US: A Nation of Cowards on Racial Matters

[Dave McReynolds]

That's interesting to me, because if true, I wonder how it breaks out between the generations. We've transferred so much wealth from younger generations to older ones, I'd suspect younger people, absent jobs, might try to reclaim that wealth through political and other means. Recent riots by young, unemployed Greeks comes to mind.

 

Absolutely. FDR was just a primer for Barack Obama, and I'm sure someone will pick up where he leaves off. While I lean to the left, I know that you can't have any of these social programs without a solid business backing to generate the taxes needed to pay for it, as we're finding out in California. As the poor grow in numbers and gain power, I'm afraid the solid business backing will erode.

[KDeline]

May be off of the original topic a bit but what do you think would happen if someone tried to start Ivory Magazine, or white Miss America, etc? Whites are cowards because of the forced PC, we don't dare do that. Frankly I'm tired of hearing about all the silly division. Each is different in their own way whether we like it or not, and some just can't move past that.

[DavidEBSmith]

 

As has been pointed out by a few folks in this thread, each side seems to perceive a unique portion of any racial incident; in most cases, it seems that black people perceive only the slight, and white people perceive only the intent. Take the cartoon we've been discussion, and imagine this dialogue instead:

 

Black dude: "Look, I know you didn't mean anything racist by it, but that cartoon kind of scratches at some old wounds, you know?

 

White cartoonist: "You're right, I didn't intend any offense, but I can see why the monkey imagery might be bothersome."

 

Instead, black opinion leaders resort to immediate hammer blows, and the white cartoonist go completely on the defensive.

 

 

Based on his other works, I'm not particularly ready to give Sean Delonas the benefit of the doubt in the "didn't mean any offense" department.

[John Ranalletta]

The point I was trying to make is that the educated wealthy from the right families seem to have at least one thing in common with your uneducated poor who are religious: the desire to associate exclusively with others who think, act, and look the same way they do. From that perspective, I see very little difference between racial discrimination and social discrimination.

I get your point and the end result may be the same, however, I don't equate snobbery and pretention with bigotry. Hell, we've got evidence of snobbery right here as in the occasional HD-bashing thread.

 

It's funny to me to walk through the 1st class section of an airplane to my tourist class seat. I know I'm walking by corporate stiffs who couldn't afford the seat price if their company wasn't paying the freight, but they act like they own the airplane. I guess it's snobbery too that I figure I could buy and sell most of the people in that section.

 

Smugness is it's own reward.

[Selden]

The point I was trying to make is that the educated wealthy from the right families seem to have at least one thing in common with your uneducated poor who are religious: the desire to associate exclusively with others who think, act, and look the same way they do. From that perspective, I see very little difference between racial discrimination and social discrimination.

But there is a difference between self-selected grouping (such as anglo, black, asian, hispanic students eating together in a college cafeteria) and external grouping, based on appearance. You can instantly and at a distance tell what "race" a person likely belongs to by his skin color, without knowing anything at all about his social status (unless he's wearing a HD t-shirt ). I occasionally dress like a bum, but I'm a white bum, which carries some degree of privilege with it.

 

Last night I stumbled on a great "turn the tables" video on YouTube: The Job

 

[David]

It's funny to me to walk through the 1st class section of an airplane to my tourist class seat. I know I'm walking by corporate stiffs who couldn't afford the seat price if their company wasn't paying the freight, but they act like they own the airplane. I guess it's snobbery too that I figure I could buy and sell most of the people in that section.

 

Next time, please, don't pause and gawk. It's keeping the flight attendant from getting me warm peanuts and a Mojito.

[beemerman2k]

May be off of the original topic a bit but what do you think would happen if someone tried to start Ivory Magazine, or white Miss America, etc? Whites are cowards because of the forced PC, we don't dare do that. Frankly I'm tired of hearing about all the silly division. Each is different in their own way whether we like it or not, and some just can't move past that.

 

If I had a dollar for every time this question had come up in my discussions over the years, I'd be a millionaire!

 

First, black American culture is an American sub-culture. That that means is that we have issues that must be addressed that do not apply or concerns that are not shared by the main culture in this country. Because of that, there are media forms that are created to address our unique concerns. Web sites, magazines, TV and radio shows, etc. American in general would not appreciate it if the mainstream media outlets spent too much time on issues that only pertain to a subculture of this country. And if the general population doesn't want to hear about these tangential concerns, then advertisers don't want to hear it either, and advertisers are what makes this whole machine work.

 

When I was a child, every black home had a subscription to Ebony magazine. Today? Relatively few do. I wonder if any of my 3 black daughters are even aware of Ebony magazine (OK, I'm sure my 12 year old is, but I don't know about the 9 or the 5 year old). Today, black Americans are finding themselves able to share in the mainstream culture in a way that wasn't possible when I was a boy. So now, these unique issues are becoming less of an issue with us. The day black culture truly integrates with mainstream American culture is the day when Ebony and Jet become pamphlets.

 

In any case, advertisers see a financial opportunity to market their products to a sub-culture whose issues are not addressed by the mainstream culture, so media that appeals to that subculture are created. There are media outlets that appeal to blacks, women, Latinos, the various Asian cultures, gays, the political left, the political right, motorcyclists, and so on. Why do we need Sport Rider magazine? Why can't we all just read Cycle World? Because advertisers know that there is a sub-culture of motorcyclists who only care about ripping up the pavement with the latest high tech machinery available. Such riders don't care about dirt riding, or baggers, or choppers, or ..., they only care about hp/weight ratios, track times, and the latest in protective gear.

