Racism

[Stu Pidasso]

There are white people who are prejudiced against blacks.
There are black people who are prejudiced against whites.

As a percentage, are whites more prejudiced against blacks than blacks are against whites?

Stu

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
As a percentage, are whites more prejudiced against blacks than blacks are against whites?

[/ QUOTE ] I think as a percentage, black people are more prejudice against white people.

[wacki]

According to Bill Cosby? I would say black.

According to Chris Rock? Old black men, followed by white people.

Token
1) noun. Slang for black boy at a white school. Token's normally get a lot of attention and have no problem getting laid by white chicks with jungle fever.

Dead man
1) noun. White boy at an all black school.

I honestly don't know though, it's too hard to analyze. There are a lot of pros and cons to being black. The same goes with being white. Racism, or even reverse racism, is something that is pretty difficult to survey. It's not like zigby is out there doing polls on the stuff. I would have to agree with Salt if I was going to guess.

[MMMMMM]

Not sure of which there are more, but just for the sake of completeness, let's add that there are some blacks who are prejudiced against blacks, and some whites who are prejudiced against whites.

[ThaSaltCracka]

I am not even guessing. I realize this all probably sounds racist, but it has just been my experience that black people, and yes for the most part, either don't like most white people or don't want to be friends with white people. There are of course exceptions, especially if the people grew up together, they will probably be friends, but if I met a black guy, and we hung out through a mutual friend, he is probably less likely to consider me a friend than I would be to consider him a friend.

I don't know if this is racism on his part or if it is just a distrust in white people. My likely guess is that it is a combination of both. Part of it also probably has something to do with his parents as well. A lot of the black people my age had parents who grew up in the 60's when racial tension may have been at its highest in this country. I am sure part of that carries over. I am just glad my parents never cared about someones race. They were always very open and accepting(part of the reason my dad left Louisiana in fact). I am also fortunate to have gone to not only a diverse school, but one in a urban enviroment. I was by no means sheltered in regards to race during high school. My opinions on this are based pretty much on personal experience too.

But this does not mean white people aren't racist either. I thought for sure I would go my whole life without hearing a white person say "nigger" and mean it, well that ended quickly, when I was 18. I just don't understand that hate.

[junkmail3]

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure of which there are more, but just for the sake of completeness, let's add that there are some blacks who are prejudiced against blacks, and some whites who are prejudiced against whites.

[/ QUOTE ]

And there are some whites who are predujice against caucasians.

[bholdr]

and blacks who don't like asians, and japanese that don't like koreans or chinese, and everybdy seems to hate the arabs right now and so on and so forth.

blacks being racist towards whites, according to my africian american friend, usually has something to do with 500 years of slavery, oppression, lynching etc. whereas whites being racist towards blacks usually has something to do with the color of their skin and their image in popular culture.

as far as old racist black men go, i geuss enduring a lifetime of racisim would tend to make one bitter.

neither is an excuse in this day and age, but it's something to chew on.

[nothumb]

Pretty difficult to quantify this.

I was walking through Albany to an appointment with one of the kids I work with today and he made some remark about walking through the hood with a white dude driving a minivan. I kind of laughed at him.

I think it's more productive to look at the relative standing of groups and how we can improve them all. I guess commonly held prejudices are a part of this but there are other, larger factors. In particular, the prejudices of those in power and those who control media portrayals of different groups (which, I suppose, are largely influenced by the perceived prejudices of their audiences...)

So it all goes in circles. Fun, huh?

NT

[Rooster71]

Here is my view on racism. The whole tired subject of racism has been beat to death in this country. Laws are already in place to protect against discriminatory (race-based) events and practices. Discriminating based on race is wrong. However, it is important to realize that some discrimination will always be present. Just like some people will experience discrimination based upon stupid things like their accent, their surname or any of hundreds of other reasons. I think this country should be way past the constant discussions and examinations of racism, there are many more important issues that need to be addressed.

[Cyrus]

"There are white people who are prejudiced against blacks.
There are black people who are prejudiced against whites."

It's not the same prejudice. While white racists will tend to look down on blacks as "inferior", the blacks will tend to be sceptical of whites' intentions ("up to no good") or just plain weary and suspicious. I don't think that black extremists/racists have propagated to any serious extent the notion that "whites are inferior". (I remember a few riffs like that from Black Panther literature but nothing remotely apporaching the "systematic" approach of a KKK.)

