What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

A Analysis of Systemic Racism in the United States: From It's Inception to Current Day - Exhibit A

NewsVine_Mariyam

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
5,395
Reaction score
2,535
Points
365
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/racist-history-portland/492035/

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
 
Last edited:

Meathead

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
35,861
Reaction score
9,845
Points
1,330
Location
Prague, Czech Republic
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/racist-history-portland/492035/

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
It's 2021, the "current day" of the article is 2016 when the systematically racist president was black.

FAIL!
 
OP
NewsVine_Mariyam

NewsVine_Mariyam

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
5,395
Reaction score
2,535
Points
365
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/racist-history-portland/492035/

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
It's 2021, the "current day" of the article is 2016 when the systematically racist president was black.

FAIL!
So in your opinion, the fact that the article was written in 2016 invalidates everything in it?

Exhibit A doesn't imply to you that there will be following Exhibits, that A is just the first?
 
  • Love
Reactions: IM2

Meathead

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
35,861
Reaction score
9,845
Points
1,330
Location
Prague, Czech Republic
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/racist-history-portland/492035/

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
It's 2021, the "current day" of the article is 2016 when the systematically racist president was black.

FAIL!
So in your opinion, the fact that the article was written in 2016 invalidates everything in it?

Exhibit A doesn't imply to you that there will be following Exhibits, that A is just the first?
It certainly reminds me it is not to current date, and among the poor suffering blacks was a black US president at the time. That must be systematic racism ... I guess.
 
OP
NewsVine_Mariyam

NewsVine_Mariyam

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
5,395
Reaction score
2,535
Points
365
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/racist-history-portland/492035/

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
It's 2021, the "current day" of the article is 2016 when the systematically racist president was black.

FAIL!
So in your opinion, the fact that the article was written in 2016 invalidates everything in it?

Exhibit A doesn't imply to you that there will be following Exhibits, that A is just the first?
It certainly reminds me it is not to current date, and among the poor suffering blacks was a black US president at the time. That must be systematic racism ... I guess.
Okay, maybe I chose my words poorly.
 

Meathead

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
35,861
Reaction score
9,845
Points
1,330
Location
Prague, Czech Republic
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/racist-history-portland/492035/

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
It's 2021, the "current day" of the article is 2016 when the systematically racist president was black.

FAIL!
So in your opinion, the fact that the article was written in 2016 invalidates everything in it?

Exhibit A doesn't imply to you that there will be following Exhibits, that A is just the first?
It certainly reminds me it is not to current date, and among the poor suffering blacks was a black US president at the time. That must be systematic racism ... I guess.
Okay, maybe I chose my words poorly.
That, and a knee-jerk reaction.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
35,671
Reaction score
23,994
Points
1,905
Location
Arizona
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/racist-history-portland/492035/

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
Nothing in those laws says blacks are inferior. It was just understood they were never considered citizens. They were encouraged to leave as free men and go to another nation, an African nation.
 

TemplarKormac

Political Atheist
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
45,260
Reaction score
9,860
Points
2,040
Location
The Land of Sanctuary
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/racist-history-portland/492035/

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
Hmm...

This seems like an attempt to indict the entire system. It makes the chronological argument that somehow past systemic racism indicates existing systemic racism within the whole system.

Assertion:

The system itself is not inherently racist, some elements may be due to how they are implemented, but the majority (provably) is not.
 

TemplarKormac

Political Atheist
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
45,260
Reaction score
9,860
Points
2,040
Location
The Land of Sanctuary
Might I add that black people are being repeatedly told by the left that other people think they are inferior? The left is instilling this sense of false victimhood and inferiority within the demographic. Stop reminding them of a past they were never a part of and things that never happened to them. Stop reminding them how inferior they were in the past and let them know how well the current system treats them compared to the archaic systems of America's past.

There is a reason we call history, history.
 
Last edited:

Damaged Eagle

Angels have fallen
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2015
Messages
16,193
Reaction score
22,559
Points
2,445
Location
Inside a window that leads to your conscience
1620689824384.png


What makes you think that systemic racism is only a black versus white thing? I see no where in the term used that identifies it in that manner.

Do you think the Irish, Scottish, Polish, Italians, Germans, etc,... were not shown, and still are shown, animosity and considered less entitled by those who had already settled the United States?

Your belief that only blacks and other darker skinned people are the only ones being discriminated against only shows how foolish you are.

*****SMILE*****


:)
 

Concerned American

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
6,846
Reaction score
7,069
Points
1,908
Location
In your head
There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs
And we hear from one of our resident racists. Now that you defined your beliefs, maybe you can look inside and see how inaccurate they are. BTW, are you writing down for "money?" as in prosperity or are you trying to relate to people that you are leaving info for your next generation as in posterity. It would behoove you to learn English before you try to lecture people on your mistaken beliefs.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
76,921
Reaction score
18,174
Points
2,220
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
Nothing in those laws says blacks are inferior. It was just understood they were never considered citizens. They were encouraged to leave as free men and go to another nation, an African nation.


Looks to me the point is that they were not welcome to be part of that community.

Not welcome does not mean inferior. There are plenty of people of my own race, who I would be happy to see "whipped twice a year" until they decided to leave America.

It is not because I consider them inferior based on race, we share race.
 

IM2

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
47,174
Reaction score
12,167
Points
2,220
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
Nothing in those laws says blacks are inferior. It was just understood they were never considered citizens. They were encouraged to leave as free men and go to another nation, an African nation.
How obtuse can a person be? If blacks had not been considered inferior, they get equal rights as citizens and don't have to leave or get whipped because they didn't.
 

IM2

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
47,174
Reaction score
12,167
Points
2,220
Is the blacks hatred of Asians and Jews systemic?
Blacks don't hate Asians and Jews. Furthermore blacks have not created a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring blacks at the expense of Asians and Jews.

Why do you racists ask these stupid ass questions?
 

BlackSand

Nobody
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
16,418
Reaction score
6,058
Points
380
Location
Wherever I May Roam
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.
.

However anyone may feel about Systemic Racism ... My white, black and red ass doesn't need to repeat the mistakes my ancestors made ...
In fatal attempts to correct the problems they created.

It's also not my problem if race pimps are just a bit jelly my bloodstream is more diverse than theirs.

That diversity is what allowed my closest ancestors to understand that purpose in the present, and vision towards the future ...
Beats animosity in the past, and the need or desire to pretend blaming someone dead, will fix their problems ...
Every Fucking Time.

.
 

Oddball

Unobtanium Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
72,849
Reaction score
40,709
Points
2,615
Location
Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
\
Exhibit A: The State of Oregon - Portland

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.

There are a lot of people who bristle at the term racism when used by black people, and many seem to particularly dislike the term "systemic racism" so I'll begin by defining each term as they are commonly used, I will do the same.

Systemic:
relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.
[Note: The United States is made up of 50 individual states each having the freedom to pass their own laws and do things as is seem fit for the residents of that particular state. What's good for the people of California may not necessarily be feasible for the people South Dakota, therefore the use of the term "systemic" in this discuss refers to the United States as a whole affecting all 50 states]

Racism:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

System racism in the United States then refers to a system where due to the "the belief" in the superiority of whites and the alleged inferiority of blacks caused the creation of a "system" of treaties, laws, acts, policies, procedures and social mores which were created with the intention of favoring whites at the expense of blacks and other non-whites. These laws, et al were not restricted to only some of the states such as the southern states which fought a civil war in order to continue the institution of chattel slavery, they were enacted in every single state of the U.S. therefore the racist antagonism, animosity, hostility, and hatred towards black people by those members of society subscribing to this white supremacist mind set was endemic to the entire United States, thereby making it "systemic".

Fact:
A fact is an occurrence in the real world. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Proof/Prove:
demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

If a person has only heard something or heard about something but never seen or experienced it with their own eyes, then maybe they could be excused for having a limited perspective of certain topics. However when the evidence is put in front of their eyes and they still deny it's existence it kind of stumps me. My nature is to keep trying different ways of explaining the same thing in order to get my point across and I oftentimes do with I'm training someone but it truly is my opinion that the scientific method should be able to prove this if for no other reason that they don't have to guess at what people thought and believed at various points throughout our country's history. There were plenty of people who were more than happy to write down for prosperity their beliefs and motivations for the things they did thereby providing us with an accounting to simply read

The following article is very well written and in-depth in my opinion, however it's long and I'm only going to post excerpts:

The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America​

It’s known as a modern-day hub of progressivism, but its past is one of exclusion.

[snipped]
From its very beginning, Oregon was an inhospitable place for black people. In 1844, the provisional government of the territory passed a law banning slavery, and at the same time required any African American in Oregon to leave the territory. Any black person remaining would be flogged publicly every six months until he left. Five years later, another law was passed that forbade free African Americans from entering into Oregon, according to the Communities of Color report.

In 1857, Oregon adopted a state constitution that banned black people from coming to the state, residing in the state, or holding property in the state. During this time, any white male settler could receive 650 acres of land and another 650 if he was married. This, of course, was land taken from native people who had been living here for centuries.

This early history proves, to Imarisha, that “the founding idea of the state was as a racist white utopia. The idea was to come to Oregon territory and build the perfect white society you dreamed of.” (Matt Novak detailed Oregon’s heritage as a white utopia in this 2015 Gizmodo essay.)

With the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments, Oregon’s laws preventing black people from living in the state and owning property were superseded by national law. But Oregon itself didn’t ratify the Fourteenth Amendment—the Equal Protection Clause—until 1973. (Or, more exactly, the state ratified the amendment in 1866, rescinded its ratification in 1868, and then finally ratified it for good in 1973.) It didn’t ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote, until 1959, making it one of only six states that refused to ratify that amendment when it passed.

This history resulted in a very white state. Technically, after 1868, black people could come to Oregon. But the black-exclusion laws had sent a very clear message nationwide, says Darrell Millner, a professor of black studies at Portland State University. “What those exclusion laws did was broadcast very broadly and loudly was that Oregon wasn’t a place where blacks would be welcome or comfortable,” he told me. By 1890, there were slightly more than 1,000 black people in the whole state of Oregon. By 1920, there were about 2,000.

The rise of the Ku Klux Klan made Oregon even more inhospitable for black people. The state had the highest per-capita Klan membership in the country, according to Imarisha. The democrat Walter M. Pierce was elected to the governorship of the state in 1922 with the vocal support of the Klan, and photos in the local paper show the Portland chief of police, sheriff, district attorney, U.S. attorney, and mayor posing with Klansmen, accompanied by an article saying the men were taking advice from the Klan. Some of the laws passed during that time included literacy tests for anyone who wanted to vote in the state and compulsory public school for Oregonians, a measure targeted at Catholics.

It wasn’t until World War II that a sizable black population moved to Oregon, lured by jobs in the shipyards, Millner said. The black population grew from 2,000 to 20,000 during the war, and the majority of the new residents lived in a place called Vanport, a city of houses nestled between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, constructed for the new residents. Yet after the war, blacks were encouraged to leave Oregon, Millner said, with the Portland mayor commenting in a newspaper article that black people were not welcome. The Housing Authority of Portland mulled dismantling Vanport, and jobs for black people disappeared as white soldiers returned from war and displaced the men and women who had found jobs in the shipyards.

Dismantling Vanport proved unnecessary. In May 1948, the Columbia River flooded, wiping out Vanport in a single day. Residents had been assured that the dikes protecting the housing were safe, and some lost everything in the flood. At least 15 residents died, though some locals formulated a theory that the housing authority had quietly disposed of hundreds more bodies to cover up its slow response. The 18,500 residents of Vanport—6,300 of whom were black—had to find somewhere else to live.
Men wade through the Vanport flood in 1948 (AP photo)

For black residents, the only choice, if they wanted to stay in Portland, was a neighborhood called Albina that had emerged as a popular place to live for the black porters who worked in nearby Union Station. It was the only place black people were allowed to buy homes after, in 1919, the Realty Board of Portland had approved a Code of Ethics forbidding realtors and bankers from selling or giving loans to minorities for properties located in white neighborhoods.

As black people moved into Albina, whites moved out; by the end of the 1950s, there were 23,000 fewer white residents and 7,000 more black residents than there had been at the beginning of the decade.

The neighborhood of Albina began to be the center of black life in Portland. But for outsiders, it was something else: a blighted slum in need of repair.
* * *
Continued here:
The Racist History of Portland, the Whitest City in America

Proof:
1843 Champoeg territorial government adopted a measure “prohibiting slavery” that required slave holders to free their slaves with the added requirement that all Blacks must leave the territory within three years.

1844 Acts to prohibit slavery and to exclude Blacks and Mulattoes from Oregon were passed. The infamous “Lash Law,” required that Blacks in Oregon – “be they free or slave – be whipped twice a year until he or she shall quit the territory.” It was soon deemed too harsh and its provisions for punishment were reduced to forced labor.

I generally believe that when people want to discuss a topic, then all participants should be clear and in agreement on how the subject of the discussion is defined.


Then let's do some defining...."Systemic racism"....Two words....Let's ask two easy questions...

First of all, is racism a choice made by people?
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$280.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top