 

If the demographic trends and predictions that I read hold true, and indeed continue, and Latino culture becomes the dominant culture in this country, then you will see a fundamental change in the media. Either the CBS's of the nation will have to air material that primarily appeals to Latino culture, or the Univision TV network type of outlets will become the dominant media outlet in the country. When that day comes, I would not be at all surprised to see an Ivory magazine.

[John Ranalletta]

It's funny to me to walk through the 1st class section of an airplane to my tourist class seat. I know I'm walking by corporate stiffs who couldn't afford the seat price if their company wasn't paying the freight, but they act like they own the airplane. I guess it's snobbery too that I figure I could buy and sell most of the people in that section.

 

Next time, please, don't pause and gawk. It's keeping the flight attendant from getting me warm peanuts and a Mojito.

i thought that was you...

[KDeline]

 

 

First, black American culture is an American sub-culture.

 

 

IMHO that is how most black people view themselves, thus keeping us divided.

[Silver Surfer/AKAButters]

"I would challenge anyone one reading this thread who works for a public or private but non governmental organization to tell us how many Blacks occupy executive positions in their companies. I hope I'm wrong, but I'd bet it's very few."

 

The number one manager/executive in my company is a black man.

 

He is by far the finest man I have ever known. He is a retired drill instructor from Lackland Air Force Base.

 

He has been with me since April of 1989.....yes, almost 20 years.

 

I can't imagine running my bidness with out him.

 

 

Right on WIP! I work for a company that employs in excess of 75K people. Our Supply Chain VP is black, my Corporate Logistics boss is black, our VP of HR is black, and there are countless other minorities in positons of authority. This makes not one damn bit of diffence to me as they are all amazing individuals with impeccable qualifications, education, and talent. Beyond that, they are excellent communicators, champions of diversity and fairnesss, and most of all warm and caring individuals. I can honestly say that I love how each of them has contributed to our company, the community, and the personal growth and well being of all employees. I am a better person for knowing them.

 

My gripe lies with the Sharpton's of the world who look to turn every misfortune into a racial battlefield and fuel the fires of hatred and devisiveness, or those who use racism to describe their lack of progress or growth when no effort has been made on their part to grow themselves. In my mind there are slackers and neerdowells of every race and that's fine, in those cases all that I ask is that you don't drop the race card in my face when you fail to progress. Have I seen instances where minorities have been treate unfarily? Absolutely, and I despise and condemn those actions for what they are. It sucks, and I respect and admire those who are able to rise above. I also recognize that it can be so extreme in some case that people are beaten down and unable to rise above. I do feel that the tide is shifting and in many areas racism is less prevalent.

 

When I returned from Vietnam in 1974, I was unable to get the classes I needed for my degree because the Vietnamese (or are they yellow people? Is that PC?God, I'm so tired of this s&%t!) refugees had priority for enrollment. Wait a minute! I just spent two years of my life trying to help and defend these folks (right or wrong), and now I must put my dreams aside once again? I was at the time, upset, but not bitter. Did it stop me? No. Was i more difficult? You betcha. Was it worth it? Well, I know many highly educated, successful Vietnamese that I have the privelege of working alongside. I guess I'm trying to say that many of us face challenges regardless of our DNA.

 

I wish folks would just let all of this racial BS go and get on with it. I don't care what color you are or where you are from. I only care about who you are and how you contribute to the overall well being or advancement of the human race. Referring to Obama as a black American IMO is devisive. Someone said earlier, he is as black as he is white, an American. Get over it!

 

I must say when I sam the chimp cartoon, the first thing that came to my mind was that it was a slam on Obama, and I immediatley thought, "how f&%$'d up is that? It was clearly vague enough to lead to misinterpretation. Really poor journalism and journalist editing at a minimum. What's to defend? Someone should lose their job. They will certainly lose readership.

 

Anyway. What a great forum. Hope I didn't offend anyone

[beemerman2k]

IMHO that is how most black people view themselves, thus keeping us divided.

 

You say that as though it's a bad thing. The fact that America has sub-cultures speaks to our strengths, not our weaknesses. Our diversity is what gives us a competitive advantage over many other countries. Look at how comparatively creative our collective culture is: movies and music born here are exported and warmly received all over the world. Just like we don't need a nation of purely cruiser riders, but sport bikers, tourers, and custom choppers make those bike gatherings all the more appealing, so too do our numerous sub-cultures. Were we not such a free and open society, sub-cultures would not be permitted, let alone valued and allowed to fully flourish and mature.

 

The only problem is when there is discrimination against members of a subculture that society needs to pause and consider its ways. But the mere presence of subcultures is a good thing in my view.

[SweetP]

Beemerman,

 

I think KDeline has a legitimate question and I also think your response was a bit of a dodge. There are myriad so-called 'sub-cultures' in America and they do have serious concerns about a range of issues. They form organizations, hire lobbyists, elect political representatives, start corporations, etc. etc. But these are generally in the framework of ensuring that they get equally in housing, jobs, education and so forth. As entertaining or image/confidence building as Miss Black America may be, it does fly in the face of equality because the contestants have to be of a particular race to compete. Even though the rules don't specifically state it, the official organization language leaves no doubt. So, where's the outrage? And why is that any different from a PRIVATE club wanting to limit membership to whites?

 

When I worked for the government in the 1980s, my agency approved a proposal for black officers to start their own 'Black Affairs' group, complete with a one day presentation of all kinds of subjects on black history, achievement, issues, etc. to which was attached a MANDATORY attendance by all officers during official work hours. Yet when another officer proposed to establish an 'Irish-American Affairs' group, it was refused, with no explanation. I refused to attend the Black Affairs presentation, not because I was anti-black, but because I was anti-discrimination. Fair is fair.

 

This isn't about selling beauty products or magazines, it's about double standards and the cowardice to denounce them.

 

 

[Boone60]

The only problem is when there is discrimination against members of a subculture that society needs to pause and consider its ways. But the mere presence of subcultures is a good thing in my view.

 

I disagree, discrimination against anyone is wrong. I dislike forms that ask if I'm White, Black, Asian, etc.. Which leads to affirmative action, and whether race should be a factor in hiring or college admissions.

 

 

[REVz]

The point I was trying to make is that the educated wealthy from the right families seem to have at least one thing in common with your uneducated poor who are religious: the desire to associate exclusively with others who think, act, and look the same way they do. From that perspective, I see very little difference between racial discrimination and social discrimination.

 

A lesson within a lesson for me and I thank you for helping me see it. What does this mean?

 

A few years ago, at first blush to the comment above I might have felt agitated at the categorization of the "uneducated religious." Some years have passed, you take a deep breath and you read on to the last sentence and say, yeah...I agree.

 

I can't say I'm as well educated or as highly trained as most here seem to be. I have a few graduate degrees, and I am religious.

 

That said, I am now living in a community that has a sector of fairly affluent population and racially UN-diverse with regard to African-Americans. At the same time it is a community, that is diverse with respect to people from cultures from literally the entire world. In this small town we have world corporate offices of two very large companies. These same white-collar executives and scientists are a big part of the community here, and quite frankly a big part of our church community too. So the uneducated religious categorization would be quite a misnomer here, but your concluding point is well taken.

 

Classism can and does exist. Here rental and broken down homes are quickly purchased when vacated, they are torn down, and grass is growing within a week(that would be the one week of summer ;-), truthfully I have never seen anything like it. On the flip side the corporate money/foundations/etc., makes this community have things(arts, science, parks, community activism, public school programs) most larger towns would not even begin to have.

 

Yet, there is classism here in the schools, businesses, clubs, social events etc. So you are right with the point that the desire to associate exclusivelydoes exist, it does here.

 

Whether that meets the definition of social discrimination you meant or not I will leave that up to you, I don't think that was your point. This town hasn't been around for 200+ years, and I haven't seen anybody physically abused for not having the right social dress, home, clubs, and toys.

 

And my point?

 

It was right in the beginning of this, after a few years you take a deep breath try to understand what the other guy is saying and you may just discover it wasn't the categorization you thought it was. And even if it was, if you stop listening at the beginning you miss the other point(s) which were right on.

 

I pray that we are moving ever closer to that time when we can take a deep breath and listen to what goes on around us, and keep listening when the discussion seems to get choppy. I am sure that forms of discrimination will continue to exist, I can only hope that as the years pass by it is diminished to the largest degree possible.

 

I'm glad that this post has gone on for 11+ pages, it means that the group hasn't stopped listening to the others...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Boone60]

But there is a difference between self-selected grouping (such as anglo, black, asian, hispanic students eating together in a college cafeteria) and external grouping, based on appearance. You can instantly and at a distance tell what "race" a person likely belongs to by his skin color, without knowing anything at all about his social status (unless he's wearing a HD t-shirt ). I occasionally dress like a bum, but I'm a white bum, which carries some degree of privilege with it.

 

Last night I stumbled on a great "turn the tables" video on YouTube: The Job

 

Selden,

I was thinking about the college dining room self-segregation when I read the speech by Eric Holder. Lots of opportunities are being lost by this self-selected grouping.

[beemerman2k]

This isn't about selling beauty products or magazines, it's about double standards and the cowardice to denounce them.

 

This is a difficult question to answer and I'll tell you why. It's only in the time that I have been an adult in this country that a black woman could become a "Miss America", and that was Vanessa Williams back in the 80's. It's only been in the past 10 or so years a black person could be a head coach of a NFL football team or a quarterback of an NFL football team. Black films were nonexistent until Spike Lee came along and finally made some. And now you name a black movie star and I'll show you the black film avenue that gave that person their start (usually a Spike Lee movie). Wesley Snipes, Hallie Barry, Sam Jackson, Lawrence Fishburne, Martin Lawrence, and the list goes on. You never would have heard of these people if they didn't have an avenue for their talents and skills. Many sub-cultures will create mirror organizations to provide avenues of achievement for its members when such avenues do not exist in the mainstream culture.

 

Anyone who is sane would much rather be a star in the mainstream culture than in any sub culture, believe me! Hallie Barry isn't going to quit working in Hollywood so she can limit her career to black films I assure you that (to the relief of many male viewers out there I'm sure!)

 

There used to be a "Negro League" in baseball in this country. What happened to it? Well, the MLB opened up to all people and now the Negro Leagues are a distant memory.

