work in terms of our communication. My best bet is that our deep disagreements come from deep differences in life. Differences in current situations and differences in past experiences. Our different lives have led us to very different assesments.

I do not think that disagreements are usually over facts vs lies. Unfortunately, it is more complex. There are billions of facts out there and anybody can pick and choose which facts are important to point out and which ones are not. That will always express a bias. Also, I do not believe there is really such a thing as "the whole truth...so help me God."

As I write I get a better sense of what I need to simply say. For a variety of personal reasons I want racism to end. For the most part the reason this issue is important to me is because of how my life has gone, both in good ways and hard ways. But once I realized how important it is to me I spent a great deal of time trying to figure out how it can be eliminated. One thing I found is that the first racism that has to be eliminated is my own. And as I move on that I will be in increasingly better shape to assist other individuals and groups to lessen and eliminate their racism.

Can you simply write back a response that strives to communicate respect to me. You may not think that a great deal of what you write comes across to me as deeply invalidating but it does. I am not saying that is your intent. I am simply stating a fact that I hope concerns you. I am so tired of all of the hot air arguments all over the internet. It just seems like there is so much being yelled and very little being spoken. There seems to be so much talk and not nearly enough listening. So the dialouge between you and I needs to move to different ground.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dramasnot6

"regarding above, you continue to intimate that there is some grandiose structure - a global network of white power bent on oppressing blacks and it's simply not the case. i agreed that there are forms of discrimination, but not always directed toward groups or persons. "

Ill have to agree with you here jon. there isnt one constant,official power structure in the world. It can all be rather objective.

---

I wrote at length about the importance of understanding other forms of oppression: sexism being one, and class oppression being another.

OK. There is not a "global" "network" "of" "white" "power" "bent on" "oppressing" "blacks."

Fine. For what that is worth. A "network" can never be "bent on" anything. A network is a noun that describes a complex dyanamic. Only human beings have the capacity for intent. People can create things because of their intent and then use them for a variety of intents but the thing itself does not have intent.

I do think that a network, a system,an oppression...whatever... is global. At least racism is global. That is, racism effects people in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Europe and the United States.

I think that corporations have a global impact at this era in history.

And I also would say that if you wanted to determine what institutions have the most impact in the world today...certainly corporations would be near the top of the list.

If you had a list of all the corporations in the world and it would be a very long list...I would be my computer that almost all of biggest in terms of profits earned would be international and also predominantly run by white men.

I would further state that it is certainly possible for a white person to direct a corporation without any racist policies or practices. But at this point in history I feel confident in saying that if you took IBM and Nestle and Pepsi and GM and somehow demanded that they stop exploiting people of color...they would first deny the exploitation or try and say it is really not that bad at all...they would say that what they were doing was necessary to stay competitive.

And you know what, I would probably agree with them about the last point, at least. I really do not know how to move forward without millions of people going from bad wages to no wages. So I can even sympathize with some corporate struggles. But I still assert that racism is a very destructive dynamic...that corporations participate in racism because it is pretty much built into the current economic system of profit, markets and the creation of commodities. And that it is international.:D :yawnb:

i understand what you mean pertaining to the dialogue. look, if i didn't respect you or what you had to say and others here, i would have ignored you after the first post. focus on what's being discussed here - the ideas. you're spending more time bent about superficialities and decorum than the issues. not to worry, i respect you my brother. :)

i agree, life experience is a powerful source of knowledge. it shapes our identity by allowing us to 'see' the world, just not the whole ball of wax. this seeing the world is too often colored by misrepresentations and overgeneralizations, which imbues a great deal of what's being taught in college classrooms today. for example, your criticism of corporations has all been said before, and you took the easy way out by not giving key examples to support your global racism theory. forget your "studies," ---most studies are cooked up in ivory towers anyway, and most of those folks don't even read the newspaper because they're too busy presenting papers at their conferences and holding on to cushy jobs with ideologies that don't comport with modern realities. :)

what did YOU come away with from the "variety" of sources available to you? what are people saying about so and so? where exactly is this discrimination that Company X is allegedly levying against people of color in Region Y? and what parties are involved and what, if anything, is being done about it? if nothing, why not? i can turn on any liberal radio show and listen to the same speak about "governments" and "countries" that your opinions are drowning in, as if governments are the masters of the universe. the world is far more complex---but that complexity is available to us, but requires - necessitates. a more careful consideration of our sources of information. your main source appears to be life experience. well that's great. but it's hardly enough to draw final conclusions about racism, let alone the world and people in it.

