Racism

[Scheherazade]

W a r n i n g

Posts containing personal comments will be deleted without further notice.

Please discuss the topic, not each other.

[Emil Miller]

Which brings me to a post I must respond to…

If you are actually suggesting that black students are “temperamentally unsuited to intellectual pursuits” then you are sadly mistaken. That is not only an intolerable but an irrational stance. Oh, but perhaps my black colleagues will be thrilled to know that they can count as one of the “few obvious exceptions?” I hardly think there’s anything more to say except that this statement is wrong.

The whole purpose of this, or any other forum, is that members can agree to disagree and we must each form our opinions on the basis of our own experiences rather than be conditioned by those of others, which may be different to our own.

[Petrarch's Love]

Now, don't take this the wrong way, but what if it's true?

Again, I will resort to the example of Maori. Despite affirmative action by universities and government departments, graduation rates for Maori remain appallingly low. They have been passed by another racial group - Samoans - despite Samoans clearly having to overcome racism, low socio-economic status and lack of privileges.

I don't necessarily agree with Brian, but the potential that some races are suited to certain pursuits is compelling. Otherwise, how do we explain Ashkenazi Jews, whose outstanding IQs and successes in science and Nobel Prizes are factual? Given the small size of their populations, genetic mix through inbreeding should be weakening the strain, not strengthening it.

There are very few absolute statements that I would make without feeling that there was some justice for an alternate point of view. Saying that a person's race has nothing to do with their intelligence or other moral or intellectual traits is one of those few statements that I will say and will continue to say absolutely. As Drkshadow has pointed out, there are many possible factors such as a difference in cultural attitudes and upbringing that could and do influence differences in success that appear to be linked to race. I don't know much about the Maori, but I know that people sometimes make similar statements regarding the academic success of Asian Americans versus African Americans in this country, and there are indeed many cultural factors, both external and within the communities of these respective groups, that are far more likely to be the cause of a gap in performance than a difference between races.

[amarna]

I don't know how old you are but I have noticed that you live in East Germany. Therefore, it is quite possible that you have received a communist education, which runs contrary to the western experience.

Silly me. And I thought I'd have to be black to be unsuited to intellectual pursuits.

[The Atheist]

sorry for being unfriendly but i was angry.

Why?

well, i certainly will not spend my time for argueing with someone whom i suspect being a wannabe top dog and who is not willing to respect (i do not mean agree with) my point of view. that would serve no purpose.

I find the "wannabe top dog" pretty insulting as well. So far, I have tried to deal with the subject on an evidentiary basis, and have concluded that we have "no idea".

But in the circumstances, I agree that going no further is a good idea as it seems to be stiking a personal chord with you. I'd love to know why, but c'est la vie.

The G-d you don't believe in made us that way! J/K

(there's a smiley face you don't believe in either).

On a more serious note, I still think culture (read: nurture) plays a major role in all this. In Jewish communities you're constantly encouraged by family and the larger community to either pursue law, accounting, banking, medicine, or higher education. I am still not convinced Jews are genetically predisposed to be smarter than everyone else, except for me of course.

You could be right, but then again, the centuries of deprivation should have meant that those traits failed if there was absolute truth in the nurture scenario.

Saying that a person's race has nothing to do with their intelligence or other moral or intellectual traits is one of those few statements that I will say and will continue to say absolutely. As Drkshadow has pointed out, there are many possible factors such as a difference in cultural attitudes and upbringing that could and do influence differences in success that appear to be linked to race.

Why do you take an absolute stand on it then? You're supported by no hard evidence and there is no more or less basis for certainty on the subject than many others. I'm sure upbringing is a major factor, but I'm equally sure it isn't the only one. We have sufficient examples of different outcomes from the same upbringing to show that it isn't just that.

I don't know much about the Maori, but I know that people sometimes make similar statements regarding the academic success of Asian Americans versus African Americans in this country, and there are indeed many cultural factors, both external and within the communities of these respective groups, that are far more likely to be the cause of a gap in performance than a difference between races.

Again, you could well be right, but I'm not ready to rule genes out just yet.

[Petrarch's Love]

The whole purpose of this, or any other forum, is that members can agree to disagree and we must each form our opinions on the basis of our own experiences rather than be conditioned by those of others, which may be different to our own.

I gather you objected to the fact that my post was worded as a statement rather than an opinion? I will rephrase: It is my opinion that any person who values tolerance toward others, wishes to see a society as free as possible from bigotry, and has spent any time at all interacting with people of different races from their own should find the statement that, due to their race, black students are “temperamentally unsuited to intellectual pursuits” a wrong statement.

Brian--In all my other interactions with you on these forums I have found you an intelligent, reasonable and well intentioned person whose opinions I may or not agree with but can, none-the-less respect. I do not intend my posts as a personal attack on you as a person but on the view that you suggested with that line. If I have in some way misunderstood the view that you were trying to convey, if there is some more nuanced thinking there than what I am following, then by all means correct me. If you are trying to say that some groups perform less well than others based on their race, then this is an opinion that I deeply believe it is very important for myself and others to speak out against. Surely you are aware of the line of thinking and action concession or silence regarding such a statement could open up? Surely you have noticed that statements like this have been made about all sorts of groups in the past and then subsequently proven untrue? I'm not sure I quite follow what you mean about being "conditioned" by another's opinion, except that, as I said above, you objected to my phrasing my response as an absolute statement rather than an opinion. I did not intend to "condition" you, but to make a public statement condemning an opinion I feel is deeply wrong. I also do not really follow what you mean about not letting another person's experience change the opinion you have formed from your own experience. If we all formed opinions based on personal experience of the world alone we would be very narrow people indeed. That said, it is possible that I do not understand the form of experience that would lead a person to make a statement such as the one I objected to and to think that's a reasonable thing to say. Perhaps you could explain why this is a view you feel the need to defend, either here or via PM?

[Emil Miller]

[QUOTE=Petrarch's Love;758305]There are very few absolute statements that I would make without feeling that there was some justice for an alternate point of view. Saying that a person's race has nothing to do with their intelligence or other moral or intellectual traits is one of those few statements that I will say and will continue to say absolutely.

Which you are perfectly free to do so, except that it doesn't invalidate beliefs held to the contrary by others whose experience may be different to your own.

[billl]

Here are a few thoughts about how we might find reason for believing that racism is still negatively impacting minoritites in the U.S. and other places, despite an official end to obviously racist laws and the enactment of laws outlawing discrimination. The capital letters are just an attempt to organize this long post, sorry for the weighty or shouty appearance.

CONQUERED PEOPLES
The native populations in the U.S., Canada, and (well, i did 10 minutes of Wikipedia research) New Zealand have suffered similar fates in many ways. They all have higher than average rates of suicide, alcoholism, unemployment, and child/spouse abuse. They all have lost land to the colonizing people. They all have, to certain extents, had their cultures and languages devalued and discouraged. I think it would be fair to say that there is a certain "demoralization" involved in having one's land occupied by foreigners, and seeing one's culture fade in significance. I think that this sort of demoralizing history and a sort-of cultural confusion (at best) probably accounts for the similar outcomes, moreso than any genetic link between the groups.
NOTE: I'm using the word "demoralization" strictly in the sense that the word "morale" is used other more conventional contexts, such as in a military unit. I mean it as a substitute for the not-quite-right-word "humiliation."

I also saw Samoans mentioned in this discussion (in comparison to the Maori), but they are different from the others discussed above in that they are the majority population on their home islands. I haven't looked into the case of the Australian Aborigines. If anyone can add anything regarding that case, or any others, I think it'd be interesting to hear.


THE LEGACY OF INSTITUTIONALIZED RACISM
It wasn't until 1965 that African-Americans were protected from discriminating voting policies (such as literacy tests coupled with grandfather clauses allowing white illiterates to vote, as well as inconvenient polling times/locations, etc) and other Jim Crow laws that allowed separation of races at various facilities (schools, bathrooms, restaurants, etc.). Only a few generations (in the South, in fact; and in the North, in spirit) have lived free from those circumstances, and I think it is perfectly reasonable (as amarna pointed out) to say that they are still finding their feet.

Native Americans were cruelly (the word doesn't do it justice) herded into Reservations, mostly in deserts, often very far from the non-desert homelands of the particular tribes. The political relations between those on the reservations and the U.S. government were, of course, uneven to begin with, and can only be said to have been improved at the rate of the government's shame. Of course, for all I know the worst mistakes were made by tribal leaders. But I think the crushing poverty and hopelessness of the reservations can hardly be viewed as unrelated to the history of their removal from their lands, and their sad escape from what was, arguably, genocide by the inheritors of their land. In many ways, the unfair agreements (many long since broken) made between Native Americans and the expanding U.S. gov't are still oppressing those people.


FOR THOSE (earlier in the thread) DISCUSSING INSTITUTIONALIZED RACISM
Affirmative Action Laws in the U.S. could actually be described, I think, as Institutionalized Racism practiced in order to combat previous Institutionalized (and contemporary informal) Racism (see above). It's a messy thing, but I think it was the best idea for dealing with the problem. It is what gave Barack Obama and Colin Powell and many others (professor Gates, too, I imagine, I'm not sure) the opportunity to take their place on our national stage.

Those who recoil at these policies have a good point, I think. In the end, Obama and Powell made it because of their efforts and abilities. However, at the time of those efforts, affirmative action policies opened doors that would otherwise almost certainly have been closed to them, owing to the momentum of discrimination that was, in fact, perfectly legal not many years earlier. I can tell you from experience, this makes for some uncertainty and perceived injustice in hiring, no matter how perfect and unbiased the process might be. The necessity for affirmative action could only ever recede along an uncomfortable and often suspicious course, and it's understandably difficult for everyone to agree on when it should end.

