2023 Thread of Racism in America

[Satchel 6982]

47 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Racism is just tribalism made easy.

Tribalism has a distinct biological and evolutionary advantage....until it doesn't.  Once we shrank the globe/created pluralist societies, a way of doing things that was once advantageous is now destructive.  Lots of things are like that.  Would be nice if we weren't too stupid to figure it out.  But, sadly, we are.

Maybe, but I think it’s deeper than that. 
Recently I had a chance to reconnect with some of the nuns who taught me and my siblings. Most of these women came to the US from Ireland as teens to join a community dedicated to the education of black and brown children throughout the South. (In todays parlance, their order would be considered very woke.) While preparing to watch the live stream funeral Mass of one of my favorite teachers, I spent a minute perusing the obituaries of some of the other nuns I had known. I will admit to be somewhat surprised by the number of these very elderly women who included the “Black Lives Matter” declaration as part of their final testimonies. Imagine, if you will, my shock after learning that they educated the black child who would later become a founding member of first community of black women religious. This was notable only because she was not allowed to join the community that nurtured, taught and spiritually formed her, because she was black. I don’t get how this type of internal dissonance could exist, given the established Christian charism of these women.  Racism just doesn’t make sense.
 

[Catdaddyhorn 3462]

38 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I don't know that I'd say there is a genetic disposition towards racial conflict as much as I'd say there is a genetic disposition towards tribal formations. It just so happens that one of the easiest is to identify based on appearance, for obvious reasons. 

But if you go back and look at human history and pre history through the fossil record, there is absolutely evidence of tribal conflict which ended in extermination. Certainly species conflict, such as with Homo Erectus and Neanderthals, to name two of the most prominent. 

Name one society that has successfully navigated multiple tribes making up their composition over their entire history. At some point they all break down into some form of tribal conflict. And those are only the ones that actually manage to incorporate multiple tribes in the first place. The vast preponderance of successful societies have been mostly homogenous, or with a clear and permanent delineation between those in power, and those who are not. With often violent results when that power dynamic one day dramatically shifts.  

The United States is by far the country that has historically navigated multiple tribes the most successfully. And yet we concentrate on how terrible we've been. For good reason. We have aspirations to do better than we have. That's not a bad thing. That's a good thing. But it doesn't belie the fact that history has not looked favorably in trying to incorporate multiple tribes into a functioning society in more a less a collaborative process. It's extremely difficult and challenging, to the point of saying it hasn't really been done all that well. Ever. 

My point is not that we can't overcome racism. My point is that there is a natural disposition for tribal identity, and that one of those significant tribes is our racial history. So there has to be an extreme conscious effort by everyone involved to overcome that natural disposition. And what we have instead, based on my observations, is a growing reluctance to overcome that, and a big part of that growing reluctance is the narrative being put forth by people who are ostensibly trying to fight racism. 

 

What happened with the tribal conflict that existed between white Americans and the Irish, Italians, Eastern Euros, et al? At some point a collective decision was made to grant entrance to all those ethnic white groups into greater white America. For some reason there's been a refusal to do the same for black Americans. Part of it is because of our fictitious adherence to racial categories and visible skin differences. Most black Americans have anywhere from 15% to 60% European ancestry. This tribe you keep referring to is wholly created through the American project.  For the most part, as human beings we're dumb in how we ascribe skin color as a function of the majority of genetic differences. Black American have more genetic similarities to white Americans than they do with an African from Zimbabwe, despite the similarities in skin color. The "otherizing" of black Americans in this country in everything from what we learn as school children and the manner in which we learn, to the segregation and exclusion from various aspects of American life goes a long way towards creating what you see as tribal differences. It's a tribe only in the socially constructed American sense of the word, not due to any 1000 year differences that we couldn't possibly overcome. 

Edited February 25, 2023 by Catdaddyhorn

[lemonlime 5503]

2 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

I

Of course, I also don't believe we can actually end racism. The most effective way to end racism in my mind is to create more of a homogenous community through interracial marriage/breeding. It's harder to be racist when your grandchild is another race. Not impossible. But harder. But what we can do is consciously choose to draw our tribal affiliations along lines other than race. But that has its own unintended consequences. For example, we always talk about anti Semitism, but the source of anti Semitism is a group of people who isolate themselves from the wider community in very important ways - one of them being not marrying outside the tribe. As long as they don't hold power or influence, they can be seen as harmless, although likely discardable. But as soon as Jews grew to have power and influence on some level, they immediately became targets of suspicion and violence. As someone who considers myself a rabid philosemitist, the last thing I want is for Jews to give up their identity, intermarry with non Jews to the point where they're assimilated into the wider culture, until there's no such thing as Jewish culture and identity remaining. However, without that they will always encounter some level of racism, because they set themselves apart in ways that when they hold power it's going to naturally create resentment, envy, and a sense that we're not all on a level playing field, regardless of merit. 

 

What in the actual fuck?  And, seriously, on a day in which Nazis have declared a Day of Hate against Jews,  and in recent years for the first time in my life when I'm uneasy telling people that I'm Jewish, you're complaining that the problem is we're too insular.   After leaving my synagogue this morning, which required extra security, a few weeks after another synagogue down the road had a Molotov cocktail thrown at it, I really, really don't want to be lectured about how I'm too insular.

And IMO philosemitism is just a method of Jewish othering.  

 

[SL Xpress 7608]

5 minutes ago, safe sex said:

I've appreciated a lot in your recent posts, but cannot eyeroll enough at this. This is not a real thing. Holy shit.

We can agree to disagree. 

There are different phrases used. The male patriarchy. Institutional racism, and the underpinning that black people cannot be racist towards white people because they're not in control of the power structures. The Atlantic article I cited above, where the repression going on in South Africa right now has at its roots the system of apartheid, rather than as I believe, it's inherent in gaining power. 

