Why Is Merely POINTING OUT Racism Worse Than ACTUAL Racism To So Many on The Right??

[catzmeow]

Damn straight, Skippy!

People can pull themselves up, but sometimes, they need a person to give them a hand up.

I'll agree with the hand up, but not with the hand outs.

Where did I advocate a handout? I am not a fan of entitlements...not for corporations, and not for individuals.

 

[catzmeow]

A huge part of the problem is the fact that neither party's reps have the stomach to make the tough decisions and follow through. The pols are all petrified that they might lose part of their voter base, so each party panders to those they think will vote for them.
Realistically, though, the poor have always been part of every social structure. There have always been individuals among them who will put forth the effort to improve their lot, and often the lot of those nearest to them. No matter how well-intentioned, no one can lift them out of their poverty but them.

Neither party's reps have the stomach to make tough decisions and end entitlements for ANYONE, including corporate America, the retiree crowd, or poor folks. Vote-buying is the name of the game right now, whether pols are buying votes from the rich or the poor or the old or the minorities or the women or the do-gooders or the churches, and using our collective tax dollars to do it.

Let me be clear: Both parties spend like drunken sailors on shore leave in a Thai bordello. Both parties treat our tax dollars as if our dollars are their reelection campaign funds, spending on their favorite pet projects, sending pork home to their district, and bribing the people most likely to vote for them with our money.

And, that's some bullshit. We have some serious problems facing us as a nation, economically, and we cannot compete with the rest of the world when something like 24% of Americans aren't even able to attain a high school diploma (and that statistic is much starker when you look at inner city and rural areas with high poverty rates). We ALL cannot succeed when a fourth of us are being left behind economically. This is not a world where a kid with a GED can get a job paying $30 an hour at a local car manufacturing plant. It's a new world, and the biggest problem facing us as a nation, longterm, is the economic disenfranchisement of a healthy percentage of Americans. The people who make the highest chunk of funds get tired of subsidizing them. And, living in a constant state of poverty creates all kinds of other problems: high levels of criminal involvement, high levels of domestic violence, issues with substance abuse, growing prison populations, drug trafficking problems, etc. All of those things cost significant amounts of taxpayer dollars and greatly diminish the quality of life for everyone in the community, plus they further add to an increasing spiral of concentrated problems and dysfunction.

You are right...We can't lift individuals out of poverty. However, we can push for every school to use proven methodologies and emphasize reading and basic math skills from kindergarten on. We can push to ensure that children have access to books that are stimulating and which create a lifelong appreciation for reading. We can hold teachers, particularly at the elementary level, accountable for ensuring that every student in their classroom learns to read. We can support the charter school movement, which for the first time is giving many families in areas with failing schools a way out and an opportunity to vote with their feet. We can start holding school district officials accountable--with criminal sanctions--for "gaming" standardized tests (Rodney Paige's district was NOTORIOUS for doing this, and then Rod Paige was appointed by George Bush as head of DOE. Talk about putting the fox in charge of the hen house). We can support programs like Boys & Girls Clubs and Big Brothers/Big Sisters and the YWCA/YMCA, which provide children in many dangerous parts of the U.S. with a safe place to go after school, tutoring, mentoring, and other types of programming. We can more strictly regulate funds allocated to help poor students to attend college, and ensure that students who receive federal funds are only able to use those funds to obtain degrees in marketable fields, i.e., nursing, education, engineering, IT, etc. (not "women's studies", for example).

We can realize that not every kid starts out with the support, structure, nutrition, opportunities, adequate healthcare, adequate dental care, adequate eye care, and adequate clothing that they need to succeed in school, and in life.

And, we can address those obvious deficits, whether it is through local charities or government grants or local/state/federal programs or through charitable foundations. However, those programs should require people to use research-based strategies that have been through a scientific evaluation of effectiveness, and should require scrupulous accountability for use of public/private funds to ensure that appropriate numbers of kids are served, in research-based ways, and receiving sufficient dosage to counteract the negative effects of high-crime neighborhoods, disrupted and dysfunctional families, and other social problems that these kids are dealing with daily.

We could and should do all of those things. But, in doing that, we might piss alot of people off, and our political "leaders" lack the cojones to do that.

 

[Si modo]

But according to many on the right, the term has been so misused, that it no longer has any meaning and/or holds any more weight.

So why the outcry for merely POINTING racism out?

Very confusing...

I think that most people are rightfully wary of being labeled as racists, because that shit can fuck you up.

I mean, look what it did to Shirley Sherrod's life.

In essence, it's a label that can destroy you professionally, and which can be very difficult to disprove. In essence, in many cases, people who are accused of racism are assumed to be guilty until they prove themselves innocent. And, there isn't any kind of objective standard for how it's applied.

If someone makes racist comments, I'm going to point out the fact that their comments are racist. But, I don't think people clearly understand even what the term means right now, they're just deathly afraid of being labeled and professionally destroyed.

But so many on the Right keep saying the worlds holds no more meaning because of it's misuse and abuse.

So what is it? Either its still a very powerful word, allegation, or it isn't.

It WAS a powerful allegation, now not so much because of so many cases of "crying wolf".

 

[gallantwarrior]

People can pull themselves up, but sometimes, they need a person to give them a hand up.

I'll agree with the hand up, but not with the hand outs.

Where did I advocate a handout? I am not a fan of entitlements...not for corporations, and not for individuals.

I did not say you advocated a hand-out. I agree with your point that a hand up might be the impetus for someone to work harder to improve their lives. Like you, I abhor the way our government just tosses more money at some perceived problem. I stand just as firmly against government selection of winners and losers, corporate and individual.

 

[gallantwarrior]

A huge part of the problem is the fact that neither party's reps have the stomach to make the tough decisions and follow through. The pols are all petrified that they might lose part of their voter base, so each party panders to those they think will vote for them.
Realistically, though, the poor have always been part of every social structure. There have always been individuals among them who will put forth the effort to improve their lot, and often the lot of those nearest to them. No matter how well-intentioned, no one can lift them out of their poverty but them.

Neither party's reps have the stomach to make tough decisions and end entitlements for ANYONE, including corporate America, the retiree crowd, or poor folks. Vote-buying is the name of the game right now, whether pols are buying votes from the rich or the poor or the old or the minorities or the women or the do-gooders or the churches, and using our collective tax dollars to do it.

Let me be clear: Both parties spend like drunken sailors on shore leave in a Thai bordello. Both parties treat our tax dollars as if our dollars are their reelection campaign funds, spending on their favorite pet projects, sending pork home to their district, and bribing the people most likely to vote for them with our money.

And, that's some bullshit. We have some serious problems facing us as a nation, economically, and we cannot compete with the rest of the world when something like 24% of Americans aren't even able to attain a high school diploma (and that statistic is much starker when you look at inner city and rural areas with high poverty rates). We ALL cannot succeed when a fourth of us are being left behind economically. This is not a world where a kid with a GED can get a job paying $30 an hour at a local car manufacturing plant. It's a new world, and the biggest problem facing us as a nation, longterm, is the economic disenfranchisement of a healthy percentage of Americans. The people who make the highest chunk of funds get tired of subsidizing them. And, living in a constant state of poverty creates all kinds of other problems: high levels of criminal involvement, high levels of domestic violence, issues with substance abuse, growing prison populations, drug trafficking problems, etc. All of those things cost significant amounts of taxpayer dollars and greatly diminish the quality of life for everyone in the community, plus they further add to an increasing spiral of concentrated problems and dysfunction.

You are right...We can't lift individuals out of poverty. However, we can push for every school to use proven methodologies and emphasize reading and basic math skills from kindergarten on. We can push to ensure that children have access to books that are stimulating and which create a lifelong appreciation for reading. We can hold teachers, particularly at the elementary level, accountable for ensuring that every student in their classroom learns to read. We can support the charter school movement, which for the first time is giving many families in areas with failing schools a way out and an opportunity to vote with their feet. We can start holding school district officials accountable--with criminal sanctions--for "gaming" standardized tests (Rodney Paige's district was NOTORIOUS for doing this, and then Rod Paige was appointed by George Bush as head of DOE. Talk about putting the fox in charge of the hen house). We can support programs like Boys & Girls Clubs and Big Brothers/Big Sisters and the YWCA/YMCA, which provide children in many dangerous parts of the U.S. with a safe place to go after school, tutoring, mentoring, and other types of programming. We can more strictly regulate funds allocated to help poor students to attend college, and ensure that students who receive federal funds are only able to use those funds to obtain degrees in marketable fields, i.e., nursing, education, engineering, IT, etc. (not "women's studies", for example).

We can realize that not every kid starts out with the support, structure, nutrition, opportunities, adequate healthcare, adequate dental care, adequate eye care, and adequate clothing that they need to succeed in school, and in life.

And, we can address those obvious deficits, whether it is through local charities or government grants or local/state/federal programs or through charitable foundations. However, those programs should require people to use research-based strategies that have been through a scientific evaluation of effectiveness, and should require scrupulous accountability for use of public/private funds to ensure that appropriate numbers of kids are served, in research-based ways, and receiving sufficient dosage to counteract the negative effects of high-crime neighborhoods, disrupted and dysfunctional families, and other social problems that these kids are dealing with daily.

We could and should do all of those things. But, in doing that, we might piss alot of people off, and our political "leaders" lack the cojones to do that.

You see, we CAN agree!

 

[catzmeow]

A huge part of the problem is the fact that neither party's reps have the stomach to make the tough decisions and follow through. The pols are all petrified that they might lose part of their voter base, so each party panders to those they think will vote for them.
Realistically, though, the poor have always been part of every social structure. There have always been individuals among them who will put forth the effort to improve their lot, and often the lot of those nearest to them. No matter how well-intentioned, no one can lift them out of their poverty but them.

Neither party's reps have the stomach to make tough decisions and end entitlements for ANYONE, including corporate America, the retiree crowd, or poor folks. Vote-buying is the name of the game right now, whether pols are buying votes from the rich or the poor or the old or the minorities or the women or the do-gooders or the churches, and using our collective tax dollars to do it.

Let me be clear: Both parties spend like drunken sailors on shore leave in a Thai bordello. Both parties treat our tax dollars as if our dollars are their reelection campaign funds, spending on their favorite pet projects, sending pork home to their district, and bribing the people most likely to vote for them with our money.

And, that's some bullshit. We have some serious problems facing us as a nation, economically, and we cannot compete with the rest of the world when something like 24% of Americans aren't even able to attain a high school diploma (and that statistic is much starker when you look at inner city and rural areas with high poverty rates). We ALL cannot succeed when a fourth of us are being left behind economically. This is not a world where a kid with a GED can get a job paying $30 an hour at a local car manufacturing plant. It's a new world, and the biggest problem facing us as a nation, longterm, is the economic disenfranchisement of a healthy percentage of Americans. The people who make the highest chunk of funds get tired of subsidizing them. And, living in a constant state of poverty creates all kinds of other problems: high levels of criminal involvement, high levels of domestic violence, issues with substance abuse, growing prison populations, drug trafficking problems, etc. All of those things cost significant amounts of taxpayer dollars and greatly diminish the quality of life for everyone in the community, plus they further add to an increasing spiral of concentrated problems and dysfunction.

