A very serious thread about race relations

[ricechickie]

If you use secondary sources, they need to be trustworthy. Now there are sources that actively lie and distort.

IMO, one of the biggest issues in the black community is illegitimacy.


My reading on the problems caused by that, (not limited to black community, but just more of it there)


have been supported by personal interaction and observation of single mothers, specifically blacks single mothers.



I support pro job policies to, among many other reasons, to give black men the economic option of being providers.

I think that all children, including black children, should be taught how much better a two parent family is, than a one parent one.


So that we can reduce illegitimacy, specifically in the black community, to reduce all the effects, crime, drug use, poverty, suicides, ect ect ect


In your opinion, where did I go off the rails?

I don't know if you did go off any rails.

Single parents (not just moms) need support, not ostracism. Not that you ostracized any yourself, but the stats about crime, drug use, poverty, etc, is sometimes used to target single moms (especially single black moms) to blame them for being single, and causing those social ills. As if they don't have enough problems.

Yes, a two-parent family is best. People should be taught that.

So, that's the model I will be using instead of "one on one".


And the above position has gotten me called racist, probably literally thousands of times.

Don't expect that model to accomplish much.

You do know that there are single parents whose children do NOT succumb to crime, drugs, and poverty, right? Those single-parent families are going to get defensive, recognizing that no one factor is a guarantee of success or failure.

Two points.


1. Only if someone tells them that a general problem is a personal, likely "racist" insult.


2. So, we don't address a huge social problem because it might hurt some people's feelings? That is not valid to me.

It's not about hurt feelings; it's just ineffective because of the hurt feelings.

I'm telling you how it is, but it's not how you want it to be. That's not my problem.

 

[Correll]

IMO, one of the biggest issues in the black community is illegitimacy.


My reading on the problems caused by that, (not limited to black community, but just more of it there)


have been supported by personal interaction and observation of single mothers, specifically blacks single mothers.



I support pro job policies to, among many other reasons, to give black men the economic option of being providers.

I think that all children, including black children, should be taught how much better a two parent family is, than a one parent one.


So that we can reduce illegitimacy, specifically in the black community, to reduce all the effects, crime, drug use, poverty, suicides, ect ect ect


In your opinion, where did I go off the rails?

I don't know if you did go off any rails.

Single parents (not just moms) need support, not ostracism. Not that you ostracized any yourself, but the stats about crime, drug use, poverty, etc, is sometimes used to target single moms (especially single black moms) to blame them for being single, and causing those social ills. As if they don't have enough problems.

Yes, a two-parent family is best. People should be taught that.

So, that's the model I will be using instead of "one on one".


And the above position has gotten me called racist, probably literally thousands of times.

Don't expect that model to accomplish much.

You do know that there are single parents whose children do NOT succumb to crime, drugs, and poverty, right? Those single-parent families are going to get defensive, recognizing that no one factor is a guarantee of success or failure.

Two points.


1. Only if someone tells them that a general problem is a personal, likely "racist" insult.


2. So, we don't address a huge social problem because it might hurt some people's feelings? That is not valid to me.

It's not about hurt feelings; it's just ineffective because of the hurt feelings.

I'm telling you how it is, but it's not how you want it to be. That's not my problem.

If we have pro-job policies and put out the truth about how illegitimacy is harmful to children, young women are going to have the option of finding fathers who can also be providers.


That some single moms, and their political allies are unhappy does not stop that, unless we let them.

 

[Mac1958]

Must be another pledge drive going on.

The troll is trying to hijack the thread. It happens. So, back to the conversation.

There was a conversation earlier here about how hyper-sensitive both "sides" of this issue are to outside criticism, and how it's likely that the only way forward may be to demand that each "side" clean its own house.

I'm believing that more and more. You?
.

oh, yes.

I have seen a greater inclination from conservatives to distance themselves from the actual nazis and kkk types than I have the left, however. I don't think I have ever seen a lefty challenge any of extreme black racists who post here, but I HAVE seen it from the conservatives.

On this issue I definitely lean in that direction - the Left has caused, and continues to cause, great damage because it's so committed to any political advantage it can squeeze out of this. I see it in my own family.

