US: A Nation of Cowards on Racial Matters

February 28, 2009

I think it's ironic that Clint and his end of the political spectrum are always whining about how "liberals" are self-absorbed, and his whole comment can be summarized as "I want to say whatever I want without having to care if it offends somebody else". Sorry if it's too much trouble to think about other people's feelings. What an a**.

Eebie, maybe he wants the same thing I do. That's the freedom to say whatever I want without having to care if it offends somebody else. Not necessarily to indulge in that freedom thoughtlessly, for self-censorship is the essence of manners, but to have that freedom, for it's hard to say almost anything any more without offending someone.

I read this to say:

"I should have freedom to say anything I want and you should not have freedom to respond".

You read that wrong. Completely wrong. Freedom of speech, and the freedom to impose private consequences as a result of speech or actions, flow both ways. The government should play no part in it, nor should any organization funded by the government play any part in inhibiting freedom of speech. I speak particularly there to colleges, especially public colleges.

Perhaps I read you wrong, too, for from what I see, your position would lead you in very few steps to the kind of "hate speech" laws that have been put in place in Canada and other countries. Do you look upon those laws sympathetically?

Finally, I will say that I am not particularly sensitive to hurt feelings, mine, or others, although I do generally try to avoid giving gratuitous, unfounded offense as a matter of simple courtesy.

Pilgrim

February 28, 2009

Hoo, not an easy subject to discuss, is it?

DavidEBSmith, were I to guess, I would bet my bottom dollar that you are a black man! I never thought I would ever meet a non-black man who understands how it feels to have to deal with these racial slights everyday to the level you do. You have paid close attention to the experiences of others who are not like you, and for that I commend you.

Our conversation on race must be held in a manner that is different from most other discussions. I would argue that the value of this conversation comes not from those who speak, but from those who listen. Anyone and everyone can and should feel free to speak freely and to know that they will be heard, no matter how different and unpopular their views might be. Yes, Dr. Martin Luther King's words will be heeded more than mine will, but that doesn't mean my sentiments are not legitimate and do not have value. DavidEBSmith might have incredible insight into the problem, but that doesn't mean his are the only views worth hearing. And I have learned much from everyone who posted on this thread even if I didn't appreciate the value of your views on first read. There are no right or wrong answers here, only real life experiences. To me, the only qualification a speaker must have is that they have lived life in the USA and have had interactions with people of other races.

That's how I view this subject; all views have value.

For what it's worth, I am going to comment on the very valuable sentiments expressed by Clint Eastwood, Pilgrim, EffBee, and others over the course of this thread with respect to the hypersensitivity blacks often have toward what we percieve as slights against us. I believe that the key to our collective maturity as a people (black Americans, specifically) rests in the very perspective these men have expressed.

March 1, 2009

Whew, beemerman2K! Glad you're back on the thread. Most of all because the tone you set throughout the thread is most likely to promote conversation.

On several side issues, I have already noted logical fallacies that arise when ardent folks get too warm in advocacy: In one sidebar alone, I could count faulty generalization AND faulty cause/effect . Most recently came the straw man in intentionally altering the quote of another.

I personally know several academic types, nearly monomaniacal in their race/class/gender interests, who are willing to look favorably upon campus speech codes as long as they make people talk nice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's been almost 40 years since Tom Wolfe pointed out how people with a bellyful of good intentions can make causes NOT work, or at least seem ridiculous. [At the time he was talking about Leonard Bernstein and his fashionable pandering of the Black Panthers, making sure his black servants were replaced by white ones for the party

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,904627,00.html? Review of Wolfe’s “Radical Chic” and “Mau-Mauing the Flak Catcher”: “Few scenes could better reveal the painfully comic convulsions that beset oldfashioned, dead-serious liberalism in the age of the ripoff, the put-on, and the total acceptance of verbal overkill.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nowadays, listening to young college students, I'm convinced that the old-fashioned guiltmongering once used upon and by earnest liberals will merely be viewed as odd. Well before Obama, it already sounded dated.

Perspective: Obama was elected to worldwide applause. Numerous late-night comedians satirize the near-mystical adulation of the media, blacks and whites. Holder brings up the "nation of cowards." You starting--and almost presiding--over the thread.

Point: Young, forward-looking, articulate black intellectuals and consultants, like we saw on CNN before the election, and who Shelby Steele and Robert Boynton have been writing about for over a decade--I hope hope hope they become the leaders and spokesmen for any conversations about race.

Don't let it be taken over by any old guard. They succeded much sooner than they believed. It's time for new voices.

March 1, 2009

The government should play no part in it, nor should any organization funded by the government play any part in inhibiting freedom of speech. I speak particularly there to colleges, especially public colleges.

Perhaps I read you wrong, too, for from what I see, your position would lead you in very few steps to the kind of "hate speech" laws that have been put in place in Canada and other countries. Do you look upon those laws sympathetically?

No. That's why I don't get why you and Clint are talking about restrictions on your freedom of speech. I don't think Al Sharpton protesting the NY Post or citizens complaining about the mayor of Los Alamitos involves any sort of government action, so it's not a first amendment issue, and I don't think anybody has (or should have) any sort of immunity from responses like that. For that matter, politicians or government officials expressing their negative opinions of someone's speech doesn't make it a first amendment issue, either, until they start trying to pass laws regulating the viewpoint they oppose.

I guess I'd have to disagree on the first part of this, insofar as, I can think of many legitimate situations where government restricts speech. Time/place/manner limits on political speech, billboard regulations, etc. etc.

An apropos example for this discussion would be a policy that prohibits speech that is racially/sexually/religiously offensive in the government workplace. Without getting into all the legal background on the tension between the first amendment and workplace discrimination laws, and because it starts getting into areas I can't opine about outside my employer, let's just cut to the chase and say that, if at my government workplace, somebody went around saying racially offensive things, I would expect that person to be disciplined, and I would not think that "freedom of speech" would be a particularly good defense.

March 1, 2009

OK, as if I haven't spilled enough of my guts already, what I'm going to say here really needs to say among us (right, fat chance, I know). I am simply saying that the perspectives and thoughts that I am about to share would rank among the most controversial ever said about black America. So it's a good thing I'm a nobody or this could get some feathers all in a tizzy!

Earlier in this thread, I mentioned my paternal grandfather, Moses Granberry of Moscow, TN. He passed away at the age of 84 back in the summer of 1999. That would place the year of his birth at 1915. No doubt he saw a lot over the course of his lifetime with respect to race relations in this country.

I asked him once what he thought of the Civil Rights Movement. He felt that it was ultimately a great cause, but he felt that at the time, we black Americans were not really ready for the freedom we were fighting for. He felt that it takes a real sense of maturity to be able to navigate your way in a truly free society, and that maturity was lacking among us blacks in his view.

And that, he told me, was the true and ultimate damage to black America from the institution of slavery. More than the labor or the brutality -- something that even "free" people often have to bear up under -- it was the complete dependence upon another for one's own well being. For countless generations, blacks lived lives unaware of the skills necessary to survive and to prosper in this country. Unable to read or to write, count money, work with financial institutions, and engage in other exercises necessary to conduct life in America, these slaves were totally dependent upon their masters for their survival.

To my grandfather, we had not yet fully grown up as a people as of the 60's. We really didn't yet appreciate what it really meant to be responsible for ones own well being, and for the well being of your family, your community, your race, and your country. I have thought much about what he told me and I think I see what he means. Whenever I see what I consider to be the unhealthy lifestyles of my fellow black Americans -- substance abuse, disrespecting law enforcement and other social authorities (teachers, parents, the elderly, political leaders), when I see the gansta rap culture spout their self righteous pronouncements against our country and those who are charged with its peace, when I see our terrible family structures -- or complete lack of a family structure! -- I am reminded of what my grandfather told me. Yes, in many respects, we have not yet grown up as a people. We too often live like children in need of outside authorities to look after us (this is probably the reason why the "center" of black America is to the "left" of American in general).

I think it was tallman who pointed out that 90% of the Africans brought over in the Slave Trade ended up at destinations outside of the United States. Those slaves, and of course our African brothers and sisters, weren't subject to the kind of treatment black American slaves were that created in us a sense of dependency. Therefore, many of them come to this country and wonder why black Americans aren't taking greater advantage of all that this place has to offer. They come from more mature cultures with more responsible values and a more directed purpose.

