Do hyphenated-Americans contribute to racism?

[Mathbud1]

I'm assuming that you have something in mind when you write "decreasing the importance of differences and increasing the importance of similarities is the fundamental place to start" so I'm curious about a.) what actual method or policy you feel is the best way to achieve that and then b.) how do you imagine the policy would be received and what will your opponents do to counter the policy you support.

This is a dynamic game - move and countermove. You noted that the effort should "start" with your suggestion. I took this to mean that you had more suggestion in mind which would follow after the starting move was initiated.

Here's an example. People who hate the injustice of Affirmative Action work to make it illegal by amending their State Constitutions. This seriously pisses off black people who count on this to advance in their lives. They respond by suing the state and trying to overturn the changes. There are two factions which are diametrically opposed to each other's positions. There is no compromise in a binary stand-off. Either you have AA or you don't.

In general, here in the US there is a lot of white support for race neutrality - whites want a level playing field without racial interest groups and policies having any role. This is completely unacceptable to blacks and Hispanics because they end up a huge losers in terms of unequal outcomes and so they'll fight you tooth and nail.

You want to emphasize similarities but all Hispanics and blacks are going to see is unequal outcomes. Race is a hugely visible attribute in the social realm. The social variation that we see within white communities - some people are rich, others poor, some smart, others dumb, some in professional jobs, some in blue collar jobs, some thin, some fat, some healthy, some sick, is just seen as diversity within a community and accepted. However, if that diversity breaks along racial lines, for instance, if blacks are unhealthy, fat, predominantly in blue collar jobs, and poor then the differences are in your face difficult to avoid noticing. How will pointing out similarities soothe the griping about unequal outcomes?

Thank you for ellaborating. Your assumption was not correct though. I didn't really have anything well-formed in mind when I made that statement. It would take more thinking than I have actually given the subject to form an actual plan. I was actually just pointing out the idea that I think any plan would need to be formed around to have any real chance of success in combatting racism and other division. That is what I meant by "start" there.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Unity isn't based in differences though. It is based in similarities. People don't form groups based on what makes them different from each other. They form groups based on what they have in common.

This right here is the cancer, the ticking time bomb, in the heart of American society and this is what is going to destroy our nation. It won't be a quick death, rather a painful lingering one that we'll fight every step of the way until all other avenues are closed. There have been plenty of multicultural societies throughout history and every single one of them has failed. Diversity is not strength. In diverse societies like will always be attracted to like.

Democracy - Free Markets -Multiculturalism - Pick Two

Then the diversity in the group can help make them a more interesting stronger group, because the differences are there, but they are not the thing of most importance.

Take a similar group and look within and you will see diversity. There is diversity within the black community, within the white community, within all communities. Japan has a lot of internal diversity even though it finds multiculturalism a repulsive concept. What Japan also has is a tighter culture, less cultural stress, and a tighter sense of community because of the universal aspect of shared values.

In a multicultural society, the common features which are bridges between the groups really are not sufficient in quantity or strength to overcome the breadth of the moats which work to divide us. Those differences and emphasizing the differences don't have to be expressed as conscious choices. they're simply natural outgrowths of people living their lives. Any plan to focus on similarities brings about resistance to the artificial nature, such as black kids rebelling at "acting white." For over half a century since the Civil Rights Act was passed, do-gooder white America has worked on the project of remaking blacks into white Americans with black skin. The same values, the same sense of family, the same desire for career, the same past times, etc. We see this most vividly on TV with token blacks always being a part of a social group of whites, with black role models always in positions of authority - the chief of surgery, the police captain, the brilliant physicist, etc. and all of this effort has amounted to failure. We're not ever going to create a multiracial society into one unified society of shared values and outlooks.

If we want true unity in America, we need to be proud to be American again. That's a similarity that can tie the truly different people together in the country while still allowing their differences to add real spice to the mix.

But you're right. The special interest groups don't really want unity. They want a cause.

The closest we came to a unified America was in the late 50s and early 60s. The nation was 88% white, immigration had been significantly closed off since 1924 so the share of immigrants in the population was at an all-time low. Blacks were not a part of that unified America, but taken as a whole, that's the closest we've ever come. It's all been downhill since then and it's going to get worse. Look at the divides now between Red and Blue, between white, black, Hispanic and Asian. Whites have always been the core because of their sheer number and now as that core diminishes so too does the coherence of American identity.

 

[Mathbud1]

This right here is the cancer, the ticking time bomb, in the heart of American society and this is what is going to destroy our nation. It won't be a quick death, rather a painful lingering one that we'll fight every step of the way until all other avenues are closed. There have been plenty of multicultural societies throughout history and every single one of them has failed. Diversity is not strength. In diverse societies like will always be attracted to like.

Democracy - Free Markets -Multiculturalism - Pick Two



Take a similar group and look within and you will see diversity. There is diversity within the black community, within the white community, within all communities. Japan has a lot of internal diversity even though it finds multiculturalism a repulsive concept. What Japan also has is a tighter culture, less cultural stress, and a tighter sense of community because of the universal aspect of shared values.

In a multicultural society, the common features which are bridges between the groups really are not sufficient in quantity or strength to overcome the breadth of the moats which work to divide us. Those differences and emphasizing the differences don't have to be expressed as conscious choices. they're simply natural outgrowths of people living their lives. Any plan to focus on similarities brings about resistance to the artificial nature, such as black kids rebelling at "acting white." For over half a century since the Civil Rights Act was passed, do-gooder white America has worked on the project of remaking blacks into white Americans with black skin. The same values, the same sense of family, the same desire for career, the same past times, etc. We see this most vividly on TV with token blacks always being a part of a social group of whites, with black role models always in positions of authority - the chief of surgery, the police captain, the brilliant physicist, etc. and all of this effort has amounted to failure. We're not ever going to create a multiracial society into one unified society of shared values and outlooks.



The closest we came to a unified America was in the late 50s and early 60s. The nation was 88% white, immigration had been significantly closed off since 1924 so the share of immigrants in the population was at an all-time low. Blacks were not a part of that unified America, but taken as a whole, that's the closest we've ever come. It's all been downhill since then and it's going to get worse. Look at the divides now between Red and Blue, between white, black, Hispanic and Asian. Whites have always been the core because of their sheer number and now as that core diminishes so too does the coherence of American identity.

I don't really have anything to refute what you are saying. I live in a predominantly white area of a predominantly white state. I have friends and co-workers from many races, but as far as I know they aren't representative of the majority if their respective races. Just watching the footage of the mess in Ferguson seems to support what you are saying though.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I believe they don't. People should not have a problem with me calling myself African-american. if they do then they need to look within themselves to figure out exactly why that bothers them. If I was a "regular American" then the discriminatory treatment I have witnessed and been subject to would not have occurred. I have no problem with people noticing I am Black. I do have a problem with them forming a judgement of me before they know what I am about.

But, you ARE a "regular American" and ALL Americans are hyphenated.

Some just don't want to admit it.

 

[Pogo]

Do terms like African-American, Asian-American, Muslim-American, etc. contribute to racism? I believe they do. Rather than making people out to be something other than a regular ol' "American" hyphenated forms seem to highlight how they're somehow different. Only time you should hyphenate yourself is if you have dual citizenship. But unless an African-American is also a citizen of an African country, or is a naturalized American citizen born elsewhere, just say you're "American." All well and good to be proud of your ancestry, but there are other ways to do that.

No. Racism is a belief that some race is inferior to another. That doesn't come from hyphenated adjectives; that comes from cultural mythology. It comes from paranoid ignorance, and it's taught. Can't do that out of an adjective.

These terms may be pussyfooting PC-itis or a manifestation of paralysis through analysis but they can't cause racism, nor do they in themselves make a statement on racial hierarchy.

"Muslim" isn't a race btw.

And the other side of this coin: my father and my grandmother before him did what your OP seems to call for -- called themselves "Americans". As a result we the offspring never knew they were pure Irish. They were taught to be ashamed of it and "assimilate". He never talked about it until I ferreted it out. And I resent missing that exposure.

 

[Pogo]

They separate everyone into categories of color and race. So yes, it contributes to racism by pointing out all the differences. We're all Americans, that's it. If you're for example, of Irish descent, you'd be an American of Irish descent, not an Irish-American, that's idiotic.

Uh -- how does specifying a distinction imply inferiority?

 

[Pogo]

As long as you consider yourself first and foremost an American.

Feel free to explain why one's country ---- an abstract (and very changeable) concept of government -- should take precedence over what one's own personal atoms are made of.

 

[Pogo]

I think that is when the country started going to hell

We used to be just all, Americans. that reason they immigrated here

There's never been a time when that was the case, Steph.

"Wops"... "Chinks".... "Pollocks".... "No Irish need apply" ... "the only good Indian is a dead Indian".... water fountains and back doors marked "colored".... these are firmly entrenched in our history. What you have posted above is a pipe dream myth that has never existed, ever.

The only new concept here is the use of the hyphen.

 

[Pogo]

The fundamental idea behind the hyphenation is the same as the fundamental idea behind racism: we are different, you and I.

Nope, false premise. The fundamental idea behind racism is not "we are different"; it is "we are superior to them".

 

[Pogo]

If I have to refer to people as some kind of hyphenated-American then I wanna be hyphenated too. A hypen race

So let's see, I'm a Jewish-Caucasianal-Bisexual-Visually-Impaired-American.

I'll choose the label "Real-American" and everyone who hyphenates differently is a "Fake-American."

Yeah? What tribe?

 

[Pogo]

The fundamental idea behind racism is not that you are different but that between us you are an inferior form of human. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being different. Unless you have a twin you are different from everyone else anyway.

"You are inferior" is built on "you are different." You can't think someone is inferior to you without first thinking they are different from you. The more importance you place on that difference that you have recognized, the more misunderstanding, intolerance, and hate you invite. If you want to end racism, decreasing the importance of differences and increasing the importance of similarities is the fundamental place to start.

"Difference" does not imply a hierarchy.

Eight and five are "different" numbers. Is one "superior" to the other? How 'bout green and blue? Spanish and Portuguese? Strawberry and banana?

 

[Rikurzhen]

The fundamental idea behind racism is not that you are different but that between us you are an inferior form of human. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being different. Unless you have a twin you are different from everyone else anyway.

"You are inferior" is built on "you are different." You can't think someone is inferior to you without first thinking they are different from you. The more importance you place on that difference that you have recognized, the more misunderstanding, intolerance, and hate you invite. If you want to end racism, decreasing the importance of differences and increasing the importance of similarities is the fundamental place to start.

"Difference" does not imply a hierarchy.

Eight and five are "different" numbers. Is one "superior" to the other? How 'bout green and blue? Swedish and Danish? Strawberry and banana?

Look at the bolded statement above. That's the condition that you're missing. He's not saying that Eight and Five constitute an inferior versus superior framework, he's saying that you first need to have an Eight and a Five before you can overlay the superior-inferior framework.

 

[Pogo]

The fundamental idea behind the hyphenation is the same as the fundamental idea behind racism: we are different, you and I.

The fundamental idea behind racism is not that you are different but that between us you are an inferior form of human. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being different. Unless you have a twin you are different from everyone else anyway.

Says the feral negro who's more proud of the color brown than he is about being an American.

You must be really incensed you got caught not knowing how to lookup your blunder before you posted it.

Bubu nyeupe mvulana

Just because I told you how stupid it is to call yourself an African-American because you're not from Africa is no reason to not understand anything else I say. But then again, none of you guys ever came close to splitting the atom, and blacks need affirmative action just to try to keep up, so I guess I shouldn't expect too much from you. Carry on.

Who decided that splitting the atom was a positive?

Damn this thread delivers the low hanging fruit...

 

[Pogo]

Do terms like African-American, Asian-American, Muslim-American, etc. contribute to racism? I believe they do. Rather than making people out to be something other than a regular ol' "American" hyphenated forms seem to highlight how they're somehow different.

Yes, absolutely.

PC and Identity Politics have caused this country great harm and continue to do so.

The Left has gone out of its way to divide us for political advantage, and we are seeing the predictable result.

Hyphenated America, enjoy.

.

"Identity politics"

Comic books making a comeback.

 

[Pogo]

The fundamental idea behind racism is not that you are different but that between us you are an inferior form of human. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being different. Unless you have a twin you are different from everyone else anyway.

"You are inferior" is built on "you are different." You can't think someone is inferior to you without first thinking they are different from you. The more importance you place on that difference that you have recognized, the more misunderstanding, intolerance, and hate you invite. If you want to end racism, decreasing the importance of differences and increasing the importance of similarities is the fundamental place to start.

"Difference" does not imply a hierarchy.

Eight and five are "different" numbers. Is one "superior" to the other? How 'bout green and blue? Swedish and Danish? Strawberry and banana?

Look at the bolded statement above. That's the condition that you're missing. He's not saying that Eight and Five constitute an inferior versus superior framework, he's saying that you first need to have an Eight and a Five before you can overlay the superior-inferior framework.

You think he's saying that races don't exist?

The way I read it he's saying that merely acknowledging that A and B are different leads to a hierarchy of superior/inferior (racism) all by itself. Which is kind of what the OP posits. Which is why I disagreed with both.

Same point as two posts prior (129).

 

[Rikurzhen]

The fundamental idea behind racism is not that you are different but that between us you are an inferior form of human. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being different. Unless you have a twin you are different from everyone else anyway.

"You are inferior" is built on "you are different." You can't think someone is inferior to you without first thinking they are different from you. The more importance you place on that difference that you have recognized, the more misunderstanding, intolerance, and hate you invite. If you want to end racism, decreasing the importance of differences and increasing the importance of similarities is the fundamental place to start.

"Difference" does not imply a hierarchy.

Eight and five are "different" numbers. Is one "superior" to the other? How 'bout green and blue? Swedish and Danish? Strawberry and banana?

Look at the bolded statement above. That's the condition that you're missing. He's not saying that Eight and Five constitute an inferior versus superior framework, he's saying that you first need to have an Eight and a Five before you can overlay the superior-inferior framework.

You think he's saying that races don't exist?

The way I read it he's saying that merely acknowledging that A and B are different leads to a hierarchy of superior/inferior (racism) all by itself. Which is kind of what the OP posits. Which is why I disagreed with both.

Same point as two posts prior (129).

I'm not understanding why you're confused with his statement. It makes sense to me. He's not saying that acknowledgment leads to the sup-inf framework, he's saying that you need to have the first step, differences, before you can build a sup-inf framework. If you knockout the emphasis on differences then you make it impossible to have a sup-inf framework. Has my rephrasing made his point clearer?

By analogy. If milk is deemed superior to OJ, then by knocking out different beverages and focusing only on DRINKS you no longer have the tools to distinguish between OJ and milk, all you see is liquid in a glass and bye-bye goes the sup-inf framework.

Now I understand his point but I don't believe it's achievable.

 

[Pogo]

The fundamental idea behind racism is not that you are different but that between us you are an inferior form of human. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being different. Unless you have a twin you are different from everyone else anyway.

"You are inferior" is built on "you are different." You can't think someone is inferior to you without first thinking they are different from you. The more importance you place on that difference that you have recognized, the more misunderstanding, intolerance, and hate you invite. If you want to end racism, decreasing the importance of differences and increasing the importance of similarities is the fundamental place to start.

"Difference" does not imply a hierarchy.

Eight and five are "different" numbers. Is one "superior" to the other? How 'bout green and blue? Swedish and Danish? Strawberry and banana?

Look at the bolded statement above. That's the condition that you're missing. He's not saying that Eight and Five constitute an inferior versus superior framework, he's saying that you first need to have an Eight and a Five before you can overlay the superior-inferior framework.

You think he's saying that races don't exist?

The way I read it he's saying that merely acknowledging that A and B are different leads to a hierarchy of superior/inferior (racism) all by itself. Which is kind of what the OP posits. Which is why I disagreed with both.

Same point as two posts prior (129).

I'm not understanding why you're confused with his statement. It makes sense to me. He's not saying that acknowledgment leads to the sup-inf framework, he's saying that you need to have the first step, differences, before you can build a sup-inf framework. If you knockout the emphasis on differences then you make it impossible to have a sup-inf framework. Has my rephrasing made his point clearer?

By analogy. If milk is deemed superior to OJ, then by knocking out different beverages and focusing only on DRINKS you no longer have the tools to distinguish between OJ and milk, all you see is liquid in a glass and bye-bye goes the sup-inf framework.

Now I understand his point but I don't believe it's achievable.

Unless he's just expressing something totally different from what he intends, it's pretty clear already. When he says above,

"The fundamental idea behind the hyphenation is the same as the fundamental idea behind racism: we are different, you and I."

-- he's saying that noting a difference equals racism. Which does not follow. "Different" simply does not mean "superior" in any sense.

When he says above,

"'You are inferior' is built on "you are different."

Again, no it does not follow. And again the refutation by analogy: blue and green are clearly different, but that in no way declares or even slightly implies that one is superior to the other.

We can let him explain himself if he so chooses. I admit, I can't follow the point of your last paragraph about the drinks at all.

 

[Mathbud1]

You think he's saying that races don't exist?