you seem to suggest that white people are clueless about racism and other forms of discrimination, but it's not the case, at all. i don't know about the rest of whites, but i don't get all hung up on your race war notions because i am confident that actors/organizations/governments are responsive to these issues (not all the time). if you're upset with the speed of such progress, then i suggest, again, that you consider getting involved in volunteer work. donate money, go over to africa, latin america, proselytize, set up a rally in Washington, D.C., work on a political campaign, whatever it takes that will make you feel at the end of the day that you're doing everything YOU can. you mentioned thoreau's civil disobedience as being an act against systemic injustice. but thoreau emphasizes the "system's" infringement of personal liberties. MLK incidentally left thoreau's fierce notions of the individual out of his own views of thoreau. maybe that's where you got it from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghideon

I would further state that it is certainly possible for a white person to direct a corporation without any racist policies or practices. But at this point in history I feel confident in saying that if you took IBM and Nestle and Pepsi and GM and somehow demanded that they stop exploiting people of color...they would first deny the exploitation or try and say it is really not that bad at all...they would say that what they were doing was necessary to stay competitive.

And you know what, I would probably agree with them about the last point, at least. I really do not know how to move forward without millions of people going from bad wages to no wages. So I can even sympathize with some corporate struggles. But I still assert that racism is a very destructive dynamic...that corporations participate in racism because it is pretty much built into the current economic system of profit, markets and the creation of commodities. And that it is international.:D :yawnb:

---

there you go again --- this is a perfect example based on what i said in my previous post. how the hell do you know IBM and Nestle and Pepsi and GM are all "exploiting people of color?"

man, you really are an angry white guy! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1jt

oh please! how the hell is a white guy privileged exactly? i have two friends - both white - one has a masters and is collecting unemployment benefits because he got laid off recently as an engineer. the other works construction and has sat in the union hall every morning the past two months unassigned and is living on borrowed money. but they're not whining or spinning theories about a black or latino power structure taking over the world.

this poster is yet another example of internal racism.

admit it: you think affirmative action is a "complex" subject matter too. :sick: :sick:

your local college is offering plenty more of those courses this spring in "women's studies" and "cultural history". (vomit)

---

This post, as do many others of yours, has a lot of anger in it, and I feel like you are personally attacking me when you say "this poster is yet another example of internal racism". You don't even know my race, or anything about me so how can you make this statement? I was simply addressing hierarchy of power which has much more to do than just with race. Race is one element. I listed others. Class is also another one.

A "white guy" is privileged because he can move into almost any neighborhood and be sure he has neighbors that look like he does. He is almost guaranteed to have a boss the same sex and skin color as he does. He can easily turn on the tv and see shows about people the same color as he is. He is priveleged because he could go into a convenience store at midnight and not necessarily be eyed with suspicion. Your "white guy" friend is priveleged because he actually got to go to school and get a Masters (whether or not he's employed). Just because they are not "winers" doesn't mean they are any less privileged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by genoveva

This post, as do many others of yours, has a lot of anger in it, and I feel like you are personally attacking me when you say "this poster is yet another example of internal racism". You don't even know my race, or anything about me so how can you make this statement? I was simply addressing hierarchy of power which has much more to do than just with race. Race is one element. I listed others. Class is also another one. A "white guy" is privileged because he can move into almost any neighborhood and be sure he has neighbors that look like he does. He is almost guaranteed to have a boss the same sex and skin color as he does. He can easily turn on the tv and see shows about people the same color as he is. He is priveleged because he could go into a convenience store at midnight and not necessarily be eyed with suspicion. Your "white guy" friend is priveleged because he actually got to go to school and get a Masters (whether or not he's employed). Just because they are not "winers" doesn't mean they are any less privileged.

This post, as do many others of yours, has a lot of anger in it, and I feel like you are personally attacking me when you say "this poster is yet another example of internal racism". You don't even know my race, or anything about me so how can you make this statement? I was simply addressing hierarchy of power which has much more to do than just with race. Race is one element. I listed others. Class is also another one.

