racism in reverse

[TheRoo]

Jim Crow laws may have been outlawed, but their effects still live on. There is this myth that there is social mobility in this country, and while that is true for a select few, the fact remains that both poverty and wealth get passed down through the generations. Do you think George W Bush or Ted Kennedy would be rich had they not come from rich families? When parents have money, kids get more oppurtunity, which translates into money for the kids and oppurtunities for their children.

[TennesseeWhiskey]

Jim Crow laws may have been outlawed, but their effects still live on. There is this myth that there is social mobility in this country, and while that is true for a select few, the fact remains that both poverty and wealth get passed down through the generations. Do you think George W Bush or Ted Kennedy would be rich had they not come from rich families? When parents have money, kids get more oppurtunity, which translates into money for the kids and oppurtunities for their children.

Yeah, kids with rich parents start off with more money, but, just because you're not born with a proverbial silver spoon doesn't mean you're damned from the git-go. Speaking for myself, I finished high school, started in my industry at 19, entry level, and manage a store, and, though I ain't hauling wheelbarrows of cash to the bank, I ain't wondering where my next meal is coming from either. I'm not from a rich family, we're solid middle-working class, the last three generations including myself, and before that, just typical Upper East Tennessee farm people. Nobody figured the world owed them anything, nor did they think that they couldn't get out here, work and better themselves, and have just as good a chance as anyone. That's what is lacking now. Too many people talk themselves out of trying before they get going good!

[AFPheonix]

I'm glad you have experienced success in your life, Tennessee Whiskey. However, statistically you still have a leg up, simply for being white.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...663841,00.html

The affects of institutionalized racism are still with us. Even though it is no longer kosher to be outwardly racist, the reality is there's still the aftermath of when it was ok. Statistically, Blacks are poorer and have worse schools than we do as whites. We are still very segregated along class and racial lines. I will also submit that in this current time, while outward racism against blacks is considered bad, blatant racism against Latinos is absolutely rampant in this country, and they are also affected by the racial and class lines that affect blacks.

We cannot put on blinders to this. If we do, we will only let the problem fester and it will blow up again like it did in the 60's. Yes, people are ultimately responsible for their fate, but it is our responsibility as the majority and the power holders to do our best to level the playing fields for all.
Actually, this leads right back into my favorite rant about school reform, but I've already taken over several threads on that tack.

[NightAngel]

I guess I'm weird. I don't see "in color" except when I'm forced to- such as someone pulling the race card on me. There have actully been times when someone has pulled the race card and left me surprised because I hadn't even noticed the person's skin color until then.

Of course, at that point I am forced to see "in color" and it really kind of pisses me off. I don't WANT to see you differently- please don't make me.

[Seshat]

I used to be like that, NightAngel. However, I've since had several things pointed out to me. Now, I'm Australian, so the majority of our racism is towards Aboriginals, or towards immigrants (yes, I see the irony). Let's compare the life stories of a random white person (me, for instance) with Frank Fullblood aboriginal. If this interests people, I can also do Helen Halfblood, and Immanuel Immigrant.

I was born in the dominant culture of my country, raised in that culture, and can reasonably reliably predict what an employer expects of me, what resources are available to me, and so forth. I perceive teachers, social workers, and police as providing a service, and as basically my equals.

Frank was born in the outback, among a bunch of aboriginals who live and work on a station (a ranch, to USA folk). He was raised in his culture, with some schooling in the dominant culture from the School of the Air. His family had an agreement with the station holder that they could go walkabout when they needed to, so long as they were back when he needed them. However, a long drought caused the station holder to sell up, the farm was bought by an agribusiness, and Frank's people ended up moving to the fringe of one of the cities - let's say Alice Springs.

Frank and his family meet up with a cop, who tells them they can't stay in the camp they've set up - it's private land. The cop, intending to do the right thing, talks to the social workers, who find Frank and his family housing. But they split them up, along lines that make sense to the whites, but not to Frank. For Frank, his family is all twenty-five of them! Not just the four the whites put in this three-bedroom house.

Frank and his family don't understand how to maintain the house, so it gets run-down. They've never lived by clock-time before - on the station, you watched the cattle and the weather and did jobs when they needed doing, and the rest of your time was your own. So they have trouble holding down jobs that require them to turn up at 9am and stay at the workplace until 5pm. They definitely don't understand the concept of 'looking busy' - either you are busy, or you aren't!

The welfare system is confusing, and they have no idea what they're entitled to. Cops and social workers are people who randomly show up, tell you that you can't do something, split your family up, and vanish. These whites also don't seem to understand communal property - if our sister (who the whites call a distant cousin) shows up, of course she can stay with us! So can her children (some of whom the whites may consider to be nieces, nephews, or simply unrelated).