That doesn't mean the Right is blameless, though. First, there are still those who claim/pretend that racism no longer exists to any significant extent, and second, it has shown its own hypersensitivity on the issue. Trump's recent comments, while they may have largely been accurate regarding violence, were tone-deaf in the extreme, and his fans refused to give an inch there.

While I agree the "sides" are not "equal" in blame on this issue, that doesn't preclude both "sides" from cleaning their own house before pointing the finger.
.

 

[Correll]

Must be another pledge drive going on.

The troll is trying to hijack the thread. It happens. So, back to the conversation.

There was a conversation earlier here about how hyper-sensitive both "sides" of this issue are to outside criticism, and how it's likely that the only way forward may be to demand that each "side" clean its own house.

I'm believing that more and more. You?
.

oh, yes.

I have seen a greater inclination from conservatives to distance themselves from the actual nazis and kkk types than I have the left, however. I don't think I have ever seen a lefty challenge any of extreme black racists who post here, but I HAVE seen it from the conservatives.

On this issue I definitely lean in that direction - the Left has caused, and continues to cause, great damage because it's so committed to any political advantage it can squeeze out of this. I see it in my own family.

That doesn't mean the Right is blameless, though. First, there are still those who claim/pretend that racism no longer exists to any significant extent, and second, it has shown its own hypersensitivity on the issue. Trump's recent comments, while they may have largely been accurate regarding violence, were tone-deaf in the extreme, and his fans refused to give an inch there.

While I agree the "sides" are not "equal" in blame on this issue, that doesn't preclude both "sides" from cleaning their own house before pointing the finger.
.

We are not fans, we are political supporters, and giving an inch to an implacable enemy serves no purpose.

 

[Mac1958]

Must be another pledge drive going on.

The troll is trying to hijack the thread. It happens. So, back to the conversation.

There was a conversation earlier here about how hyper-sensitive both "sides" of this issue are to outside criticism, and how it's likely that the only way forward may be to demand that each "side" clean its own house.

I'm believing that more and more. You?
.

oh, yes.

I have seen a greater inclination from conservatives to distance themselves from the actual nazis and kkk types than I have the left, however. I don't think I have ever seen a lefty challenge any of extreme black racists who post here, but I HAVE seen it from the conservatives.

On this issue I definitely lean in that direction - the Left has caused, and continues to cause, great damage because it's so committed to any political advantage it can squeeze out of this. I see it in my own family.

That doesn't mean the Right is blameless, though. First, there are still those who claim/pretend that racism no longer exists to any significant extent, and second, it has shown its own hypersensitivity on the issue. Trump's recent comments, while they may have largely been accurate regarding violence, were tone-deaf in the extreme, and his fans refused to give an inch there.

While I agree the "sides" are not "equal" in blame on this issue, that doesn't preclude both "sides" from cleaning their own house before pointing the finger.
.

We are not fans, we are political supporters, and giving an inch to an implacable enemy serves no purpose.

And that's the problem.

Neither side gives an inch to the enemy, and we just decay.
.

 

[Correll]

Must be another pledge drive going on.

The troll is trying to hijack the thread. It happens. So, back to the conversation.

There was a conversation earlier here about how hyper-sensitive both "sides" of this issue are to outside criticism, and how it's likely that the only way forward may be to demand that each "side" clean its own house.

I'm believing that more and more. You?
.

oh, yes.

I have seen a greater inclination from conservatives to distance themselves from the actual nazis and kkk types than I have the left, however. I don't think I have ever seen a lefty challenge any of extreme black racists who post here, but I HAVE seen it from the conservatives.

On this issue I definitely lean in that direction - the Left has caused, and continues to cause, great damage because it's so committed to any political advantage it can squeeze out of this. I see it in my own family.

That doesn't mean the Right is blameless, though. First, there are still those who claim/pretend that racism no longer exists to any significant extent, and second, it has shown its own hypersensitivity on the issue. Trump's recent comments, while they may have largely been accurate regarding violence, were tone-deaf in the extreme, and his fans refused to give an inch there.

While I agree the "sides" are not "equal" in blame on this issue, that doesn't preclude both "sides" from cleaning their own house before pointing the finger.
.