OK, my point. I am no sociologist, but I would bet my bottom dollar (although I already lost my bottom dollar to DavidEBSmith when he posted his remarkable understanding of what blacks go through, but let's pretend I still have another dollar left) that it is much more difficult to, on average, insult an African or a West Indian than it is a black American. Why? Different histories for one -- those words don't mean the same to them as they do to us because they were not oppressed by the same system that created them. But I think another reason is because they come from more mature cultures. And therefore, they don't allow themselves to be so offended by the ill meaning words of others.

Come to think of it, I am reading Barack Obama's book, "Dreams from my Father", and in it, he says this about an encounter his father had with a racist man in Hawaii (the Barack in this story is the father of our President, and "Gramps" is our President's maternal grandfather):

In fact, I can only recall only one story that dealt explicitly with race; as I got older, it would be repeated more often, as if it captured the essence of the morality tale that my father's life had become. According to the story, after long hours of study, my father had joined my grandfather and several other friends at a local Waikiki bar. Everyone was in a festive mood, eating and drinking to the sounds of a slack-key guitar, when a white man abruptly announced to the bartender, loudly enough for everyone to hear, that he shouldn't have to drink good liquor "next to a nigger." The room fell quiet and people turned to my father, expecting a fight. Instead, my father stood up, walked over to the man, smiled, and proceeded to lecture him about the folly of bigotry, the promise of the American dream, and the universal rights of man. "This fella felt so bad when Barack was finished," Gramps would say, "that he reached into his pocket and gave Barack a hundred dollars on the spot. Paid for all our drinks and puu-puus for the rest of the night -- and your dad's rent for the rest of the month." - Page 10-11 (in the hardcover version of the book)

Therefore, (I know, finally, right?) we black Americans still have a ways to go to reach full maturity as a people. We need to learn to stop giving others the power to offend us and instead, to turn such occasions as opportunities for understanding (if at all possible). At the very least we need to learn the power that we have to enable or disable the ability of someone else to offend us.

March 1, 2009

You know what? I would love to read a similar thread concerning women's issues. While I think it has the potential to be just as controversial as a thread on race, I think most of us guys acknowledge that we don't understand women at all (as our many nights sleeping on the couch can attest to!).

Personally, I believe that women in general have suffered from the same "parental" type treatment from men that black Americans have from whites. I think that this has produced a similar dependence in women on men that blacks have toward whites -- in fact, probably more so. Much more so I think.

In any case, I think it's easier for a white person to understand a black person than it is for a man to understand a woman. So I would readily and heartily welcome such a thread if any of you female readers are interested :thumbsup:

March 1, 2009

James,

Last night my wife and I went to an event sponsored by the Black History Cultural Club.

"Change, Where do we go from here?"

I find your comments about geographic influences interesting.

The drummers and dancers from West Africa and the Carribean were fantastic and stayed for the entire evening.

The step artists and hip hop performers from a local university left when their performance was over.

They missed out on more than they could imagine.

The keynote speaker is a former student of my wife who taught her in the 1980's.

That lady now has her Doctorate and it was moving to hear her acknowledge my wife and her father as the two major influences in her life.

She stated that it was the encouragement, support, and example my wife offered her during High School that gve her the inspiration

to pursue the path that has led her to become recognized as an expert in the field of low level socio-economic students and how to motivate them.

Strangely enough, on Friday, another "lady" accused my wife of being a racist b***h not willing to do anything to help her son (who was disciplined for beating the tar out of another student).

This "lady" has three students by three different fathers, none of whom are involved in the family.

The kids are in trouble and struggle with school. The mom's take is anyone who doesn't give in to her demands is a racist.

I don't hold out hope for her to change and find it unlikely her kids will either. I hope, however, I'm wrong about that.

My point is that racism is a two way street. No matter how well intentioned you may be, someone may not accept what you've done because you are different than they are, so it was "racism" that caused you to do that (either positive or negative) thing.

"You only did that so people don't think you're a racist" is as much of a problem as "you did that because you are a racist".

Best wishes.

March 1, 2009

But I think another reason is because they come from more mature cultures. And therefore, they don't allow themselves to be so offended by the ill meaning words of others.

I think this is at the center of Kent/Fernando's lament, and the point I made earlier in this thread ("anything you say can and will be used against you..."). Some people are so hypersensitive that it appears as if they are deliberately looking for the most offensive interpretation of anything anyone says to them.

...he shouldn't have to drink good liquor "next to a nigger."

Now that you've broken the ice with that quote, I can use that troubling word to further my point. "Nigger" is now widely interpreted as being so incredibly, unmitigably offensive, that in mainstream media you will almost never see it in print or hear it uttered. That is to say, context no longer matters, and as far as broadcast radio and television are concerned, "nigger" falls in the same category as Carlin's infamous Seven Dirty Words, despite the fact that the FCC has no problem with it.

When a word is considered so offensive that it overrides the defining power of context - so that a discussion even about the word becomes cumbersome - I think that just makes white folks want to back away slowly.

As an aside, the weird thing to me is that "nigger" is kind of meaningless, in terms of its etymology. The word is a corruption of the original Spanish/Portuguese word "negro," which simply means black. And yet, "nigger" carries more baggage than slurs that are deliberately constructed from words that bring definite meaning, such as "porch monkey" or "jungle bunny."

March 1, 2009

In any case, I think it's easier for a white person to understand a black person than it is for a man to understand a woman.

"We all know that men and women are different – "different" doesn’t begin to cover the ground, we aren’t even the same species. In fact, we’re so different I’m surprised we can breed.

Why is that?"

Taken from Men Are Hunters - Women Are Berrypickers copyright Kent Lundgren, 1999.

Black men and white men are the same species, but the male and female of each race have been misclassified as the same species. Thus, understanding and communication are easier in one case than in the other.

Pilgrim

March 1, 2009

As an aside, the weird thing to me is that "nigger" is kind of meaningless, in terms of its etymology. The word is a corruption of the original Spanish/Portuguese word "negro," which simply means black. And yet, "nigger" carries more baggage than slurs that are deliberately constructed from words that bring definite meaning, such as "porch monkey" or "jungle bunny."

Oooooooooooooooh! :eek:

OK, that's it. I'm calling for a race riot at Mitch's place. Who's in?!

(Oh wait, you're an engineer, aren't you Mitch? Maybe we can take 5 from the rioting and you can take a look at my bike, OK?)

Alright, change of plans. Race riot/Tech Daze at Mitch's! :rofl:

I didn't realize that using the word "nigger" was being so avoided in this discussion. Yes, context is everything, and if we're going to openly discuss race, then we have to openly discuss race!

The funny thing about that term is that, as you know, blacks often use it against one another. It's our sick humor that implicitly says, "you know those horrible and disgusting stereotypes whites put upon us? I totally reject those images, but in your case, the shoe fits" :rofl: That's the sick humor behind us calling one another that term.

OK, having said that, I loath the term. I do not use it nor do I permit other blacks to use it on me. I appreciate the humor behind its usage, and if these knuckleheads had the sense enough to limit their use to private contexts I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with it (although I would think to myself that we need to elevate our own image of ourselves).

I think the other very real concern among us blacks is this: we are a minority in virtually every context in which we live, from work to school to the gym to sports to ... So the last thing we want to have to tolerate is folks carelessly tossing around insulting terms, and then telling us not to be so thin-skinned about it! Yes, that word only as the meaning that I assign to it, and it only has the value that I assign to the speaker. Agreed. But I still don't want to have to hear racially demeaning terms as I live my life. This kind of scenario is a nightmare one among us black folks, so that has a lot to do with the hyper-sensitive reaction you might get from us if we perceive a lack of respect based upon our race.

To that, I can only say what I have already said many times: stand strong and do the right thing! If your attempts at reconciliation are mistaken for racism, do not take it personally. Do not! Stand strong! Your sentiments are not in vain. Your listener might need some time, but usually, eventually, your message of freedom and understanding will sink in. Of that I am pretty confident :thumbsup:

March 1, 2009

My point is that racism is a two way street. No matter how well intentioned you may be, someone may not accept what you've done because you are different than they are, so it was "racism" that caused you to do that (either positive or negative) thing.

"You only did that so people don't think you're a racist" is as much of a problem as "you did that because you are a racist".

Best wishes.

Yes, this is a tough scenario to have to deal with. Again, say the right thing (and your conscience is the judge of what the "right thing to say" is), and do the right thing, and then move on.

OK, since I'm into quoting folks, allow me to share one of my favorite passages from the Christian Bible to make a point:

Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, i will be measured to you.

Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eyes and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, "Let me take the speck out of your eyes", when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

These are the words of Jesus of Nazareth as recorded by his apostle Matthew in the 7th chapter (and can I get an amen? ..AMEN! OK, time to pass the plate :smile:)

When we first dwell on the problems and faults of another, that creates an environment of hostility and conflict. Little will be accomplished here. But when we first dwell on our own shortcomings, all manner of doors open up. What Jesus is saying here is not Christian doctrine, it's the reality of how humans behave! You don't need an ounce of Christian faith to see and understand the point he is making.

When a black person is caught up in dwelling on the perceived speck of saw dust in the eyes of a white person, or when a white person is dwelling on the speck of sawdust in the black person's eye, you can forget about communication and understanding. It ain't gonna happen.

The best thing that we can do is to first take the plank out of our own eye. In other words, approach the conversation by first admitting your own faults, even if that fault is your failure to understand certain concepts (like I don't understand why that NY Post cartoon was racially offensive or I don't understand why you think everything I do is because I am a racist. Help me out here, would you please?). If the person you are dealing with has integrity, they will reciprocate with a mutual open attitude that invites your input as well.

I remember a friend of mine named Terry, who belonged to a Christian group I used to belong to back in college when he said to Jim, another friend of mine, "brother, please help me to remove the plank from my own eye". To that, Jim responded with, "but why?". Then Terry said, "so I can see clearly to remove the speck from your eye". This was Terry's diplomatic way of wanting to discuss a problem he was having with Jim, but also wanting to first invite Jim to comment on Terry's own short comings. I was quite impressed with Terry's approach to the problem they were having.

I have noticed that in the course of this thread, when I have openly admitted or discussed shortcomings in the black community, it was follow up with whites discussing how they have fallen short as well. Go back and peruse this thread and you'll see the pattern I am talking about. "Openness breeds openness" my preacher used to say.

In any case, it's this type of non-defensive attitude that everyone is going to have to adapt for us as a nation to have a successful conversation on race. Clearly, not everyone is ready for such an engagement, but we will be someday. Of that I have no doubt.

March 1, 2009

Black men and white men are the same species, but the male and female of each race have been misclassified as the same species. Thus, understanding and communication are easier in one case than in the other.

Pilgrim

I remember when a woman I knew, who was a student at Harvard University, said to me, "there is greater variation within the respective genders than there is across genders". In other words, there is greater variation between men there there is between men and women, and vice versa :eek:

Needless to say, I cannot more strongly disagree with that sentiment, but it's out there. So don't be surprised if not everyone agrees with you, Pilgrim.

March 2, 2009

Now that you've broken the ice with that quote, I can use that troubling word to further my point. "Nigger" is now widely interpreted as being so incredibly, unmitigably offensive, that in mainstream media you will almost never see it in print or hear it uttered. That is to say, context no longer matters, and as far as broadcast radio and television are concerned, "nigger" falls in the same category as Carlin's infamous Seven Dirty Words, despite the fact that the FCC has no problem with it.

When a word is considered so offensive that it overrides the defining power of context - so that a discussion even about the word becomes cumbersome - I think that just makes white folks want to back away slowly.

As an aside, the weird thing to me is that "nigger" is kind of meaningless, in terms of its etymology. The word is a corruption of the original Spanish/Portuguese word "negro," which simply means black. And yet, "nigger" carries more baggage than slurs that are deliberately constructed from words that bring definite meaning, such as "porch monkey" or "jungle bunny."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Great post, Mitch. Now I must ask: Aren't there ANY other academics out there who can join in? People who teach and profess that "context" is much more a factor than the above statement implies?

One of my colleagues and friends, with her doctorate in speech and impeccable alternative credentials ala Berkeley/transgender/Marxist and the usual Bay Area staples, once answered an angry white male student's aggrieved statement that blacks could say the n-word while he, the white victim, was muzzled. Her calm reply was that context was key: whites saying the word linked it to a history of degradation, but most importantly to a public show of power. Blacks, especially certain classes and in some contexts, "appropriated" the term for themselves. [speech theorists love to say "appropriated" ]

Seemed like a good distinction to me in a world short of distinctions.

But then there are those young folks again: several weeks ago, one of my son's friends, a young black police officer who rides sport bikes with us, used the word in joking about my son's riding moves in the twisties. None of the 5-6 folks [25-35 yrs] in the group even gave it a passing shrug. Which left me wondering: Is that the new cool? Or a sign of the degradation of language?

March 2, 2009

Bill,

This is a discussion I have often w/students.

I disagree w/the Speech Doctor.

IMO, using the "N" word, or words like; "Ho", "Bitch", "fag", "mick", "spic", "kike", "Japanese", "chink", "wetback", "Halfbreed",

"gook", "slant eye", and all the other words that are/were used in a negative manner with regard to a specific group cannot be rehabilitated through "appropriation".

One might even argue that to have the group that the slur was directed at incorporate the word

into their everyday speech would be a victory for the original group that used the word

in its most negative connotation.

To me, the context doesn't erase the past.

On New Year's Day, Beth and I were sitting on our deck.

Behind our house is a multi-family complex.

A car pulled up blasting music.

"F*** you My N****r" and many other verses similar to this came blasting through the woods, easliy heard from over 100 yards away.

The fact that it was a Black Man playing the music did not in any way, IMO, liberate, minimize, rehabilitate, or make positive, the "N" word.

It seemed more like a pathetic cry from someone who has little understanding of, or use for History.

I do not want my daughters, my wife, my friends who are female called "ho's".

Nor do I think that using defamatory, inflamatory language by the group it was intended to insult changes the fact that once upon a time, and in many cases unfortunately, still upon this time, the word was a powerful tool used by intolerant people.

Now I also tell students not to let words have power over you.

I tell them not to fight just becasue someone says X.

I believe that words only have the power we allow them to have.

But, some words, IMO, like some incantations, are better left unspoken.

It would be better, IMO, to find a new word, a word that is a positive word, a word that emphasizes the good found in people and use that word instead of recycling a word replete witha history of hate,

intolerance, bigotry, injustice, legal abuse, and criminal misdeeds.

I have a suggestion.

Yo, my Man.

For being a Man is what it takes to correct the problems of today.

Your friend w/the Doctorate may accomplish more good in the long run by emphasizing the

fact that data shows that having a Man in the plan can do more to fascilitate success in school and life than all the offensive words in the world shouted at the top of your voice.

Best wishes.

March 2, 2009

OK, that's it. I'm calling for a race riot at Mitch's place. Who's in?!

(Oh wait, you're an engineer, aren't you Mitch? Maybe we can take 5 from the rioting and you can take a look at my bike, OK?)

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

I am indeed an engineer. I place a high value on reason and logic, and I prize rational discourse. Given the difficulty we have discussing something so universal as politics, it's been amazing, gratifying, and edifying to see such a fruitful discussion unfolding here in one of the most difficult, volatile venues available: the internet discussion board. Thanks for getting the ball rolling, James. :thumbsup:

Your grandfather's perspective on the effects of slavery was one I hadn't encountered before. I've only ever heard of the damage caused by the oppression of black people for so long; the idea that relieving black people of the burden of managing their own freedom for many generations may have left them ill-prepared to manage their own freedom when the time came is intriguing.

My own short experience with mismanaging newfound freedom? In May '91, after a year of making the Dean's list, I turned 21. This meant I now had access to alcohol, not just when I managed to get it, but whenever I wanted it; that is to say, I had not yet been burdened with managing my own alcohol consumption. For the next few months of summer school, I found myself trying to study advanced engineering subject matter with a beer or three in my hand every night. Result? A "B" in heat transfer, a dropped thermodynamics course, and an "F" in metallurgy. Oops. :dopeslap: I did better the following summer, by which time I had learned some self-displine: homework first, then large quantities of beer. :grin:

For a fictional example, look to Shawshank Redemption: Brooks Hatlen (James Whitmore's character) had been incarcerated for so long that he was terrified of being released from prison. He nearly killed a man to stay in prison, and ultimately committed suicide after he was released. Red (Morgan Freeman) had trouble adjusting after he was released, but the movie hinted at the difficulty of adjusting the sudden change from total oppression to total freedom.

So now I'm imagining an entire generation of newly-freed slaves who have never before experienced the burden of managing their own freedom - of making their own decisions about when, where, how to live. Continued oppression by the white majority was certainly a huge obstacle, but the lack of any experience or even cultural knowledge of self-determination/discipline/management must have been at least as big a factor.

March 2, 2009

I asked him once what he thought of the Civil Rights Movement. He felt that it was ultimately a great cause, but he felt that at the time, we black Americans were not really ready for the freedom we were fighting for. He felt that it takes a real sense of maturity to be able to navigate your way in a truly free society, and that maturity was lacking among us blacks in his view...