At its root there is a narrative that there's something special about whites being racist, as opposed to it's a mindset that is natural to our species, and is exhibited every time one tribe achieves power over another. When Idi Amin famously took over in Uganda and kicked out all the Indians who made up a significant portion of the merchant class. When the Hutus massacred the Tutsis. The Chinese wiping out the Uyghurs. The Aztecs and Mayans making slaves and sacrifices out of neighboring tribes. The Hindus deporting long time citizens from India and attacking evangelizing Christians. Not to mention the massacres of Muslims. The rapid extinction of indigenous tribes in the Amazon forest. The Orthodox Jews gutting school district funding in East Ramapo. 

None of these are okay.

White racism is not okay. But there is not something special about whites that makes them more prone to racism than anyone else. And that is absolutely a part of the narrative. It's just that whites are the ones in power in this country, and so when we act in ways that disadvantage other races - particularly people of color - we're being racist in the way people have always been racist. It's a problem, and we need to work to overcome it. But there's nothing peculiar about our whiteness that makes us more racist than the next person. 

 

[SL Xpress 7608]

5 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

What in the actual fuck?  And, seriously, on a day in which Nazis have declared a Day of Hate against Jews,  and in recent years for the first time in my life when I'm uneasy telling people that I'm Jewish, you're complaining that the problem is we're too insular.   After leaving my synagogue this morning, which required extra security, a few weeks after another synagogue down the road had a Molotov cocktail thrown at it, I really, really don't want to be lectured about how I'm too insular.

And IMO philosemitism is just a method of Jewish othering.  

 

Is that what I'm doing? Lecturing you?

If Jewish people weren't insular they wouldn't exist any more. There's no other cultural identity that has continued to exist without a homeland for 2000 years. No one even close. There's no other diaspora that even approaches Jewish success by virtually any metric. 

But Jewish people create an other through that identity. That's inherent. And since they're such a successful minority, it creates friction everywhere they've ever settled. If you want to blame me in some way for pointing out that dynamic, go ahead. I don't give a shit. It's not going to change how I feel about Jews, which is a bit akin to awe. Your experiences are your own. I'm sorry you're having to go through what you're going through simply to practice your faith and identify the way you want. What I am saying is that Jewish people will experience some form of anti Semitism for as long as they exist, because it's part and parcel with that insular identity. It's been that way anywhere they've settled. It's even that way in people's approach and views toward Israel. I'm not responsible for it. I'm simply identifying it. You want to be mad at me go right ahead. 

[SL Xpress 7608]

16 minutes ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

What happened with the tribal conflict that existed between white Americans and the Irish, Italians, Eastern Euros, et al? At some point a collective decision was made to grant entrance to all those ethnic white groups into greater white America. For some reason there's been a refusal to do the same for black Americans. Part of it is because of our fictitious adherence to racial categories and visible skin differences. Most black Americans have anywhere from 15% to 60% European ancestry. This tribe you keep referring to is wholly created through the American project.  For the most part, as human beings we're dumb in how we ascribe skin color as a function of the majority of genetic differences. Black American have more genetic similarities to white Americans than they do with an African from Zimbabwe, despite the similarities in skin color. The "otherizing" of black Americans in this country in everything from what we learn as school children and the manner in which we learn, to the segregation and exclusion from various aspects of American life goes a long way towards creating what you see as tribal differences. It's a tribe only in the socially constructed American sense of the word, not due to any 1000 year differences that we couldn't possibly overcome. 

But it's not just white Americans that do this. The black community has often famously favored light skinned blacks. 

Visible differences in appearances is an easy way to distinguish ourselves from one another that doesn't take the kind of work things like identifying other tribal connections or differences do.

As far as tribal conflicts among Irish, Italians, Eastern Euros, are we trying to pretend they didn't exist? "At some point a collective decision was made to grant entrance to all those ethnic white groups into greater white America." You make it seem like it was easy. It took a lot of work, and on some level a collective decision being made by the children of those immigrants to lessen their identity as associated with their country of origin. 

It's a little tougher if you're 40% African and 60% European to let go of your ancestry. It's right there on your face. 

"For the most part, as human beings we're dumb in how we ascribe skin color as a function of the majority of genetic differences."

I couldn't agree with you more. Even more than that, if there were some kind of genetic differences, it's not even remotely helpful to emphasize them.

All of our brains work the same way. They're all a pretty standard size, with the same parts to them. We all have the same kinds of connective materials. After we're born, an amazing part of our ability to reach our potential is embedded in how rich and stimulating an environment we're raised in. You have bullshit like The Bell Curve, which is simply another way of dehumanizing people of color in favor of reinforcing the sense of entitlement the people who already control the power structure possess. 

"It's a tribe only in the socially constructed American sense of the word, not due to any 1000 year differences that we couldn't possibly overcome." 

When you and I use the word tribe, I don't think we use it the same way. I use it to describe an instinctual need we have to form associations that have meaning to us with fellow human beings. So, for example, you and I are part of the Longhorn tribe, and part of our bond is that we vilify people who are part of the Sooner tribe. I am part of the iPhone tribe, and there is an inherent sense of disgust I feel when I'm on a group text and someone pipes in with that odious green color. Some tribal associations are obviously more powerful than others, and we all belong to multiple tribes at any one time and also across the course of our lives. Which ones take priority for us is a matter of our individual choices and priorities, and go a long ways toward defining who we are. 

Regardless, these tribal associations are as instinctual to us as kicking our leg when tapped on the knee, and just as impossible to eliminate. What is possible, is to consciously choose our tribes so that we deemphasize race in favor of other associations. But there will always be a possibility that we gravitate towards those racial differences as an aggregate, particularly over a long enough span of time. Usually because someone somewhere has figured out how to appeal to that instinctual need to form tribal associations, and to create others who are our tribe's enemy. Which is an extremely vital aspect of any powerful tribal association.  

So what I'm saying is that tribal associations will always happen. Period. If we want to overcome racial tribal associations, it's important to form different tribal associations not related to race. I will uncategorically state we are terrible as a country in doing that, but we're not exactly alone. In fact, I'd argue we've gone out of our way as a society to embed those tribal associations in a racial context, whether it's Far East, Subcontinent, Latina, Black, or White, but without a doubt the most pernicious and the most destructive has been the white/black dynamic, both for obvious historical reasons, and then current manifestations which may or may not be a part of the historical reasons, but may simply be an extension of natural tribal identities that are always present. Starting in the 60s and 70s, we have had a movement that has somewhat demonized people of foreign cultures having to give up identities related to their nation of origin, and while the intent is good and I can certainly easily defend it, it also has the unintended consequence of creating populations less assimilated in many ways than previous generations. 

