A couple of questions about race and racism....

In my own broadest of definitions of racism, I've always taken it to mean believing a person is inferior because of their race or treating a person in a different way because of their race.

Lately it seems like many other topics, questions or dealings with race tend to lead one or others automatically accused of racism or racist acts.

Currently there is a local politician out there who claims the use of "black hole" is racial (which makes me wonder what people think of the term "white washing").

Then there is the use of the word "people." In one post I used the word "people" to describe a group of people here at DU that so often like to jump to conclusions without even asking about a posters motivations and was hit with the "you people" refrain of using it in an insensitive manner ("folks" I guess would have been okay to use).

Then there is the current threads dealing with Chris Matthews wondering about a group of black soldiers meeting Obama where the crowd seems to be overrepresented with people of color (myself, I think there are some valid questions to be asked before such answers automatically lack merit - for example, were people asked if they wanted to go see Obama and what sort of military units, if asked, were asked. Just recently I found out it may have been Obama found soldiers from his home state of Illinois).

I guess what I'm getting at is, how can we as a country discuss race when it seems like any discussion about race turns into a nasty debate about race and who is or is not a racist. Are we losing this debate because of things like this?

What debate are you referring to?

over the issue of race and racism. (Should have thrown "discussion" in there - because debate is sort of a wrong word, sorry.)

I guess what I'm asking is it seems this topic is growing, or has grown, so incendiary that any progressive discussion is hard to do.

If you want to talk about race expect to put some effort into it, because it is a difficult topic. There are always people who will find offense or take things the wrong way, but most people on DU, I think are quite capable of reasoning about the topic.

Remember, you bring to the topic all of your experiences and previous discussions, and you might learn something about yourself or your attitudes you might not have been so conscious or aware of.

that's a huge part of the problem of discussing race in america. sure...anyone CAN be racist.
if we are ever going to have an honest discussion about the racism, then we have to be willing to take a peak at historical and institutional racism. "everybody can be racist" is a copout and a dismissal, imho.

Being racist is not always a conscious decision. If you're brought up in a racist environment, you are taught through subtle cues that racism is acceptable. Consciously rejecting that racism also does not mean you're not racist, because so much of your identity that you've never considered has been touched by racism.

I don't hold the same definition of racism as the OP. I can understand the notion that only the majority ethnic group can be "racist" - at least in a certain sense of the word. Anyone, though, can harbor hate against the "other." Some people do not call that racism. Regardless, we're all human and we all deal with the issue in one way or the other.

further complicated by a collective denial about the topic when it is reduced to "everybody can be racist." i am honestly puzzled by that mantra, given...well, you know.

do we not doom any sincere discussion of this complex topic because one, people refuse to look deep inside of themselves and admit something they think, say or do might be racially questionable (like what Matthews asked) and two, because so often when people may do or say something, they are automatically accused of being, saying or harboring questionable things?


I guess another part is, is it possible for a person to harbor a stereotypical view and not be racist and be able to openly say, "I never thought of it that way" without being coined "racist."

I guess another part of it, I do think the term "racist" is thrown around too quickly, just as the word "hate" is and to do so might hamper sincere discussion. But I also believe many white people are very slow to acknowledge view and opinions that they may have that are questionable about all things non-white.

It is very hard to discuss race openly and honestly without serious backlash. Look what happened to Bill Cosby -- black himself -- who dared suggest that perhaps some of the black community's ills have been wrought by blacks themselves. To even question the conduct of some black people results in taunts of being a racist. And when you get hit with that tag, it doesn't really spark further discussion.

And if anyone tries to explain their opposition to affirmative action, then the wheels fall off the bus and all rational discussion breaks down.

I think we have to look fairly at CONDUCT, good and bad. And I mean conduct by all races. One race cannot get a free pass on conduct. And one race should not get universally condemned. And I am never in favor of lowering standards, be they for education or jobs. I want fairness.

Affirmative action is the bugabear, huh?


Part of the reason that racism is difficult to talk about is because many people neglect to look at their own baggage and unpack their loaded notion of what the "problem" is.

is that affirmative action seems to be the fault line between the two camps when it comes to discussing race. And the two sides are so entrenched that no one is rational.

one can be rational in support of and in opposition to affirmative action. the problem i see often is that many of the arguments against affirmative action aren't rational.
what i mean is that some people tend to personalize racial issues, and either become extremely defensive or extremely offensive.

some of them weren't. he was rightfully called on those that were racist. to his credit, he finally stopped talking about "those" black people in the media and NAACP meetings, and he started talking directly to the people he had been talking about. i have a lot of respect for the efforts cosby made to reach out to the people he previously had been talking about. he went into the communities and he brought resources and information, instead of mouthing off to the press and the well-heeled.