We are not fans, we are political supporters, and giving an inch to an implacable enemy serves no purpose.

And that's the problem.

Neither side gives an inch to the enemy, and we just decay.
.

When the Right gives an inch, the left takes it and just keeps attacking.

If the Left ever gave an inch, well, I strongly suspect that once we recovered from the shock, that we would be very pleased and open to something constructive.

 

[ricechickie]

I don't know if you did go off any rails.

Single parents (not just moms) need support, not ostracism. Not that you ostracized any yourself, but the stats about crime, drug use, poverty, etc, is sometimes used to target single moms (especially single black moms) to blame them for being single, and causing those social ills. As if they don't have enough problems.

Yes, a two-parent family is best. People should be taught that.

So, that's the model I will be using instead of "one on one".


And the above position has gotten me called racist, probably literally thousands of times.

Don't expect that model to accomplish much.

You do know that there are single parents whose children do NOT succumb to crime, drugs, and poverty, right? Those single-parent families are going to get defensive, recognizing that no one factor is a guarantee of success or failure.

Two points.


1. Only if someone tells them that a general problem is a personal, likely "racist" insult.


2. So, we don't address a huge social problem because it might hurt some people's feelings? That is not valid to me.

It's not about hurt feelings; it's just ineffective because of the hurt feelings.

I'm telling you how it is, but it's not how you want it to be. That's not my problem.

If we have pro-job policies and put out the truth about how illegitimacy is harmful to children, young women are going to have the option of finding fathers who can also be providers.


That some single moms, and their political allies are unhappy does not stop that, unless we let them.

If you put out that truth, you are only putting out part of the story.

Is it always best to have a two-parent home when one is abusive? Is a two-parent home best when both are miserable with each other?

Education is about more than propagandizing the American dream. Honest conversations need to be had, more than prescribing how people behave. Meaning that, with all other things being equal, a two-parent home works better because it is easier to raise a child with a committed partner. Because there's someone else to pick up the slack. Because you have another pair of ears and eyes and another person's judgment for the tough problems.

 

[ricechickie]

The troll is trying to hijack the thread. It happens. So, back to the conversation.

There was a conversation earlier here about how hyper-sensitive both "sides" of this issue are to outside criticism, and how it's likely that the only way forward may be to demand that each "side" clean its own house.

I'm believing that more and more. You?
.

oh, yes.

I have seen a greater inclination from conservatives to distance themselves from the actual nazis and kkk types than I have the left, however. I don't think I have ever seen a lefty challenge any of extreme black racists who post here, but I HAVE seen it from the conservatives.

On this issue I definitely lean in that direction - the Left has caused, and continues to cause, great damage because it's so committed to any political advantage it can squeeze out of this. I see it in my own family.

That doesn't mean the Right is blameless, though. First, there are still those who claim/pretend that racism no longer exists to any significant extent, and second, it has shown its own hypersensitivity on the issue. Trump's recent comments, while they may have largely been accurate regarding violence, were tone-deaf in the extreme, and his fans refused to give an inch there.

While I agree the "sides" are not "equal" in blame on this issue, that doesn't preclude both "sides" from cleaning their own house before pointing the finger.
.

We are not fans, we are political supporters, and giving an inch to an implacable enemy serves no purpose.

And that's the problem.

Neither side gives an inch to the enemy, and we just decay.
.

When the Right gives an inch, the left takes it and just keeps attacking.

If the Left ever gave an inch, well, I strongly suspect that once we recovered from the shock, that we would be very pleased and open to something constructive.

The same kind of talk that so derails race conversations, you did with politics.

You just criticized my whole side of the political spectrum.

Nice.

 

[TNHarley]

So, that's the model I will be using instead of "one on one".


And the above position has gotten me called racist, probably literally thousands of times.

Don't expect that model to accomplish much.

You do know that there are single parents whose children do NOT succumb to crime, drugs, and poverty, right? Those single-parent families are going to get defensive, recognizing that no one factor is a guarantee of success or failure.

Two points.


1. Only if someone tells them that a general problem is a personal, likely "racist" insult.


2. So, we don't address a huge social problem because it might hurt some people's feelings? That is not valid to me.

It's not about hurt feelings; it's just ineffective because of the hurt feelings.

