Racism

[blazeofglory]

OK this is my first time starting a new thread so please bear with me

I know that not all the facts are known about the issue with the harvard professor but the whole thing got me thinking about race relations. Are people too quick to cry 'racism'?

In this particular incident it is hard to believe the man was arrested for being black and easier to belive that he was just being rude to the cops. I live in britain and no matter who you are, if you are rude, aggressive or disorderly towards the police you get arrested.

What im asking is this
Doesnt crying 'racism' over trivial issues like this cause further strains on race relations? I would hate to see a world where police are to afraid to arrest someone because they dont share the same skin colour.

And how will we ever be able to resolve and get past racism if everytime something goes wrong for a member of a minority they blame everyone else instead of taking responsibility for their own lives?

In point of fact it is a very interesting thread, and I hope that people take it seriously as the world is divided between racist ideas.

[Scheherazade]

The OP:

OK this is my first time starting a new thread so please bear with me

I know that not all the facts are known about the issue with the harvard professor but the whole thing got me thinking about race relations. Are people too quick to cry 'racism'?

In this particular incident it is hard to believe the man was arrested for being black and easier to belive that he was just being rude to the cops. I live in britain and no matter who you are, if you are rude, aggressive or disorderly towards the police you get arrested.

What im asking is this
Doesnt crying 'racism' over trivial issues like this cause further strains on race relations? I would hate to see a world where police are to afraid to arrest someone because they dont share the same skin colour.

And how will we ever be able to resolve and get past racism if everytime something goes wrong for a member of a minority they blame everyone else instead of taking responsibility for their own lives?

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Not sure how this discussion, according to the OP, isn't supposed to be political.

[cacian]

Racism runs deeper then you think but it is not always black and white.
Racism transcend skin colour age gender and beliefs. Think nazis and then thing of the Jews.
Racism can be hard to shift if everything around you is pointing the wrongs from the rights turning people into numbers and labels. Words such as miniorities ethnicities and tick boxes with labelling people into genders sexuality race and so on. All these small words play very big in the mind of an individual. It teaches the person to see people under a different light make people aware of different people from them.
Countries with different flags each usually indicate separatism and can send messages of conflicts.
All this reminds me of farmers paiting their sheep a certain colour to distinguish them from other sheep.
It is a devisive mechanism that has dire consequences and one of them is definetely racism.

Take the Olympics for example it is an individualistic driven sport. Althought it appears grand and brings people together its main focus is to race one human agaisnt another.
The flip side of the Olympics is that idnividuals are instructed to compete against each others as a mean to achieve success and gold. It is quite a harsh lonesome task because the athlete is on his/her own against the elements.
Then focus is on THREE winners only.
The question is this:
What about the rest? the ones that participated and made it possible for the THREEs to win. Without this rest winning would not materialise. In other words you cannot have winners if there are no losers.
I do think about this majority, in this case the losers, the ones that did not make to the top three ,and I wonder about how they must have felt/feel not having a say/consideration or even an acknowledgment of their presence efforts and endurance in the sports they took part in.
Olympics is quick to reward and quick to forget.
That is what I mean by individualism is that it eventually drives others to drop out.

Another thought.
Think of the word RIGHT it means something the law sets out to give out to individuals as a form of protection but agaisnt whom? one group of people against another group of people.
The idead of ''my right to do this and my right to do that'' only emphasises a type of conflict which may go against another social group which often leads to sanctions and people pursuing other people for the sake of their rights. Suing and the Law is what makes the concept of RIGHTS a bit shaky.

but then there is the same word appearing in FAR RIGHT.
It also appears as the opposite of the word LEFT.
It is a word that implies tension and resistance does it not?

[Basil]

That's a good point, Cacian.

[Basil]

Racism runs deeper then you think but it is not always black and white.
Racism transcend skin colour age gender and beliefs. Think nazis and then thing of the Jews.
Racism can be hard to shift if everything around you is pointing the wrongs from the rights turning people into numbers and labels. Words such as miniorities ethnicities and tick boxes with labelling people into genders sexuality race and so on. All these small words play very big in the mind of an individual. It teaches the person to see people under a different light make people aware of different people from them.
Countries with different flags each usually indicate separatism and can send messages fo conflcits.
All this reminds me of farmers paiting their sheep a certain colour to distinguish them from other sheep.
It is a devisive mechanism that has dire consequences and one of them is definetely racism.
Take the Olympics for example it is an individualistic driven sport. Althought it appears grand and brings people together its main focus is to race one human agaisnt another.
The flip side of the Olympics is that idnividual are instructed to against others individual as a mean to achieve success and gold. It is quite a harsh lonesome task because the athlete is one his/her own against the elements.
Then focus is on THREE winners only.
The question is this:
What about the rest the ones that participated and made it possible for the THREEs to win. Without this rest winning would not materialise. In other words you cannot have winners if there are no losers.
I do think about this majority. in this case the losers, the ones that did not make to the top three ,and I wonder about how they must have felt/feel not having a say/consideration or even an acknowledgment of their presence efforts and endurance in the sports they took part in.
Olympics is quickto reward and quick to forget.
That is what I mean by individualism is that it eventually drives others to drop out.

Another thought.
Think of the word RIGHT it means something the law sets out to give out to individuals as a form of protection but agaisnt whom? one group of people against another group of people.
The idead of ''my right to do this and my right to do that'' only emphasises a type of conflict which may go against another social group which often leads to sanctions and people pursuing other people for the sake of their rights. Suing and the Law is what makes the concept of RIGHTS a bit shaky.

but then there is the same word apperaing in FAR RIGHT.
It also appears as the opposite of the word LEFT.
It is a word that implies tension and resistance does it not?

Some well thought out commentary here.

[Basil]

I liked the part about sheep being painted different colors. That really made me think.

[tonywalt]

I guess you're asking whether class trumps race? I don't think it does because society and institutions are organized in ways that privilege whites. For example, when an Asian or Latino individual is promoted to a prestigious post, there is always widespread surprise. It is generally not expected that racialized individuals would excel in certain fields. This reinforces the notion that minorities are 'below' whites. Even if whites and minorities share the same socioeconomic class, the white person may still feel superior because the Hong Konger (in your example) is considered to be an anomaly, whereas he himself is considered to be the norm.

The whole Majority/Minority is not the material issue. Asians (certainly those of the Orient) are an ecomically dominant minority wherever they are-even as a minority. Lebananse - same thing. Jewish - same thing. Whites - same thing. I can given you dozens of countries and examples that I visit and know very well.

In many countries the Asians are oppressed and taxed unfairly. (Indonesia for example - they burn down Chinese commerical/private property every decade or so). And I know of their history in Indonesia.

The question is not why Certain groups are poor/disenfranchised Rather the real question is why are certain ethnic groups so successful-even with persecution(or without it) as minorities or majorites? It has everything and everything to do with their work ethic, natural intelligence, family structure and network, discipline, and application to skill that causes them to succeed.

Now, most people are going to disagree, but that's no bother. It's what people privately think and do not say that really matters. What people say at cocktail parties is hardly as important as what they are not saying.