A "white guy" is privileged because he can move into almost any neighborhood and be sure he has neighbors that look like he does. He is almost guaranteed to have a boss the same sex and skin color as he does. He can easily turn on the tv and see shows about people the same color as he is. He is priveleged because he could go into a convenience store at midnight and not necessarily be eyed with suspicion. Your "white guy" friend is priveleged because he actually got to go to school and get a Masters (whether or not he's employed). Just because they are not "winers" doesn't mean they are any less privileged.

---

I write poems not anger. :D

so you think that you can make grandiose statements about "all white men" but i can't make an educated guess that your comment is an example of internal racism? surely ye jest?

if you had read my comments from the first one and not been so busy worrying about trite "anger" innuendos made, you'd figure out that i said quite a lot about internal racism and what it means as applied to you. i wasn't personally attacking you at all - i meant that in the academic sense based on the previous remarks you left.

don't you think that you owe it to people who leave comments to at least read what they have to say on a subject matter before suggesting somebody "personally attacked" you? and let me ask you, how do you suppose to know everything about the white male race (which includes me) based on the comments you made here?

as to my "white friend" 'at least getting the "chance"' to go to college as you put it, the last i checked the US government was giving away huge amount of tax dollars in the form of PELL and Tuition Aid Grants that they are not required to pay back. there's also Stafford Loans with deferment options, etc. and if your academically motivated in high school our generous system actually has quite a number of scholarships. don't you know? i should add that far too many incoming college students have at best a six grade reading level so the government has to coddle them further by setting up remedial programs in an effort to give students basic skills that they should have had if they had only brought home their textbooks in high school. it just so happens that the folks in this category are mostly black and hispanic. so please spare me your suggestion that my white friend is "privileged" and black folks/minorities have little opportunity to obtain the same education as my white male friend because the "system" is somehow holding down the black man. my friend worked his tail off to get where he is and he didn't have any handouts from government either. then again, he's also not the kind of guy who whines about people personally attacking him or that the system is holding him back. :D

It's very interesting to me that i never once met an Asian in the United States who whined about the system holding him/her back, in spite of the harsh treatment and systematic racism once waged by the US government against them via Chinese labor of transcontinental railroads/anti-chinese immigration laws/Japanese detainment camps, WWII. they study hard, go to college, get good-paying jobs, all while overcoming the language barrier. many obtain college scholarships and they're actually proud to be American! and they never petitioned the government in the spirit the black community did to make EBONICS a legal form of black language.

Here is some information from http://www.rc.org/ur/InternalizedRacism.html that may help provide some information regarding what "internalized racism" is, and how it affects people:

INTERNALIZED RACISM

Internalized racism occurs when people targeted by racism are, against their will, coerced and pressured to agree with the distortions of racism. Each of us targeted by racism fights, from childhood on, as long and as hard as we dare, to maintain a sense of ourselves as good, smart, strong, important, and powerful. However, in our societies, racist attitudes are so harsh, so pervasive, and so damaging that each of us is forced at times to turn racism in upon ourselves and seemingly agree with some of the conditioning, internalizing the messages of racism. We come to mistreat ourselves and other members of our group in the same ways that we have been mistreated as the targets of racism.

Examples of internalized racism appear everywhere, for example:

*

Racism has made us think of ourselves or each other as stupid, lazy, unimportant, or inferior.
*

Racism has made us criticize or verbally attack each other, using the racist messages of our societies, or allow others in our group to do so.
*

Racism has made us physically attack or kill each other, playing out our rage about racism at one another.
*

Racism has made us put our individual well-being last. Racism has made us unable to think about our physical and emotional health, making us vulnerable to heart disease, high blood pressure, obesity, diabetes, HIV/AIDS, ulcers, and more.
*

Racism has made us criticize and beat our children in misguided efforts to "discipline" them and keep them from openly displaying pride or pleasure in themselves (attempting to make them less vulnerable to racism, but instead leaving them more beaten down and enraged).
*

Racism has made us feel hopeless, despairing, and angry, which can make us vulnerable to the lure of alcohol and other drugs for "relief" from those feelings, even though we know that this does additional harm to ourselves and our families.
*

Racism has made our various racial groups fight with each other over what seems like a scarcity of resources; racism has made us fight each other in gangs.
*

Racism has made some of our group join racist institutions and take part in carrying out their racist policies against our own people.
*

Racism has made us feel disconnected from other members of our group, or divide or categorize each other by behaviors or lifestyles, believing that some of us are "better" or "more legitimate" than others and that what some others do is "not part of" our cultures.
*

Racism has made us place higher value on members of our group who appear more white, and denigrate those who have darker skin, kinkier hair, or other "less white" features. We also do the reverse--we target those with lighter skins as not being "black enough," not legitimate persons of color.