I'm telling you how it is, but it's not how you want it to be. That's not my problem.

If we have pro-job policies and put out the truth about how illegitimacy is harmful to children, young women are going to have the option of finding fathers who can also be providers.


That some single moms, and their political allies are unhappy does not stop that, unless we let them.

If you put out that truth, you are only putting out part of the story.

Is it always best to have a two-parent home when one is abusive? Is a two-parent home best when both are miserable with each other?

Education is about more than propagandizing the American dream. Honest conversations need to be had, more than prescribing how people behave. Meaning that, with all other things being equal, a two-parent home works better because it is easier to raise a child with a committed partner. Because there's someone else to pick up the slack. Because you have another pair of ears and eyes and another person's judgment for the tough problems.

excellent post. I do think as far as "two parent households" go, a mom and dad are the best option. A man and a womans input on different things, or the same with different viewpoints, are extremely important in development. Generally speaking, of course.

 

[Correll]

So, that's the model I will be using instead of "one on one".


And the above position has gotten me called racist, probably literally thousands of times.

Don't expect that model to accomplish much.

You do know that there are single parents whose children do NOT succumb to crime, drugs, and poverty, right? Those single-parent families are going to get defensive, recognizing that no one factor is a guarantee of success or failure.

Two points.


1. Only if someone tells them that a general problem is a personal, likely "racist" insult.


2. So, we don't address a huge social problem because it might hurt some people's feelings? That is not valid to me.

It's not about hurt feelings; it's just ineffective because of the hurt feelings.

I'm telling you how it is, but it's not how you want it to be. That's not my problem.

If we have pro-job policies and put out the truth about how illegitimacy is harmful to children, young women are going to have the option of finding fathers who can also be providers.


That some single moms, and their political allies are unhappy does not stop that, unless we let them.

If you put out that truth, you are only putting out part of the story.

Is it always best to have a two-parent home when one is abusive? Is a two-parent home best when both are miserable with each other?

Education is about more than propagandizing the American dream. Honest conversations need to be had, more than prescribing how people behave. Meaning that, with all other things being equal, a two-parent home works better because it is easier to raise a child with a committed partner. Because there's someone else to pick up the slack. Because you have another pair of ears and eyes and another person's judgment for the tough problems.

i think we can get the message out that illegitimacy is bad, without encouraging staying with abusive men.

 

[ricechickie]

Don't expect that model to accomplish much.

You do know that there are single parents whose children do NOT succumb to crime, drugs, and poverty, right? Those single-parent families are going to get defensive, recognizing that no one factor is a guarantee of success or failure.

Two points.


1. Only if someone tells them that a general problem is a personal, likely "racist" insult.


2. So, we don't address a huge social problem because it might hurt some people's feelings? That is not valid to me.

It's not about hurt feelings; it's just ineffective because of the hurt feelings.

I'm telling you how it is, but it's not how you want it to be. That's not my problem.

If we have pro-job policies and put out the truth about how illegitimacy is harmful to children, young women are going to have the option of finding fathers who can also be providers.


That some single moms, and their political allies are unhappy does not stop that, unless we let them.

If you put out that truth, you are only putting out part of the story.

Is it always best to have a two-parent home when one is abusive? Is a two-parent home best when both are miserable with each other?

Education is about more than propagandizing the American dream. Honest conversations need to be had, more than prescribing how people behave. Meaning that, with all other things being equal, a two-parent home works better because it is easier to raise a child with a committed partner. Because there's someone else to pick up the slack. Because you have another pair of ears and eyes and another person's judgment for the tough problems.

i think we can get the message out that illegitimacy is bad, without encouraging staying with abusive men.

Not if you point a blaming finger at single black moms for all of society's ills.

Just like I will be hesitant to discuss things with you because your insistence that "the left" won't give an inch, when I have bent over backward to be reasonable in my dialogue.

And yes, I am now defensive.

 

[Correll]

oh, yes.

I have seen a greater inclination from conservatives to distance themselves from the actual nazis and kkk types than I have the left, however. I don't think I have ever seen a lefty challenge any of extreme black racists who post here, but I HAVE seen it from the conservatives.