...For countless generations, blacks lived lives unaware of the skills necessary to survive and to prosper in this country. Unable to read or to write, count money, work with financial institutions, and engage in other exercises necessary to conduct life in America, these slaves were totally dependent upon their masters for their survival...

...I have thought much about what he told me and I think I see what he means. Whenever I see what I consider to be the unhealthy lifestyles of my fellow black Americans -- substance abuse, disrespecting law enforcement and other social authorities (teachers, parents, the elderly, political leaders), when I see the gansta rap culture spout their self righteous pronouncements against our country and those who are charged with its peace, when I see our terrible family structures -- or complete lack of a family structure! -- I am reminded of what my grandfather told me. Yes, in many respects, we have not yet grown up as a people...

I think it was tallman who pointed out that 90% of the Africans brought over in the Slave Trade ended up at destinations outside of the United States. Those slaves, and of course our African brothers and sisters, weren't subject to the kind of treatment black American slaves were that created in us a sense of dependency. Therefore, many of them come to this country and wonder why black Americans aren't taking greater advantage of all that this place has to offer. They come from more mature cultures with more responsible values and a more directed purpose...

...Therefore, (I know, finally, right?) we black Americans still have a ways to go to reach full maturity as a people. We need to learn to stop giving others the power to offend us and instead, to turn such occasions as opportunities for understanding (if at all possible). At the very least we need to learn the power that we have to enable or disable the ability of someone else to offend us.

Continued oppression by the white majority was certainly a huge obstacle, but the lack of any experience or even cultural knowledge of self-determination/discipline/management must have been at least as big a factor.

James, your comment is admirable in its candor, and I know you have placed a lot of trust in us by being so honest. I might otherwise take issue with the broadbrush approach of "we as a race," because I see so many, many examples of blacks who understand perfectly the responsibilities and duties that come with true freedom. But I'll acquiesce to your general statement and forego the hair splitting.

I wonder, though, given when the Civil Rights movement began, and the generations that have followed, if the sense of continued victimization which seems to keep many from learning how to handle the fullness of life on their own, still comes in the majority from treatment by whites? With black ordained and non-ordained "ministers," black television hosts, black media personalities, black entertainment personalities, even attorneys general and presidents bombarding their own race about how they're still getting the short end, does this not hold greater sway in holding back a people from saying, "it's there and its ours if we want it, all we have to do is master it." And if so, then what would be the motivation for all of the above to continue to beat down a people by telling them that it's NOT available to them or that they have to have life's equalities GIVEN to them rather than, always having been worthy and deserving of them, simply have to master the process of learning to use them? Would it be that their popularity base, power and money stems from maintaining an inflamed race issue?

If the audience were yours to speak to, what advice would you give Black America? And equally, white America?

March 2, 2009

Black men and white men are the same species, but the male and female of each race have been misclassified as the same species. Thus, understanding and communication are easier in one case than in the other.

Pilgrim

I remember when a woman I knew, who was a student at Harvard University, said to me, "there is greater variation within the respective genders than there is across genders". In other words, there is greater variation between men there there is between men and women, and vice versa

Needless to say, I cannot more strongly disagree with that sentiment, but it's out there. So don't be surprised if not everyone agrees with you, Pilgrim.

That rattling sound you hear in the background is me digging through my chatboard toolbox in search of the tongue-in-cheek icon that I just know is here somewhere . . .

Because I don't want to change the thrust of this valuable thread, I'm not going to respond to your Harvard acquaintance's remark, other than to say I think she is badly mistaken. Further discussion along that line should be in another thread.

Pilgrim

March 2, 2009

I note for interest's sake, that according to the historical news clip I saw this morning, it has been 202 years since the United States banned the importation of slaves. It was a step of the possible toward eliminating the cancer that so undermined our professed ideals.

And we think we have a political divide in this country today, and we're so concerned that one legislative act or another will have an adverse economic impact on once class or another.

It took a fraternal bloodletting of epic proportions to work it out, but work it out we did. Now, if we can just keep in mind the price we've paid to get to where we are, and not throw it all away.

Pilgrim

March 2, 2009

James, your comment is admirable in its candor, and I know you have placed a lot of trust in us by being so honest. I might otherwise take issue with the broadbrush approach of "we as a race," because I see so many, many examples of blacks who understand perfectly the responsibilities and duties that come with true freedom. But I'll acquiesce to your general statement and forego the hair splitting.

This absolutely is a gross generalization. Some black families have made significantly more progress than others. Some didn't have to start from as far down the social ladder as others, too. Some got lucky by migrating north to work in the factories, which led to other opportunities as well. But yes, this is a very giant generalization.

I wonder, though, given when the Civil Rights movement began, and the generations that have followed, if the sense of "victimization" which seems to keep many from learning how to handle the fullness of life on their own, still comes in the majority from treatment by whites? With black ordained and non-ordained "ministers," black television hosts, black media personalities, black entertainment personalities, even attorneys general and presidents bombarding the black community about how they're still getting the short end, does this not hold greater sway in holding back a people from saying, "it's there and its ours if we want it, all we have to do is master it." And if so, then what would be the motivation for all of the above to continue to beat down a people by telling them that it's NOT available to them or that they have to have life's equalities GIVEN to them rather than, always having been worthy and deserving of them, now have to learn to use them. Would it be that their popularity base, power and money stems from maintaining an inflamed race issue?

If the audience were yours to speak to, what advice would you give Black America? And equally, white America?

I'm kinda chuckling to myself here; leave it to EffBee to just get right to the heart of the matter! I've been dancing around for pages upon pages, but EffBee is going to nail me down right here and now :Cool:

My answer will contain some more gross generalizations, but my hope is that you add it to the bucket of information you use to interpret what you see going on out there. My views might add some value, or they might not. But since you asked...

I have already answered your question, really, I just didn't phrase it as such. I will again refer to the quote by Jesus of Nazareth:

Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, i will be measured to you.

Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eyes and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, "Let me take the speck out of your eyes", when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

Were I given the floor for a minute, I would first address black Americans. I would call for the immediate end to what I entitle the "bitterness movements" among us. This very mindset was characterized by many over the course of this thread, but probably most pointedly by tallman when he wrote:

My point is that racism is a two way street. No matter how well intentioned you may be, someone may not accept what you've done because you are different than they are, so it was "racism" that caused you to do that (either positive or negative) thing.
"You only did that so people don't think you're a racist" is as much of a problem as "you did that because you are a racist".

The bitterness movement holds strong to the idea that says this: "I am an innocent victim and you are a guilty perpetrator". Therefore, you see no signs of self examination, no sense of introspection, no humility among those with this mindset.

Now, I honestly do have respect for the aims and goals of such groups as the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam. They have done much good for blacks over the years to bring about equal rights and social justice, and even helping us to see why we should consider ourselves worthy of being treated as equal citizens. But my criticism of these groups is that they crystalized the "bitterness movement" mentality and made it popular and mainstream in black consciousness. You want to have a very short career as a black leader in this country? Refute the black "bitterness movement". In my opinion, many of today's civil rights leaders are merely the latest advocates of what I call the "bitterness movement".

I believe that Louis Farrakhan lived long enough to see the unhealthy results of bitterness movement thinking, and that's why he organized the "Million Man March" in Washington, DC back in 1995. The whole point of that gathering was simply this: let us first take the plank out of our own eye, and then we will see clearly enough to remove the speck from our white brother's eye That was the point of that gathering. Unfortunately, the energy from that time has dissipated over time and seems to have been lost.

I believe black need such a gathering on an annual basis for a time where we address the plank in our own eye. In such a meeting we collectively agree that:

- you have a run in with law enforcment? Nobody is going to riot over your butt if you were arrested in the context of something that does not represent our ideals (work, family, church, politics). In other words, if you were out speeding or driving while drunk or gang banging, you're on your own!

- you have a run in at school, nobody is going to riot over your butt unless you are at least a B student. Otherwise, you're on your own.

- a newspaper prints something you find offensive? Don't buy the paper and move on. End of story.

Now maybe we can filter out the whining to only those cases that seem to truly have a legitimate unjust element to them. As of now, it's out of control.

Dr. King had it on straight and I believe time and history has shown his words to be those that called us all to where we need to be as a country. King had faith in America! King had faith in you, too. He lived by this faith and he died by it, too. King was a good man and he was right! King was not a spokesman for the "bitterness movement". In fact, he loathed such sentiments. King was a spokesman for the "American Ideal" movement! And it's the work of that movement that black American needs to recommit itself to.