We are not to blame for any of these attitudes or behaviors, but we can increasingly understand them and take steps to end them and to heal the damage done to us by racism.

HEALING FROM THE DAMAGE INFLICTED BY RACISM AND INTERNALIZED RACISM

To heal from the damage inflicted by racism and internalized racism, we need to tell our stories--how racism has affected our lives, what has happened to us and to our people. We need the chance to openly express our feelings about our experiences of racism. When we do this, the damage done by racism begins to dissipate. We start seeing ourselves as good, smart, strong, complete human beings. We feel and act more powerfully and hopeful about ending racism and other oppressions. We treat each other more respectfully and cooperatively.

For this healing process to work well, we need someone to listen attentively--someone who is sincerely interested, who stays relaxed while we express our emotions, and who encourages us to use the process of emotional release--crying, laughing, trembling, and so on. Any two individuals can agree to take turns listening to each other, without interruption, for a specified amount of time (for example, half an hour each), encouraging each other to share our experiences fully and release our emotions.

United to End Racism has found that safety for healing from internalized racism builds when people meet not only in pairs but also in support groups with others from a similar background or heritage (for example, African or African descendant, Indigenous, Asian or Asian descendant, Chicano/Chicana, Mestizo/Mestiza, or Arab or Arab descendant). In these support groups each member has an equal amount of uninterrupted time to share experiences of racism while the others listen attentively. The support group leader encourages the person talking to express his or her thoughts and feelings. The leader welcomes and encourages the tears, trembling, raging, and laughter that often occur spontaneously as people talk about their struggles with racism.

When we first participate in these groups, internalized racism may cause negative feelings about each other (feelings of distrust, dislike, upset with, and so on) to surface. Members of the group have to make an agreement to not act on the basis of those feelings that would keep us separated from each other.

Questions such as the following can help members of support groups begin to identify and focus on internalized racism:

*

What information about yourself would you like others to know--about your heritage, country of origin, family, class background, and so on?
*

What makes you proud about being a member of this group, and what do you love about other members of this group?
*

What has been hard about being a member of this group, and what don't you like about others in this group?

*

What were your early life experiences with people in this group? How were you treated? How did you feel about others in your group when you were young?

When people are given a chance to talk and express their feelings, internalized racism is directly challenged. As emotions are released, people's negative feelings about themselves and others in their groups begin to disappear. People are able to think more clearly. They can reach for cooperative relationships more easily. Once groups of people have had a chance to meet separately in this way, greater unity and participation are possible when they join with larger, more diverse groups of people.

Support groups can be used in many settings--at the workplace, at school, in religious settings, in the neighborhood. Support groups are increasingly helpful for the participants over time. As the participants get to know each other, they become closer to each other, more supportive of each other, and more open. Even two people can have a support group, taking turns listening to one another. Support groups can also be used for non-race-based groups, such as women, young people, and working-class people.

Wow...thank you so so so much for that wonderful elaboration on internalized racism! Very much appreciated, I'm sure others feel the same.

Thank you dear, I had read this post previously somewhere, twice.
Now this is the third, benefitial.
Thank you

This is the final reminder to everyone contributing to this thread:

Racism is a sensitive enough subject without us personalising our arguments and/or offending those who come from different backgrounds by various generalised remarks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1jt

I write poems not anger. :D

so you think that you can make grandiose statements about "all white men" but i can't make an educated guess that your comment is an example of internal racism? surely ye jest?

Jon1, I do not believe that the statements made as regards white privilige and how it is manifest in the world were "grandiose". Grandiose means that something is exagerated inorder to impress, in this case, the other readers of this thread.