On this issue I definitely lean in that direction - the Left has caused, and continues to cause, great damage because it's so committed to any political advantage it can squeeze out of this. I see it in my own family.

That doesn't mean the Right is blameless, though. First, there are still those who claim/pretend that racism no longer exists to any significant extent, and second, it has shown its own hypersensitivity on the issue. Trump's recent comments, while they may have largely been accurate regarding violence, were tone-deaf in the extreme, and his fans refused to give an inch there.

While I agree the "sides" are not "equal" in blame on this issue, that doesn't preclude both "sides" from cleaning their own house before pointing the finger.
.

We are not fans, we are political supporters, and giving an inch to an implacable enemy serves no purpose.

And that's the problem.

Neither side gives an inch to the enemy, and we just decay.
.

When the Right gives an inch, the left takes it and just keeps attacking.

If the Left ever gave an inch, well, I strongly suspect that once we recovered from the shock, that we would be very pleased and open to something constructive.

The same kind of talk that so derails race conversations, you did with politics.

You just criticized my whole side of the political spectrum.

Nice.

What derails any conversation on race, is the constant use of false accusations of racism, ie The Race Card.

I spoke of the Left as a general group. Unless specified, normally people understand that comments about a large group, does not mean universally.


If someone says that a city is very excited about their team making the Superbowl, you know that there are rare individuals in that city that, for whatever reason, don't give a damn.

 

[Correll]

Two points.


1. Only if someone tells them that a general problem is a personal, likely "racist" insult.


2. So, we don't address a huge social problem because it might hurt some people's feelings? That is not valid to me.

It's not about hurt feelings; it's just ineffective because of the hurt feelings.

I'm telling you how it is, but it's not how you want it to be. That's not my problem.

If we have pro-job policies and put out the truth about how illegitimacy is harmful to children, young women are going to have the option of finding fathers who can also be providers.


That some single moms, and their political allies are unhappy does not stop that, unless we let them.

If you put out that truth, you are only putting out part of the story.

Is it always best to have a two-parent home when one is abusive? Is a two-parent home best when both are miserable with each other?

Education is about more than propagandizing the American dream. Honest conversations need to be had, more than prescribing how people behave. Meaning that, with all other things being equal, a two-parent home works better because it is easier to raise a child with a committed partner. Because there's someone else to pick up the slack. Because you have another pair of ears and eyes and another person's judgment for the tough problems.

i think we can get the message out that illegitimacy is bad, without encouraging staying with abusive men.

Not if you point a blaming finger at single black moms for all of society's ills.

Just like I will be hesitant to discuss things with you because your insistence that "the left" won't give an inch, when I have bent over backward to be reasonable in my dialogue.

And yes, I am now defensive.

Accusing me of "blaming single black moms for all of society's ills" is an interesting way to show defensiveness.

 

[Pogo]

Is there anyone here, or does anyone here know of anyone, who wants to see race relations improve?

No, I don't mean "beat" the other "side". No, I don't mean punishing the other side for their opinions. No, I'm not talking about the political angles, particularly pointing the finger and blaming the other guy.

I mean, is anyone aware of anyone whose top priority is better, more open, more positive, more civil, more constructive, more fruitful human relationships between the races?

Dead serious question. Examples would be great. Links would be great.
.

I think everyone wants to see them improve --- at least everyone except those who stand to gain from creating and fueling such discord, such as KKKlannists and certain bloggers.

It all starts with self-education about how we historically got here, and rejecting the standard schooling indoctrination as grossly insufficient at best. This shit didn't start last week or last year or last century or with the Civil War -- it's been going on five hundred years.

 

[Mac1958]

Is there anyone here, or does anyone here know of anyone, who wants to see race relations improve?

No, I don't mean "beat" the other "side". No, I don't mean punishing the other side for their opinions. No, I'm not talking about the political angles, particularly pointing the finger and blaming the other guy.

I mean, is anyone aware of anyone whose top priority is better, more open, more positive, more civil, more constructive, more fruitful human relationships between the races?

Dead serious question. Examples would be great. Links would be great.
.

I think everyone wants to see them improve --- at least everyone except those who stand to gain from creating and fueling such discord, such as KKKlannists and certain bloggers.