. . . this is why Frank and his family end up being stereotyped as lazy thieves who don't want to work, can't take care of anything, and crowd lots of people into a small house. When what's happening is that we're expecting a massive cultural shift in only two or three generations. That can't be done.

So I'm prepared to cut Aboriginals a bit more slack than I'd cut someone of my own cultural background.


* In case it has to be said:
There are Aboriginal groups and individuals who are learning how to live in the world as it now is. Both those Aboriginals and people of other races are helping people like Frank adapt. I give Frank and his like a bit of slack because there are still many, many Aboriginals who are the first generation of their family adapting to the modern world.

There are also Aboriginal tribes who, with assistance from someone who knows the modern world, pool their welfare payments and use it as capital to develop a communal enterprise. Tourism is a common one, but Aboriginal crafts and arts are also common. Most of these groups come off welfare entirely this way, and should be very, very proud of themselves. If you're interested in visiting Australia, I can strongly recommend checking with our tourist bureaus for a visit to one of these tribes.

[Misanthropical]

I'm so sick of the race card. I am white, but guess what? I grew up in a poor family! My mother wasn't really educated and couldn't help me with my homework. My father wasn't around, since they divorced when I was three and he had a second family and didn't want to bother with his first. I have lost track of how many times my mother has been married.

I had to deal with a lot growing up, things that no child should ever have to deal with, I still have nightmares about the things that went on, but I don't blame my problems on my childhood.

No one offered to help me with anything, I did it on my own! I didn't wallow around in misery and try to blame everyone else for my failings.

I took responsibilty for my life and the choices I make. I didn't look to anyone to be my role model. I knew what I wanted out of life and tried to make it happen.

I'm not going to feel sorry for anyone that revels in victimhood and tries to blame others for their own failings.

If someone is a victim and is trying to over come that, then I'm more than happy to help, but wearing victimhood like a badge of honor will not get sympathy from me.

Pulling the race card on me will only insure that I think you are uneducated and can't get through life without screaming racism to get your way.

Besides, I hate everyone equally.

[protege]

No one offered to help me with anything, I did it on my own! I didn't wallow around in misery and try to blame everyone else for my failings.

Exactly, Mis. My parents struggled for years...up until recently. Dad's ad agency had failed, throwing him out of work. My mother, even though she was working full-time, still couldn't make ends meet. Not one government agency lifted a finger to help us--we were *barely* above the minimum income level, and were ignored. Since that was impossible, at one point, my father was working 3 part-time jobs. He was tired as hell...but I don't *ever* remember him complaining about it. In fact, it drove him harder...and eventually, he went back to school and became a teacher.

In fact, when all that was going on, he literally inspired me *not* to repeat his mistakes. I put myself through college, landed a good job, etc. I'm not rich by any means...but I was poor once, and I told myself that I was *not* going to allow things to end up like that.

With all that said, I guess I'm just tired of people using race as an excuse for their circumstances. To me, it seems easier and more convenient than working hard.

[Difdi]

One of my pet-peeves is getting called anti-semitic because I personally favor Palestinians over Israelis in a lot of things. I tend to favor the underdog in such matters, and have no tolerance for abuse or injustice. But it annoys me that some people don't know what the word semitic refers to.

I take a political side, and get accused of racism. I can handle that. But what bugs me is that Palestinians are a semitic people as much as Hebrews are. And more so than a Caucasian whose grandparents converted to Judaism and moved to Israel. So how the heck am I being anti-semitic if I favor a semitic person over a Caucasian, for purely political reasons?!?

[BlackIronCrown]

Somewhat along those lines... why is it OK for black people to call themselves the N-word...but if a white person does it, it's racist? I don't use that word, but I can't figure that one out.

Actually, I have an answer for this.
The current definition of "racism" in academia and in racial relations studies and practice is "Prejudice + Power = Racism".

What this means is that you are only racist if you are a member of a race that holds majority power in a society. Since the USA is (and I quote) "a white-power patriarchical society" any use of the N-word by a Caucasian is racist. However, those of African-American persuasion are able to embrace the N-word and use it as a self-referential weapon against overbearing white autocracy.

Similarly, should an African-American persist in calling a Caucasian a "cracker" or "honky", that is NOT a racist act. Since the African-American is a minority race, they are out of power and so therefore cannot possibly be racist by definition. They are using words of power to fight the white hierarchy.

I encountered this prevailing definition of racism in the LJ debunkingwhite community, which is populated almost entirely by those of Caucasian bent. In the same thread, it was also shown that whie people are inherently racist from birth, as we benefit from white privilege whether we wish to or not and so must admit to being racist by default, even if we take no overt acts.