 

As various avenues open up, you'll see these sub-cultural mirror organizations disappear. They don't exist out of some warped desire on the part of blacks to be different and exclusionary, they exist because members of this particular subgroup were effectively excluded from participation in mainstream American culture. Do you really think that Art Shell was the first black man eligible to be an NFL head coach? That Jackie Robinson was the first black man eligible to play professional level baseball?

 

I cannot answer for all that is being done in this regard, there are some strange things happening out there in the name of diversity that even have me scratching my head, I can only address the historical reasons for such thinking. The ground is shifting faster than societies can adjust, and some of us still live in a past world that does not reflect today's realities. I will say this, though, as America opens up these sub-cultural mirror avenues will deteriorate for lack of interest, just like the Negro League in baseball did. For instance, my favorite sport is college football. On Saturday, I don't watch Grambling versus Florida A&M, even though those are football teams from historically black colleges. No, I want to see the best that the nation has to offer, so I watch USC versus Notre Dame, Texas v Oklahoma, Michigan v Ohio State, Florida v Florida State, baby

 

I have 3 lovely black daughters and I think the world of them. All 3 of them go to Catholic schools that are overwhelmingly white. They love it there and the school loves them; I don't think words like "racism" would ever find a home there. But this reality was not always the case. It is today and for that we are all grateful.

 

Oh, back to the question at hand: no one is being a coward by not addressing them. These are relic of yesterdays thinking, and as people realize that today is not yesterday, in general such race based activities will dissolve. Yes, there will always be those who are slow to get with the times, but they will come around when there is dwindling support for their outdated plans. Feel free to continue to be the voice of reason; if you feel something is outdated and no longer necessary (or was never necessary), speak up! Engage in dialog that investigates why it still exists, or why it is necessary in the first place. You won't win them all, but maybe you'll hasten the day when folks start living in the present.

[beemerman2k]

Oh, one last thought. To contend that the black sub-culture is what's keeping us divided is also, I would argue, an outdated view of things. Of the many blacks you see in the media today, how many of them live in what would be considered "black neighborhoods", and send their children to black schools? Today, historically black colleges are operating with extremely tight budgets because blacks by and large no longer feel it necessary to attend these colleges. How many of your black friends, riding buddies, and co-workers live in black neighborhoods?

 

Today, "classism" reigns supreme. Middle class people congregate together regardless of race. Same with the upper classes; Oprah Winfrey won't even think about visiting my mostly white neighborhood - we're a bit too plebeian for her tastes!

 

Blacks, by and large, are finding their way into the mainstream; living in non-black neighborhoods, attending non-black schools, working at non-black corporations, and riding in non-black motorcycle groups (thus, my presence here!). It's the poor of all our respective races that are probably the last to truly integrate.

[Whip]

I would like to comment on "classism". I don't want to argue about whether or not it exists cause it does.

 

"Classism" is what you make of it.......or what you let it make of you.

 

 

I have run in almost all the "classes" in my life....except the super rich.

 

I ran the streets as a young man hangin out with thugs carrying chains. Tryin to figure out a way to get $$ without goin to jail.

 

I've spent many a day and night with athletes in an urban area doin anything from playin basketball for a $1 a game to goin runnin at 5am in the dead of winter tryin to stay one step ahead of a rival school or competitor. I can still see everyone of their faces. Between us we didn't have change for $5.

 

I've traveled the US with millionaires in private jets and played golf at "restricted" country clubs. No one carried anything less than a $20.

 

I've even hung out with foreigners on bikes in Torrey. Money has never even come up in conversation.

 

 

The only group that wasn't havin any fun and acted like they were never satisfied or happy with their lives or anyone around em was the group that had the most.

 

 

I've parted ways with them.......prolly for that reason....don't really know. They just don't fit into my life any longer.

 

 

 

How many days till Torrey????????????????

 

 

There's a bunch of great peeps and fun waitin on me when I get there.

 

 

Life is too short.

 

 

Your Philosopher

 

Whip

 

 

 

 

 

 

[beemerman2k]

The only problem is when there is discrimination against members of a subculture that society needs to pause and consider its ways. But the mere presence of subcultures is a good thing in my view.

 

I disagree, discrimination against anyone is wrong. I dislike forms that ask if I'm White, Black, Asian, etc.. Which leads to affirmative action, and whether race should be a factor in hiring or college admissions.

 

 

Yes, another relic from yesteryear. May the most qualified person get the job. Period. Don't like it? Then get qualified!

[Paul Mihalka]

A little bit of a hijack. What I find absurd is putting among "races" "hispanic". What is hispanic? It only means that they came to the USA from a Latin American country. It can be any combination in any proportion of mostly white, black, and idigenous Americans, and may be a bit of others. It is as much of a non-race as it can be.

[Heck]

+1

[upflying]

A little bit of a hijack. What I find absurd is putting among "races" "hispanic". What is hispanic? It only means that they came to the USA from a Latin American country. It can be any combination in any proportion of mostly white, black, and idigenous Americans, and may be a bit of others. It is as much of a non-race as it can be.

Agree, but the political correctness police has now required the term Hispanic. Calling someone Mexican could be deemed offensive.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

As various avenues open up, you'll see these sub-cultural mirror organizations disappear.

