Since the concept "race" has no real scientific basis, it has a limited usefulness for our accurate understanding of current conditions or for planning effective organizing campaigns

I suppose I should explain what "science" means to me. In short, it means this: ideas are to be judged according to how useful they are and for what purposes. Judged on this basis, the history of the idea of "race" in the Americas rather suggests that "race" has been useful mainly as a justification for stealing native land and for constructing a lumpen-proletariat whose labor can be exploited. This functions in several distinct ways:

(a) "Race" is supposed to be something immediately determinable by visual examination: that is, the question of whose land can be taken and whose labor can be exploited does not require any complicated process; one knows instantly which persons are unprotected;
(b) Separation into "race" groups is a divide-and-conquer tactic, that prevents persons with similar economic interests from joining together to fight for their mutual advantage;
(c) Since "race" is not a scientific concept, analysis based on "race" obscures essential features of the real situation and prevents people from thinking clearly about the forces that control their lives; and this mystification of the world benefits the status quo;
(d) Moreover, the fact that "race" is not a scientific concept allows the attachment of all manner of vague mythology to "race," there being no way to refute these mythologies for one simple reason: the entire ideological set-up is a fantasy independent of the real world

These functions have had lasting social and psychological consequences. Self-rationalization is a common human behavior, and it occurs frequently in the case of bad behavior. So, for example, whoever owns slaves naturally tells himself that they cannot be civilized or educated and that they are too child-like to assume the responsibilities of adult life: this explains, at least to the slave-holder himself, why slaves are not educated and why they are allowed little control over their own lives. Similarly, if the economy depends on chain-gang labor rented from local jail authorities, the person renting the "convicts" easily convinces himself that the persons he rents are natural and congenital criminals, who are paying their debt to society. When the slaves or chain-gang laborers were largely defined by their "race," such self-justifications of the exploiting classes were easily converted into society-wide myths of the unintelligent or criminal black, after which they reproduced freely as "common sense," irrefutable by any evidence because they were never actually based on any fact, other than enslavement or rental to a chain-gang

The rage, with which convinced racists responded to protests against their social system, can therefore be viewed as evidence of the irrationality of their beliefs

This is easy enough to understand abstractly; but it is much trickier as a remark about our culture and social history, because various beliefs about "race" have genuine consequences (even though there is no such thing as race). Some consequences are obvious and grotesque; others are less obvious but insidious

It seems to clear to me that racism depends on the notion of "race" and that the notion has no scientific content. And it also seems to clear to me that once enough people understand that "race" is an idea without scientific content, racism must necessarily lose most of its power, since the racists' thinking (being unscientific and confused) will be defeated by behavior based on more accurate ideas

But the victims of slavery did not need a theory explaining that there is no such thing as "race" -- they needed help escaping from that system. Nor did the victims of Jim Crow need such a theory -- they needed the Federal government finally to find the will to enforce the Civil War amendments. And a similar remark applies to anyone victimized today

to back up these contradictory assertions?

This question has received enormous attention in the years following WWII, and UNESCO published some of the inquiry, such as this The following, now about fifty years old, is something of a classic:
[link:http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED091460|Science and the Concept of Race.
Mead, Margaret, Ed.; And Others
... an outgrowth of a symposium held at the meetings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington on December 30, 1966 ...]

... traits most commonly used to distinguish one race from another, like skin and eye color, or the width of the nose, are traits controlled by a relatively few number of genes, and thus have been able to change rapidly in response to extreme environmental pressures during the short course of Homo sapiens history. And so equatorial populations evolved dark skin, presumably to protect against ultraviolet radiation, while people in northern latitudes evolved pale skin, the better to produce vitamin D from pale sunlight. ''If you ask what percentage of your genes is reflected in your external appearance, the basis by which we talk about race, the answer seems to be in the range of .01 percent,'' said Dr. Harold P. Freeman, the chief executive, president and director of surgery at North General Hospital in Manhattan, who has studied the issue of biology and race. ''This is a very, very minimal reflection of your genetic makeup'' ...