So no more dwelling on the speck of sawdust in the eyes of white America! No more! Time to dwell *SOLELY* on the plank that is in our own eyes as black Americans. Time for us to *openly* address our own shortcomings! Time for us to consider forming an apology to white Americans for the countless mischaracterizations of their actions and intentions as being racist when they were not!

And if we're going to learn to better manage our freedoms, that means we're going to learn how to become students. And if we're going to become students, then we're going to learn to listen to everyone who cares enough to speak their minds -- be it those sentiments that address where we are now (like DavidEBSmith) and those that address where we need to be (like Clint Eastwood, Pilgrim, EffBee, and others over the course of this thread). One thing all these Americans have in common is that they have always been free and therefore they have something of value to teach those of us who come from lineages that have been tainted with slavery. Not every bit of information will be readily received, but it will be listened to, considered, and recalled when we reach that appropriate level of maturity to where we can appreciate the information in its proper context.

Mitch: that reference to that film, "The Shawshank Redemption" is a very good one. Great film and a great mataphore for the concept I am trying to bring forth. As black Americans, we were "institutionalized" by slavery, segregation, and paternalistic government programs. Now it's time for us to leave those bad perspectives behind and join the fight for independence!

Now, were we to actually do this -- to promote this message, these values, and this ethic -- here's what I would bet my other bottom dollar on: America in general would fully embrace this movement by blacks to 1) truly let go of yesterday 2) thank the society at large for their involvement in our freedoms even when we failed to realize it and to appreciate it 3) and to fully embrace the rights and responsibilities of a free people. Many of the social problems we face would disappear overnight. And what of those rare instances when white truly are taking advantage of blacks or the poor? Society at large would totally condemn such actions long before blacks even got word of it because nobody honors a person who would step on another who is trying to do what is right.

No more bitterness movements! No more bitterness mindsets! Humility, openness, honesty, faith, first addressing the plank in our own eye so we can see clearly to remove the speck of sawdust in our brothers eye. These are the values I would have black America embrace!

Now, as you mentioned EffBee, many black American families have already crossed this bridge. They have long ago left behind these bitterness mindsets if they ever had them to begin with. They live as full and free Americans and they do not see the world in "black and white", but in "red, white, and blue" :thumbsup: So they would serve as even more powerful examples and leaders than most white could simply because they can say, "here's how we rose from the ashes".

But these aren't the kind of families being pointed out by tallman, motorinla, or others in this thread, so my message is not directed at those black families that do appreciate all that America has to offer.

In fact, my only message to them is that they continue to do what they do and to serve as examples for the rest of the country.

My message to whites in America is what I have said all thread long: do not allow yourselves to be deterred by misunderstandings, conflicts, mischaracterizations of your motives as being "racist" or anything else. What you have to say is of great value! I would also call upon us all to do what blacks need to do and that is to continually address the planks in your own eyes as well. Not just for race relations but so that we can all have healthy souls that continue to strive for a better society.

But my strongest words are for the black Americans who subscribe to the message of the bitterness movements, who do not look at the plank in their own eyes, and who dwell on the speck of dust in the eyes of whites in America. It is this group that I am addressing first and foremost -- which includes me, too, by the way. I learn a lot in this forum from you all, so you'll even see growth from me if you go back and read what I might have written in the past that contradicts what I might write now. That's called growth! And for that I am thankful. When I debate you, I am not looking to defeat you, I am simply trying to understand where you are coming from and to have my doubts addressed to see if you can help me make sense of the things in my mind that do not line up with what you are promoting. But I always reserve the right to grow in my understanding. So all you ever get to see is a snapshot of where I stand at this point in time. You are perfectly free to affect that snapshot if you'd like, because I will listen to what you have to say.

I hope this answers your question EffBee. This is the most honest, open, and heartfelt response I can generate to your inquiry.

March 2, 2009

James, my eyes actually have tears in them at your courage and honesty. We ALL still have a long way to go. And the path we're all on does not seem to be leading to enlightenment --- only more bitterness, finger pointing, accusations, damage, destruction, and (hopefully not) violence.

The cause of race relations, growth, strength, pride and national unity would be well served to have a million more voices like yours be heard, and listened to. I wonder if that's possible if there's no money in it for the leaders on either side?

March 2, 2009

James, my eyes actually have tears in them at your courage and honesty. We ALL still have a long way to go. And the path we're all on does not seem to be leading to enlightenment --- only more bitterness, finger pointing, accusations, damage, destruction, and (hopefully not) violence.

The cause of race relations, growth, strength, pride and national unity would be well served to have a million more voices like yours be heard, and listened to. I wonder if that's possible if there's no money in it for the leaders on either side?

I think so. The election of Obama does much to remove the us vs. them struggle, and his policies may well show that this nation is trying for what we hope is best.

March 2, 2009

Beemerman,

Eloquent choice of words. Too bad they can't play to a broader audience.

March 2, 2009

James, my eyes actually have tears in them at your courage and honesty. We ALL still have a long way to go. And the path we're all on does not seem to be leading to enlightenment --- only more bitterness, finger pointing, accusations, damage, destruction, and (hopefully not) violence.

The cause of race relations, growth, strength, pride and national unity would be well served to have a million more voices like yours be heard, and listened to. I wonder if that's possible if there's no money in it for the leaders on either side?

I think so. The election of Obama does much to remove the us vs. them struggle, and his policies may well show that this nation is trying for what we hope is best.

Perhaps. Perhaps not. There is a segment, and it is not small, who claim that the 47% of the population who did not vote for Mr. Obama did so because they are racist, rather than accepting that there were political and ideological differences between the candidates. Thus the divisive inflamers, who seem to want to maintain the breach between the races, are still at it, even in victory. Again, I ask, what motivates them? Is it not that there is money to be made, power to be secured? Racial harmony would cost a lot of these people their jobs, their platforms, their influence.

March 3, 2009

Again, I ask, what motivates them? Is it not that there is money to be made, power to be secured? Racial harmony would cost a lot of these people their jobs, their platforms, their influence.

This was my point much earlier in the thread: entities/individuals whose existence/relevance depends on racial strife will not be particularly thrilled to see total racial harmony.

March 3, 2009

The "divisive inflamers" may be maintaining their own power by preserving racial disharmony, but they may also be raising legitimate issues while doing it. And it's temptingly easy to blame all racial disharmony on the professional race-mongers, but that's a gross oversimplification.

The difficulty of race is that we like to have a single simple solution for everything, and in this area, there is no single simple solution. Making Al Sharpton shut up will not cure racial disharmony. There are plenty of reasons for disharmony without the Sharptons stirring up new ones.

James talked the legacy of slavery and learned helplessness. Other people have talked about personal initiative and simply putting the past behind. The reality is, everybody's right to some extent. The effects of history are there for everybody, some more than others. It's not a uniform burden. Nor are the skills to overcome that burden uniformly distributed. Some people have them more than others. Saying "black people need to stop being divisive", "black people just need to work harder and stop expecting handouts", or "black people can't get ahead because of the lingering effects of racism" are all gross oversimplifications as much as "black people like watermelon and fried chicken".

People have raised a lot of issues and arguments regarding race in this discussion. None of them is the universal answer, and perhaps there isn't one (or perhaps there is.)

March 3, 2009

The "divisive inflamers" may be maintaining their own power by preserving racial disharmony, but they may also be raising legitimate issues while doing it. And it's temptingly easy to blame all racial disharmony on the professional race-mongers, but that's a gross oversimplification.

The difficulty of race is that we like to have a single simple solution for everything, and in this area, there is no single simple solution. Making Al Sharpton shut up will not cure racial disharmony. There are plenty of reasons for disharmony without the Sharptons stirring up new ones.

Ah, but imagine the far simpler job before us all if we could get the "divisive inflamers" to stop sewing the seeds of bitterness and discontent.

But as long as they persist, then any further effort stands a good chance of being sabotaged by their venom. Should we then not do anything? Of course not. But what we should do first, IMO, is to silence them or come to an understanding of what their goals are thus neutering their efforts. And that is a directive that cannot come from the white world. As James pointed out, it's really not in our hands any more.

March 3, 2009

Making Al Sharpton shut up will not cure racial disharmony. There are plenty of reasons for disharmony without the Sharptons stirring up new ones.

But as long as they persist, then any further effort stands a good chance of being sabotaged by their venom. Should we then not do anything? Of course not. But what we should do first, IMO, is to silence them or come to an understanding of what their goals are thus neutering their efforts.