 

I suspect some of these sub-culture organizations you mention will not go quietly into the night as the Negro league did.

 

Certainly in some cases of racial conflict, righteous indignation seems like a very rational response. Those cases cases in which the response seems overblown can fall into two categories:

 

1. an entrenched attitude of vigilance toward any slight at all, a feeling of "virtue in victimhood," a sense of pleasure/power/accomplishment at putting the offender on the defensive.

 

2. a deliberate, conscious effort to overstate the egregiousness of the offense in order to ensure the longevity of an organization(s) dedicated to fighting oppression.

 

Having read the NY Post's apology for the cartoon, today I saw an article quoting the NAACP chairman as follows:

 

"This is tastelessness taken to the extreme," he said. "For the publication to suggest the only people who object to it are constant critics of the New York Post is beyond ridiculous.

 

"This was an invitation to assassination of the president of the United States and anyone who was not offended by it doesn't have any sensibilities."

 

Maybe I'm a socially inept engineer and I should be faulted for taking people at their word, but I didn't see where the Post's apology said that no one was upset except constant critics of the post. Should I start reading between the lines more, or does the NAACP chairman need a lesson in reading comprehension?

 

And the rest of his statement - about the cartoon being an invitation to assassinate the president, and anyone who disagrees has no sensibilities - wow. That's not an opinion leader, that's an opinion dictator.

 

So why would he make statements like that? Does he really feel this way? Is he trying to get people to feel like they need the NAACP to fight for them, so that the NAACP will continue to have dues-paying members into the distant future?

 

I do not suggest racism is dead, but I do believe it will die a long, long time before organizations like the NAACP do.

 

No, I want to see the best that the nation has to offer, so I watch USC versus Notre Dame, Texas v Oklahoma, Michigan v Ohio State, Florida v Florida State, baby

 

I humbly suggest you remove Michigan from your list...

[velomoto]

... So why would he make statements like that? Does he really feel this way? Is he trying to get people to feel like they need the NAACP to fight for them, so that the NAACP will continue to have dues-paying members into the distant future?

To those with knowledge of the American history, or the recent election, the racism in the cartoon is clear. I for one was astonished to find people who had absolutely no understanding of the underlying messages of the cartoon.

 

Perhaps the anger is feigned and is intended to stir up support - but this would be no different than many of the actions of the NRA and other political groups. Money is power. More members, more money...

 

No, I want to see the best that the nation has to offer, so I watch USC versus Notre Dame, Texas v Oklahoma, Michigan v Ohio State, Florida v Florida State, baby

 

I humbly suggest you remove Michigan from your list...

Yes - I'd second that recommendation... and replace them with Penn State!

[Selden]

"This was an invitation to assassination of the president of the United States and anyone who was not offended by it doesn't have any sensibilities."

I feel like I must be one of the last people in the nation not to have seen the cartoon, so I googled it last night. I must not have any sensibilities, because this reading of the cartoon didn't occur to me until I saw this quote. However, after reading this, I see the cartoon in an entirely different light, and I better understand the furor now.

[BanjoBoy]

Can we talk about this?

I grew up a Red-Neck/Hill-Billie in the backwoods of northern CA, and was usually on the "giving" end of racism. Then I met this cool Chinese lady in '83 and ended up marring her.

Her parents hated "round eyes" and my parents didn't like anybody who wasn't white. We told our parents to go to hell and eloped to Reno. We are still happily married today, and find our laughter together. Even though we have relations with our surviving parents, it's a shame that ignorance, and racism had to change things.

 

I had to trow my two cents in here, because now I've been on both sides of racism.

Even though our Country has a ways to go as far as racism is concerned, we've come a real long ways. I think each generation is more "enlightened" than the last.

 

"I write this because I feel very grateful to belong to a community of riders that, quite frankly, are very honorable and so far ahead of the social curve so to speak."

We probably are ahead of the curve, because that RT you're riding doesn't care what color you are or where you're from, it just likes to be ridden!

I think it is good that we can talk about these things here. It makes us all more enlightened.

 

I'm proud to be an American, and I'm proud to be a BMWST member!

 

[beemerman2k]

I'm proud to be an American, and I'm proud to be a BMWST member!

 

After reading and participating in this discussion for all these pages, I feel the same way, too.

 

[MotorinLA]

Although it is good to have discussions about controversial subjects and sometimes this leads to being able to see a different point of view, there are limitations to what can be accomplished simply by sharing opinions and talking.

 

Take politics as an example. It is a prohibited subject on this board. Why? I suspect because it causes division and never leads to a productive outcome. When beliefs are deeply ingrained in people, no amount of ‘discussion’ is going to lead to agreement or mutual understanding. IMO in these cases discussion will only lead to stronger polarization.

 

As a LEO I probably get publicly accused of being a racist more often than the average person. Based on my personal experience I can say that most of my efforts to explain my actions to my accusers have had little or no noticeable success. Explaining that the reason the person is getting a ticket is because they committed an infraction, not because of their skin color is seldom met with a positive response. An elderly Black man even told me, “Just wait until Obama becomes president!” in some apparent ‘threat’ that when this took place no Black person would be stopped for running a stop sign ever again. The only exception I have seen to this is people that use ‘the race card’ simply as an attempt to get out of a ticket, not because they actually feel that the stop was racially motivated. Conversation usually reveals the difference between these groups fairly quickly.