... A turning point in debates on race was marked in 1972 when, in a paper titled “The Apportionment of Human Diversity,” Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin showed that human populations, then held to be races, were far more genetically diverse than anyone had imagined. Lewontin’s study was based on molecular-genetic techniques and provided statistical analysis of 17 polymorphic sites, including the major blood groups in the races as they were conventionally defined: Caucasian, African, Mongoloid, South Asian Aborigines, Amerinds, Oceanians and Australian Aborigines. What he found was unambiguous—and the inverse of what one would expect if such races had any biological reality: The great majority of genetic variation (85.4 percent) was within so-called races, not between them ...

... An anthropologist who proposed using race as a serious way of describing human variability would be laughed out of the profession—not for reasons of political correctness, but because the idea displays a manifest ignorance of biology. More than 60 years ago, M. F. Ashley Montagu demolished the concept of “race” in his book, Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race (1945). Nevertheless, like many a bad idea, the notion persists that there is some useful purpose in classifying humanity into five, six or a dozen races. But it persists at the margins of anthropology, among popular-science books and in the nonscientific imagination. Living humans share too recent a common ancestor for there to be many deep-seated biological differences among us. From an evolutionary standpoint, we are all Africans. Race is folk taxonomy, not science. The variables used to organize it, such as skin color and hair texture, are arbitrary choices ...

No one is questioning the whether "race" is a social construct ... what I/we, and the body of the academic study of racism, contest is the regulation of racism to merely being an aberration that masks the "real" issue, classism. Racism is very real to PoC.

So the claim that there is no scientific basis for "race" theories is current

which is slightly difference from saying, "no scientific basis" ... which is a false statement. Race has the same scientific basis as fruit fly eye color ... both are scientifically base; but neither, hold any known scientific significance.

But that said ... Again, no one is questioning the whether "race" is a social construct ... what I/we, and the body of the academic study of racism, contest is the regulation of racism to merely being an aberration that masks the "real" issue, classism. Racism is very real to PoC.

Really?

unsurprisingly, since it seems to me a rather natural observation, though in my experience a rather significant number of people find the remark inconsistent

That's like an atheist saying, religion is not real because God doesn't exist.

Last edited Thu Jun 11, 2015, 12:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Uh.... race IS a real thing.

I for instance am white. No one would mistake me for Asian or Black. There are real genes that make real racial characteristics. Sure they are cosmetic, but that doesn't mean race doesn't exist.


This falsehood does NOT help in solving the problems of racism. Not at all.

He is correct that the academic literature demonstrates that race is culturally constructed rather than biological. However, that makes racism no less real for the people who experience it. And it certainly doesn't mean members of color should forget about being black and organize around the class interests of the OP.

and that's something that some white people who are not ruling elites fail to grasp. being racist does absolutely nothing for them, economically speaking, and very little in any other way that is based in reality. i think it would be more useful for you to convey that message to white people than to black people. most black people are painfully aware of how the construct of race has been used to oppress, however, it is clear to me that too many white americans are unaware of how race is used to manipulate them. it is laughable how hostile white americans are to reparations for slavery and jim crow, but they know good and damn well that racism absolutely does still exist. i truly believe your services are needed elsewhere.

... District 20 declared a strike to commence on July 8, 1908 ... By the end of July a sense of panic gripped district operators. The strike was more effective than they had anticipated ... Mine owners resorted to a number of aggressive measures in their efforts to counter these developments, such as ... increasing their use of unpaid convicts leased from the state to maintain coal production ... In addition, owners and their supporters in Birmingham's business community openly advocated vigilantism and resorted increasingly to inflammatory rhetoric to rouse white Alabamians against the interracial UMW ... The most remarkable feature of the strike was the union's ability to unite miners across the racial divide ... A parade of striking black and white miners through the streets of Jasper provoked fury among members of Birmingham's business community who warned the UMW that its policy of biracial organizing would ignite racial violence. Prominent mineowners denounced the UMW's interracial workforce as an insult to southern traditions ... In mid-August, black UMW member William Millin was snatched from the jail at Brighton and lynched ... The mine operators' increasingly strident appeals for forceful intervention, supported by lurid reports of "racial mixing" among striking miners in Birmingham's business press, eventually won over Governor Comer. In late August, he summoned UMW leaders to his office and warned that legislators would not tolerate what they perceived as efforts to promote equality among black and white miners ...
http://www.encyclopediaofalabama.org/article/h-1478

There's been a lot of talk about economic justice and racial justice on the boards, and I haven't seen how your thread talks about it. Please be a bit more specific.

