Governments seem to do the opposite of what they say

[VladK]

This is just my outsider opinion, but it seems to me that racial tensions in the US are due to a one-sided view of racism.

Leftists won't even admit that there is such a thing as racism against whites because their definition of racism is one-sided. They think racism isn't what the dictionary defines it, but "power+prejudice", therefore since "blacks don't have power" and "white are privileged" blacks cannot be "racist" against whites. This leads to a whole host of bullshit caused by double standards. If you're strong on racism only when the majority group does it to the minority, then you are in fact racist.

Of course if I point this out I'm either going to be accused of:

a. "dog whistle" speak
b. being a useful idiot for racist right-wingers

Another issue is illegal immigration. If you don't support amnesty for illegals you're "racist". (cause you know, it's perfectly fine for Americans to have their country invaded by people who didn't go through the legal procedure to join)


Now as for high incarceration in the land of the free, here's an idea, legalize drugs. Let morons kill themselves slowly if they want to. Sometimes you just gotta let natural selection do its thing. If they're stupid enough to pump themselves full of chemicals that kill them despite all the information out there, why should the state help?

[Hijiri Byakuren]

Of course if I point this out I'm either going to be accused of:

a. "dog whistle" speak
b. being a useful idiot for racist right-wingers

The only thing I'm going to say is that your definition of racism is incorrect. Sociology defines racism as being both individual and institutional. If you only have the former, the person's just being a dick; and if you only have the latter, the government and private sector are just instituting general oppression. This is why you can have, say, a highly educated white man go to a far east Asian country and expect to get a good respectable job, but be shunned and/or feared by the average man on the street.

While you could argue that Obama is proof that racism is mostly dead, most sociologists will tell you that it's still unclear whether Obama's presidency represents true change or a hegemonic shift. Arguments for the latter will tell you that despite his skin color, Obama was basically raised like an average white American, and that he additionally doesn't share the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow due to his father being from Kenya as opposed to the United States. He's not the first black president so much as he is the first president who is only half white (through his mother). This gives him mannerisms that are considered more acceptable by the white majority in the United States, allowing him to get elected despite a social and institutional atmosphere that still largely embraces racism against non-whites.

I'm not going to use this to conclusively say that you are mistaken in your opinion, but it is something to consider.

[zarus tathra]

Now as for high incarceration in the land of the free, here's an idea, legalize drugs. Let morons kill themselves slowly if they want to. Sometimes you just gotta let natural selection do its thing. If they're stupid enough to pump themselves full of chemicals that kill them despite all the information out there, why should the state help?

Christianity and its ban on suicide, or at least that's my theory. You life isn't really your own, according to the religious; even death won't free you from their doctrines.

[Shiranu]

(cause you know, it's perfectly fine for Americans to have their country invaded by people who didn't go through the legal procedure to join)

Invaded? Seriously? Like... are they coming in with guns and bombs and running the "natives" out of their homes and forcing us to work shitty jobs while they take all the good paying ones?

[VladK]

Okay maybe not invaded, but trespassing, yes. Or simply breaking the law.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

You're not racist..I bet "some of your best friends" are another race...  :roll:

[Shiranu]

Okay maybe not invaded, but trespassing, yes. Or simply breaking the law.

If the law is injust and morally wrong, than it has no obligation to be obeyed or respected.

The majority of immigrants who move here illegally are extremely hardworking and are not "stealing jobs" (that would be the white CEO's who move them over seas).

The majority of immigrants who move here illegally are not committing any other crime, nor are they criminals in their own country, and are law abiding and tax paying citizens. They are mostly people who are fleeing countries that are full of criminals and poverty and want to contribute to our society.

The majority of welfare goes to white women, not immigrants.

The entire history of America is based on immigration, both legal and illegal. Undocumented workers built the very foundations of modern America, from our railroads, highways, infrastructure and their children have innovated technology used in all fields, from medical to construction to corporate. Many of the top American corporations are owned by the children of immigrants.

The entire history of America also revolves around fearing and demonizing and making the currently in vogue minority a boogieman. It hasn't even been a hundred years since my ancestor's were considered sub-human by the white establishment of America, and before the "Mexicans" (anyone south of the border is now apparently a Mexican) it was the Eastern Asians and African immigrants, as well as groups like the Turks, the Germans and the Japanese (Eastern Asian, obviously...) during WW2 (as well as us Italians), the Irish... pretty much any group besides the English you can imagine has been demonized at one point or another.