 

Do I personally make some assumptions based on skin color? Of course. However, these assumptions are generally more of a culturally based nature than a racially based nature.

 

Why is it that children often tend to be more colorblind? Because they don’t constantly discuss and focus on race as an important issue. It is my opinion that race is such an issue in the US because we talk about it too much. Should we address the issues of inequality based on race? Sure. Do we create further polarization between races by constantly focusing on race? I personally believe we do.

 

[Dave McReynolds]

Take politics as an example. It is a prohibited subject on this board. Why? I suspect because it causes division and never leads to a productive outcome. When beliefs are deeply ingrained in people, no amount of ‘discussion’ is going to lead to agreement or mutual understanding. IMO in these cases discussion will only lead to stronger polarization.

 

One difference is that most people, I believe, left, right, or center, would truly like to see better race relations in this country. And are willing to listen to different peoples' views of how to make that happen. Few people feel that further polarization among the races would be a good thing.

 

I don't think the same thing can be said of politics. Most people with polarized views, to the right or to the left, are perfectly happy with those polarized views, thank you very much, and don't particularly believe that a movement toward the center or in any other direction other than theirs would be a particularly good thing.

 

As the Romans used to say, quod erat demonstrandum: just compare the tone of this discussion with some political (or verging on political) discussions we have had.

[beemerman2k]

MotorinLA, to me, there are 2 basic reasons (no doubt more, but I see these 2 most often) that kill what could otherwise be productive conversation:

 

1) People engage in the discussion to teach, rather than to learn. So confident are we that we have the truth, that we want to go and pour it all over everyone else and whoever doesn't want to listen to our point of view (like the example Mitch provided of the NAACP chairman) we violently ostracize them from the conversation. That's why I promote an attitude of seek first to understand, then to be understood. I have learned a lot from others in this discussion on race. Furthermore, I am pleasantly surprised at how well non-blacks understand racism in America. Some of these posts have been incredibly insightful and have helped me to see how I appear in the eyes of others, and therefore how I can tailor my position to more closely match reality.

 

2) We somehow link ourselves to "symbols" and then feel we have to defend that symbol. The symbol might be an idea, a person, a political party, a religion, a deity, or whatever. But as soon as someone verbally questions our symbol (Barack Obama, George W Bush, Democrats, Republicans, NAACP, Al Sharpton, Rush Limbaugh), we take the assault personally and then angrily respond in kind.

 

Both of these attitudes are killers when it comes to having a productive conversation on anything, especially race, politics, and religion.

 

In keeping with this, I do want to challenge all to engage with the priority of learning rather than teaching. That means you do not presume to be so knowledgeable as to be a teacher; if someone asks you for clarity or for an opinion, then there's an opportunity to share your views. If they are warmly received, you just taught! Congratulations. But your real test is whether you learned anything from the engagement. If not, then why not? And presuming you were dealing with a bunch of close minded idiots is not an adequate excuse, either. I think blacks really need to take this to heart in discussing race. There is an assumption in this country that blacks don't need to be taught when it comes to this subject, but I think this is false. We have just as much to learn as anyone does and so we, too, especially need to show up to the table to learn. What do we need to learn? How to let go of the past for starters. How to live as full and responsible citizens in a free country as well. How to raise strong families as is the standard among our white counterparts, too. We blacks have a lot to learn! How to vote, how to live such that we avoid having to deal with the criminal justice system, how to....

 

Secondly, engage dispassionately. Your ideas or your leaders do not depend upon you for their survival! If they are strong and true, they can stand up to the light of scrutiny all by themselves. Deities don't need you to come to their rescue either, they are perfectly capable of standing on their own. Otherwise, all we achieve is the silence of counter views, but silence does not equal agreement.

 

I suppose a good third would be to know when to walk away from an encounter gone bad. When tempers rise and passions get stirred, that's probably a good sign that any hope of a productive conversation is now gone.

 

Now, having said all of this, we've made it this far as a nation with our closed approach to discussing race, so maybe it's best to keep a lid on it. I don't think so, though. If we cannot approach the subject with mutual humility and a desire first to learn, then to teach, then it's all a futile effort. But if we can manage to open the door on this closeted subject, freedom and peace will pour down upon our nation like never in history. Blacks will come to understand whites and therefore appreciate history in a way like never before. That doesn't mean agree with history, but understand it. And it's understanding that brings healing. Whites will understand blacks better as well, and be in a position to help life us out of the chains of history so we can all celebrate this great country and our great history together.

 

As Jesus of Nazareth would say, "The truth shall make you free". But no one learn the truth if they don't show up FIRST with a desire to learn.

[MotorinLA]

Beemerman2k,

 

I think that you are making a very good point about being open to learning, however, sadly I think that a large portion of our population, regardless of race, is far less receptive and open-minded than yourself (myself included).

 

Discussions involving race are often rooted in deep beliefs and also involve a strong emotional component. If we could get people to be more personally responsible, more open-minded, more willing to learn and be more tolerant of each other, I’d write a lot less tickets. The problem is that human beings tend to be self-centered and self-serving (cynical, I know, but still ‘human nature’). Speeches about harmony and equality are great, but not very realistic based on what I have observed so far in my personal life (if you need proof, just look at all the ‘wonderful’ things people have done to each other through the last few thousand years).