Under what pretext and how would one 'make Al Sharpton shut up' or '...silence them...'? Do you suppose that would have any negative repercussions?

'There is a segment, and it is not small, who claim that the 47% of the population who did not vote for Mr. Obama did so because they are racist'.

Do you really want to make such unsupportable and patently incredible statements the underpinnings of your argument?

March 3, 2009

What "we" as a nation should do first is to come together and tell the divisive elements that while much remains to be done, we're going to focus on the positive that has been done, move forward from that point, and that their disruptive influence is no longer welcome.

As for my statement, it is neither unsupportable nor patently incredible. If you didn't watch much of the media, its commentators and its guests, if you didn't read the dozens and dozens of online blogs and the thousands of comments made therein, I can't help you.

On to less accusatory issues, I can't thank the people on this board enough for the absolutely professional way they have handled this incredibly controversial issue. We've seen differing opinions handled (mostly) without the animus and bickering that a highly charged topic like this can generate. James (beemerman2k) you and I have met several times and spoken very openly with each other when you lived in CA. I have always enjoyed your frankness and shared with you the pain that both races cannot seem to find the path to mutual agreement and resolution. I believe we have each others' respect. However, my appreciation for you has grown exponentially as your candor and non-agendized comments in this public forum have revealed you to all as I've known you. . . as a man of great principle, strong beliefs, high morals and unquenchable hopes for blacks, whites, and our entire nation.

Much the same goes to everyone else who has participated here (and who I hope will continue to participate). This is not an easy discussion to have. It is an issue that is not resolved, but with some of the wisdom and openness displayed here, may be resolvable some day. And soon I pray.

I can't recall when I've been more impressed by the people assembled here. I applaud you all.

March 3, 2009

I would like to thank everyone who participated in this discussion for your manners, your willingness to listen, your willingness to think, and your hosest remarks/questions. While I am very pleased with the discussion we have enjoyed, I am not at all surprised that we could conduct ourselves in such an exemplary fashion. I know of no other place on the Internet where these issues could have been covered in such a civil manner. And like I said when I opened this thread, I knew I would have no trouble getting folks to open up and to say what you really think. I don't know where Attorney General Eric Holder hangs out, but it obviously ain't on BMWST.COM! :rofl:

EffBee, you know I have always enjoyed our conversations. You also know that I have had my convictions long before I even knew who Barack Obama is. I knew this country had turned the corner on race some time ago, and that the incidents we see from time to time in the media are, for the most part, residual incidents from people who are caught up in the past. And yes, of course you have my respect! You have both a tough mind and a tender heart (this was the name of a great speech by Dr. King, based upon that scripture in Matthew 10 when Jesus sends out the 12 apostles and calls them to be "wise as serpents yet innocent as doves". King points out that oftentimes, tough minds that are as wise as serpents lead to hard hearts -- or what I label as "bitterness movement" thinking. Other times, a soft heart is accompanied by a soft mind (nice, loving and forgiving, but also completely ignorant of the realities of life). We are called to have both tough minds [learned] and tender hearts [forgiving].) You exemplify these virtues in your everyday life, EffBee, so I consider myself quite blessed to be named among your friends.

What "we" as a nation should do first is to come together and tell the divisive elements that while much remains to be done, we're going to focus on the positive that has been done, move forward from that point, and that their disruptive influence is no longer welcome.

My "tough mind" makes me feel that if the election of a black President doesn't put concerns about race to bed in this country, then nothing will. Regardless of how you feel about Barack Obama (or the trillions he's borrowing :eek: ), his election says volumes for how far this country has come in this respect. But the tender heart in me hopes for this: that we can come together to listen. That we can come together not to defend our position or to defend our symbols, not to "win" an argument, not to label, not to teach, but to listen and to learn. If those of us can just make this our policy when it comes to managing the race relations we come across in our lives, our very openess and humility will invite and encourage a similar response in those we converse with. More than anything, fear of the terrible past coming back to life is what prevents many (most?) blacks from truly opening up without feeling threatened and vulnerable. You can help us see that we have nothing to fear (but fear itself :Cool: ). Yes, there are many who feel they have little to learn and everything to teach -- they aren't ready yet for growth :cry: But for those who are mature and who value all that this country can be, they will consider the encounter to be life changing.

March 3, 2009

As for my statement, it is neither unsupportable nor patently incredible. If you didn't watch much of the media, its commentators and its guests, if you didn't read the dozens and dozens of online blogs and the thousands of comments made therein, I can't help you.

Out of the 300 million people in the US, I'm reasonably certain that one could find thousands and thousands of bloggers and others who would make any number of claims, from the existence of flying saucers to trolls living in the middle of the earth and anything in between. But that doesn't make them true. To proffer that everyone who voted for a candidate other than Obama is a racist is absurd. Would it be reasonable to claim that every black who voted for Obama did so because of his color or because they were anti-white? Equally absurd.

That point aside, I think I did ask you a legitimate question about your statement suggesting that how to handle the 'divisive inflamers' is to 'silence them'. Just how would you propose to do that? As odious as you may find them, their language, beliefs, or non-violent actions, they are all protected under the First Amendment. Simply because they are an impediment to your cause, no matter how noble, is not grounds to infringe on that right.

If your reference to 'accusatory issues' was directed at me, that's lamentable. Posing a question is not an accusation.

March 3, 2009

SweetP,

It looks like you are misunderstanding the point that EffBee is trying to make.

March 3, 2009

This is what I said:

There is a segment, and it is not small, who claim that the 47% of the population who did not vote for Mr. Obama did so because they are racist, rather than accepting that there were political and ideological differences between the candidates.

This is what you said I said:

To proffer that everyone who voted for a candidate other than Obama is a racist is absurd. Would it be reasonable to claim that every black who voted for Obama did so because of his color or because they were anti-white? Equally absurd.

I believe there is a distinct difference between my statement and your interpretation of my statement. I might normally say that I don't appreciate having my words twisted, but this has been such a peaceful thread so far that I'm going to just let it pass.

As for this:

That point aside, I think I did ask you a legitimate question about your statement suggesting that how to handle the 'divisive inflamers' is to 'silence them'. Just how would you propose to do that? As odious as you may find them, their language, beliefs, or non-violent actions, they are all protected under the First Amendment. Simply because they are an impediment to your cause, no matter how noble, is not grounds to infringe on that right.

We silence them by ignoring them, by taking away their power and neutering their divisiveness. Silencing them, as I described it, was a passive act. Their First Amendment rights remain intact.

If your reference to 'accusatory issues' was directed at me, that's lamentable. Posing a question is not an accusation.

What you said was:

Do you really want to make such unsupportable and patently incredible statements the underpinnings of your argument?

You posed a question which accused me of making "unsupportable and patently incredible statements. . ." You choose to focus on the fact that the accusation was posed as a question. I could not escape the fact that it IS an accusation.

Let's not sully the fine discussion that has gone on before us by getting into a personal squabble. I'm available offline to discuss whatever you'd like. Send me a PM. And let's let the main topic here get back to the incredible sharing and honesty that has brought forth so many excellent perspectives, ideas, and helpful suggestions.

March 4, 2009

PM sent.

March 4, 2009

The "divisive inflamers" may be maintaining their own power by preserving racial disharmony, but they may also be raising legitimate issues while doing it. And it's temptingly easy to blame all racial disharmony on the professional race-mongers, but that's a gross oversimplification.

The difficulty of race is that we like to have a single simple solution for everything, and in this area, there is no single simple solution. Making Al Sharpton shut up will not cure racial disharmony. There are plenty of reasons for disharmony without the Sharptons stirring up new ones.

James talked the legacy of slavery and learned helplessness. Other people have talked about personal initiative and simply putting the past behind. The reality is, everybody's right to some extent. The effects of history are there for everybody, some more than others. It's not a uniform burden. Nor are the skills to overcome that burden uniformly distributed. Some people have them more than others. Saying "black people need to stop being divisive", "black people just need to work harder and stop expecting handouts", or "black people can't get ahead because of the lingering effects of racism" are all gross oversimplifications as much as "black people like watermelon and fried chicken".

People have raised a lot of issues and arguments regarding race in this discussion. None of them is the universal answer, and perhaps there isn't one (or perhaps there is.)

Sorry, but I did want to comment on this post before this thread dies a nice quiet death.

DavidEBSmith, once again I am quite impressed with the depth of your understanding. I am only making 1 and only 1 point, though, and that is this: whatever your situation (regardless of your race, really) scapegoating, blameshifting, and finger pointing are counterproductive with respect to helping you to improve your lot. Whether you are a poor minority child in the inner-city or a wealthy billionaire who feels he/she should be worth yet another billion more, blaming others for your plight prevents you from seeing the real issues that keep you where you are.