My point would be as a society if we truly believe reducing racial tribal associations is important, then movements which aspire to emphasize tribal associations based on race will do the exact opposite. 

[atomheartbevo 90546]

2 hours ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

The powerful used race as a wedge issue back then just as readily as they use it today. Had they used some other issue to wedge up disagreement among the masses we'd be divided using different categories today rather than race. 

And if it wasn't race, it was stuff like Catholics vs Protestants - I've been reading some Cold War history stuff, and it delved into JKF's election, and it's absolutely fascinating to see things being said about JFK being a Catholic, that were said about Obama being half-black.  Sounds silly now - we just elected another Catholic.

[Willfully Horn 8204]

5 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

There's also the demonization of the other side that occurs, whether you're Democrat or Republican. No matter how bad someone from your tribe seems to be, they're way better than the spawns of hell on the opposite side of the issue. But that's my experience. 

Inchoate false equivalencies are so 2016. “White folks are the real victims, dems are socialists/communists, and Dems want to take all your guns” was the laughable beginning to a point of view yet to be factually articulated on this board. 

Example: “white folks are inherently evil,”  The only venues peddling that bullshit, effectively, are the GOP grievance media: Nevertheless, the message has been repeated constantly, to the point that the lying liars feel justified in criminalizing the discussion itself. The solution, according to the new right, is halcyon days where one shit heel can use racial and homophobic slurs, free of consequence, while another calling out those behaviors as racist and homophobic can face civil liability.

There is no hope for meaningful communication as long as facts are not respected. The right did this. It is their stated plan, towards a stated goal of monarchical rule. Remove the log. Then let’s talk splinters.

Edited February 25, 2023 by Willfully Horn

['stache 22117]

That’s a lot of words to just reply “all lives matter.”

[hookemATL 12228]

10 minutes ago, 'stache said:

That’s a lot of words to just reply “all lives matter.”

I was typing this, then made sure to check the new replies. 
 

[YChang 3531]

Sure, everyone has the innate ability to discriminate. And everyone should do better. And yeah, it’s better here than other parts of the world. But I live here and people that’s benefited from institutional racism don’t get a magic hall pass to shirk their responsibilities or at the very least be more of an ally either. 

Edited February 25, 2023 by YChang

[naija 2961]

8 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

It's so interesting to watch someone just pull the rip cord, give in to their most base instincts, damn the consequences. 

I had such a huge amount of respect for the creator of Dilbert because the sense of humor displayed was so intelligent and so on target. I haven't read a Dilbert cartoon in years, simply because I no longer read a paper version of the newspaper, but when the Chronicle bought the Post in Houston and began running all the comics from both newspapers for a time period, reading the comic section was a daily highlight in many ways, and Dilbert was always a favorite. 

I was startled to watch Adams make his early comments regarding Donald Trump and his effective persuasive style, but was very impressed by his prescience, even while being terrified by it.

There is no hope for this country the more people give in to this mindset. I do not believe minorities and their allies approach racism in a way designed to bring rapprochement, but reacting in this manner is akin to throwing in the towel, although to be honest, given the tone of his comments I seriously doubt his efforts were good faith in the first place. 

... and you think Adams is the problem.

[Catdaddyhorn 3462]

 

 

[naija 2961]

6 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

That’s a long way to say “if black prior had been the dominant power structure here instead of white people, they would have behaved shittily too.” Probably correct, but irrelevant. White people were, and retain, the power structure.
And they’ve never, ever, come even close to acknowledging that completely. There can be no reconciliation without responsibility. That is true for every single relationship.
So, how is the white power structure responding to that truth? By LITERALLY banning discussion of the things that actually happened (you know, like the actual reasons for secession, as stated by the people who did it, or even mentioning the fact that one of the “accomplishments” of white society last century was to lynch 30k to 40k black people, etc).
For literally hundreds of years, white society has enslaved black people, murdered them, subjected them to Jim Crow status, and more. And now, after a few decades of laws that only STOPPED the worst of that negative behavior, and done little to rectify the centuries of systemic advantages/disadvantages that system created.
So, “the negroes aren’t conciliatory enough” strikes me as some arrogant bullshit. Because it’s not even meant sincerely. It’s just an excuse to keep on keeping on without taking any responsibility or ownership of the society we’ve inherited. But keep on blaming black people for still wrestling with (and being resentful about) the effects of 300+ years of systematic cruelty and oppression. That seems…super smart and fair.

also broadly mischaracterizes the ask as always being about needing appeasement or self-flagellation from White people. entirely untrue. There was a time when what was being asked for wasn't even help or affirmative action, it was simply to be left alone, to have the chance to succeed or fail, independent of malignant outside forces. And even that wasn't granted. Entire successful, self-sustaining Black-American communities, were destroyed merely for existing. 

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

4 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

There's no other cultural identity that has continued to exist without a homeland for 2000 years.

Where’s the cultural homeland of Christianity?

[hookemATL 12228]

1 minute ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Where’s the cultural homeland of Christianity?

Branson, Missouri

[naija 2961]

3 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

But it's not just white Americans that do this. The black community has often famously favored light skinned blacks. 

.. and how did that come to be.

[SL Xpress 7608]

3 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

And if it wasn't race, it was stuff like Catholics vs Protestants - I've been reading some Cold War history stuff, and it delved into JKF's election, and it's absolutely fascinating to see things being said about JFK being a Catholic, that were said about Obama being half-black.  Sounds silly now - we just elected another Catholic.

I remember my grandfather on my father's side talking about how JFK was a tool of the Papacy in the 70s and 80s, long after the election had passed.

[SL Xpress 7608]

9 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Where’s the cultural homeland of Christianity?