I know that many white men do not "feel" priviliged but that does not mean they are not the recepients of privilige. Just because an individual does not feel something does not, in any way, prove that a certain dynamic, object...does not exist. Certainly the individual or group can be unaware of many aspects of their environment. And in this case, because the US has been led by, governed by, white people for so long a great deal of the privilige is simply...it is like the old fish in the water story where the water is so dominant a reality that the fish does not see it.

This is even more so the case when discussing oppression. If a woman is talking to me about some of the struggles she faces as a woman how can I, as a man, really tell her that she is wrong. I can not. Now obviously if she says that 1,000 men have guns pointed at her she is out of touch with consensual reality and I can certainly confidently know that. But that is really all I can know. There is simply no way that me, as a man, can understand the internal world of a woman in this culture. I probably can only be a bit aware of the external factors in her life but in terms of understand how she experiences this society and what her emotions are about that. I really owe it to her and to myself to take a position of deep humility.

Now from that position of humility one can certainly think critically about any statement anybody makes. But I am trying to lay out a basic format of respect when discussing an oppression that one group faces when you or I are not part of that group.

It is your decision whether or not you want to try and adopt the above perspective. But you are also responsible for refusing to take on a perspective of respect towards others.

if you had read my comments from the first one and not been so busy worrying about trite "anger" innuendos made, you'd figure out that i said quite a lot about internal racism and what it means as applied to you. i wasn't personally attacking you at all - i meant that in the academic sense based on the previous remarks you left.


Jon, when you write statements like "been so busy worrying about trite anger innuendos" you are first off basically saying that someones sense of respect or being the target of un-explained rage are not important...that in your opinion they are making a big deal out of nothing. But this is a huge mistake in a philosophical and personal sense. Again, how you view the world is not how others do and it is not particularly helpful to totally invalidate other peoples views, especially if they are trying to point out how they feel.

Now you have written many times about how people in this thread are lumping all white people together. But what are you doing when you say that you have written a lot about internal racism "and what it means as applied to you"

You barely know the person. But you feel very confident that your general comments about IR apply to her. Lets have it be one way or the other ok? Either there are situations where one can make general statements about a large group of people and, if they mirror objective conditions, such statements can be considered valid. Or not. If you want white people to be thought of with a great deal of respect and thought of both as a group but also as individuals then it would seem prudent to model that approach when you write. You do not do that and it makes me want to know what is really going on.

how do you suppose to know everything about the white male race (which includes me) based on the comments you made here?

If knowing that white men receive priviliges is the same as knowing everything about them then I guess there is not much worth knowing about white men and since I am a white man I most ardently disagree.




it just so happens that the folks in this category are mostly black and hispanic.

It just so happens? What does that mean? Would you be bold enough to say that the economic, educational, societal conditions of black and hispanic people...just so happens. I mean, I can not think of one example where something "just happens." Again, this is a philosophy forum and I do believe in the fundamental logic of cause and effect. I know that there is a great deal that can be discussed about cause and effect but for now lets just accept, for argument sake, that all things have causes. What are the causes for the low educational levels in poor communities and communities of color.

We are not talking about a few isolated cases here. If that were true then your points would have merit. We are talking about the vast percentage of the communities of color in this nation. Now I suppose it is theoretically possible that a repeated and repeated phenomena can "just happen" but I can not come up with one example.


It's very interesting to me that i never once met an Asian in the United States who whined about the system holding him/her back, in spite of the harsh treatment and systematic racism once waged by the US government against them via Chinese labor of transcontinental railroads/anti-chinese immigration laws/Japanese detainment camps, WWII. they study hard, go to college, get good-paying jobs, all while overcoming the language barrier. many obtain college scholarships and they're actually proud to be American! and they never petitioned the government in the spirit the black community did to make EBONICS a legal form of black language.

---

And finally, your ending. It was actually your last paragraph that has inspired me to write back. It is way way out there. Very common, sadly. But not worthy of being tolerated. There is just one slight difference, actually there are hundreds but one key one...one fundamental difference between the historical experience of blacks in the US versus Asian Americans. Blacks were brought here in chains. Now every single brutality that you listed as regards the Asian community is accurate and is important to take into account when thinking about racism towards people from that region. But the simple, unarguable, basic, objective truth is that there is only one group of human beings in the US who can point to chains and slave ships as the absolutely dominant way that people of their race came to America. Irish can not say it. Jews can not. Greeks can not. Chinese can not.