Is worth repeating. It is "the privilege" that allows you to not HAVE to have being white, be a part of your self-concept ... In this society (world-wide) it is the normative state, and all others are considered "others" (read: lesser than).

to understand here.

It is precisely the fact that they are never confronted with their whiteness, nor do they even have to think about race--that is the very essence of white privilege!! They pretend not to know this. Bullshit! They know it.

It is precisely the fact that as a black person, we are constantly reminded of our race--whether scientific, socially constructed, or whatever. That IS the point! We don't need dissertations about why we black folk don't understand the difference between race and economic justice! We know damn well what the difference is. We're not stupid and we don't need anyone to come up in here and talk down to us! If race is simply a social construct and didn't matter at all, then racism would cease to exist and all we would therefore strive for is economic justice. BULLSHIT! And they know it's bullshit, too.

If racism did not exist and everyone were truly colorblind and not discriminated against based on race, then no one would be forced to think about it.

DUH!!!

These people DO understand. They only pretend to be ignorant; they are not. They know damn well that they benefit from being white and having white skin. They'll just never admit it.

You guys are much more patient than I am. Much more.

to his credit, he thought my point was valid.

and neighborliness in societies: current evidence suggests that under some circumstances ill-will can propagate very quickly

Illustrative cases can be found easily. In Germany under the Nazis, in the former Yugoslavia, in Rwanda, all that seemed to be required was a multi-year media campaign stirring up divisions and hatreds -- and then many people were willing to look the other way, while others were willing to attack strangers, and some became willing to attack former friends

If societies can easily be divided and degraded by constant propaganda, the natural conclusion is that a constant struggle is always required against it

indoctrination?

The oppressed are not responsible for their own oppression. This is true of all those groups you mention. It is true of the black experience here in America. It is true of all oppressed persons all over the globe.

In chain-gang labor under Jim Crow, for example, there are various features. One feature is simply the economic motive: cheap labor obtained by creating and maintaining an underclass. But this motive then leads to a definition of the underclass and to an extensive social apparatus enforcing the class distinction. The social apparatus has a legalistic component but it also has a large extra-legal component: the violence officially allowed by the state is combined with an unofficial violence that is often simply overlooked; and there is a whole complex of psychological adaptations that support the system, including rationalizations ("They're just criminals&quot and non-involvement ("MYOB! Look away! Look away! Look away!&quot

So in chain-gang labor under Jim Crow, we see a system that is woven tightly together in multiple ways: some people support the system because they derive economic benefit from it; but there are also people with borderline personalities, delighted to have "acceptable victims" as targets for their periodic violent outbursts; there are people who blind themselves to unpleasant reality because getting involved would destroy their inner tranquility; there are ideologues, who are convinced that the system is right; there are people, who can see perfectly well what is happening but prefer to "go along with the crowd," no matter what

Since we have good evidence that such a system can be created, if constant propaganda explicitly re-enforces ideas about who is an "acceptable victim" and some of the above adaptive psychological mechanisms, the question arises: what is the proper response to such propaganda? On the one hand, paying attention to fringe groups can provide them with a certain aura of legitimacy, and arguing against idiotic ideas sometimes merely re-enforces those ideas. On the other hand, there are circumstances where "silence is consent"

A disadvantage of race-based analysis is that, because there is really no such thing as race, discussion can revolve vacuously around an empty concept, into which anyone may freely pour their anxieties, since no objective standard exists. We should not be surprised if the result is often unsatisfactory