You are right...We can't lift individuals out of poverty. However, we can push for every school to use proven methodologies and emphasize reading and basic math skills from kindergarten on. We can push to ensure that children have access to books that are stimulating and which create a lifelong appreciation for reading. We can hold teachers, particularly at the elementary level, accountable for ensuring that every student in their classroom learns to read. We can support the charter school movement, which for the first time is giving many families in areas with failing schools a way out and an opportunity to vote with their feet. We can start holding school district officials accountable--with criminal sanctions--for "gaming" standardized tests (Rodney Paige's district was NOTORIOUS for doing this, and then Rod Paige was appointed by George Bush as head of DOE. Talk about putting the fox in charge of the hen house). We can support programs like Boys & Girls Clubs and Big Brothers/Big Sisters and the YWCA/YMCA, which provide children in many dangerous parts of the U.S. with a safe place to go after school, tutoring, mentoring, and other types of programming. We can more strictly regulate funds allocated to help poor students to attend college, and ensure that students who receive federal funds are only able to use those funds to obtain degrees in marketable fields, i.e., nursing, education, engineering, IT, etc. (not "women's studies", for example).

We can realize that not every kid starts out with the support, structure, nutrition, opportunities, adequate healthcare, adequate dental care, adequate eye care, and adequate clothing that they need to succeed in school, and in life.

And, we can address those obvious deficits, whether it is through local charities or government grants or local/state/federal programs or through charitable foundations. However, those programs should require people to use research-based strategies that have been through a scientific evaluation of effectiveness, and should require scrupulous accountability for use of public/private funds to ensure that appropriate numbers of kids are served, in research-based ways, and receiving sufficient dosage to counteract the negative effects of high-crime neighborhoods, disrupted and dysfunctional families, and other social problems that these kids are dealing with daily.

We could and should do all of those things. But, in doing that, we might piss alot of people off, and our political "leaders" lack the cojones to do that.

You see, we CAN agree!

I think most Americans agree on more than we think we do, when we actually talk about who we are, and what we want. I think, for instance, that most Americans aren't racists. I think that most Americans want good schools for our kids, and want the majority of children to succeed in them. I think that most Americans want a government that functions properly and hasn't been co-opted by special interests and lobbyists. I think we want to live in safe neighborhoods where our kids can play and where we can sit safely on the front porch at night. I have always thought that we have far more in common than we disagree on.

The stupidity of partisan politics is that it keeps us distracted from what really matters, and allows the corruption to go on, uninterrupted, in both parties.

 

[Gem]

But so many on the Right keep saying the worlds holds no more meaning because of it's misuse and abuse.

So what is it? Either its still a very powerful word, allegation, or it isn't.

To jump into this conversation late...I wanted to address this idea because its absolutely can and is both power and losing meaning...

The word "racist" has lost meaning because it has been used so often for things that are not. The examples that jump to my mind right now are the universe-themed greeting card that said, "You're a black hole." and due to complaints and cries of "racism" it was pulled from the market because the NAACP claimed it was saying "You're a black ho." Or - the moment in reality television where a woman, trying to make a point about the hypocrisy of another woman said, "Don't you think thats the pot calling the kettle black?" And was immediately attacked by the woman because she had used the word "black," and was obviously racist.

I could go on with examples - but it is these silly attacks (and people caving to them by pulling products off the shelves or apologizing when no apology was needed) that make people tired of the word "racism," and therefore ALL claims of racism have begun to become tired and viewed with skepticism.

At the same time, calling someone a racist still carries a lot of power. People have lost jobs, been ostracized from friends, been humiliated and shamed in public due to accusations of racism. Deserved or not - being called a racist can ruin your life.

Hence why so many are tired (if not angry) about cries of racism in our society. It is the ultimate way to silence someone...because we have also made it "funny" for a person to try to counter claims of racism. People are mocked for saying, "But my aunt is black..." or "I have black friends," when they are accused of racism.

So - from many people's perspectives...heres the way its currently working:

1) A black person (or a white person on the black community's behalf) can claim racism for any perceived slight. No matter how ridiculous that slight is, s/he will often be able to make a public issue out of that claim.

2) The person accused of racism has little or no way to prove that they are not racist. Pointing out their involvement with members of the black community will be mocked and used as further proof OF their racism. If they are not involved with the black community in anyway that will be used as proof of their racism as well.

3) Due to actual distate for racism, fear that they too will be called a racist, or as a way to prove that they side with the minority community, people who know the accused racist will be forced (or will willingly) separate themselves from that person or s/he will be fired, reprimanded, forced to make public apology, etc.

Now - PLEASE understand...I do believe that racism exists in this country. I believe that we should talk about it and address it when we see it.

But currently...we have a group of people who either a) truly see racism in places where it is not or b) claim to see it in places that it is not for political or personal reasons. It is these people who are harming this debate - not the people frustrated about the situation.

To truly be able to discuss real racism...there has to be a way for those accused of racism to be able to legitimately discuss how or why their actions were misunderstood...and those who accused them have to be willing to listen and believe that a misunderstanding is possible.

 

[MarcATL]

Why do so many on the Right feel this way?

Anyone...?

It's deflection. The Republican Party is 90% white. They vote for their white candidate, openly talk about nominating a Hispanic to shore up the "Hispanic" vote and then "complain" that blacks vote for Obama.

But so many on the Right keep saying the worlds holds no more meaning because of it's misuse and abuse.

So what is it? Either its still a very powerful word, allegation, or it isn't.

To jump into this conversation late...I wanted to address this idea because its absolutely can and is both power and losing meaning...

The word "racist" has lost meaning because it has been used so often for things that are not. The examples that jump to my mind right now are the universe-themed greeting card that said, "You're a black hole." and due to complaints and cries of "racism" it was pulled from the market because the NAACP claimed it was saying "You're a black ho." Or - the moment in reality television where a woman, trying to make a point about the hypocrisy of another woman said, "Don't you think thats the pot calling the kettle black?" And was immediately attacked by the woman because she had used the word "black," and was obviously racist.

I could go on with examples - but it is these silly attacks (and people caving to them by pulling products off the shelves or apologizing when no apology was needed) that make people tired of the word "racism," and therefore ALL claims of racism have begun to become tired and viewed with skepticism.

At the same time, calling someone a racist still carries a lot of power. People have lost jobs, been ostracized from friends, been humiliated and shamed in public due to accusations of racism. Deserved or not - being called a racist can ruin your life.

Hence why so many are tired (if not angry) about cries of racism in our society. It is the ultimate way to silence someone...because we have also made it "funny" for a person to try to counter claims of racism. People are mocked for saying, "But my aunt is black..." or "I have black friends," when they are accused of racism.

So - from many people's perspectives...heres the way its currently working:

1) A black person (or a white person on the black community's behalf) can claim racism for any perceived slight. No matter how ridiculous that slight is, s/he will often be able to make a public issue out of that claim.

2) The person accused of racism has little or no way to prove that they are not racist. Pointing out their involvement with members of the black community will be mocked and used as further proof OF their racism. If they are not involved with the black community in anyway that will be used as proof of their racism as well.

3) Due to actual distate for racism, fear that they too will be called a racist, or as a way to prove that they side with the minority community, people who know the accused racist will be forced (or will willingly) separate themselves from that person or s/he will be fired, reprimanded, forced to make public apology, etc.

Now - PLEASE understand...I do believe that racism exists in this country. I believe that we should talk about it and address it when we see it.

But currently...we have a group of people who either a) truly see racism in places where it is not or b) claim to see it in places that it is not for political or personal reasons. It is these people who are harming this debate - not the people frustrated about the situation.

To truly be able to discuss real racism...there has to be a way for those accused of racism to be able to legitimately discuss how or why their actions were misunderstood...and those who accused them have to be willing to listen and believe that a misunderstanding is possible.

How do you propose that happen?

Also, I'm more interested in finding out what you'd consider to be legitimate and illigitimate claims of racism.

Finally, you must forgive me, but I do not buy the claim that something cam simultaneously be both not important but important, by the same people. That's a clear example of having your cake and eat it to.

From your post, it seems that racism or the claim of being racist rather, is still very important and holds meaning/carries weight. The mere fact there's ALWAYS such strong reaction to it from all sides makes it meaningful by default.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Neither party's reps have the stomach to make tough decisions and end entitlements for ANYONE, including corporate America, the retiree crowd, or poor folks. Vote-buying is the name of the game right now, whether pols are buying votes from the rich or the poor or the old or the minorities or the women or the do-gooders or the churches, and using our collective tax dollars to do it.

Let me be clear: Both parties spend like drunken sailors on shore leave in a Thai bordello. Both parties treat our tax dollars as if our dollars are their reelection campaign funds, spending on their favorite pet projects, sending pork home to their district, and bribing the people most likely to vote for them with our money.

And, that's some bullshit. We have some serious problems facing us as a nation, economically, and we cannot compete with the rest of the world when something like 24% of Americans aren't even able to attain a high school diploma (and that statistic is much starker when you look at inner city and rural areas with high poverty rates). We ALL cannot succeed when a fourth of us are being left behind economically. This is not a world where a kid with a GED can get a job paying $30 an hour at a local car manufacturing plant. It's a new world, and the biggest problem facing us as a nation, longterm, is the economic disenfranchisement of a healthy percentage of Americans. The people who make the highest chunk of funds get tired of subsidizing them. And, living in a constant state of poverty creates all kinds of other problems: high levels of criminal involvement, high levels of domestic violence, issues with substance abuse, growing prison populations, drug trafficking problems, etc. All of those things cost significant amounts of taxpayer dollars and greatly diminish the quality of life for everyone in the community, plus they further add to an increasing spiral of concentrated problems and dysfunction.

You are right...We can't lift individuals out of poverty. However, we can push for every school to use proven methodologies and emphasize reading and basic math skills from kindergarten on. We can push to ensure that children have access to books that are stimulating and which create a lifelong appreciation for reading. We can hold teachers, particularly at the elementary level, accountable for ensuring that every student in their classroom learns to read. We can support the charter school movement, which for the first time is giving many families in areas with failing schools a way out and an opportunity to vote with their feet. We can start holding school district officials accountable--with criminal sanctions--for "gaming" standardized tests (Rodney Paige's district was NOTORIOUS for doing this, and then Rod Paige was appointed by George Bush as head of DOE. Talk about putting the fox in charge of the hen house). We can support programs like Boys & Girls Clubs and Big Brothers/Big Sisters and the YWCA/YMCA, which provide children in many dangerous parts of the U.S. with a safe place to go after school, tutoring, mentoring, and other types of programming. We can more strictly regulate funds allocated to help poor students to attend college, and ensure that students who receive federal funds are only able to use those funds to obtain degrees in marketable fields, i.e., nursing, education, engineering, IT, etc. (not "women's studies", for example).

We can realize that not every kid starts out with the support, structure, nutrition, opportunities, adequate healthcare, adequate dental care, adequate eye care, and adequate clothing that they need to succeed in school, and in life.

And, we can address those obvious deficits, whether it is through local charities or government grants or local/state/federal programs or through charitable foundations. However, those programs should require people to use research-based strategies that have been through a scientific evaluation of effectiveness, and should require scrupulous accountability for use of public/private funds to ensure that appropriate numbers of kids are served, in research-based ways, and receiving sufficient dosage to counteract the negative effects of high-crime neighborhoods, disrupted and dysfunctional families, and other social problems that these kids are dealing with daily.

We could and should do all of those things. But, in doing that, we might piss alot of people off, and our political "leaders" lack the cojones to do that.

You see, we CAN agree!

I think most Americans agree on more than we think we do, when we actually talk about who we are, and what we want. I think, for instance, that most Americans aren't racists. I think that most Americans want good schools for our kids, and want the majority of children to succeed in them. I think that most Americans want a government that functions properly and hasn't been co-opted by special interests and lobbyists. I think we want to live in safe neighborhoods where our kids can play and where we can sit safely on the front porch at night. I have always thought that we have far more in common than we disagree on.

The stupidity of partisan politics is that it keeps us distracted from what really matters, and allows the corruption to go on, uninterrupted, in both parties.

I think you're right.

 

[gallantwarrior]

But so many on the Right keep saying the worlds holds no more meaning because of it's misuse and abuse.

So what is it? Either its still a very powerful word, allegation, or it isn't.

To jump into this conversation late...I wanted to address this idea because its absolutely can and is both power and losing meaning...

The word "racist" has lost meaning because it has been used so often for things that are not. The examples that jump to my mind right now are the universe-themed greeting card that said, "You're a black hole." and due to complaints and cries of "racism" it was pulled from the market because the NAACP claimed it was saying "You're a black ho." Or - the moment in reality television where a woman, trying to make a point about the hypocrisy of another woman said, "Don't you think thats the pot calling the kettle black?" And was immediately attacked by the woman because she had used the word "black," and was obviously racist.

I could go on with examples - but it is these silly attacks (and people caving to them by pulling products off the shelves or apologizing when no apology was needed) that make people tired of the word "racism," and therefore ALL claims of racism have begun to become tired and viewed with skepticism.

At the same time, calling someone a racist still carries a lot of power. People have lost jobs, been ostracized from friends, been humiliated and shamed in public due to accusations of racism. Deserved or not - being called a racist can ruin your life.

Hence why so many are tired (if not angry) about cries of racism in our society. It is the ultimate way to silence someone...because we have also made it "funny" for a person to try to counter claims of racism. People are mocked for saying, "But my aunt is black..." or "I have black friends," when they are accused of racism.

So - from many people's perspectives...heres the way its currently working:

1) A black person (or a white person on the black community's behalf) can claim racism for any perceived slight. No matter how ridiculous that slight is, s/he will often be able to make a public issue out of that claim.

2) The person accused of racism has little or no way to prove that they are not racist. Pointing out their involvement with members of the black community will be mocked and used as further proof OF their racism. If they are not involved with the black community in anyway that will be used as proof of their racism as well.

3) Due to actual distate for racism, fear that they too will be called a racist, or as a way to prove that they side with the minority community, people who know the accused racist will be forced (or will willingly) separate themselves from that person or s/he will be fired, reprimanded, forced to make public apology, etc.

Now - PLEASE understand...I do believe that racism exists in this country. I believe that we should talk about it and address it when we see it.

But currently...we have a group of people who either a) truly see racism in places where it is not or b) claim to see it in places that it is not for political or personal reasons. It is these people who are harming this debate - not the people frustrated about the situation.

To truly be able to discuss real racism...there has to be a way for those accused of racism to be able to legitimately discuss how or why their actions were misunderstood...and those who accused them have to be willing to listen and believe that a misunderstanding is possible.

Well done! As someone who suffers frivolous accusations of racism, I thank you for your observations.

 

[Gem]

How do you propose that happen?

Well thats a question that could take a whole other thread, isn't it? To answer briefly, I would imagine that it will require that those who are so quick to call out racism take a step back and really examine if there is cause for such claims or if they are simply projecting their own concerns and fears on to the situation (or simply trying to profit from making it a race issue), for those who feel they are falsely accused of racism to examine how that perception was reached and, if necessary, make changes to address that miscommunication, and for those who are falsely accused of racism to stand up and discuss it rather than apologize quickly or allow themselves to be reprimanded without fighting.

Also, I'm more interested in finding out what you'd consider to be legitimate and illigitimate claims of racism.

I gave several examples of claims I find to be illegitimate. To try to define further, I suppose I would say that I feel that any claims of racism which are based solely on the evidence that the two people are of a different color to be suspect. We should be cautious then, to ascribe racism as the cause before we have heard all the evidence.

Finally, you must forgive me, but I do not buy the claim that something cam simultaneously be both not important but important, by the same people. That's a clear example of having your cake and eat it to.

From your post, it seems that racism or the claim of being racist rather, is still very important and holds meaning/carries weight. The mere fact there's ALWAYS such strong reaction to it from all sides makes it meaningful by default.