I understand racism to be the idea of a race's supremacy -- rather than the standard prejudices on the basis of race, e.g. the Irish are stupid, the Greeks shag sheep, the Italians are gangsters, etc. (White men can't jump, blacks have big cocks.) These are not racist notions in my book, they're more like superstitions.

"As a percentage, are whites more prejudiced against blacks than blacks are against whites?"

There must be a far greater percentage of blacks who are scared or angry with whites (i.e. prejudiced) than a percentage of whites who are holding racist views against blacks.

As far as pure racism is concerned, I already called it: Far greater percentage of white racists/supremacists, no question about it.


Dictionary definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=racism)

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not the same prejudice. While white racists will tend to look down on blacks as "inferior", the blacks will tend to be sceptical of whites' intentions ("up to no good") or just plain weary and suspicious. I don't think that black extremists/racists have propagated to any serious extent the notion that "whites are inferior". (I remember a few riffs like that from Black Panther literature but nothing remotely apporaching the "systematic" approach of a KKK.)

[/ QUOTE ] Well said, this was probably what I meant in my post but couldn't find the right words. I agree that blacks "racism" of white people is probably predicated out of fear or suspicion of white intentions, but I think that is also a form of racism too.

[Victor]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not the same prejudice. While white racists will tend to look down on blacks as "inferior", the blacks will tend to be sceptical of whites' intentions ("up to no good")

[/ QUOTE ]

This is false. Whites are very very very skeptical of blacks intentions. Living in suburbia, if a black person was in our neighborhood we would get worried and make sure our stuff (bikes, toys, etc) was put away.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's not the same prejudice. While white racists will tend to look down on blacks as "inferior", the blacks will tend to be sceptical of whites' intentions ("up to no good")

[/ QUOTE ]

This is false. Whites are very very very skeptical of blacks intentions. Living in suburbia, if a black person was in our neighborhood we would get worried and make sure our stuff (bikes, toys, etc) was put away.

[/ QUOTE ] Thats not the same thing, that right there would be racism because you assume that black people are more likely to steal from you. What Cyrus is referring to is black peoples mistrust of white people. Basically, black people are less likely to associate with white people because they assume that the white people will screw them over somehow.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
I understand racism to be the idea of a race's supremacy -- rather than the standard prejudices on the basis of race, e.g. the Irish are stupid, the Greeks shag sheep, the Italians are gangsters, etc. (White men can't jump, blacks have big cocks.) These are not racist notions in my book, they're more like superstitions.


[/ QUOTE ]

This statement kinda reminded me of some prejudices I formed on the basis of race. In my college years I worked at a theme park. At one point in my theme park career I was an area supervisor. Id basically be responsible for the operation of 1/3 of the rides in the park for my shift.

Something that occurred quite often is a large group would cut in front of the line for a popular ride. Sometimes it would be a group of whites, or a group of blacks, or asians or hispanics. They would do it right in front of you as if you weren't even there.

Heres how each group would behave when I would approach them on it. The whites would try to rationalize their behavior, trying to convince you to let them slide by. The blacks would vehemently deny it and accuse you of being a racist. The mexicans and asians would simply pretend not to speak any english.

A lot of racial prejudices one forms come from ones own life experiences. I suspect this is a uniform trait amoung all humans. Is it a fault?

Stu

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
and japanese that don't like koreans or chinese

[/ QUOTE ]
From my experience, it seems that an unusually large proportion of Koreans, Japanese and Vietnamese dislike Chinese. I don't have a clue what that is all about.

[ QUOTE ]
according to my africian american friend, usually has something to do with 500 years of slavery, oppression, lynching etc.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry man, but this is just stupid. Some people hold that view, mainly because they are dumb. What do they want? Many white people have white ancestors who were slaves, so what?

[ QUOTE ]
whereas whites being racist towards blacks usually has something to do with the color of their skin and their image in popular culture.

[/ QUOTE ]
Again, this is just stupid. It seems that you are saying white racists are racist based on skin color, while black racists actually have a reason to be racist. I don't know what you mean by "their image in popular culture".

[ QUOTE ]
as far as old racist black men go, i geuss enduring a lifetime of racisim would tend to make one bitter.

[/ QUOTE ]
Poor bastards. The few old black men I know are happy, well-adjusted people who are enjoyable to be around and don't seem to be racist.

[ QUOTE ]
neither is an excuse in this day and age, but it's something to chew on.