Christianity isn't the same kind of racial identity that being Hebrew is. Which form of Christianity? Greek Orthodox? Russian Orthodox? Ukrainian Orthodox? Coptic? Catholic? Lutheran? Baptist? Anabaptist? Calvinist? Methodist? Presbyterian? Church of Christ? Mormonism? Etc.. Being a Jew has a very different meaning than being a Christian. Conversion to Judaism versus converting to Christianity is a much different process, with a much different mechanism for it. When Hitler decided to exterminate all the Jews, he wasn't just talking about a religion. When Russia went on one of its pogroms, they weren't just thinking about the religion. Both of them were referring to a people. When anti Semitism is expressed today, it's not just a reference to a religion.

Christians suffer from massacres and become martyrs for all kinds of reasons. Heck, American evangelicals are getting specific warnings in Russia right now from the State Department. 

But we don't talk in terms of a Christian diaspora. I would argue that ever since Constantinople converted to Christianity, Christians have had a multitude of homelands. 

[SL Xpress 7608]

19 minutes ago, naija said:

.. and how did that come to be.

Because we're naturally prejudiced and look for reasons to discriminate, that's why. 

[SL Xpress 7608]

31 minutes ago, naija said:

also broadly mischaracterizes the ask as always being about needing appeasement or self-flagellation from White people. entirely untrue. There was a time when what was being asked for wasn't even help or affirmative action, it was simply to be left alone, to have the chance to succeed or fail, independent of malignant outside forces. And even that wasn't granted. Entire successful, self-sustaining Black-American communities, were destroyed merely for existing. 

And it's important that doesn't happen. What's the best way to prevent that from happening? What's the best way to create successful Black communities? Are successful Black communities being created right now? Are they under threat of destruction? There is more wealth being created in this country by members of the African American community right now than there ever has been in its history. Does that mean racism has ended? Of course not. How do we seek its reduction? What's the process of doing that?

 

[naija 2961]

15 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

Because we're naturally prejudiced and look for reasons to discriminate, that's why. 

pertaining to this specific question, this answer is either intellectually lazy or dishonest. Can't decide which.

 

[SL Xpress 7608]

50 minutes ago, naija said:

... and you think Adams is the problem.

The problem with what?

What are we trying to achieve? I'm saying if we want to marginalize white groups that feel like the current environment is an existential threat, it would be helpful to reduce the language that allows them to perceive there's an existential threat, while also maintaining they're a bunch of wackos who are on the wrong side of history. White supremacy is simply a wrongheaded belief that leads to great evil. We're never getting rid of all racism. There will always be people who seek to build tribes based on race. That's not just white people. That's everyone, all around the world. The important thing is to marginalize those tribes so they have no hold nor power over the general populace. I do not believe the current path we're on in terms of the narrative in this country regarding race leads us down that path. I have never felt that way. What I've seen build in terms of numbers, influence, and the level of violence from the white community over the last 40 years feels more prophetic than anything else. Those dynamics will continue to increase unless we seek out a different kind of dialogue around race. And even then there will be evidence of racism. 

To me the realistic goal isn't the ending of racism. It's the marginalization of people seeking it out as a solution, rather than a problem. We're going the wrong way in that regard. And yes, Adams is a perfect example of that. 

2 minutes ago, naija said:

pertaining to this specific question, this answer is either intellectually lazy or dishonest. Can't decide which.

 

Or a difference of opinion. Don't care how you classify it.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

20 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

Christianity isn't the same kind of racial identity that being Hebrew is. Which form of Christianity? Greek Orthodox? Russian Orthodox? Ukrainian Orthodox? Coptic? Catholic? Lutheran? Baptist? Anabaptist? Calvinist? Methodist? Presbyterian? Church of Christ? Mormonism? Etc.. Being a Jew has a very different meaning than being a Christian. Conversion to Judaism versus converting to Christianity is a much different process, with a much different mechanism for it. When Hitler decided to exterminate all the Jews, he wasn't just talking about a religion. When Russia went on one of its pogroms, they weren't just thinking about the religion. Both of them were referring to a people. When anti Semitism is expressed today, it's not just a reference to a religion.

Christians suffer from massacres and become martyrs for all kinds of reasons. Heck, American evangelicals are getting specific warnings in Russia right now from the State Department. 

But we don't talk in terms of a Christian diaspora. I would argue that ever since Constantinople converted to Christianity, Christians have had a multitude of homelands. 

I think you are correct on this.  Being Jewish is an ethnic identity without regard to the practice of Judaism.  Many Jewish Israelis and some of the biggest Zionists aren't practicing Jews.

The interesting question is whether that is an ethnic identity that developed by having it forced on them moreso than organically.

[naija 2961]

12 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

And it's important that doesn't happen. What's the best way to prevent that from happening? What's the best way to create successful Black communities? Are successful Black communities being created right now? Are they under threat of destruction? There is more wealth being created in this country by members of the African American community right now than there ever has been in its history. Does that mean racism has ended? Of course not. How do we seek its reduction? What's the process of doing that?

 

this wasn't offered as a tangent on Black prosperity, but a rebuttal to your characterization of the messaging from Black Americans. Now you want to shift the burden to the how's and why's of Black prosperity. You don't acknowledge that what was asked for wasn't always what you have described, and don't offer an explanation of what motivations would prompt the invasion and destruction of said communities. 

The truth is that that tension between "we need them" and "we would be better off on our own" has always existed. Booker T and DuBois, Malcolm and Martin etc. Even characterizing the reconcilers as people who have demanded prostration is wildly inaccurate.

[naija 2961]

It's not a difference of opinion if your summation of the reasons for colorism in Black populations is "Because we're naturally prejudiced and look for reasons to discriminate, that's why."

That is just ignorant and ahistorical. 

[SL Xpress 7608]

3 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

Inchoate false equivalencies are so 2016. “White folks are the real victims, dems are socialists/communists, and Dems want to take all your guns” was the laughable beginning to a point of view yet to be factually articulated on this board. 

Example: “white folks are inherently evil,”  The only venues peddling that bullshit, effectively, are the GOP grievance media: Nevertheless, the message has been repeated constantly, to the point that the lying liars feel justified in criminalizing the discussion itself. The solution, according to the new right, is halcyon days where one shit heel can use racial and homophobic slurs, free of consequence, while another calling out those behaviors as racist and homophobic can face civil liability.