Bitterness movements based upon race, gender (yes, there are movements afoot where the woman is the innocent victim and the men are the guilty perpetrators and vice versa (she is Eve and I am Adam)), class (the poor are the innocent victims and the rich are the guilty perpetrators and vice versa (I am responsible and they are not)) all take this kind of counterproductive view of things. They [insert target group here] will always exploit us, therefore we need to erect laws and policies designed to protect us from their predatory ways -- regardless of whether those laws are in keeping with the principles laid out in our Constitution and/or Bill of Rights.

Reconciliation movements take the opposite approach: we are all healthy or we are all sick, but we must all work together to make this country the place our founders intended it to be. Everyone had duties and all are responsible in protecting our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. Therefore, let each of us commit to doing what is right regardless of what another does. We can only account for one person and that is our own selves :thumbsup:

March 4, 2009

James, see if you can guess which country this is:

1) Very low crime rate.

2) Average home is ca. $1.2 million.

3) Highest per capita income in all the world (just under $100k, I believe).

4) Nearly 60% black, and with a horrible background in slavery.

I just find that interesting, since in many cities whites in the US would think "crime-ridden, poor, inner city" with "blacks."

March 4, 2009

This reminds me of that NPR show, "The World", which begins with a geographical quiz whose answer is revealed later in the show.

My first thoughts were places like Morrocco or some other Northern African country. Then I thought about Dubai; I know nothing about that place other than the people there are quite wealthy! But having googled your question and finding some material on Wikipedia (which pointed me to the country of Liechtenstein by the way, but I'm going to ignore that recommendation) and go with...Qatar? :confused:

Here are the top 10 poorest countrys, all in Africa, from "richest" to "poorest":

Central African Republic

Eritrea

Niger

Sierra Leone

Guinea-Bissau

Somalia (I would have guessed that this country would be at the bottom of the list)

Liberia

Burundi

Congo

Zimbabwe

March 4, 2009

I am only making 1 and only 1 point, though, and that is this: whatever your situation (regardless of your race, really) scapegoating, blameshifting, and finger pointing are counterproductive with respect to helping you to improve your lot. Whether you are a poor minority child in the inner-city or a wealthy billionaire who feels he/she should be worth yet another billion more, blaming others for your plight prevents you from seeing the real issues that keep you where you are.

I don't disagree with this at all. The point I was trying to make is the scapegoaters and blameshifters may have something worthwhile to say, but it's lost in the noise and counterproductive results generated by their methods.

To use everybody's favorite example, I've heard Al Sharpton say some profound and thoughtful things. But then there's an incident that requires a news conference, and the cameras come on, and he's back to the blame game. He's a very talented communicator and a charismatic leader, but he seems stuck on bitterness, whether as an intentional tactic or an unconscious mindset, and he's not using his substantial talents to help anybody, black or white, get past divisiveness. Which is tragic.

In the NY Post cartoon flap, there was a point to be made. Going on the attack wasn't a productive way of making it.

Reconciliation movements take the opposite approach: we are all healthy or we are all sick, but we must all work together to make this country the place our founders intended it to be.

Bitterness, hate and divisiveness are all harmful emotions. We can choose to hold them closer or we can choose to put them aside. But that is easier said than done.

March 4, 2009

It's Bermuda!

March 4, 2009

It's Bermuda!

I know a guy who lives in Bermuda. An expatriot Swede who was given citizenship (not easy to come by). He lives in a $30 million house overlooking Hamilton Harbour and used to make about $50 million a year managing real money and doing a very good job. I wonder how much he skews the per capita data?

March 5, 2009

[sharpton is] a very talented communicator and a charismatic leader, but he seems stuck on bitterness, whether as an intentional tactic or an unconscious mindset, and he's not using his substantial talents to help anybody, black or white, get past divisiveness.

I watched Sharpton and his entourage come into Emory University's main library a few years ago, and I would say that, more than anything, he is stuck on himself.

By the way, Emory made its Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database available to the world recently. It's a remarkable resource.

March 5, 2009

Tell you folks what. Remember all that stuff I wrote about black Americans and learned helplessness and so on? Well, I was quite nervous about Barack Obama's candidacy. Sure, he could get assassinated, but I was also worried about a white backlash if he won the election. I am still a bit concerned about that in my heart.

But now I'm watching 24 on Hulu.com (great way to watch the show at your own convenience) and the White House has been taken by a bunch of black men. They are fully armed and they have the President as hostage. They even roughed her up a bit. It wasn't that along ago when a scene like this that had black bandits would have resulted in a serious public backlash -- even though it's just a television show! The very thought and the fact that actors played it out would be enough. Some poor brothers who are in the wrong place in the wrong time would surely have been lynched after a show like this just 40 years ago! Even now, I am not at all comfortable with it.

I remember just a few years ago a black man played the role of Jesus in a play in New York City or New Jersey. That man received death threats because he, a black man, played the role of Jesus! :confused:

When you are a minority, these are the kind of things you have to think about. I know I'm being fearful and paranoid, but man, why did the bandits have to be black?! I'm glad those guys have jobs and all, but dang! :eek:

March 5, 2009

I never knew that I needed to grow, until I looked back to see where I had been.

Someday their skin color won't matter. I sure hope it's soon. In my own little white woman way I am happy to feel the shedding of our collective negative mind set. Our President is black. Actually he's caramel. I'd like to throw the whole color wheel out.

All that matters is that all Bad Guys are male. ( will someone tell me where the emoticons are? ;-)

March 5, 2009

But now I'm watching 24 on Hulu.com (great way to watch the show at your own convenience) and the White House has been taken by a bunch of black men. They are fully armed and they have the President as hostage. They even roughed her up a bit.

Dammit man, some of us haven't rented the DVD's yet! Stop spoiling the surprise! :mad:

(funny how we never had this problem in the days before you could rent TV show DVD's... :grin: )

March 5, 2009

Mitch: check it out on Hulu.com. A friend of mine recently turned me on to this web site. You can watch all kinds of shows, free of charge on this site. They give you a choice: sit through about 2 minutes of commercials and then watch the show uninterrupted, or watch the show and see the commercials spread throughout. At this point, you'll only see 1 or 2 commercials, no doubt because the site is so young. When this catches on, though...

Sometimes, I wonder what a "black 24" television show would look like, or a "black X-Files" show. Drug Lords would be portrayed as aliens from other planets intent on taking over the earth. As their influence over law enforcment and local governments spreads, that means their evil plans to conquor the world are coming to fruition. Governments and multinational corporations are, of course, simply "window dressing" to mask the true workings of these alien beings. In other words, it's not secret federal agencies that work in collusion with alien interests like on "X-Files" or "24", it's these ever powerful drug lords that do.

Various eposides would probably conjure up some wild theories to address aching questions in the black mind with respect to:

- why is the African continent, a land hugely rich in natural resources, the poorest on the planet? (obviously there are deep, "other-worldly" powers at work here :smile:)

- how could little ole Europe and little ole Japan dominate geographical regions many times their size? Whereas hugely large political entities have relatively smaller influence (compare Japan vs China in terms of world influence over the previous 100 or so years. That's changing now, but traditionally...)

- why did my lineage get selected for this particular history: the slave trade up until life in America today as opposed to remaining in Africa and dreaming about what life is like in America? For what great and grand purpose am I possibly being called to fulfill?! What? Work at Walmart? :cry:

- what planet did various black leaders throughout American history, and especially Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and President Barack Obama, come from? Why did they come to this planet during the time they did? (Sent to battle the ongoing alien invasion perhaps?)

- how come white guys can walk around in freezing weather in shorts and a tee shirt, and I freeze my butt off even though I am wearing a winter Eskimo coat? :eek:

- what sick, alien mind invented this concept called, "morning", and why can't my day begin at, oh, around 2PM? :mad: (This would no doubt be a 2 part special show, maybe even without commercial interruption :tongue: )

Anyhow, you get the drift. These and other pressing questions would be answered with the latest in techno-ideas from black writers in Hollywood.

March 5, 2009

James,

While dated in some ways, the information on how it works in Africa may still have some relevance.

http://www.amazon.com/Investment-Biker-Around-World-Rogers/dp/1558505296

March 5, 2009

Wow, looks like a good book, tallman. Thanks.

(Most financial books put me to sleep faster than you can imagine, but given this guy is touring the world on a bike, maybe that'll be enough to hold my interest. I do not have a financial mind, unfortunately).