[/ QUOTE ]
True. But I believe that tossing around reasons (excuses) for exhibiting racism is counterproductive. The best thing for everyone to do is just grow up, realize that the world isn't perfect and live their own life.

I have a form of Muscular Dystrophy which makes it very difficult for me to walk and sometimes to use my hands. I could sit around whining and crying about how I have been discriminated against (which I have), but I just don't see the point. I live my own life.

[Cyrus]

"Whites are very very very skeptical of blacks' intentions. Living in suburbia, if a black person was in our neighborhood we would get worried and make sure our stuff (bikes, toys, etc) was put away."

Yes, this happens, and quite extensively too.

But I would say that the reverse is more pronounced and systematic, i.e. black people, in general, are more weary of whites' intentions and feelings.

Here's how it goes, IMHO, grossly put:

Lots of Whites look down on Blacks but also lots of Whites OK with Blacks -> Blacks weary and suspicious because damage from racists stronger than benefit from non-racists -> reverse prejudice of Blacks against Whites in proportion to black suffering because of racist Whites (no matter how many of them there are).

As a proof, check out guilt. It has been determined that there is a tremendous amount of collective guilt felt by Whites about the treatment of Blacks in America, a feeling they get even by just reading History! You will not find any kind of similar gulit feelings among Blacks. The Blacks (rightly) do not feel that they have been treating the Whites in a significantly racist or demeaning manner.

[ACPlayer]

According to the second definition in the link you provided - Discrimination or prejudice based on race - the cop who pulls over a black man driving a Lexus assuming that it is stolen and the black woman who berates brother for dating a white chick are both guily of racism and not just prejudice. Neither may be acting because of feelings of racial superiority- of course it is possible that is why they are taking these positions as well.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
According to the second definition in the link you provided - Discrimination or prejudice based on race - the cop who pulls over a black man driving a Lexus assuming that it is stolen and the black woman who berates brother for dating a white chick are both guily of racism and not just prejudice. Neither may be acting because of feelings of racial superiority- of course it is possible that is why they are taking these positions as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is why I provided the dictionary link. The definition includes (pure) prejudice in racism -- and I wanted to make a point in that I don't. As I said, it's more akin to superstition, IMO.

[ACPlayer]

Your reduced defintion pretty much forces the conclusion that racism is practised by very few groups (such as the KKK). I think this is too narrow a view.

However, no one can stop you from your own prejudiced definition of race. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

There are certain prejudices that are formed not from superstition, but from a learned response to statistical behaviours (these of course are not pure prejudices, if that is how you define pure). So, statistically the cop may be right in thinking that the black lexus driver may be an auto thief. However, the racism comes not from thinking that the driver is black, but from thinking that his being a thief comes from his blackness (it usually comes from the economic backgrounds). It is the same thinking that leads some to assume that all Muslims are terrorists, because those are the only inputs into the brain's learning networks - specially from those exposed to other's racist views. Racist actions are not always a result of a feeling of superiority but being quick to make an assumption on insufficient inputs and on thinking that the observed responses are from the race.

If instead one was to assume that fundamentally all races (in the broadest definition of race) are similar in emotional and intellectual thinking and are acting rationally according to their background and then looking for the reasons for differences in observed behaviour (either true differences or impressions from insufficient information) then one has a chance of looking at the world in a balanced way.

Note too that it is the equal protection clause that disallows even statistical based discriminatory behaviour. So yes, subjecting all middle east men of a certain age group to special scrutiny at airports is a violation of the constitution (as understood by this lay person).

[Cyrus]

"Your reduced definition pretty much forces the conclusion that racism is practised by very few groups (such as the KKK). I think this is too narrow a view."

Got me! I do believe that racist-like notions come sorta "natural" to our species, for various, by now obvious reasons. Although inside we are identical (and genetically closer to the chimp than we wanna know!), we humans do focus on the outside differences quite strongly.

If we label as a racist everyone who makes a judgement in his life, even without realizing it, on the basis of race, then we'd get stuck with a huge majority of racists, IMO. On the contrary, we have to find a way out of this predicament without getting trapped in words. (A treacherous tool, in such endeavours!)

"No one can stop you from your own prejudiced definition of race."

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

"There are certain prejudices that are formed not from superstition, but from a learned response to statistical behaviours. Statistically the cop may be right in thinking that the black lexus driver may be an auto thief."

Yep, it's Bayes vs. PC, unfortunately. (The minute the labelled it "racial profiling" it was dead in the water. Don't these guys use any professionals?)

Anyway, I'm a practical man. If 90% of supermarket thieves are one-eyed blondes, I make sure of two things in my supermarket: (1) I give extra special attention to any one-eyed blonde that walks in, and (2) I try to make sure no one notices that extra special attention.

"Racist actions are not always a result of a feeling of superiority but being quick to make an assumption on insufficient inputs and on thinking that the observed responses are from the race."

We have to fight racism that comes out of superstitious ignorance with education (patiently applied) and perseverance. And we have to fight racism that comes out of supremacist political ideology (a racism born equally of ignorance but which has reached a higher stage of activism) with strength: violence if need be.

"If one [accepts] that fundamentally all races (in the broadest definition of race) are similar in emotional and intellectual thinking and are acting rationally according to their background and then looking for the reasons for differences in observed behaviour (either true differences or impressions from insufficient information) then one has a chance of looking at the world in a balanced way."

Amen, brother.

This, by the way, should be the end objective of that education I’ve been going on about.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
"If one [accepts] that fundamentally all races (in the broadest definition of race) are similar in emotional and intellectual thinking and are acting rationally according to their background and then looking for the reasons for differences in observed behaviour (either true differences or impressions from insufficient information) then one has a chance of looking at the world in a balanced way."
---------------------------------------------------------------
Amen, brother.

This, by the way, should be the end objective of that education I’ve been going on about.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the above seems pretty obvious to me; looking at people this way is a basic tenet of mine, not an end conclusion. Where many falter intellectually is in getting stuck on this to the point of not being willing to acknowledge or discuss some of the immense differences which tend to derive from background or culture, and thence the differences which tend to carry over to significant segments of each group.

[Gamblor]

whereas whites being racist towards blacks usually has something to do with the color of their skin and their image in popular culture.

That is absolutely ridiculous.

It's only skin colour.

Racist people associate intelligence/culture/attitudes with a skin colour, not the other way around.

If it were the other way around, there'd be millions of tanned caucasian kids in jails.

All of this should be read with the understanding that skin colour and ethnicity has no effect on attitudes. It is environment and upbringing that forms attitudes.

[ACPlayer]

If we label as a racist everyone who makes a judgement in his life, even without realizing it, on the basis of race, then we'd get stuck with a huge majority of racists, IMO. On the contrary, we have to find a way out of this predicament without getting trapped in words. (A treacherous tool, in such endeavours!)

If you attribute the actions to be caused by the race then yes you are racist. If you attribute the actions due to other factors then you are trying to be objective.

An example is the position MMMMMM takes on Islam. He attributes the behaviours of Muslim terrorists on Islam rather than the economic conditions prevalent in that part of the world. His view of Islam is based on the words of the extremist Mullah's as spread by websites like MEMRI that are there to magnify the sounds of the extremists to an audience wanting to be convinced of the essential badness of the religion.

When the economy is vibrant, secular notions can flourish when there is no food on the table or ones' physical safety is threatened by Apache gunships the situation is ripe for the extremists to exploit.

A realization that the Palestinians, Egyptians, Saudi average population ends up as a bomb comes from economic problems rather than religious fervor would be welcome from such extremists in our country. Which is why I would rather open trade relations with Iran than try to invade it.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]

An example is the position MMMMMM takes on Islam. He attributes the behaviours of Muslim terrorists on Islam rather than the economic conditions prevalent in that part of the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only in part; of course there are other contributing factors as well. I never claimed otherwise.

[ QUOTE ]
His view of Islam is based on the words of the extremist Mullah's as spread by websites like MEMRI that are there to magnify the sounds of the extremists to an audience wanting to be convinced of the essential badness of the religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, my view of Islam is based primarily on the texts of the Koran and Hadiths themselves.

You once asked me to post some Koranic passages to support my contentions; I did; and then you claimed to not accept the translation. So I then posted three alternate translations, all by Muslims who were also Muslim scholars, with links; all three translations essentially agreed with one another. You then stated you wouldn't accept those translations because you don't speak Arabic yourself.

[Cyrus]

"If you attribute the actions to be caused by the race then yes you are racist. If you attribute the actions due to other factors then you are trying to be objective."

Technically, as they say, you are, of course, absolutely correct.

What I'm trying to do is present the case for Man's inherent tribalism which can extend into racism. At the same time, if we wanna work constructively, we cannot alienate everyone who carries even the slightest inkling of what you described above, because, unfortunately, that would leave us with only a small minority as completely racism-free.