On the other hand, race-based analysis has a definite foundation in social history: the fact that there is no good reason to believe in "race" has not prevented some people from believing in the concept -- and forcing other people to recognize the concept, too, under the threat of being maimed or killed if they "broke the rules" by ignoring the concept

This social history is frequently not taught in much detail; and therefore a large number of people are not much familiar with the history. Being extraordinarily unpleasant, this history is difficult to discuss in detail: almost nobody wants to hear about it. And yet recalling the social history of the concept, and the uses to which it was put, and the constant violence needed to "teach" and reinforce the concept, seems to be the only way in which the actual meaning and legacy of the concept can be explained

An advantage of economic analysis is that it reveals certain features of the world that our favorite mythologies may obscure. Unless people develop an ability to reflect carefully about their own ideas and behaviors, people tend to adopt notions that justify whatever they actually do, in part because social forces often separate people into groups that experience similar economic conditions, so that people may mostly associate with people whose lives and concepts resemble their own. Economic status is typically allied with potential political clout -- so perhaps we should view (say) poverty as a symptom of political powerlessness, rather than the other way around. Then an economic analysis of the social world around us becomes a method for understanding the organization of political power

An disadvantage of such an analysis is that it is tedious to carry out, and it bores people. But it can have predictive value, and it can reveal weaknesses in the power structure

all over the world colonizing people of color and socializing them to feel inferior and internalize self hatred. The Oppressor/Colonizer divided people based on class, but those class distinctions were color and race-based. India is an excellent example. Indians representing the highest economic echelon were lighter-skinned, while darker-skinned Indians belonged to the lowest caste and were subjected to the most menial, deplorable occupations. To this very day, the conditions are the same. In South America, we find similar distinctions (e.g., Brazil). And of course, among black Americans and all people of the African diaspora, the same pattern is observed--families divided by skin color. Black Americans who could pass for white "made it" and were well represented among the social and economic elite, prestigious organizations, in politics, and so on.

This lazy and futile attempt to get black folk to ignore racism and focus on economic justice is just as rude as it is offensive. It offends our intelligence. It offends our reality. And in my view, it offends everything that we've been trying to demonstrate on this forum.

It simply does not matter if all "races" (quoted for your benefit) achieve economic equality. What we've been trying to demonstrate on this forum is that regardless of economic and social status, black people continue to get harassed, maimed, ridiculed, disrespected, even killed. No amount of economic justice will address racial hatred.

Racism is a pathology that the dominate white society created and propagated. It is NOT the responsibility of those to whom it is directed to correct the injustice or to get those who are responsible for its perpetuation to change their horrible ways. Only white people can solve this problem; only THEY can end racism once and for all.

Economic injustice is simply a by-product of racism. End racism and maybe we can then work towards economic equality. But racism must be eradicated first.

I'm sure someone will disagree with it - but then they are god damned fool for doing so!

by organizing along those lines, although I can imagine how to organize and how to build effective coalitions around economic issues

What have civil rights movements been about? They most certainly were organized movements.

Here's an idea. Rather than deciding you know the way, how about listening to people, asking what their concerns are and thinking about how to join together in pursuit of a combination of goals.

African Americans do not choose to organize around the "concept of race." They are treated as a less other from the time they are born. Parents must teach their children how to survive in a world where they are feared and despised based on race.

Your academic approach to this subject fails in one major regard. You don't acknowledge the experience of what it means to be black. You can't organize people if you don't respect their experiences and their views.

But more, why are people trying to organize anyone to neglect our reality, in favor of theirs.

That he might have been trying to say your race doesn't matter; you should focus on class instead.

but more, "your race doesn't matter; you should focus on MY class issues that happen to intersect with yours, instead.

it is comfortable enough to warrant no organizing effort, since such efforts ought to be directed at exploited classes

your class' failure to see; but more, hear from the targets of your efforts, that your efforts are also exploitative.

Edited for clarity: The problem is class' failure to recognize that your efforts are, also, exploitative, i.e., you are attempting to use PoC (and other "others&quot to resolve your issues. But the bigger problem is your class' refusal to listen to/hear the voices of those targeted (i.e., PoC, and other "others&quot that are telling you that we see your efforts as exploitative.