[Sylvia727]

Wouldn't reverse racism be nice prejudices? "Hey, you're Jewish, you must be great with numbers!", or "You're gay? Can you give me fashion advice?"

What this means is that you are only racist if you are a member of a race that holds majority power in a society.

That may be the academic definition of their jargon, but that doesn't have any bearing to daily realities. Dictionary.com says that racism is "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races," and this is the meaning in the vernacular.

Since the USA is (and I quote) "a white-power patriarchical society" any use of the N-word by a Caucasian is racist. However, those of African-American persuasion are able to embrace the N-word and use it as a self-referential weapon against overbearing white autocracy.

Sure, why not. I call my sister a bitch because I love her. Doesn't mean that anyone else is allowed to do it. But if a black person knows that his white friend means it as an insult, it's not racist. I doubt you'll find many blacks who allow this usage, because of the hateful implications, but it is hypothetically possible.

Similarly, should an African-American persist in calling a Caucasian a "cracker" or "honky", that is NOT a racist act. Since the African-American is a minority race, they are out of power and so therefore cannot possibly be racist by definition. They are using words of power to fight the white hierarchy.

"Cracker" and "honky," on the individual level, are just as racist as "nigger" and "spic". On the general level, words from majorities against minorities may be more racist because of historical and relative power implications, but to two people bumping into each other at the neighborhood grocery store, racism is racism. "Words of power"? Is it empowering to hate people for no legitimate reason? I don't want to live in your society.

If my white employee calls someone a spic, I will fire his racist ass. If my Asian employee calls someone a nigger, I will fire his racist ass. And if my black employee calls someone a cracker, I will fire his racist ass. Hatred is not suddenly acceptable based on one's skin tone.

In the same thread, it was also shown that whie people are inherently racist from birth, as we benefit from white privilege whether we wish to or not and so must admit to being racist by default, even if we take no overt acts.

You're really going to have to elaborate on this one. I refuse to believe that someone's skin tone makes him a bad person, anymore than I believe that someone's skin tone makes him morally inferior.

[Boozy]

You're really going to have to elaborate on this one. I refuse to believe that someone's skin tone makes him a bad person, anymore than I believe that someone's skin tone makes him morally inferior.

He was not saying that anyone is a "bad person"; he said that whites are racist from birth. I understand how that sounds, but if you'll re-read his post, you'll find that the definition of racism that he is using is not as morally charged as the one used colloquially.

Regarding white privilege, Seshat made a wonderful post describing what is meant by this. I can't for the life of me find it, but I'll post the link here when I do.

What BIC has said is not going to be popular, but personally I agree with him.

[Rapscallion]

He didn't even say it was his definition, just that of academia.

Rapscallion

[Sylvia727]

Which is why I asked BIC to elaborate. If all whites are inherently racist, and the definition of racism is power + prejudice, then doesn't that mean that all whites are prejudiced? I find that both wrong and incredibly arrogant.

If the definition of racism depends on the balance of power, doesn't that mean that my white friend Lilith, one of only three whites in a school with 500 black students, could use the word "nigger" as a word of power to fight the black hierarchy? And before anyone says that it's not the same, she lived in a city of some 20k people, almost all black. She went to the same schools, ate in the same restaurants, and shopped in the same grocery stores. She had less job prospects than her black classmates because prospective employers wanted someone who could "relate to the community". And she saw another white person maybe once or twice a day. She is the minority in that city.

[Rapscallion]

I think what you're up against here is a number of people who are guilt-stricken at what their ancestors may have done and are doing their best at guilting others into acting a certain way to assuage their own guilt. (Did that make sense?)

Person A reads about slavery, realises it was a very nasty time in history, works out that their ancestors may have been involved. Guilt rises, but in order to assuage that they try to make person B feel guilty.

I'm not saying that the guilty shouldn't feel embarrassed over evils they committed, but I'll be buggered sideways if I'm going to hang my head in shame over acts committed by someone else. So what if they were white as well? Doesn't mean to say I desire to own slaves as well. Doesn't mean to say I did or do own slaves.

True, we can't really get to the people who did own the slaves, what with old age having killed them off years since, but why should I feel guilty for that? I'm got no problem with policies of equality - that's pure natural justice. A sentiment of 'all people of race X should be guilt-stricken over what others of their race did' is yet more racism.

The pendulum needs to be in the middle - not swinging from side to side every so often.

Rapscallion

[Seshat]

Regarding white privilege, Seshat made a wonderful post describing what is meant by this. I can't for the life of me find it, but I'll post the link here when I do.

Thank you.

If you meant my 'Frank Fullblood' post, it's post 35 in this thread.

Another possibility is post 9 of the Sexism (Of Both Types) thread.