It all starts with self-education about how we historically got here, and rejecting the standard schooling indoctrination as grossly insufficient at best. This shit didn't start last week or last year or last century or with the Civil War -- it's been going on five hundred years.

Agreed, but there are people all over the political spectrum who stand to professionally gain from division.

Hatred keeps them relevant, and they have no problem stoking it.
.

 

[Pogo]

On this issue I definitely lean in that direction - the Left has caused, and continues to cause, great damage because it's so committed to any political advantage it can squeeze out of this. I see it in my own family.

That doesn't mean the Right is blameless, though. First, there are still those who claim/pretend that racism no longer exists to any significant extent, and second, it has shown its own hypersensitivity on the issue. Trump's recent comments, while they may have largely been accurate regarding violence, were tone-deaf in the extreme, and his fans refused to give an inch there.

While I agree the "sides" are not "equal" in blame on this issue, that doesn't preclude both "sides" from cleaning their own house before pointing the finger.
.

We are not fans, we are political supporters, and giving an inch to an implacable enemy serves no purpose.

And that's the problem.

Neither side gives an inch to the enemy, and we just decay.
.

When the Right gives an inch, the left takes it and just keeps attacking.

If the Left ever gave an inch, well, I strongly suspect that once we recovered from the shock, that we would be very pleased and open to something constructive.

The same kind of talk that so derails race conversations, you did with politics.

You just criticized my whole side of the political spectrum.

Nice.

What derails any conversation on race, is the constant use of false accusations of racism, ie The Race Card.

I spoke of the Left as a general group. Unless specified, normally people understand that comments about a large group, does not mean universally.


If someone says that a city is very excited about their team making the Superbowl, you know that there are rare individuals in that city that, for whatever reason, don't give a damn.

Then you've just called out your own fallacy.

I'm just getting here but I can see by simply looking up two levels in the nest that you just used two broad-brush generalizations, "the right" and "the left". Unless you can prove that what follows applies literally to every member thereof, whatever follows will be a lie.

 

[Pogo]

Is there anyone here, or does anyone here know of anyone, who wants to see race relations improve?

No, I don't mean "beat" the other "side". No, I don't mean punishing the other side for their opinions. No, I'm not talking about the political angles, particularly pointing the finger and blaming the other guy.

I mean, is anyone aware of anyone whose top priority is better, more open, more positive, more civil, more constructive, more fruitful human relationships between the races?

Dead serious question. Examples would be great. Links would be great.
.

I think everyone wants to see them improve --- at least everyone except those who stand to gain from creating and fueling such discord, such as KKKlannists and certain bloggers.

It all starts with self-education about how we historically got here, and rejecting the standard schooling indoctrination as grossly insufficient at best. This shit didn't start last week or last year or last century or with the Civil War -- it's been going on five hundred years.

Agreed, but there are people all over the political spectrum who stand to professionally gain from division.

Hatred keeps them relevant, and they have no problem stoking it.
.

Yes it can be used politically in multiple ways, but that 's irrelevant if we're talking about racism itself, which is a social construct, not a political one. Racism was originally contrived to morally rationalize an exploitative economic system. Then it became a pretext for dictatorial politics ("we need to take these aboriginals away from their families and place them in 'residential schools' because they're a savage race"). But in order to reach that point it had to first establish as a cultural value.

Only if the question is "how can one side or the other exploit this politically" is it relevant or useful to analyze that. Eliminate racism, and that manipulation is by definition also eliminated.

 

[Correll]

We are not fans, we are political supporters, and giving an inch to an implacable enemy serves no purpose.

And that's the problem.

Neither side gives an inch to the enemy, and we just decay.
.

When the Right gives an inch, the left takes it and just keeps attacking.

If the Left ever gave an inch, well, I strongly suspect that once we recovered from the shock, that we would be very pleased and open to something constructive.

The same kind of talk that so derails race conversations, you did with politics.

You just criticized my whole side of the political spectrum.

Nice.

What derails any conversation on race, is the constant use of false accusations of racism, ie The Race Card.

I spoke of the Left as a general group. Unless specified, normally people understand that comments about a large group, does not mean universally.