In Camden or Newark - it will be my race that gets it open in Fall 2016.

When met with the radio station WIIFM - I can make strong arguments about voting for your freedom - from racists on the right.

The class activists are the same group as the NSA activists - that means nothing to a black family in Camden NJ. Start with class, go to the NSA, talk about Keystone. Door slammed in face.

I've been knocking on those doors since 2006 - first year living in NJ.

I'm sorry - but I know more about the folks that live there than you do.


I'm invoking Trayvon, mass transit to the suburbs of NJ (lots of folks don't have transportation to the better jobs in NJ), and NCLB.

Betcha I GOTV.

we do not have a choice, as YOU do. i am not the first person in this thread to mention this, so perhaps you can stop lecturing and start listening. another privilege of privilege is to insist that you are always right. you will not be able to build coalitions by dismissing the concerns of people of color....concerns that you will never experience directly. it is not surprising that those concerns are not important to you.

to give up its power. Then, let's talk.

But white folk are unwilling to give up their privilege, so this will never work. And you know this, too.

Chris Rock's experiment was profound. He once asked white folk if they would be willing to change their skin color and become black--even if doing so would been that they could retain any wealth and assets they possessed while white.

Guess what? None of the white folk raised their hand.

This notion that all we have to do is provide economic justice and "spread the wealth" around is a bunch of bullshit.

Sure, you offend our intelligence. We are smarter than you think. Stop it!

there IS, in fact, no way for YOU to succeed, if PoC organize around what is very real to us, race.

But then, again ... we are facing and fighting different fights.

You've nailed "patronizing."

You can't imagine it so it must not be effective. LOL.

Doesn't work for modern day black Americans.

Our families tend to run the gamut from poverty to high affluence - in some cases wealth. We also reach back into our communities and give hands up. One more thing - we tend to help our family members in need to keep society's authorities noses out of our business.


I.E. There's a certain sense of sticking together that transcends economic status in black America (modern day) - and it's white folks who hold onto prejudice, bigotry, and fear -

That cause this sticking together.

If we could believe that there was ALWAYS positive intent - we could trust society to do right by our weakest members.

Because they have not traditionally - it's probably going to take another one hundred years or so to get us to let down our guards. Unless - as the Latino/Hispanic population expands - it removes white folks (a certain segment) from their comfort zones and they begin to see they are now the other in a land of brown.

and have to ask ... to what purpose?

You mention your attempts at empathetic positioning; yet, all 5 installments are decidedly euro-centric ... you cast race as a social construct (which is true) and, at once, dismiss it as an invented, abiological, fiction AND indicate its existence. The ability to create this distinction is the height of privilege. Race-based discussions only revolve vacuously around an empty concept to those that do not experience the very real manifestations of that supposedly "empty concept."

This is a clear example of your euro-centric blindness ... there is no good reason for white folks to believe in race, as they are largely unaffected by any of its many manifestations; but there remains, as you indicate, very real reasons for PoC to believe in the construct of race ... it has been forced upon us and our lives are intimately affected by it.



Why should we? Again, the life's experience of PoC, particularly PoC like myself, who have attained "economic status", and yet lack any measure of political clout, gives lie to the premise ... my current assessment of my political needs (as a Black man of affluence) has differed very little from that period in my life when I was flat broke.

I'm sorry ... I'm sure you mean well ... but for any (economic primacy) "its class" message to resonate with this Black man, it must INCLUDE this Black man's lived experience; not explain away my experience. And I would suggest that since Black folks, as a collective, have had a couple centuries to think about, and arrive at, an economic primacy message; but, haven't, might that suggest that there is none?

In GOTV efforts.

If this is the thrust of a certin candidates campaign - he's doomed.

If he wins the nomination - I will do the best I can.


But his faithful and loyal need to stick to college campuses and let us work the minority communities - because they are clueless about how to win in those communities.

2016 has to hold the line until 2020. I have zero expectation that we can change the country until January 2021.