 

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Perhaps the anger is feigned and is intended to stir up support - but this would be no different than many of the actions of the NRA and other political groups. Money is power. More members, more money...

 

Agreed, the NAACP and other organizations like it can exist only as long as Colored People believe they need a National Association to help them Advance. The problem is that such organizations have a vested interest in the continued existence of racial strife, much as the military-industrial complex has a vested interest in tweaking foreign policy so as to foment international military conflicts. It's one thing when an organization pumps up people's fear the loss of their guns and distrust of politicians; it's something else entirely when an organization pumps up people's fear and distrust of their neighbors.

 

I suspect these organizations will continue to hold the position that "race relations have come a long way, but still have a long way to go," regardless of what the actual state of race relations may be. I think it will be necessary for black people at some point to pull back from the harsh rhetoric of black "opinion leaders," because I don't believe those leaders will rein in their own rhetoric at an appropriate time - regardless of when any of us feels the "appropriate time" may be.

[Selden]

Eventually we will reach a point of diminishing returns, but I don't think we're there yet. And then something else will come along.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Interestingly enough, I found the following article a few minutes after my previous post:

 

A New Mission for the NAACP

The youngest president in association history leads at a time when many question the body's very necessity.

 

 

 

[tallman]

A good friend has just become head of our local NAACP.

This will be the closest link to leadership in that organization

I've had.

He is a good person and it will be interesting to see what direction he takes (tries to?) them.

[DaveTheAffable]

Hmmmm... been watching for a few days, and even commented a little.

 

There are people in this country, and outside this country, that would LOVE to see America crumble.

 

The tools they will use to implement the destruction will be largely financial, racial, sexual, or gender inequities issues.

 

Does it go unnoticed by us all, that racial cartoons and chimpanzee cartoons were "acceptable" when they were put upon George Bush and Condoleeza Rice? Or Clarence Thomas?

 

No... the outcry only comes when the "offense" is levied against someone who is trying to move America further and further down the path of socialism and/or blatant communism.

 

A friend of mine returned from a trip to Russia a few years ago and told of meeting conservative Russians who asked, "Why is America going down the path that they told us was so wrong for so many years?"

 

We think this long, lengthy thread is about racism. It is not.

 

It is about people OUTSIDE of this forum that want to keep the topic alive, festering, bubbling. Those people are going to use it, along with the financial, sexual, and gender inequities in our society to CONVINCE us that the government needs to step in and be our answer in all things.

 

I wonder how many of us, in the last days this post has been going on, have written our Representatives, or attended a town hall meeting, or in someway recognized that there is a MUCH bigger thing going on.

 

...DaveTheAffable, feeling rather contemplative.

[beemerman2k]

Does it go unnoticed by us all, that racial cartoons and chimpanzee cartoons were "acceptable" when they were put upon George Bush and Condoleeza Rice? Or Clarence Thomas?

 

No... the outcry only comes when the "offense" is levied against someone who is trying to move America further and further down the path of socialism and/or blatant communism.

 

We think this long, lengthy thread is about racism. It is not.

 

I think you need to start a new thread. I do not agree with what you are saying and this is what I consider to be very off topic. Racial discrimination in this country precedes communism, socialism, or whatever else you want to assign blame to. This is about each of us dealing with the one person we have control over, our own lives and our own hearts.

[DaveTheAffable]

Does it go unnoticed by us all, that racial cartoons and chimpanzee cartoons were "acceptable" when they were put upon George Bush and Condoleeza Rice? Or Clarence Thomas?

 

No... the outcry only comes when the "offense" is levied against someone who is trying to move America further and further down the path of socialism and/or blatant communism.

 

We think this long, lengthy thread is about racism. It is not.

 

I think you need to start a new thread. I do not agree with what you are saying and this is what I consider to be very off topic. Racial discrimination in this country precedes communism, socialism, or whatever else you want to assign blame to. This is about each of us dealing with the one person we have control over, our own lives and our own hearts.

 

With apology if it seemed like a hijack. I think what's been said INSIDE this forum has great value, and I have learned from it.

 

I painted with too broad a brush when I said "We think this long, lengthy thread is about racism. It is not." That was unfair.

 

My greater concern was for a national view that looks at multiple issues... and a new thread would have been more appropriate. I would delete the post, but that then causes more confusion.

 

And on a personal note... I like your posts Beemerman!

 

[beemerman2k]

Thank you Dave.

 

I started this thread for 2 reasons:

 

1) thank this great community for always telling it like it is, even on issues of discrimination and

 

2) to encourage positive and productive communications.

 

I would not argue for a second that there are parties out there who will seize upon our social weaknesses for their own gain, but that's not what divides us -- external parties exploiting us that is. Each of us needs to always be, "wise as serpents, yet innocent as doves"; aware of our surroundings yet ensuring that our own hearts and hands are clean.

 

To me, government has played as great a role as it possibly can when Eric Holder made the statement that inspired this thread. Any greater role by government would be inappropriate in my view (and even his position is one that I stated up front that I don't agree with, I think people are open to discussing this subject when given a good forum to do so).

 

[REVz]

ironic? From the Writer's Almanac today(2/23)...