If they commit a serious crime, I say deport them without blinking. But if they are coming here, putting money into our government through taxes, working hard and supporting their families so the rest of us don't have to and are just the victim's of American "Boogieman" fears like many of our ancestors were at one point or another... let them be.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

You got that right Shiranu.
The Indian tribe analogy is silly because that was about genocide,  not merely taking jobs.

[Jack89]

The only thing I'm going to say is that your definition of racism is incorrect. Sociology defines racism as being both individual and institutional. If you only have the former, the person's just being a dick; and if you only have the latter, the government and private sector are just instituting general oppression. This is why you can have, say, a highly educated white man go to a far east Asian country and expect to get a good respectable job, but be shunned and/or feared by the average man on the street.

While you could argue that Obama is proof that racism is mostly dead, most sociologists will tell you that it's still unclear whether Obama's presidency represents true change or a hegemonic shift. Arguments for the latter will tell you that despite his skin color, Obama was basically raised like an average white American, and that he additionally doesn't share the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow due to his father being from Kenya as opposed to the United States. He's not the first black president so much as he is the first president who is only half white (through his mother). This gives him mannerisms that are considered more acceptable by the white majority in the United States, allowing him to get elected despite a social and institutional atmosphere that still largely embraces racism against non-whites.

I'm not going to use this to conclusively say that you are mistaken in your opinion, but it is something to consider.

You can call it what you like, but there are large segments of all ethnic groups that dislike and even hate other ethnic groups because of their differences.  I call that racism.  You can call it individual, institutional, cultural, or even horizontal, but it's still racism.  The hate promoted by the Black Panthers and people like Louis Farrakhan is just as racist as the hate promoted by Stormfront, the Klan and David Duke.  In fact I think it's worse because it tends to be marginalized and sometimes even tolerated by the public and the media.

[Sal1981]

Whenever a government says that it promotes a certain interest, it generally ends up doing the exact opposite.

The People's Republic of China has the most repressive, elitist government in the world.

America, Land of the Free, has more prisoners per capita than anyone.

"Civil rights" has spread racial tensions throughout the country.

People who rely on HUD have the worst housing in America.

I propose that we create a political movement dedicated to everything that we hate so that we might decrease their incidence wherever we are active.

Let's support increased pollution, increased suppression of technological change, increased suppression of the free flow of information, increased racial tension.

What else?

What a bunch of ridiculous hasty generalizations.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

There's a HUGE difference Jack between the KKK and the Black Panthers. The KKK was never part of an oppressed minority while the BPs were fighting for their communities survival against the institutions that systematically discriminated against them leaving huge swaths of anyone not white vulnerable to a clearly white power structure.  Farikan had his own agenda, but it wasn't born out of merely just not liking white people.

[Jack89]

There's a HUGE difference Jack between the KKK and the Black Panthers. The KKK was never part of an oppressed minority while the BPs were fighting for their communities survival against the institutions that systematically discriminated against them leaving huge swaths of anyone not white vulnerable to a clearly white power structure.  Farikan had his own agenda, but it wasn't born out of merely just not liking white people.

When you're on the receiving end of racism, does it really matter where the hate stems from?  After I joined the military my family moved to very rural southern Oregon because my step dad was chasing road construction work, as always.  My little brothers went to a school that was mostly Native American.  They were beaten up and threatened with weapons on multiple occasions because they were white.  They eventually moved because it got so bad.  Do you think my brothers really gave a shit that the hatred they endured stemmed from past social injustices that they had no part in?  Do you think the Native American kids knew why they hated the white kids?  

The Black Panthers may have had good intentions in the beginning, but they eventually became an icon of black nationalism, the ugly side of Black Power.  Today's version is an openly separatist group that preaches hate and there are people who eat it up.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Oh...you poor poor victims. I wonder why they might not have liked them.
There is a big differece in hating people who oppress you vs hating people you oppress. Perhaps you missed the memo.

[Plu]

Oh...you poor poor victims. I wonder why they might not have liked them.
There is a big differece in hating people who oppress you vs hating people you oppress. Perhaps you missed the memo.

I'm pretty sure some white kids in some school weren't opressing anyone. Probably it was more the other way around, if it's a school full of native americans and a few white people.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Because the tea party patriots are doing so much to help our poor indian tribes everywhere.   :roll: