Zone1 What are “isms” - Racism and Racist

[Carl in Michigan]

Only white people beat themselves up over this stuff.

 

[TheParser]

Yes, it is difficult to define "racism."

* Is it racist to decline delivering food to high-crime areas?
* Is it racist to find safety in a nearby store if one sees gang members coming down the street?
*Is it racist to refuse to enroll your child in an urban school?

In my opinion, the answer is NO.

 

[Concerned American]

A example would be red-lining.

Would you also say that benefits given exclusively to a race or segregation based a race are racist? E.G. AA or preferences of any type based on race and race exclusive graduations or schools. If you answer in the affirmative, then I would say we are on the same page.

 

[Coyote]

Yes. It is also illegal. Racism has a long a dark history in this country and even longer in other places. It's not as bad as it used to be but I think getting better as time passes. The term 'racist' has been thrown around so much that it has lost some of it's punch, pretty much everything that gets said, done, or even proposed is labeled as racist by somebody and often without justification. When you call everyone on the other side a racist, nobody cares any more unless it's some outrageous action or speech. But what happens is that legitimate criticisms and disagreements or new ideas may never surface for fear of being unfairly castigated by others. And that ain't good.

Exactly. There are a number of terms thrown around so much they no longer have any meaning or the meaning is whatever the speakers wants (commie, Marxist, fascist, anti-Semite, woke, etc). That is why I think maybe it is good to revisit it and why I thought Obama was a good example to use In how racist is misused.

I think to be a racist there has to be some kind of intent or belief behind it. There is a difference between racism, on one hand, and the inequality that is the legacy of racism on the other or inequality due to class differences, and bigotry. It isn’t all necessarily racist, sometimes it is just ignorance..

 

[Coyote]

Obama's goal was to USE Racism in order to divide and transform America. He was very successful in achieving his goal. I could care less whether he personally is or is not Racist. His policies exploiting Racism is what damaged America greatly.

I strongly disagree. Obama had to walk a fine line, as president for ALL of us, and that meant a lot of Blacks were annoyed when he didn’t push some of the policies they wanted.

What divided America was having a Black president, and that brought a lot of hidden racist anger to the surface.

 

[Coyote]

Would you also say that benefits given exclusively to a race or segregation based a race are racist? E.G. AA or preferences of any type based on race and race exclusive graduations or schools. If you answer in the affirmative, then I would say we are on the same page.

It depends on intent.

AA was meant to address deeply entrenched inequalities and open doors for a variety of groups: women, Latinos, Blacks, Native Americans and Asians. It would be hard to call it racist when it actually includes all races. The issue imo is whether it is still needed, for whom and in what areas?

On race exclusive graduations? Whether it is racist depends on intent (belief about races), but it is divisive and a bad idea for an event that should be an all inclusive celebration. Things like this further divide on racial lines and exclusionary groups. It does seem like there would be grounds for a lawsuit. I’m open to argument on this one though.

 

[Coyote]

Yes, it is difficult to define "racism."

* Is it racist to decline delivering food to high-crime areas?
* Is it racist to find safety in a nearby store if one sees gang members coming down the street?
*Is it racist to refuse to enroll your child in an urban school?

In my opinion, the answer is NO.

On 1 and 2 I agree it isn’t racist. On 3, that depends on why.

 

[Concerned American]

for a variety of groups:

Those were added in later.
Affirmative action was first created from Executive Order 10925, which was signed by President John F. Kennedy on 6 March 1961 and required that government employers "not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, or national origin" and "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin" but did not require or permit group preferences.

Affirmative action - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

We are in perfect agreement as regards the rest of your post.

 

[Concerned American]

I strongly disagree. Obama had to walk a fine line, as president for ALL of us, and that meant a lot of Blacks were annoyed when he didn’t push some of the policies they wanted.

What divided America was having a Black president, and that brought a lot of hidden racist anger to the surface.

I think that racism was what prompted a lot of the anti Obama sentiment. That being said, I think that Obama did a lot to create much of the division that came to pass after he was elected. We see the similar events happening regarding Trump today. Where we saw anyone but Obama (Dems) we saw anyone but Trump in 2020.

 

[Coyote]

I think that racism was what prompted a lot of the anti Obama sentiment. That being said, I think that Obama did a lot to create much of the division that came to pass after he was elected. We see the similar events happening regarding Trump today. Where we saw anyone but Obama (Dems) we saw anyone but Trump in 2020.

Interesting. I do see what you mean there.

What in particular did Obama do that created more division? He made some rookie mistakes in his first but most presidents do.

 

[task0778]

I strongly disagree. Obama had to walk a fine line, as president for ALL of us, and that meant a lot of Blacks were annoyed when he didn’t push some of the policies they wanted.

What divided America was having a Black president, and that brought a lot of hidden racist anger to the surface.

America was already divided before Obama came along, I don't think we should lay that on him. But a lot of white people like me that went through the segregation of the 50s and the race riots that came later really wanted to see some sort of racial healing that MLK called for and were disappointed when it didn't happen. Maybe the job was too big for one man, even a president to manage by himself and my own personal opinion is that he didn't get much help from anybody including the black community. There were too many people looking for a bigger piece of the pie rather than meaningful advancements and as always it turned into political battles wherein both parties own some blame for the lost opportunities.

 

[MarathonMike]

What divided America was having a Black president, and that brought a lot of hidden racist anger to the surface.

Nope. Barack Obama is the consummate conman and he conned you and all the people that thought he was going to be the great uniter. He could have been, but he chose to embark on a vicious anti-Police campaign fueled by incidents involving Black victims. He endorsed Black Lives Matters with he power of the Presidency which gave it the legitimacy it needed to become a force. He vilified SB-1071 making asinine speeches about little Mexican kids going out for ice cream being accosted by border officials.

That's what a con man does. He smooth talks his way in, gains your confidence and then he fucks you over hard.

 

[TheParser]

On 1 and 2 I agree it isn’t racist. On 3, that depends on why.

Regarding No. 3: Many urban schools are plagued by vandalism and violence. Teachers cannot teach because they are essentially cops trying to maintain some order. Many new teachers assigned to such schools often quit the profession. Of course, academic standards are substandard.

 

[Coyote]

Regarding No. 3: Many urban schools are plagued by vandalism and violence. Teachers cannot teach because they are essentially cops trying to maintain some order. Many new teachers assigned to such schools often quit the profession. Of course, academic standards are substandard.

In that case it would not be racist. But what if the parent didn’t want their kid in the school because they didn’t like Black kids? Then that would be racist. Whether or not something is racist often depends on what intent or belief lies behind it.

 

[IM2]

First, Obamas policies can be opposed due to racism. Second, when a specific race has and continues to create policies that cause social problems calling that out is not racism. Third, we should not be gaslighted into the belief that the term is overused by the people who practice racism.

My definition is the belief that racism is a trait, whether positive or negative, that is applied to an entire race of people. That is why the practice should be described as the behavior of a subgroup. For example, all whites are not racists, but there is a subgroup that primarily consists of white right wing republicans. But, there are white liberals who are also racists but not in the same number.

However modern racism cannot be defined by old definitions. That's where laissez faire racism enters the discussion. Laissez faire racisn is what we see most here and it's really something that needs to be discussed.

 

[IM2]

Regarding No. 3: Many urban schools are plagued by vandalism and violence. Teachers cannot teach because they are essentially cops trying to maintain some order. Many new teachers assigned to such schools often quit the profession. Of course, academic standards are substandard.

BS.

 

[IM2]

Yes. It is also illegal. Racism has a long a dark history in this country and even longer in other places. It's not as bad as it used to be but I think getting better as time passes. The term 'racist' has been thrown around so much that it has lost some of it's punch, pretty much everything that gets said, done, or even proposed is labeled as racist by somebody and often without justification. When you call everyone on the other side a racist, nobody cares any more unless it's some outrageous action or speech. But what happens is that legitimate criticisms and disagreements or new ideas may never surface for fear of being unfairly castigated by others. And that ain't good.

No, the term has not been thrown around. Legitimate criticisms and disagreements are not called racist or racism. What some people here call legitimate disagreements arre one sided criticisms mainly by whites about blacks that are not based in reality.

 

[IM2]

What do you mean by that exactly?

The brilliance of America is that it was founded on the principle of individualism to secure that no one is judged by the content of their DNA. Everyone who arrives is American and that is how it should be.

Today, people are trying to say that not evennthose who were born in America are American because their surname is "Gomez".

When all comes around, "ethnicity" does not matter in the real world and trying to ascribe significance to it is to treat human beings like dogs -- "Look, a Golden Retriver!"

It is yucky and immoral.

America was not founded on the things you claim.

 

[IM2]

People who exhibit a clear and consistent pattern of antipathy towards people based upon their race are racists.

Incorrect. See, in order for this discussion to work, one side must accept that everything has never been the same for all people.

Why would a black or native america person have antipathy for white people? Whites cannot just feign innocence and pretend that past has nothing to do with the present until it's a time to glorify white past achievement. They also cannot declare how racism is gone are deny the continuing racism of the present in this kind of discussion.

 

[Lisa558]

On 1 and 2 I agree it isn’t racist. On 3, that depends on why.

Refusing to enroll your children in an urban school is not racist if it is poor-performing, it is plagued by violence, or your child would be a minority and the majority kids are racist.