March 5, 2009

I guess it’s time for me to jump in now. I have been lurking around and my thoughts have been expressed here by others far better than I could have done myself. I have a question.

First a bit of background.

I grew up in Maine in an essentially all white town. I can remember only 3 black kids in high school in the 7 years between my older sister’s graduation and mine. Integration was something being fought about down south and mostly we wondered what’s the big deal why can’t everyone go to the same school?? Fast forward to the Navy in electronics school I hade 4 room mates. Two were from the deep south (very red necks) one from NYC (northern redneck) the other from the south but he was black. Now the black guy was one of the laziest people I have ever met in my life, so my young impressionable and naive self started to believe that the things the other three were saying about blacks were true, maybe they are lazy and dishonest etc….. Well after spending lots of time working with and for black people and actually getting to know them I realized the truth that hey he’s just like me. So he listens to different music and has different ideas about things but so what. While I was stationed in Pensacola , FL I was invited to go hunting with a co worker from a tiny town in Mississippi, while here I heard people using the N word in normal everyday conversation but it did not seem to have a hateful connotation to it ( I have read previous posts about this) it was just so much part of the culture. The other thing I noticed was that during the day everyone both black and white interacted around town but at night everyone went to their side of the tracks (literally the train tracks divided the town).

Recently I was watching programs on the history channel about the civil rights movement and listening to the anti integration speeches and Klan rallies and such and these people had a deep down vicious hatred for blacks.

Which brings me to my question.

Where does that deep down hate come from?

Even though I have had some misconceptions and believed the stereotypes I never hated anyone. The hatred has not gone away, there are still plenty of people out there that have this deep down hate in their minds, just look around the internet.

I just can’t conceive having a vicious hatred for someone just because they are different.

If we really want to have harmony don’t we have to figure out where that hate comes from?

With credit to Dr. King; I think that if we all teach our children to judge a man by the content of his character and not the color of his skin things will keep progressing for the better.

March 5, 2009

Where does that deep down hate come from?

There are always "reasons" for hatred. Many Southerners prior to the Civil War resented having the will of others from outside the South imposed on them, and so voted to secede. They resented losing the Civil War, and having to stay in the union. They resented losing their farms and estates in the Reconstruction period following the Civil War, and in some cases having blacks put in various public offices through elections or appointments that seemed to be rigged. They passed this resentment down through the generations.

That last thing causes me more wonder than the underlying "why" of the hatred: how can the resentment be passed down through the generations? My family was dispossessed from their holdings in the South after the Civil War, and helped found the town of Palestine, Texas. Those original settlers may have had good reasons to resent the North, and by association, blacks. But by the time I came along, nobody in several generations had been treated unfairly by any Northerners or blacks in any general sense. All the folks who settled Palestine were dead by the time my generation came along. And yet the racial hatred was just as strong, if not stronger, in the '50's when I grew up than in any previous generation.

This is not localized to racial hatred between blacks and whites in the US. You can see the same thing in relationships around the world: Bosnians and Serbs, with racial tensions kept in check for 70 years under the Soviets, only to burst into flames again when the Soviets withdrew, Jews and Europeans, Northern and Southern Irish, Hutus and Tutsis, Indians and Pakistanis, Israelis and Arabs, etc.

I felt strange growing up in that culture. I remember going over to the playground when I was about 8 and joining in to play with some black children on the swings or merry-go-round. My folks noticed and were appalled, and ran the black children off. I got a lecture, which I don't remember. It didn't stick. I continued to be puzzled about why I couldn't play with the black children, and would sneak off to wander around the black community from time to time. To me, my reaction seems more normal than other people's reaction in adopting the racial hatred that is passed down from their parents. The blacks hadn't done anything to me; in fact, they were nice to me when I visited in the black community, so I liked them. But I suspect that far more people adopted racial hatred passed down from the older generations than didn't. I wonder why that is?

March 5, 2009

Recently I was watching programs on the history channel about the civil rights movement and listening to the anti integration speeches and Klan rallies and such and these people had a deep down vicious hatred for blacks.

Which brings me to my question.

Where does that deep down hate come from?

If we really want to have harmony don’t we have to figure out where that hate comes from?

That's a great question, and one I would love to hear some answers to as well.

Just so you know, Martin Luther King, Jr wrote a book back in 1963 entitled, "Why We Can't Wait", which focused on the reasons behind the protests that took place that summer in Birmingham, AL. A copy of King's essay entitled, "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" is in that book. In any case, in the first chapter of that book he ponders the same questions you posed: "...are blacks so hated because blacks fought this country in some war at some point in time?"

My personal theory is that all manner of negative images were spread about blacks to justify the enslavement, and later the segregation of blacks in this country. It's a common tactic; if you can dehumanize a people -- that is, consider them as something less than human -- then it's not such a bad thing to treat them as something other than human, is it? Jesus only said, "Do unto others (implicitly he means humans, right?) as you would have them do unto you", but he never said this about non-human life, right?

Who among us gets all knotted up over the fact that farm animals are slaughtered everyday so we can enjoy nice steaks, hamburgers, and mmmmmmmm fried chicken!? :rofl: They aren't humans and they were obviously put here to feed us, right? So what's the problem? It's only those California tree-hugging vegetarians who think otherwise. They're nuts; they actually want to treat all life as though it is as valuable as human life. Anyhow, we can't subscribe to that view and still enjoy our meat-eating lifestyles, can we? If it ain't human, then it ain't a "sin" to mistreat it.

Blacks have been historically portrayed as being lazy, stupid, self serving, disloyal, and unpatriotic, regardless of what reality might say is true. Therefore, those among us who fulfill these stereotypical views got lots of media coverage (TV, movies, music) in times past, while those who didn't received barely a mention. When Bill Cosby launched "The Cosby Show", people called it a fantasy show, even though I grew up in a household where my father is a University of Michigan Ph.D. and my mother is a SUNY - Binghamton, Masters in Business Management. My brother is a LASIK eye surgeon in Los Angeles, CA (http://www.LasikSpa.com) Families like mine don't exist in this country according to our own lore; we're a big fantasy (although to my great relief and pleasure, this has changed greatly since Bill Cosby's TV show. Today, families like mine are getting more exposure in our media :thumbsup: ).

So blacks were labeled as "niggers", and as you know from reading this thread, now -- to my dismay -- black youth toss this term around like it's going out of style. This is a dehumanizing term; he isn't a man, he's a nigger. I believe the use of this term makes it easier for black gangbangers to kill other blacks in this society. "I didn't kill a person, I killed a nigga" is the rationale that takes place nowadays. :cry:

That's my take on things, anyhow. Anyone else wanna offer up an explanation to ltljohn's excellent question?

March 5, 2009

Great response, Dave.

Obviously, I am totally and 100% against any form of discrimination, let alone segregation and slavery. Having said that, I can see why southerners would get upset over this issue. If the federal government offered to buy the slaves from their masters with the purpose of setting them free, that would be one thing. But to simply mandate that these people be set free without any compensation to the plantation owners is like asking someone to just let tens or hundreds of thousands of personal net worth just walk away scott free!

I wish the government could have offered a bail out to the slave owners so that emancipation would not have cost them the potential fortune that it did, but I am glad my ancestors were set free however it was done.

Your post does offer insights, however, that I had never really considered before.

Sign In

US: A Nation of Cowards on Racial Matters

Recommended Posts

Pilgrim

Link to comment

beemerman2k

Link to comment

bendbill

Link to comment

DavidEBSmith

Link to comment

beemerman2k

Link to comment

beemerman2k

Link to comment

tallman

Link to comment

Joe Frickin' Friday

Link to comment

Pilgrim

Link to comment

beemerman2k

Link to comment

beemerman2k

Link to comment

beemerman2k

Link to comment

bendbill

Link to comment

tallman

Link to comment

Joe Frickin' Friday

Link to comment

EffBee

Link to comment

Pilgrim

Link to comment

Pilgrim

Link to comment

beemerman2k

Link to comment

EffBee

Link to comment

Boone60

Link to comment

Stir

Link to comment

EffBee

Link to comment

Joe Frickin' Friday

Link to comment

DavidEBSmith

Link to comment

EffBee

Link to comment

SweetP

Link to comment

EffBee

Link to comment

beemerman2k

Link to comment

SweetP

Link to comment

Boone60

Link to comment

EffBee

Link to comment

SweetP

Link to comment

beemerman2k

Link to comment

David

Link to comment

beemerman2k

Link to comment

DavidEBSmith

Link to comment

David

Link to comment

Lets_Play_Two