That's when time is on our side - and demographics too.

Our chief goal needs to be SCOTUS appointments in the next Admin. The three on the board right now (Chafee is a non starter for me) won't make anti voting rights for all appointments.

January 2017 to January 2021 is about holding the line and holding back Conservatism ripping apart our social services, social security, public education, etc etc. Any of these three have the backbone to get that done.

but rather, more globally about changing society.

I agree; but only if Bernie wins the Democratic nomination ... AND, with a "Do No Democratic Harm" directive when working the college campuses, as whomever wins the Democratic nomination will need/be benefited by Democratically engaged, not poisoned, college campuses.

What DU doesn't seem to want to admit (but both leading candidates have already said - to this point, O'Malley hasn't) whomever wins the Democratic nomination (if able to accomplish any of they agenda) will move the country farther to the left ... the major distinction being just a matter of degree.

He's got a luxury you don't have - neither does my brother.

And what you propose would get the door slammed in my face.

Thats my focus as a black American.

You have your agenda - I have one my nephews - and after what happened in McKinney TX - my niece.

What we experience is real - cuts across class lines - and can't be explained away with Marxist nonsense.

So give me something that can make a difference or help - because what you gave doesn't help.

I've got folks up in here irritated and offended.

The main difference I notice is that I generally get a rather better reception in downscale neighborhoods, although I suppose this could be read as a "race" matter, since skin colors of residents in those neighborhoods are somewhat more likely to be darker than mine. I find people in the more upscale neighborhoods tend to be more suspicious of me and unfriendly towards me -- and more likely to express offense at the simple fact that I am knocking their doors. Actual results vary door-to-door, of course

He's patronizing us, ridiculing us behind fancy words and jargon.

Everything he has stated, with the exception of race as a social construct, is phony anthro-sociological bullshit!

I was trying to be kind and non-antagonistic.

I observed at the annual MLK march through downtown a couple of years ago: a group of young pale-skinned activists shouting angrily at dark-skinned police, calling them "racist pigs." What do you think I should conclude from that?

I'll give a bit of background on that

I live in one of the bluest towns in the US, though the surrounding state is divided R/D about 50/50, a fact that is obscured by gerrymandering after we lost control of state government in the 2010 elections. According to the US Census (which appropriately determines "race" classification by what people self-report as their identities) about 42% of the population is white (not Hispanic/Latino), with about 38% of the population AA and about 13% Hispanic/Latino. The city council is majority AA, including the mayor. Many police here are AA, with a Hispanic chief

The annual MLK march here really does not resemble strolling across the Edmund Pettis bridge on Bloody Sunday. There's usually a sizable and diverse crowd. Some of the streets get blocked off partially by a police escort. The crowd walks from the police station on one side of downtown to a church. There is then a short service, with some singing and a few talks

IIRC the young activists were hoping to call attention to several police shootings in 2013

Confused analysis, in this case, a euro-centric analysis, does, in fact, produces confused behavior.

But I will suggest that you learn something about/update your knowledge regarding the nature of institutionalized racism, wherein, PoC can, and frequently do, act as agents of that institutional racism.

Your only response to the members of this group was to say you have more posts to make. You seem to think you are here to enlighten group members about race.

The lips are moving but all I'm hearing is chin music.

The OP should consider that Marxist frame the OP wishes to apply was developed in a largely (racially) homogenous environment. By doing this, and then, by listening to PoC, perhaps, he/she will see the applicability gap.

you silly people need to stop focusing on race because it doesn't exist, scientifically speaking i can't see how this argument is any different than "talking about race turns off white voters."

Very good to see you!

i am in the middle of a lawsuit and other stuff that has been consuming my life. great to see you.

about race but hasn't lived a second in our shoes as PoC.

His posts are as offensive as they are wrong.

He is patronizing us with his condescension. It's up to us to ignore him.