There is no hope for meaningful communication as long as facts are not respected. The right did this. It is their stated plan, towards a stated goal of monarchical rule. Remove the log. Then let’s talk splinters.

 

Do you feel like I want to criminalize the discussion? Is that what you get out of this? I have sought out and certainly shared acts of rabid, violent racism all of my life. People act as if the Tulsa massacre was some kind of secret. I knew about it in the 80s. There were violent acts of racism carried out in Sugar Land, where I got my handle from. People don't talk about that the way we should. There is a desire to skip over or somehow hide under the rug not only the rampant displays of repression that exists in our history, but the acts that occur every day. That is not what I am seeking. If that's what you're seeing in what I've posted, then there has been a miscommunication. 

Nonetheless, there is often a demonization of white people when these narratives are shared that I don't think is helpful if we're trying to move forward in a way that reduces acts of racism right now, or most important to me, marginalizes the ones who seek white identity as a means to power. There are plenty of white people who were on the other side of this narrative. Share their stories, too. Help people identify with healing and helpful parts of a community out of pride and emulation, rather than only seeking shame and guilt. 

[SL Xpress 7608]

2 minutes ago, naija said:

It's not a difference of opinion if your summation of the reasons for colorism in Black populations is "Because we're naturally prejudiced and look for reasons to discriminate, that's why."

That is just ignorant and ahistorical. 

I don't agree. There's obviously more to it, but it's historical in terms of that's how human beings have always been. We look for ways to create others to bond among ourselves. The color of our skin is an easy way to do that. Sure, there were many factors involved in addition to that, but that's the ultimate root cause. There are certainly communities in our human history where having light skin is a reason for discrimination as well. It just depends on who is in power, and how they choose to enforce and perpetuate that power. But the discrimination itself is rooted at an evolutionary, genetic, instinctual level. 

[SL Xpress 7608]

11 minutes ago, naija said:

this wasn't offered as a tangent on Black prosperity, but a rebuttal to your characterization of the messaging from Black Americans. Now you want to shift the burden to the how's and why's of Black prosperity. You don't acknowledge that what was asked for wasn't always what you have described, and don't offer an explanation of what motivations would prompt the invasion and destruction of said communities. 

The truth is that that tension between "we need them" and "we would be better off on our own" has always existed. Booker T and DuBois, Malcolm and Martin etc. Even characterizing the reconcilers as people who have demanded prostration is wildly inaccurate.

I'm not trying to shift anything. If you have a problem with anything I'm saying or anything I've typed, seek a clarification. I'm not looking to be an enemy or to proselytize a white apologist screed. I'm typing out my view of things. If you feel like it's completely wrongheaded - which has consistently been a common response - that's certainly a legitimate point of view. But I'm not trying to avoid or shift anything. I'm responding the best way I know to whatever you're posting. 

The motivations that prompt invasion and destruction of black communities is the same dynamic that has existed throughout history. It's occurring right now, around the world. Most dramatically in Ukraine, but not exclusively. The white tribe in power saw a threat to their power and they sought to eliminate it. And they did. Then they made sure to the best of their ability it wasn't discussed any more, or if it was, it was always in the context of the perpetrators being heroes within the community. Are you looking for more of an explanation than that?

"The truth is that that tension between "we need them" and "we would be better off on our own" has always existed. Booker T and DuBois, Malcolm and Martin etc. Even characterizing the reconcilers as people who have demanded prostration is wildly inaccurate."

There is not one message out there regarding how to best handle racism moving forward. But there is a dominant message. The dominant message in the 70s was that we had civil rights, and now everything is okay. Nothing to see here. Move along. That was a dangerous and factually incorrect message that allowed white people to perpetuate the systemic racism they were comfortable with to continue being in power and to keep black people "in their place" to use a common parlance among active racists. 

When I actively engaged in trying to educate myself about racism and find a path moving forward, I was shocked by how I'd been brainwashed - and continue to be, quite frankly - by the constant stream of messages and images that black people were inferior and didn't deserve some kind of equal treatment. I feel like that's a critical part of the equation to reduce racism, and some kind of whitewashing - literally - is unhelpful and downright dangerous. At the same time, why is there no knowledge of white abolitionists? Why when I bring up names such as Great Britain's Wilber Wilberforce or Thomas Clarkson, or the American William Lloyd Garrison, am I met with crickets? There is a need, IMO, for people in the movement to recognize primarily, and even almost exclusively, black contributions to the movement. That makes sense, because it engenders a sense of empowerment, rather than a dependence on the white man to achieve their goals. But there's also a disenfranchisement involved as an unintended consequence that I feel is a grave mistake, and I've always felt that way. 

[Willfully Horn 8204]

1 hour ago, SL Xpress said:

 

Do you feel like I want to criminalize the discussion? Is that what you get out of this? I have sought out and certainly shared acts of rabid, violent racism all of my life. People act as if the Tulsa massacre was some kind of secret. I knew about it in the 80s. There were violent acts of racism carried out in Sugar Land, where I got my handle from. People don't talk about that the way we should. There is a desire to skip over or somehow hide under the rug not only the rampant displays of repression that exists in our history, but the acts that occur every day. That is not what I am seeking. If that's what you're seeing in what I've posted, then there has been a miscommunication. 

Nonetheless, there is often a demonization of white people when these narratives are shared that I don't think is helpful if we're trying to move forward in a way that reduces acts of racism right now, or most important to me, marginalizes the ones who seek white identity as a means to power. There are plenty of white people who were on the other side of this narrative. Share their stories, too. Help people identify with healing and helpful parts of a community out of pride and emulation, rather than only seeking shame and guilt. 

No, I was pointing to proposed legislation currently making its way through the process. Legislation conceived and supported by folks on the alt-right, all white side of the discussion. While we might share a fidelity of intent, I was describing the perspective of folks who actually believe there is ‘white people are evil” subtext in diversity initiatives, African-American studies, women’s studies, CRT, etc.

Other than the nonsense I see from alt-right sources, I am drawing a blank in this demonization of white people you mention. Perhaps an example would help me understand your second paragraph. I hope you saw the video where a guy details the difference between white folk, and white people.