Just curious. I didn't pick up on anything that was racist on my own.

not all black people give their children unique names. many black men support their children. poor black people work just like poor white people do. sure...black people need to take responsibility, but so does everyone else. meth addicts probably don't act like middle-class white people either.
i appreciated his efforts at empowering people, but i am glad he finally stfu.

when other black people would send me his comments via email with a high-five and "it's about time someone said this," i would ask them: is cosby talking about YOU? do you agree with him that YOU can't speak standard english? or that YOU were too intimidated by being accused of "acting white" that YOU didn't go to college? or that YOU named YOUR child a funny-sounding name that white people won't like?
is he talking about YOU?

of course he wasn't talking about them, because the people who sent that email to me were lawyers, doctors, accountants, teachers, etc. but as far as i could tell, cosby didn't make that distinction, the distinction of class and poverty, and i think that's what pissed off and insulted a lot of people. i think what he did was a copout, one that would get him a lot of support from white people. and that's way there is a thread here titled "why do bigots always bring up bill cosby?"

finally, if his comments had come out of the mouth of pat buchannan or pat robertson, would you still consider them acceptable?

But when discussing societal issues, there is always the problem of over-generalizing, just like when we say that boys do better at "x" while girls do better at "y." Or that, in general, asians do better in school. Of course such generalities don't apply to every single member of the group, but we are talking in general.

Cosby was not addressing the problems of educated, well-off black people. He was address more of the inner city problems -- teenage pregnancy, lack of schooling, drug use, crime, etc. Of course his comments do not apply to each and every member of the black community. But that doesn't mean his comments were racist.

No matter who uttered such comments, they were valid comments.

And I'd never heard of the bigot thread. LOL

to educate people about the plight of the black underclass, and poor people in general. some people parroted his comments here, lecturing me about "bettering myself" and so on. you got the meaning of his words, but not everyone did. i found his comments offensive because he did not provide that context thereby opening himself up to be used by bigots to legitimize their racism.

So, of course they are well represented in the photo ops.

Tweety could have learned this, but he loves to shoot from the lip, and racism frequently flows from his peckerwood lips. He's one of those guys who would swear to you he is not racist, but he is. Sure, he can be cordial and respectful with that black person on his show, but that does not change his basic belief system. He harbors some nasty stereotypes about blacks.

And why is it disproportional? At least in part because minorities lack alternative opportunities for education or surviving in 21st century America.

last night, when he was actually had the balls to ask the question about whether the Iraqi people were "grateful enough" to Bush, McCain, & Petraeus for "all they had done for their country"! FUCKING DOUCHEBAG!! I had to restrain myself from throwing a beer bottle through the screen!

Or, the destruction of their museum, the destruction of their infra structure, the loss of self control, the deaths, the maimings, the degradation, and the loss of sense of country.

Can you imagine Tweety and his family held hostage in their home for five years, and their captors demanding gratitude for doing so?

people's fears. And, imho, there is no losing the debate if it is ongoing. Most people are fair and decent. When the noise dies down, you have a group of people who have tried to be thoughtful.

...with people of color. And Chris Matthews knows that.

"Lately it seems like many other topics, questions or dealings with race tend to lead one or others automatically accused of racism or racist acts."

I guess I haven't seen this at DU, although I'm sure in the real world it has always happened this way. Not to say that there isn't a lot of what I'd call racial ignorance at DU, on a variety of subjects. And in the real world, it's this ignorance which deprives people of the ability to discuss race intelligently (also guilt, but that's another matter). One side is so often unable to understand the viewpoint of the other; and by that I mean that white people as a group fail to understand why black people feel how they do. It would be easy to claim that black people are equally ignorant of whites, making it a problem on both sides, but that isn't really the case. Black people have been dealing with whites for a long time and they understand them pretty well; white people have never needed to understand black people and so they generally don't try.

It only creates an opening for Republicans to exploit to get working class white votes that should logically be Democratic. These people resent being told, well, you're white, you're just racist and you don't get it. You're incapable of understanding because of your race. How racist is that? It's really just a cop out, too, like any other change of subject/personal attack by one who is out of arguments.

The average white person of course does not understand and thinks the problems are mostly solved. You can get a DU liberal to admit there is white privilege, but not the masses out there. Maybe they should all feel guilty, but face it, it's not human nature to take that on. The Republicans exploit that, and we lose votes, by failing to acknowledge that a lot of progress has been made, especially since the 1960s.

And with a black candidate, we really need to tone that all down majorly. Obama handled it brilliantly after the initial Rev. Wright flap. His way is much better. The victim/superiority stance has to be dropped at this point. Obama needs the votes of the people who are the "bad guys" in the scenario.

The feminists would need to do the same thing if Hillary were the nominee. How can you get a woman elected by claiming that men exploit and oppress women and that women are still victims of sexism? It might not do as much damage, since there are more female than male voters, but you'd still have to have many men vote for her for her to win. You can't get a man's vote by telling him he's a sexist and that he'll never understand women. It's just common sense.

It's a cultural issue. I don't know where you get the idea that it creates some kind of "opening" for Republicans--just because it exists and we recognize it? Republicans already exploit ignorant white people in many different ways, and creating racial fear is one thing they already do anyway.

Second, I'm not going to "tone down" shit, thank you very much. I'm not talking about Obama or his candidacy or his chances of getting elected. I'm simply talking about what *is*. If you think what I have to say on DU is going to hurt our chances of taking our country back, then you have vastly over-inflated idea of DU's influence.

Third, and let me quote you:

These people resent being told, well, you're white, you're just racist and you don't get it. You're incapable of understanding because of your race. How racist is that? It's really just a cop out, too, like any other change of subject/personal attack by one who is out of arguments.

You have utterly failed to grasp what I'm talking about. I'm saying that most white people don't understand or know nothing about black people because they don't have to. That doesn't make them racist, and it doesn't make me a racist for pointing it out. I never said white people don't understand black people because of their race--now that would be racist, and ludicrous. You misconstrue my statements as an attack on white people in general, and nothing could be further from the truth.

There are no races, if you are a scientist.
There is just the human mental construct of races, a categorization in the mind.
In reality and in anthropology, all humans are one species with diverse genotypical features.

So, the conundrum question is, "If you think races exist, are you a racist?" Probably, yes.
Not that it is your fault if you are born in a racist culture, one that designates races.

And it dodges the real issue. Racist does not mean that you acknowledge the fact that there are different races. I know your point, that races are an artificial construct. But racism implies believing there are inherent differences based on race alone, and usually connotes an inferiority based on race. Acknowledging race -- in and of itself -- is not racist.

However, you can acknowledge that racism exists and not be a racist.

If you think races exist, you ARE racist.

something that does not exist.

..and as a social construct, it DOES exist.

just providing an example.

but, how is your assertion relevant in a discussion about racism?

....of the word. We both know that things are far more complex in our society than that.

I do think it is important for people to realize that race is a social construct and has no biological basis. However, I have met a surprising amount of people of all colors who believe in the concept of race, though they are not necessarily racist. I guess I should not be too surprised, as it seems the media pushes racial stereotypes which might lead some people to think that while all races are equal, they exist nonetheless. I think a lot of people confuse race with culture as well, as this is often confused by the media.

I did not learn all the facts behind race until an Anthropology class I took in college. I had always thought that there were no differences between races, but had never thought of the issue of race in terms of it being only a social construct and nothing more. I'm sure most people do not know about the biological facts that discredit race as a viable classification of humans, but I think it would increase understanding if such knowledge was made more widely known.

You're trying to claim that a black dog is not a black dog, it's just a dog. Maybe to you, but not to everyone else. They will identify the dog by breed and color. It's a Black Lab. It's a Golden Retriever.

You are denying that race exists, when it obviously does. It is recognized by the peoples of the world, so it's not us out of step, but you.

You're a race denier, and your tenuous rationale is that it doesn't exist as biologic construct you can define.

Not to mention all the gods and goddesses, etc.
Heaven and hell are real too then.
Every personal reality is real then, no matter how crazy.

Sorry, but existence is not determined by beliefs.
That, at the root of the race problem, needs to be acknowledged.

Your statements have lost any sense of rationality. Now that I know you're not firing on all cylinders, I'll write off your comments as merely loony.

Of course, your saying you are thinking I'm looney is not how to determine if I am.

you should question your thought.