I'd suggest that the OP self-delete but we all know that this would be an exercise in futility.

us who don't have the privilege of having "pinkish" skin that race doesn't exist & is full of white privilege & a cluelessness of the real world. I'm not even sure why you decided this forum was the best place to post this other than to try & explain away the serious racial discrimination we face on the daily.

he should be banned from this subforum for posting such offensive dribble.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1230

We tired of his bullshit pretty fast and banned him, and his M.O. seems to be the same no matter which safe haven group he's posting in.

And I am glad he will not be back. It's impolite in someone else's safe haven. Sad to see he's still doing it to others.

in this thread where I responded to the claim, of the Atheist Shoes company, that the US Postal Service was discriminating against them, by pointing out that (1) the company used a private mail service DHL to send their shoes from Germany to the US and that (2) DHL seems to operate in the US by trucking parcels to warehouses near the point of final delivery before dropping the parcels in the US mails for final delivery. I provided links for the claims and made no general statements about any group of persons. The Atheist group hosts seem somehow to have found my detailed analysis and questions about the Atheist Shoes company claims intolerable

Why am I not surprised that you actually bookmarked the page.

how we know the USPS is responsible for the delays and/or losses described," and then proceeded to shit all over the concerns raised by atheists in their safe haven and even tried to couch what you were doing in concern for the USPS' reputation. Don't act all "Woe is me, I was just asking legitimate questions and they threw me out." You came in to disrupt and brought on yourself exactly what you deserved.

Edit: missing letter.

If we see a pattern of "psy ops" in other places at DU (think GD) that one is allowed to get away with - then you come back here and try it - that's when we block.

Condescending bullshit is allowed - as you can see -

It gets pointed out!

Whati find interesting is 1strong used an atheism reference up thread as a point of comparison. You guys coming back here to give us the low down? Priceless!

splatter the bullshit deep and wide. It is quite charming.

We all have our personal journeys in life in regard to the understanding of various issues.

In the discussion of racism I have had my own journey as a white person, but I feel no need to inform the world how I became clued in. I do not at any point think I have a more unique or insightful view of it than those who actually live it. I speak as someone with a black wife and daughter, and been around all these issues for a long time.

Some here think you are talking down to them, because what is revelatory to you is just everyday life to them. Never for one second think that your perceptions, no matter how well you think they are informed, are more informed than their daily life experience. The best thing to do around here is to just listen.

The persistent irritation on DU is the dismissal of the lived experience of black people by those whites who think they are so liberal as to think they understand racism better.

Internet communication isn't as satisfactory for that purpose as face-to-face conversation, of course

you didn't actually type that. And that you didn't spend minutes of your life thinking it up as a way of justifying your behavior here.

1- They are the victims of it.

2- They must cope every day and every second of the day with it.

3- Their very survival depends on understanding it and mitigating its worst features.

4- To succeed and thrive, they must work much harder than any non-person of color and/or come from a
privileged environment, as President Obama did. He worked very hard AND came from a somewhat privileged
environment (at least that's my understanding).

I think we white people need to listen and learn from the victims of racism. I've learned a great deal from lurking in this sub-forum and from being at DU for 10.5 years. I think the regular posters here have made many good points in this thread, and I think it behooves you and I to read them carefully.

I'm more oriented towards practicality than theory. All science is derived from data points, and we must observe where the data lies in order to understand a phenomenon. The members of this sub-forum can give you many many data points, I assure you.

My first post here was a clueless one about "The Help". If I had posted that in GD, I would have been mocked mercilessly and probably self-deleted. Here, I was treated with patience and kindness. I am grateful for that kindness, as I continue to learn.

All the best to you.

Steve

You and I can think of ourselves as a teenage mutant ninja turtle if we want. No harm no foul.

No policeman will stop us by our front door and ask if we live in our neighborhood.

No one is going to cross the street when they see us coming.

If we go to court you will receive a lighter sentence or fine.

We will never be shot by a policeman while our hands are raised.

There are a million other indignities that you and I will never suffer.

I think economic justice is an important issue. However, until we as a Nation deal with the violation of the constitutional rights of those who are not white, economic justice will amount to little more than trickle down economics.

Teenage mutant turtle! I needed to read that today.

And plus 10000000000000000 on everything else you wrote!