The way I read it he's saying that merely acknowledging that A and B are different leads to a hierarchy of superior/inferior (racism) all by itself. Which is kind of what the OP posits. Which is why I disagreed with both.

Same point as two posts prior (129).

The difference itself doesn't "lead to" judgements of inferiority/superiority. But it is the foundation. Inferiority/superiority can't be built without that difference. Racism rests on that foundation of difference.

So when some people choose to give prime importance to the things that make them different, they are placing that foundation front and center. They are laying the foundation strong and practically inviting the people that they have divided themselves from to build a tower of hate on that foundation.

Differences in and of themselves are not necessarily bad things. Differences can be great opportunities to learn new things. That can only happen though when people come together united by the things that they have in common instead of divided by the things they don't. If, to you, the most important thing about you is the thing that makes you different from me, what have we got to build any kind of understanding and unity on?

You ask what is the importance of a geographical identity that is easily changed. The importance is that it is something that we have in common. It is something that we can begin to build an understanding and respect, if not friendship, on.

Instead we choose to emphasize what is different about us.

 

[Pogo]

You think he's saying that races don't exist?

The way I read it he's saying that merely acknowledging that A and B are different leads to a hierarchy of superior/inferior (racism) all by itself. Which is kind of what the OP posits. Which is why I disagreed with both.

Same point as two posts prior (129).

The difference itself doesn't "lead to" judgements of inferiority/superiority. But it is the foundation. Inferiority/superiority can't be built without that difference. Racism rests on that foundation of difference.

It's painfully obvious that you cannot distinguish between two things without acknowledging that there are two things and not one. That by itself doesn't lead to any kind of value judgment. Such a value judgment has to be introduced. Obviously you can't introduce a superior/inferior relationship upon a single entity.

So when some people choose to give prime importance to the things that make them different, they are placing that foundation front and center. They are laying the foundation strong and practically inviting the people that they have divided themselves from to build a tower of hate on that foundation.

Now you're expanding your own definition radically, introducing elements of "prime importance" and even "hate". While those are essential building blocks of racism, they have no relationship to a simple acknowledgment that blue is a different color from green. Saying that does not imply either color is "superior" to the other, nor does it place "prime importance" or "hate" on either one. So when you say racism is based on differences, you're just wrong. It's based on value judgments attached later to those differences -- not the differences themselves.

Differences in and of themselves are not necessarily bad things. Differences can be great opportunities to learn new things. That can only happen though when people come together united by the things that they have in common instead of divided by the things they don't. If, to you, the most important thing about you is the thing that makes you different from me, what have we got to build any kind of understanding and unity on?

How do you ever interact with a person of the opposite sex?
Or of a different age or social status or language?

Once again you're moving your own goalpost, stretching some difference noted into "the most important thing". Where is this coming from? How does referring to "that green car over there" make its color the "most important thing" about it? It isn't; it's simply a neutral identifier.

See what I'm saying? IOW "that black guy over there" is not a phrase that articulates racism; to get to that point you'd have to introduce a value judgment: "that guy is stupid because he's black".

You ask what is the importance of a geographical identity that is easily changed. The importance is that it is something that we have in common. It is something that we can begin to build an understanding and respect, if not friendship, on.

Instead we choose to emphasize what is different about us.

That's three now; again noting a difference is not necessarily "emphasizing" it. Point overmade.

And I didn't ask about geographical considerations; I asked about governmental abstracts. When we say "I'm an American" we are declaring which governmental abstract entity we are a citizen of, not geography. That's simply a function of what structure we live under -- not who we are. That's why it strikes me as wrongheaded to prioritize an abstract governmental concept over what one is oneself actually made of.

I think that was somebody else's point anyway though.

 

[Asclepias]

The fundamental idea behind racism is not that you are different but that between us you are an inferior form of human. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being different. Unless you have a twin you are different from everyone else anyway.

"You are inferior" is built on "you are different." You can't think someone is inferior to you without first thinking they are different from you. The more importance you place on that difference that you have recognized, the more misunderstanding, intolerance, and hate you invite. If you want to end racism, decreasing the importance of differences and increasing the importance of similarities is the fundamental place to start.

Your logic is simplistic and purile in nature. Where can you show proof that me feeling I am different from you means you are inferior to me? There are a lot of people that are different from me. That in no way means they are inferior. Thinking someone is inferior is what causes racism. If that were not true the definition would stress that being different was the most important factor.