If someone says that a city is very excited about their team making the Superbowl, you know that there are rare individuals in that city that, for whatever reason, don't give a damn.

Then you've just called out your own fallacy.

I'm just getting here but I can see by simply looking up two levels in the nest that you just used two broad-brush generalizations, "the right" and "the left". Unless you can prove that what follows applies literally to every member thereof, whatever follows will be a lie.

Nope. Generalizations are generalizations. YOur pretense that you don't understand that is silly.


noun
1.
the act or process of generalizing.
2.
a result of this process; a general statement, idea, or principle.
3.
Logic.

1. a proposition asserting something to be true either of all membersof a certain class or of an indefinite part of that class.

 

[Mac1958]

Is there anyone here, or does anyone here know of anyone, who wants to see race relations improve?

No, I don't mean "beat" the other "side". No, I don't mean punishing the other side for their opinions. No, I'm not talking about the political angles, particularly pointing the finger and blaming the other guy.

I mean, is anyone aware of anyone whose top priority is better, more open, more positive, more civil, more constructive, more fruitful human relationships between the races?

Dead serious question. Examples would be great. Links would be great.
.

I think everyone wants to see them improve --- at least everyone except those who stand to gain from creating and fueling such discord, such as KKKlannists and certain bloggers.

It all starts with self-education about how we historically got here, and rejecting the standard schooling indoctrination as grossly insufficient at best. This shit didn't start last week or last year or last century or with the Civil War -- it's been going on five hundred years.

Agreed, but there are people all over the political spectrum who stand to professionally gain from division.

Hatred keeps them relevant, and they have no problem stoking it.
.

Yes it can be used politically in multiple ways, but that 's irrelevant if we're talking about racism itself, which is a social construct, not a political one.

Only if the question is "how can one side or the other exploit this politically" is it relevant or useful to analyze that. Eliminate racism, and that manipulation is by definition also eliminated.

Well, that depends on the definition of the term. Sadly, it has been so over-used for political advantage that it can mean virtually anything.

"I disagree with that black person".

"Well, that's because you're a racist".

Such an important word means so little now.
.

 

[Pogo]

Is there anyone here, or does anyone here know of anyone, who wants to see race relations improve?

No, I don't mean "beat" the other "side". No, I don't mean punishing the other side for their opinions. No, I'm not talking about the political angles, particularly pointing the finger and blaming the other guy.

I mean, is anyone aware of anyone whose top priority is better, more open, more positive, more civil, more constructive, more fruitful human relationships between the races?

Dead serious question. Examples would be great. Links would be great.
.

I think everyone wants to see them improve --- at least everyone except those who stand to gain from creating and fueling such discord, such as KKKlannists and certain bloggers.

It all starts with self-education about how we historically got here, and rejecting the standard schooling indoctrination as grossly insufficient at best. This shit didn't start last week or last year or last century or with the Civil War -- it's been going on five hundred years.

Agreed, but there are people all over the political spectrum who stand to professionally gain from division.

Hatred keeps them relevant, and they have no problem stoking it.
.

Yes it can be used politically in multiple ways, but that 's irrelevant if we're talking about racism itself, which is a social construct, not a political one.

Only if the question is "how can one side or the other exploit this politically" is it relevant or useful to analyze that. Eliminate racism, and that manipulation is by definition also eliminated.

Well, that depends on the definition of the term. Sadly, it has been so over-used for political advantage that it can mean virtually anything.

"I disagree with that black person".

"Well, that's because you're a racist".

Such an important word means so little now.
.

That speaker may well be a racist, but it isn't in evidence from that passage. That's part of the issue, that the term racism is applied so carelessly . There seem to walk among us those who actually believe the mere mention of a race, or the utterance of some term, is by itself racism.

It cannot be without a causation -- the belief that one race is inferior to another. Mere mention doesn't meet that test. In the example above the accusing speaker would have to have some evidence from the past. The present conversation doesn't show it, so if that's his only basis -- he's made no point, just a baseless accusation.

Simplest way I've found to explain it:

"That guy" --- not racism.
"That black guy"-- not racism.
"That black guy stole my car" -- not racism.
"That black guy stole my car because that's what blacks do" --- racism now present.