There is, however, historical and sociological validity.

By your own terrible logic, if you think racism exists, does that make you a racist?

a few weeks ago, my white supervisor and i went for a walk. while walking, she told me about an encounter with a coworker we both find frustrating to deal with. she told me this woman had come to her office, tossed something on her desk and asked her to make
a copy of it.

then she said..."i hope you aren't offended or anything"...BUT

"i thought to myself, i'm not your N*(&%^!"

this woman supervises me, two other black woman, and an asian woman. she is 58 years old, 9 years older than me.

i handled the situation thusly: i glared at her, and she got the message. then i spoke to the HR director off the record so this incident would be unofficially on the record. the HR director, a black man, asked me what i wanted him to do, and i said: nothing. this woman had my back in a few sticky situations, so i told him i wanted to let this incident pass. and i did. but i went to him...in case it happens again.

i feel no need to educate this woman...she knows better...and whatever loyalty i felt i owed her was paid when she made that comment.

i am now documenting anything remotely questionable that she says, and if she using another racial slur, i will make sure she gets fired.

I can't think of any circumstance where I would ever be comfortable enough to say such a thing and find it amazing that a white person, no matter how close to a black person, would not see the offense in that comment. Baffling indeed and I think an instance where a person went way, way beyond any sort of liberty that existed.


Thank you for sharing.

What an incredible thing to hear nowadays. Depending on how much you like your job, I think you handled it well. You put the right folks on notice, albeit in a discreet way.

also your definition of racism is very narrow

I'm not trying to bring all topics of racism into this, but suggesting and asking if certain practices of the discussion of race actually impede our discussion of the topic.

and someone will point out that its accusatory.

about the local politician, i dont know the context he finds black hole unacceptable but he is just the one person.

honestly most white people often dont like to talk about race because they become defensive, blaming minorities for this is bullshit

just like most straight people dont like talking about homophobia because they might have to then deal with their own homophobia etc

Here's another facet I'm suggesting that creates problems - I understand how years ago when Ross Perot used the words "you people" it was seen as racially insensitive. He was up in front of one group of people and said it in the manner you suggested - in an accusatory tone. But the trouble spot comes when context is automatically missed and the attention only lands on those two words. Take what happened to me in a recent post here. The context where I was using the phrase dealt with a group of people at DU who habitually read posts here and automatically try to conclude one's entire intent without asking a follow up or clarifying question when one is probably needed. So I used the "you people" phrase to identify people who consistently do this and was hit with the racial connotation of the phrase, rather than what I really intended the phrase to mean.


As for the local politician and the black hole, I think it was they (a council or committee) were either talking about documents or money disappearing in a black hole. And this particular politician said it was a racially tinged comment.

I grew up in the 60s and 70s when blacks were still "negroes" and racial jokes as well as a wide array of other jokes were a "rite of passage". The cool kid at camp was the one who had the best Polak or Retard or Nigger jokes...and it was not only accepted but imitated by many...some who never grew out of that mindset and over the years its been cultivated with other stereotypes. These people still view things in strictly black and white...literally, and thus any discussion of race must always cut through a ton of preconcieved ideas that easily turn nasty.

The measure of a person is how they overcame this type of indoctrination. Many have...and learned the lessons from the civil rights movement...not only seeing blacks as equals but women, gays and other "outcasts" in that society. The dialogue continues...and so does my education and understands...and I hope its happened to others as well. Some still need the stereotypes to feel superior...a true indication of their own inner insecurity.

Tweety lives in a fishbowl...long removed from "the streets of Philadelphia" and from any conception of what is going on outside his own myopic beltway world. You don't have discussions in that mindset and in that forum. It's time for new blood in our media dialogue.

because he challenges white racism in a way that few others do.
a few quotes from his article about bill cosby.

"In other words, whites too often use "personal responsibility" as a bludgeon against others, when we no longer want to deal with the crap we put out there, whether its discrimination in lending by white banks, racial profiling by cops, or moving away from a neighborhood when too many of "those" people move in.

After all, how can black folks take responsibility for the fact that even when they have the same level of education and experience, they still are paid less than their white counterparts, and are more likely to be unable to find a job?

How can black folks take responsibility for the fact that black men are twice as likely to have their cars stopped and searched for drugs, even though whites are twice as likely to actually have drugs on us when we're stopped? "

http://www.lipmagazine.org/~timwise/PersonalResponsibility.html