 

"It's the birthday of W.E.B. Du Bois, (books by this author) born in Great Barrington, Massachusetts (1868). His town was virtually all white. But he didn't really notice racial discrimination — he said that he was only aware of it when people visited from out of town. He was smart; he went to Fisk University in Nashville and then to Harvard, where he was the first African-American to get a Ph.D. He taught sociology at the University of Pennsylvania, and he carried out the first serious sociological study of African-Americans, which showed that poverty and crime in black communities were a result of racial barriers in education and employment. In 1909, he founded NAACP, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People."

 

 

[tallman]

NAACP call for firing and boycott of NY Times

 

 

And, same as this thread?

If We Don't Talk About Race.... Leonard Pitts

[Stir]

Hey, kudos for you to have the cajones to bring this up. :-)

 

That said, I saw this on Digg, took the test and found out I prefer black people....slightly.

 

[Stir]

smiller:The formal barriers to minority involvement in society are falling rapidly (including the rather striking recent example), but I'm not sure that we can quite yet consider the job done.

Sorry, Seth, but that's not my experience. For 12 years, I've worked with a wide variety of private and public companies; and, my anecdotal experience is clear. Blacks are significantly underrepresented in supervisory or leadership positions. That can only be for one reason.

 

I don't agree with your hypothesis. Blacks are over represented in Sports, entertainment and politics. Blacks are ~11% of the population. And yet in these fields, they are hugely successful. Why? I feel because there is a cultural interest in those fields. In the field of engineering or business, there just seems to be a lot less participation. One of the best software engineers I know, is black. He is rewarded for his talents. I don't know any other black engineers. I think it comes down to interest and pursuit. It does not seem to be one of racism. I see the same effect with white engineers. White kids aren't interested in engineering or going to engineering school, so the majority of engineers I see are the H1b Visas from India.

[Selden]

NAACP call for firing and boycott of NY Times

Um, that should read New York Post. These are somewhat different newspapers.

[ghaverkamp]

Sorry, Seth, but that's not my experience. For 12 years, I've worked with a wide variety of private and public companies; and, my anecdotal experience is clear. Blacks are significantly underrepresented in supervisory or leadership positions. That can only be for one reason.

 

I don't agree with your hypothesis. Blacks are over represented in Sports, entertainment and politics. Blacks are ~11% of the population. And yet in these fields, they are hugely successful. Why?

 

I'd be curious how you arrived at your numbers. Black athletes may be overrepresented in comparison to the country at large. Certainly, blacks are hugely underrepresented in supervisory and leadership positions in athletics. I seriously doubt you can find any numbers to support that blacks are overrepresented in entertainment or, especially, politics.

 

I feel because there is a cultural interest in those fields. In the field of engineering or business, there just seems to be a lot less participation. One of the best software engineers I know, is black. He is rewarded for his talents. I don't know any other black engineers. I think it comes down to interest and pursuit. It does not seem to be one of racism.

 

It doesn't take "formal barriers" (as Seth called them) to constitute racism. The formal barriers are much easier to remedy.

[smiller]

It doesn't take "formal barriers" (as Seth called them) to constitute racism. The formal barriers are much easier to remedy.

Yes, which FWIW is why I noted that we should not consider the job done simply because the formal barriers are diminishing. The remaining 'informal' racism is a much more insidious and difficult target. That's what I was trying to say even if I didn't communicate it well.

[Polo]

A little bit of a hijack. What I find absurd is putting among "races" "hispanic". What is hispanic? It only means that they came to the USA from a Latin American country. It can be any combination in any proportion of mostly white, black, and idigenous Americans, and may be a bit of others. It is as much of a non-race as it can be.

 

Hispanics are from Hispania, as Caucasians are from Caucasia.

[Paul Mihalka]

A little bit of a hijack. What I find absurd is putting among "races" "hispanic". What is hispanic? It only means that they came to the USA from a Latin American country. It can be any combination in any proportion of mostly white, black, and idigenous Americans, and may be a bit of others. It is as much of a non-race as it can be.

 

Hispanics are from Hispania, as Caucasians are from Caucasia.

 

You are absolutely correct in it's real meaning, but in the USA it is used in a different definition but still mixed in with "races" for population statistics.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic#Definitions_in_the_United_States

[Pilgrim]

I'm proud to be an American, and I'm proud to be a BMWST member!

 

After reading and participating in this discussion for all these pages, I feel the same way, too.

 

Thanks for bringing this up, James. Your cogent thoughts have clarified many things for me. I think I get it all now.

 

Can fix me up with Hallie Berry? I promise not to embarrass you.

 

Pilgrim

[Polo]

This is a very difficult subject. It has so many angles.

 

I like many of you have never really felt the sting of discrimination. I am Mexican, but I do not represent the stereotype, thus only after I engage in relaxed conversation and my accent surfaces do people begin noticing differences.

 

Political correctness in my opinion is what keeps differences present. If I need to think about what I should call this or that person, then I can't stop thinking about them as different.

 

I believe that's what David meant. I would submit that skin color should be used as an adjetive, but not as a label.

 

I have friends and acquaintances from many ethnic backgrounds, but I try to keep that in mind only in regard to their sensitivities, rather than to their race.

 

I make it a point to remember not to offer chorizo and eggs to my muslim friend, a beer to my Mormon buddy, or a steak to my vegetarian pal. But that is where I draw the line. I learned long a go that trash comes in every color, and so does treasure.

 

I don't have as many friends as I would like, but I certainly would like to keep all of the ones I do have.