Also, on a slightly different tack: I am always surprised by it, but it seems that every year I hear some story, maybe about a golf course/club that Tiger Woods has managed to shame into ending its discriminatory membership policies, or a high school dance where the students band together to break with history and stop having separate proms for blacks and whites (a prom is the most important social dance in U.S. high schools, and I saw this news story just a year or two ago...). Old habits die hard in some communities/social circles, and I see no reason to doubt they wouldn't continue in certain workplaces--and whether one should call that "institutionalized" or not is something that people might disagree about, but I don't know if the semantics are as important as the situation itself.



I am an American, and (upon reflection) I am pleased to say that, I have worked for White, African-American, Asian, and Latino managers. I have also managed members of those races, as well as an Arab. And I've worked alongside immigrants from a wide variety of countries.

I have also seen instances of conflict based entirely on race, among employers, employees, and customers. However, I see progress happening, and my overall experience is strongly-colored by the amazingly rewarding feeling I've gotten when individuals (in particular, strangers) from different ends of these ugly issues are able to recognize that they have managed to rise above, and smile at each other--mission accomplished! Well, not quite. But still

[Jozanny]

As contrary as my thinking may be on this subject, and yes, I have tortured myself over it long before any incidents make themselves topics of international discussions, I would be very wary about making any generalized statements about human intelligence on the basis of broad physical (or genetic) traits, or even in contextualized circumstances: I might be able to wade through Petrarch's dissertation with more verbal acuity than a drug dealer working Huntington Ave--but put me on that corner five minutes before a turf dispute, and then ask who has the better survival capacity--the stout middle aged and half cocked disabled woman, or the dealer?

Intelligence in and of itself is a dicey metric, and it gets explosive with the social fiction of race thrown into it.

[billl]

Well-said Jozanny. Sometimes grammar, standardized tests, etc. count for nothing. And it'd be natural for the child of that drug dealer (or their customer's child) to develop similar skills.

[The Atheist]

Here are a few thoughts about how we might find reason for believing that racism is still negatively impacting minoritites in the U.S. and other places, despite an official end to obviously racist laws and the enactment of laws outlawing discrimination. The capital letters are just an attempt to organize this long post, sorry for the weighty or shouty appearance.

Good post, cogent points. You might even be right!

I also saw Samoans mentioned in this discussion (in comparison to the Maori), but they are different from the others discussed above in that they are the majority population on their home islands. I haven't looked into the case of the Australian Aborigines. If anyone can add anything regarding that case, or any others, I think it'd be interesting to hear.

I should have clarified with Samoans; I was being NZ-centric.

More Samoans live in Auckland than Samoa. They were brought out here as low-income workers during the 1960s and '70s as NZ underwent a boom and there weren't enough people to do the menial tasks. They started from well behind the 8-ball, but have passed [vastly more privileged] Maori in graduation rates and other social indicators. Samoa itself is a horrible mess - although still delightful place - beset by all sorts of political intrigue, as are many Polynesian islands. Note, the Samoa I refer to is Western Samoa, not that place which is still an American protectorate.

As to Aussie Aboriginals, they have easily faced the worst racism, having been shot on sight within the last century - without penalty - and have only had Australian citizenship since the 1960s, even though they'd been in Australia for about 30 or 40 centuries prior to the white man's arrival.

You want true horror stories? Apart from the number of dead, what happened the Aboriginals makes the Holocaust look tame.

As contrary as my thinking may be on this subject, and yes, I have tortured myself over it long before any incidents make themselves topics of international discussions, I would be very wary about making any generalized statements about human intelligence on the basis of broad physical (or genetic) traits, or even in contextualized circumstances: ...

Intelligence in and of itself is a dicey metric, and it gets explosive with the social fiction of race thrown into it.

Being a science nut, the idea of genetics really does strike a chord with me. Geneticists will point to the human genome and say that it's impossible to tell one "race" from another by typing DNA, and they generally refuse to acknowledge that race actually exists outside of culture/human construct.

Yet, we know for certain that some races have genetic traits - mainly weaknesses - which apply only to that race of people. Given that some of these things - Bright's Disease for instance, the Samoans again! - are not connected to socio-economic status, nutrition or location, I find it hard to accept.

(In your scenario, I'll have $5 on the dealer!)

[billl]

Thanks for the response tA, especially the Australia insights.

[Scheherazade]

F i n a l W a r n i n g

Posts containing personal comments will be deleted without further notice.

Such posts will lead temporary or permanent thread closure.

Please discuss the topic, not each other.

[amarna]

Please discuss the topic, not each other.

with pleasure.

[bouquin]

I am southeast Asian. A few years ago I went from London to Los Angeles, California on a British Airways flight. When I got into the terminal at LAX (just before arriving at Immigration) there was a man there in some sort of military uniform who pointed his finger at me and said, "You! Come over here!"
Before acquiescing I just had time to look about me in order to ascertain that it was indeed me that he was calling at and I noticed that I was the only Asian in that small wave of passengers making our way through that airport corridor, all the others were Caucasian-looking. I went up to the fellow, he checked my passport and then let me go.
So now my question is, why did he zero in on me? Did my race play a role in his decision to check?