[Willfully Horn 8204]

I think this thread is the perfect spot to post further examples of institutional racism. Please note, there are plenty of people who refuse to believe that institutional racism exists. I have posted, in other threads, supporting evidence that black citizens currently face discrimination in the accumulation of wealth, and in their ability to effectively utilize the right to vote.

This post addresses another, major, aspect of a better life, and the institutional racism black Americans face in our healthcare system.

 

”Serious racial disparities exist in the U.S. healthcare system. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Black and Hispanic people receive worse care on  40% of the department’s care quality measures, Batten professor and social psychologist Sophie Trawalter told an online audience during the most recent installment of Batten Expert Chats. Trawalter emphasized the importance of paying close attention to that data. “The stated purpose of healthcare is to reduce pain and suffering,” she said, “and so to condone healthcare inequalities is to condone the pain and suffering of Black and brown people.”

 

Quote

Racial disparities are particularly striking in pain treatment, Trawalter said, with studies showing that Black patients are significantly less likely to be prescribed pain medication and that they generally receive lower doses of it when they are. One possible reason for this, supported by existing studies, is that white people believe Black people experience less pain. Trawalter is attempting to uncover the root causes of this belief.

In one study Trawalter and her collaborators designed, members of the NCAA Division I medical staff read a case concerning a student athlete with a torn ACL. Participants were randomly assigned either a Black student or a white one, with everything else about the case remaining the same. They then answered questions about the case (How painful was the injury, on a scale of 1-4?) and questions designed to measure their own racial attitudes (Do you agree or disagree? Irish, Italians, Jews, and other minorities overcame prejudice and worked their way up. Blacks should do the same without any special favors.) 

As the researchers predicted, participants generally assigned lower pain ratings to the Black students. Surprisingly, however, there was no correlation between participants’ answers to the questions about their racial attitudes and the pain ratings they gave Black patients (relative to white patients). In other words, “even participants who have very positive racial attitudes show this bias,” Trawalter said. 

If a person’s feelings about race don’t influence their perceptions of Black pain, what does? In another study, Trawalter and her collaborators showed a group of medical students and residents two cases: one concerning a Black patient and another concerning a white one. They then asked the students to rate the patients’ pain; to recommend treatment; and to report the extent to which they agreed with statements about biological differences between Blacks and whites. On the list were statements such as Blacks age more slowly than whites and Blacks’ nerve endings are less sensitive than whites’. (All of the statements included were false.)

For this study, the team had crafted a new hypothesis: that a person’s belief in the biological roots of race would predict their perception of Black pain. The team based this prediction on false claims made by physicians and scientists in the 1800s, which asserted that Black people were biologically closer to apes, while white people were more evolved. Beliefs about biological differences between the two races have persisted into the modern era, Trawalter pointed out—even today, some people believe Black people are more athletic because of their biology. “What’s interesting about these beliefs is that, contemporarily, they’re actually not strongly related to racial prejudice, meaning that even people who report very positive racial attitudes still think that perhaps the Black body is fundamentally biologically different from the white body,” Trawalter said.

The study results supported the team’s prediction: Participants who endorsed biological differences between Black and white people also believed that the fictional Black patient felt less pain. Participants who didn’t ascribe to those beliefs, on the other hand, actually tended to believe that the Black patient felt morepain. While the reasons for this remain unclear, “one possibility is that the participants are reporting on something that they've observed in the world,” Trawalter said. “We know from some research that in fact Black patients report more pain—are in more pain—when they enter clinical settings.”

When it came to recommended pain treatments, the patterns were similar, but with one disturbing difference: the participants who didn’t endorse the biological statements showed no bias in their treatment recommendations, rather than suggesting more rigorous treatments for the Black patient. “We often think that no bias is good, but in this case, it's worrisome,” Trawalter said— “because remember, these are the participants who said that the Black patient will feel more pain than the white patient.”

Trawalter noted that these studies have important implications for our current climate, due not only to the coronavirus pandemic, but problems with police brutality as well. While she acknowledged that the University of Virginia and other institutions are taking commendable steps to include diversity, equity, and inclusion into their curricula, she argued that it was going to take more than “one-off” efforts to address the problem of racial bias in healthcare. What’s needed, she said, is a paradigm shift—a new kind of education that is actively anti-racist and emphasizes that race is not a biological phenomenon.

 

 

https://batten.virginia.edu/about/news/black-americans-are-systematically-under-treated-pain-why

Edited to add:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa2034159

Edited February 26, 2023 by Willfully Horn

[lemonlime 5503]

Is SL Express Tahoe?

[SL Xpress 7608]

3 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

Is SL Express Tahoe?

I don't know who Tahoe is. 

I've been posting as SL Xpress exclusively in Longhorn communities since the mid 90s GoBig12 days. 

[DDD Dad 14571]

4 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I don't know who Tahoe is. 

I've been posting as SL Xpress exclusively in Longhorn communities since the mid 90s GoBig12 days. 

Tahoe brings donuts to Alabama Republican committee meetings IIRC. 

[atomheartbevo 90546]

3 hours ago, hookemATL said:

Branson, Missouri

[SL Xpress 7608]

15 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

I think this thread is the perfect spot to post further examples of institutional racism. Please note, there are plenty of people who refuse to believe that institutional racism exists. I have posted, in other threads, supporting evidence that black citizens currently face discrimination in the accumulation of wealth, and in their ability to effectively utilize the right to vote.

This post addresses another, major, aspect of a better life, and the institutional racism black Americans face in our healthcare system.

 

”Serious racial disparities exist in the U.S. healthcare system. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Black and Hispanic people receive worse care on  40% of the department’s care quality measures, Batten professor and social psychologist Sophie Trawalter told an online audience during the most recent installment of Batten Expert Chats. Trawalter emphasized the importance of paying close attention to that data. “The stated purpose of healthcare is to reduce pain and suffering,” she said, “and so to condone healthcare inequalities is to condone the pain and suffering of Black and brown people.”