I guess that will have to become an "agree to disagree" point then. I feel that it is quite obvious that many people in our society have begun to roll their eyes at claims of racism because they feel (justly or unjustly) that so many of the claims are without merit. Therefore, the word is losing meaning - racism now can mean any number of things to any number of people.

I also feel, however, that the word still wields power...especially as a political tool meant to silence opposition voices.

 

[rdean]

True. But all of that was a long, LONG time ago.

Today's party of racism is not the democratic party. Quite the opposite, the democratic party is the party that FIGHTS racism, not fosters it.

big honking bunch of bullshit.

Hahaha.

The republican party is the racist party and the Hispanics are leaving in droves.
P.S. Even the Cubans.

Considering the Republican Party is 90% white, I wonder how many Hispanics ever belonged?

 

[WillowTree]

True. But all of that was a long, LONG time ago.

Today's party of racism is not the democratic party. Quite the opposite, the democratic party is the party that FIGHTS racism, not fosters it.

big honking bunch of bullshit.

People like you keep telling yourselves that. How's it working for you?

It works fine for me. The party of racists is and always has been the democrats.. did you know it was the democrats who started the KKK? I bet you didn't.

 

[WillowTree]

big honking bunch of bullshit.

Hahaha.

The republican party is the racist party and the Hispanics are leaving in droves.
P.S. Even the Cubans.

Considering the Republican Party is 90% white, I wonder how many Hispanics ever belonged?

see? where you err is in the supposition that only whites can be racists.. the congressional black caucus is 100% black and very exclusionary.. see how that works bad boy?

 

[catzmeow]

Implying that one party has more of a problem with racists than the other party is stupidity that hardly warrants a response.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Most white people I'd say. Black folks are quite prepared and ready to discuss this topic.

I believe that the reason you listed is perhaps the same reason why so many whites, particularly on the right seems to be of the belief that Obama is the most racially divisive President in history.

You see, with finally having a black President, race is constantly in your face. So many white folks, particularly on the right, his internalized and/or interpreted that as Obama being the racially divisive one, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

A clear example is when Obama made a totally correct, proper and related statement saying that IF he had a son he would look like Trayvon. That is a true statement, Trayvon did actually look more like our President than he did any of his own parents. The President made a statement that was proper and also deferring to the victim's parents in the time of grief. Yet, the RepubliCON$ managed to turn and twist that into a racist and/or racially divisive statement.

The truth of the matter is, just about everything and anything Obama says will be racially divisive to those people, simply due to it coming from Obama's mouth...the first black President.

The problem many of us had with that comment is that the President of the USA has no business getting involved in an ongoing criminal case. Obama had a habit of doing exactly that when one of the people involved was black and he could reap good publicity from getting involved.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I can't speak for the "sides" because I read news and I don't pay attention to political commentators. However, someone posted a link to a news article that had a verbal transcription of his comments, and I followed the link and read the entire story. Then, I made up my own mind about it.

And, what I thought was that, if I were asked that question, I'd probably have answered rather similarly (mainly because I have a minority son). It was really a pretty cautious answer, if you look at the entire statement.

I think that's what people should do. Read the news. Think about it critically, and make up your own mind about it, rather than waiting for one of the "sides" to tell you what your opinion should be.

As President, if I was asked that question, I would say it was improper for me to express an opinion.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I hadn’t noticed the dates on the posts. It’s now nine years later and the posters are making the same comments.

 

[MarathonMike]

Why do so many on the Right feel this way?

Anyone...?

Here are two examples of "Merely pointing out Racism".

1. There are some individuals who are Racist.
2. America is a Racist country.

Example 1 is a true statement. Example 2 is a lie manufactured by Democrats to foment hate and divide the country.

 

[MizMolly]

It always amazes me the ignorance of the people who point to that flag and automatically think racism.

True, if that is racism, remove the American flag, the KKK also use it