And this has nothing to do with any effort at saying this group is better then that group. Blacks are not better then any other group whatsoever. There are people with black skin that I am friends with and others that I really dislike strongly. The African-American community has certainly made many mistakes throughout its history in the US and it has also brought great benefits and brilliance to the broader US culture.

I simply can not tolerate anybody making the implication, which you did, that black people must lack the inteligence, maturity or work-ethic and that is the cause of their condition.

I read once that anybody who reads fiction "deeply" can not remain prejudiced. I would not go that far but I do believe that fiction more then any other art form exposes the reader to the "lived/felt" experience of people we would never ever meet or get to know. James Baldwin, Richard Wright, Charles Johnson, Ralph Ellison...actually one of the best novels I have ever read is called The Known World. It was considered to be up there with novels written by Faulkner in terms of the quality, power, imagery, imagination of the writing and story. Another book, now that I think of it, is Manchild Of The Promised Land about a young black boy growing up in Harlem, NY. It too is a classic.
:crash:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

This is the final reminder to everyone contributing to this thread:

Racism is a sensitive enough subject without us personalising our arguments and/or offending those who come from different backgrounds by various generalised remarks.

---

And I'm going to tag on a wee little comment onto Scher's already succinctly put comment.. just because someone doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't mean that they are being disrespectful to you. Please discuss the topic and not each other.

I'm so sorry if this thread has caused any distress Scher and Logos, i assure you i intended it as a primarily conceptual discussion using personal experience only to illustrate a theory or point. Sincerest apologies, I'm sure no one intended to stir any conflict.

Ut oh, it's getting hot in here...i see the shiny padlock coming this way! but hold on just yet...i don't think it's necessary because the fact of the matter is some unsupported claims have been waged here against white people, particularly white men. and according to one poster, my position is full of "anger." (ad hominem attacks are often a sign that either you lost the argument or don't have one) the fact is, if i don't believe that white men oppress blacks or receive special privileges and so state my opinion on the matter in the form of a reasoned argument - and you still disagree and generalize rather than address my argument point by point, then go ahead and call me angry. but please allow me do my little soapbox speech and i'll go on my little way. :lol:

my contention is, if you're going to claim that whites are inherently oppressive by virtue of historical circumstance and offer up nothing else, then the claim collapses unto itself. ghideon points to slave ships and the American "institution" of slavery:

But the simple, unarguable, basic, objective truth is that there is only one group of human beings in the US who can point to chains and slave ships as the absolutely dominant way that people of their race came to America. Irish can not say it. Jews can not. Greeks can not. Chinese can not.

then he goes on to take some of the hot air out the remark by saying how blacks aren't "better than other groups." huh?

why bring in this historical evidence then? it is most frequently used to silence the other side and has the added effect of placing the black community in a class of their own as a still oppressed people. how can anyone in good faith say that the United States hasn't tried to reverse the course of its sad history of slavery. from elementary school classrooms to public high schools, the slave issue and its legacy are discussed. african writers have been integrated into the curriculum - some ghideon mentioned, and i agree, they're great books, no denying that. most colleges "require" students to take multicultural electives in addition to World/US which is often top heavy with african/slavery themes. harvard and princeton brought about "African American Studies" and many public colleges followed. great! and there's black history month; the federal government recognizes Kwanza as a major holiday for blacks. There's Martin Luther King Day. (Fact: my undergraduate college recognized MLK as a holiday but not Washington's Birthday. wha? it's true. there's a Congressional Black Caucus (imagine a caucus labeled "white"? :alien:) ) i've talked about affirmative action and how it's denied tens of thousands of whites a college seat in first and second-choice schools.

next, ghideon accuses me of implying that blacks are unintelligent---why? because i praised the asian community's work ethic. i was praising a people who have overcome many obstacles (including racism---ghideon seems to neglect the fact that the US fought against Vietnam and Korea and a deep animosity existed in this country in the early 20th century with Chinese exclusion period and especially post-Vietnam.