 

 

https://batten.virginia.edu/about/news/black-americans-are-systematically-under-treated-pain-why

IMO the medical system, the justice system, and the political system are the three areas where discrepancies in wealth are felt in the most egregious ways. Since there are clear metrics establishing the discrepancy in wealth between whites and people of color, there is going to be an abundance of evidence of institutional racism. 

The argument against this is when people propose this is an economic issue, not a racial issue, but the two are inseparably intertwined. 

Of course, I think the way we handle health care in this country is criminal at this point. Perhaps it made sense when we were a manufacturing goliath, and productivity gains on an annualized basis were through the roof. Providing equitable health care requires extremely hard decisions we're not capable of as a society. We want to believe it's sustainable to give everyone the maximum care technology can provide to anyone and everyone who can obtain it, when that's simply not the case. So the way it ends up getting divvied out is on an ad hoc basis with the first in line being ones who can afford it under whatever mechanism they have available to them. 

One of the most enlightening articles I ever read regarding health care was about the Amish community and how they make decisions based on someone older who needs cancer treatment, versus a newlywed who needs a home and barn. With a finite amount of resources and advanced medical care completely paid out of pocket, really hard choices were made. We don't do that as a general society, and are repulsed by the uglier aspects of doing something like that. Which I admire. But in terms of having a functioning society, there's some level of health care that's not sustainable. Limiting it simply based on an ability to afford it is the worst system we could possibly choose, but that's where we are. 

[mchookem 16728]

i spread some rep around the last couple of pages. i so enjoy a good faith, intellectual discussion, and they occur all too rarely here bc we get stupid troll drivebys by the surly rightwingers 99% of the time bc 95% of their positions are difficult if not impossible to defend. so it's a show. 

anyway my point is this is an interesting, heartfelt discussion and i've found myself nodding at a variety of the posts including a couple of SL's. compared to the literally ridiculous arguments some were making in the LBGTQ thread recently, i have appreciated the points made. 

also, gotdamn there are a lot of lawyers on surly. also people that talk like lawyers lol 😄🤘

[SL Xpress 7608]

50 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

No, I was pointing to proposed legislation currently making its way through the process. Legislation conceived and supported by folks on the alt-right, all white side of the discussion. While we might share a fidelity of intent, I was describing the perspective of folks who actually believe there is ‘white people are evil” subtext in diversity initiatives, African-American studies, women’s studies, CRT, etc.

Other than the nonsense I see from alt-right sources, I am drawing a blank in this demonization of white people you mention. Perhaps an example would help me understand your second paragraph. I hope you saw the video where a guy details the difference between white folk, and white people.

I feel like the alt right movement is evil and needs to be marginalized. I do not believe the narrative we've chosen regarding race relations is going to do that. 

I did see that video. I liked it. 

One of the things I used to ask people who would claim they were color blind, "how many friends of color do you actually have?" Most of the time if they had any that they claimed, they were either co-workers who they had no meaningful interactions with outside of work, or even better, were actually hired help. 

If you have no one from a different culture you would be willing to invite over for dinner, or if you would, you haven't yet, there's some self examination that should occur. Doesn't mean you're some kind of bad person, but you're living in a way that has probably isolated you from people of color. Which, in all honesty, is more normal than I would prefer. It can be challenging in certain circles to organically form friendships with people of different cultures. 

And you cannot possibly form a real, vulnerable relationship with someone under your employ. I'm not saying you can't be close to them, and consider them as more than hired help. But at the heart of that relationship they are depending on you for an income, and that will shade every interaction in ways that can't be maneuvered around. It can only be compensated for, and never wholly. But the amount of people of wealth who try to use this as a claim they're not racist is unbelievable to me. 

[Willfully Horn 8204]

6 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

IMO the medical system, the justice system, and the political system are the three areas where discrepancies in wealth are felt in the most egregious ways. Since there are clear metrics establishing the discrepancy in wealth between whites and people of color, there is going to be an abundance of evidence of institutional racism. 

The argument against this is when people propose this is an economic issue, not a racial issue, but the two are inseparably intertwined. 

Of course, I think the way we handle health care in this country is criminal at this point. Perhaps it made sense when we were a manufacturing goliath, and productivity gains on an annualized basis were through the roof. Providing equitable health care requires extremely hard decisions we're not capable of as a society. We want to believe it's sustainable to give everyone the maximum care technology can provide to anyone and everyone who can obtain it, when that's simply not the case. So the way it ends up getting divvied out is on an ad hoc basis with the first in line being ones who can afford it under whatever mechanism they have available to them. 

One of the most enlightening articles I ever read regarding health care was about the Amish community and how they make decisions based on someone older who needs cancer treatment, versus a newlywed who needs a home and barn. With a finite amount of resources and advanced medical care completely paid out of pocket, really hard choices were made. We don't do that as a general society, and are repulsed by the uglier aspects of doing something like that. Which I admire. But in terms of having a functioning society, there's some level of health care that's not sustainable. Limiting it simply based on an ability to afford it is the worst system we could possibly choose, but that's where we are. 

Yeah, these links focus on pain relief, and opioids are cheap. 
 

I remain curious about white demonization, in action. I don’t even understand how to search for examples, as I frame the issue with words I know will give me right wing nutbutter.

I will add my take on how to make progress on the racial divide. We embrace our country’s values, and find pride in that Mexico’s culture is American (ie USA,) that Rhodesian, Vietnamese, Iranian, et al, cultures as American. that every culture is part of the social fabric of our immigrant nation. We ought celebrate this truth. Fucking revel in the canopy of the tree of Liberty whose roots reach every corner of our bright blue ball. And, we think carefully and examine diligently, how our systems and assumptions play out for all, and do whatever we can to ensure equality under the law. We see what links us all, as US citizens, and put that nationalist pride towards inclusion, and not exclusion.

[pyrohornIII 4844]

32 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

IMO the medical system, the justice system, and the political system are the three areas where discrepancies in wealth are felt in the most egregious ways. Since there are clear metrics establishing the discrepancy in wealth between whites and people of color, there is going to be an abundance of evidence of institutional racism. 

The argument against this is when people propose this is an economic issue, not a racial issue, but the two are inseparably intertwined. 