[ACPlayer]

Only in part; of course there are other contributing factors as well. I never claimed otherwise.

Well the economic conditions are not the contributing factor but the basic underlying factor. When economic conditions are good (as the are presently in the west and were not so during the days of the crusades) the fundamentalists have limited ability to rally the people to commit suicide by becoming bombs or go off to battle. Religion becomes the lightning rod for people with out hope or better things to do.


You once asked me to post some Koranic passages to support my contentions; I did; and then you claimed to not accept the translation. So I then posted three alternate translations, all by Muslims who were also Muslim scholars, with links; all three translations essentially agreed with one another. You then stated you wouldn't accept those translations because you don't speak Arabic yourself.


And I posted sites that showed different interpretations of the House of War etc.

Neither of us are Islamic scholars, we have all read about it to various degrees. All religious texts are subject to interpretation (see Wacki vs Karen Armstrong in another thread) and having lay people interpret translations that may or may not be accurate is not helpful.

The fact is that in the middle east and in palestine in particular the primary factor is the lack of hope, poor economic factors and the humiliations of living under the barrel of a gun.

[MMMMMM]

The Despicable 19 were pretty well-off. bin-Laden is wealthy. Many fanatics are well-off.

I don't agree that economic conditions are the overriding factor in terrorism, else many more cultures or oppressed peoples would have turned to terrorism, who didn't.

As for the House of War business, yes you did post an alternate assessment of meaning. However when I gave the three translations by Muslim scholars of various Koranic passages, you refused to accept them. It is not even disputable that those passages are accurate--those enjoining Muslims to force infidels to convert or die or be subjugated under Islam, and to apply other tortures and terroristic coercions to infidels for the purpose of spreading Islam.

[John Cole]

Cyrus /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[Dr Wogga]

.....you said: "..... blacks have big cocks..."
/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Uh-oh!!! Your "closet" is coming out more & more /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Cyrus]

More like a flank system.

/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[ACPlayer]

It is not a question of accepting them, it is a question of realizing that the words of every religious text are subject to many interpretations. One can only read these sights and try to form ones own opinion. My opinions are based on my understanding of humans that I have been in contact with around the world and on the belief that people are exploited in the name of religion (across the spectrum).

I am perfectly willing to accept that there are multiple interpretations to the Quran or any other religious text-- i dont accept that the extremists could exploit people into this type battle without the underlying economic stresses and even more the the attacks that Muslims have borne over the past 100 years.

Islam is NOT the underlying reason for terrorism. This is my conclusion and of course it is not yours.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
It is not a question of accepting them, it is a question of realizing that the words of every religious text are subject to many interpretations. One can only read these sights and try to form ones own opinion. My opinions are based on my understanding of humans that I have been in contact with around the world and on the belief that people are exploited in the name of religion (across the spectrum).

[/ QUOTE ]

Those particular passages--and numerous others--do not change much in meaning regardless of translation. This is not a matter which Muslims dispute, or in which there is difference between laypersons, imams, or Muslim scholars. I would be willing to bet that every version of the Koran in the entire world says essentially the same thing in those particular passages. You obviously don't wish to believe it, though.

[ QUOTE ]
I am perfectly willing to accept that there are multiple interpretations to the Quran or any other religious text--

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course there are multiple interpretations of the Koran as a whole. But those particular passages are not subject to wide interpretation at all.

[ QUOTE ]
i dont accept that the extremists could exploit people into this type battle without the underlying economic stresses and even more the the attacks that Muslims have borne over the past 100 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well they certainly did exploit people into such battle in in Mohammed's time, and forward for centuries, even when Muslims were not under serious outside pressure. Islam is an aggressively expansionist totalitarian philosophy of religious absolutism wedded to religious governance of human affairs.

[ QUOTE ]
Islam is NOT the underlying reason for terrorism. This is my conclusion and of course it is not yours.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, my view is that it is a contributing factor, and often a significant one. My view is actually more flexible than your view, as I accord its contributing effect a weighting of sorts, whereas you deny it completely.

[ACPlayer]

whereas you deny it completely.

No I do not. I still say though that I dont think it is the cause of terrorism. There is a difference.

We need to address the causes of terrorism. Not go after Islam.

[MMMMMM]

We need to keep an open mind about what some of those causes of terrorism are, if we are to be able to address them. And I don't see you as having a very open mind in this regard.