***ghideon mentioned howard zinn's name, but failed to account that Zinn has been an outspoken critic of Americans who don't know enough history, which also lends to the distortions that fuel racial conflict. Cornel West and David McCullough have said the same.***

ghideon says,
I simply can not tolerate anybody making the implication, which you did, that black people must lack the inteligence, maturity or work-ethic and that is the cause of their condition.

fact of the matter is the black community is fragmenting and i think it's a good thing -- more and more blacks are dissociating themselves from the stereotypical black who bemoans the "system" and many have fled the cities to the suburbs with advanced degrees in hand to start a new life. and the other half labels them "sell outs" and they chastise black intellectuals who take a more nuanced view of the issue and say "enough already" about the slavery argument and "rights" (e.g. the ridicule of black scholar Shelby Steele).

ghideon says:
"I know that many white men do not "feel" priviliged but that does not mean they are not the recepients of privilige."

wha? :crash:


[I]there's a double standard when it comes to, on the one hand, blacks who, in ghideon fashion, invoke American slavery to link the past to the present day notion of a white supremacy, and on the other hand, whites who are tired of hearing the same old song that we're somehow privileged and want to make a case against it.

I think a great deal of the problem is misperception. population figures don't lie. the fact of the matter is whites are the MAJORITY in the United States. (it's interesting that ghideon mentioned early on that whites were the MINORITY globally. it's disingenuous to make such a claim in the same breath one invokes American slavery to support his claim against white men oppressing blacks today.

Population of the United States by Race and Hispanic/Latino Origin, Census [CENTER]2000 and July 1, 2005Race and Hispanic/Latino origin July 1, 2005,
population1 Percent of
population Census 2000,
population Percent of
population
Total Population 296,410,404 100.0% 281,421,906 100.0%
Single race
White 237,854,954 80.2 211,460,626 75.1
Black or African American 37,909,341 12.8 34,658,190 [B]12.3 [/B]
American Indian and Alaska Native 2,863,001 1.0 2,475,956 0.9
Asian 12,687,472 4.3 10,242,998 3.6
Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander 516,612 0.2 398,835 0.1
Two or more races 4,579,024 1.5 6,826,228 2.4
Some other race n.a.2 n.a. 15,359,073 5.5
Hispanic or Latino 42,687,224 14.4 35,305,818 12.5
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, National Population Estimates.

Quote:

---

unsupported claims have been waged here against white people, particularly white men. and according to one poster, my position is full of "anger."

---

If I wrote that your posts are "full of anger" then I apologize. It would have been better if I had said "When reading your posts I become angry. There are some statements that you make that "seem" to be motivated by some strong feelings. I would not say, even if I may have done so in the past, "that your posts are full of anger." And even if they were that does not demand that I become angry by reading them.

Quote:

---

how can anyone in good faith say that the United States hasn't tried to reverse the course of its sad history of slavery.

---

I do not recall saying that this nation has not tried. But if I seemed to imply that then that was an error.

What I would say is that whatever efforts that the institutions and individuals of this nation have made in an effort to undo, reverse the course of its history of slavery have, up to this point, been inadequate.

I would say that because of the suffering I have seen around me I feel it is vital that people think about what others steps can be taken to once and for all end racism, or at the very least minimize its brutality and prevalence. I believe that there are other steps that can be taken. What they are specifically I do not know just yet. But one of the challenges in this post is that, at least for me, I see a huge problem every day in my ordinary life and I feel rather urgent about dealing with it effectively.

You have a different perspective. Neither one is bettern then the other. It is simply that if one person is passionately dedicated to ending what he sees as a crisis and he is talking to another individual who does not think there is a crisis or that what problems exist are not nearly as horrible... If that dynamic occurs it is going to be difficult to find common ground. I do believe there is common ground between people of very different backgrounds and that finding those areas of agreement is not only helpful in any discussion but vital when two or more parties have such different assesments of a situation.

I think we have are taught to hunt for what we disagree with when we are in discussions. This seems to be one of the basic modes of Western argument but I am begining to have serious doubts about its actual value in many cases. There is something to be said for critical thinking, logical arguments, building arguments and then having those arguments challenged. But there is also something to be said for developing modes of discourse that promote cooperation, that focus more on listening and less on speaking and that have ways to repatedly remind the participants in a discussion that what is of most importance is that despite the myriad of differences what we share is our humanness.
;)