Of course, I think the way we handle health care in this country is criminal at this point. Perhaps it made sense when we were a manufacturing goliath, and productivity gains on an annualized basis were through the roof. Providing equitable health care requires extremely hard decisions we're not capable of as a society. We want to believe it's sustainable to give everyone the maximum care technology can provide to anyone and everyone who can obtain it, when that's simply not the case. So the way it ends up getting divvied out is on an ad hoc basis with the first in line being ones who can afford it under whatever mechanism they have available to them. 

One of the most enlightening articles I ever read regarding health care was about the Amish community and how they make decisions based on someone older who needs cancer treatment, versus a newlywed who needs a home and barn. With a finite amount of resources and advanced medical care completely paid out of pocket, really hard choices were made. We don't do that as a general society, and are repulsed by the uglier aspects of doing something like that. Which I admire. But in terms of having a functioning society, there's some level of health care that's not sustainable. Limiting it simply based on an ability to afford it is the worst system we could possibly choose, but that's where we are. 

The hard decision is to tax the wealthy and have them pay their share.  And it's those wealthy who own the stocks in our "non-profit" healthcare systems and insurance companies and drug companies and just about every other support business involved with our healthcare.    

True, while race is the easiest dividing line, the elite rich have either always had us fighting their wars, or fighting amongst ourselves, all in order to keep up from noticing how they are picking our pockets.   It's the gilded age all over again, just different fields of monopolies.    

So there's your pendulum and hopefully it starts swinging back towards humanity soon, all over the world.  I wish we spent as much time discussing this as we do the racism and other devices they use to keep us divided.  

[Satchel 6982]

4 hours ago, naija said:

.. and how did that come to be.

White idolatry is real.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20834]

23 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

 

He's doubling down on subsequent tweets even after hundreds of newspapers just announced they're no longer going to publish him.   I read that he has a net worth of 50 million dollars so maybe he just doesn't care.  Asok was greatness back in the day. 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11856]

10 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

IMO the medical system, the justice system, and the political system are the three areas where discrepancies in wealth are felt in the most egregious ways.

Well, that pretty much covers it.   All of it.  

[Catdaddyhorn 3462]

11 hours ago, lemonlime said:

Is SL Express Tahoe?

No.

SL Express is the furthest thing from Tahoe

[Brisketexan 106618]

In the early 70s, we were pushing a national ethos of “the great American melting pot” - I mean, it was literally one of the Schoolhouse Rock bits. That SHOULD be our national ethos. For fuck’s sake, it’s even on our coinage (e pluribus unum). Even though we were far from perfect, and still had much work to do, our national multi-racial/ethnic identity was moving in the right direction. It sure as shit isn’t anymore. Not until recent years have I ever had anyone question whether I was TRULY a loyal American because of my last name (my family has most likely been here longer than theirs, but whatever).

Second issue: the “demonization of white people” when discussing historical actions/injustices. No, it is not demonization of white people qua white people BUT, intellectually lazy people who really don’t want to take ANY ownership of where we are like to say it is. Because it IS distinct from telling a story of one bad thing one white person did. It’s not. Take Tulsa as an example. Tulsa was not am example of “some renegade bad people, who just happened to be white, did some bad stuff to people who just happened to be black.” Nope.
1. Functionally the entirety of Tulsa society took part in the violence.
2. That included the apparatus of the government and law enforcement, which is literally the embodiment of society as a whole.
3. The action was against ALL blacks people in Greenwood, BECAUSE THEY WERE BLACK.
“A bad guy” didn’t attack Greenwood. White Tulsa - functionally ALL of White Tulsa - did.
Look at the photos of lynchings. It’s not a picture of the town’s there embarrassing retrograde racists smiling next to the dead body. It’s huge swaths of the town.
Look at the mob savaging black students at Little Rock High.
Look at the crowd harassing black students at the lunch counter.
These were not isolated bad actors. They were a system and society as a whole attacking black people, perpetuating racism, etc. Jim Crow laws weren’t passed by one bad guy; they were passed with broad local support.
Were there white people who did right? Of course. Off the top of my head, two of the most revered pieces of American literature are about white people who did right by black people (To Kill a Mockingbird and Huck Finn). Interestingly, they have historically been books that white America has wanted to ban.
Or on a personal note, I’ve told the story of the Koy family (Longhorn legends). My great uncle was one of the first Hispanic lettermen in the SWC, nearly 100 years ago now (sheesh). He told stories of being harassed for his ethnicity by opposing fans, merchants, etc. But he also spoke reverently about Ernie Koy Sr, a white guy from Bellville, who had his back. He proudly spoke of the time they had to keep Ernie from going up into the stands to whoop the ass of a fan who’d been spewing racist bullshit all game. So, yeah…be an Ernie Koy (also, no Koy will ever pay for his drinks while I’m in the room - that family is what honor and decency look like).
TLDR; no, not all individual white people were racist. But white society as a whole sure as shit was, and it wasn’t a quirk, it was a core function (Jim Crow). We need to stop being pussies and running away from that truth. It doesn’t mean that you and I are racist, but it DOES mean that we inherited racist institutions. If we want credit for doing the right thing, then maybe…we should do it.

[South Austin 53154]

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

also, no Koy will ever pay for his drinks while I’m in the room 

I am Koy.

[Brisketexan 106618]

32 minutes ago, South Austin said:

I am Koy.

I've met some Koys.  My great uncle was friends with Ernie Koy, and played ball with Ernie Koy.  You, sir, are no Koy.

[SilasCoade 2622]

On 2/25/2023 at 11:55 AM, SL Xpress said:

there's something special about whites being racist

In the United States of America there is something special about whites being racist. There is something special about the history of genocide of a broad swath of indigenous peoples and the history of racially-based enslavement and dehumanization. There is something special about the enduring effects of that historical context. There is something special about existing as a white person in the United States of America with that historical context and still embracing racism and/or denying the factual historical context.

[lemonlime 5503]

5 hours ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

No.

SL Express is the furthest thing from Tahoe

Ok.  Fair enough.  I saw the wall of text pontificating on race relations and may have overthought things.

[DDD Dad 14571]

5 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

  I saw the wall of text pontificating

Oh I think you meant @YGIFS