It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why racism is propagated

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:05 PM
link   
How about the fear of whitey and cops? Most people do not trust people they don't know black or white. Minority/Majority

A person might be afraid of "their opinion" rough looking people black or white.

Whereas they might not be afraid of "their opinion" civil looking people black or white.

People swat at bumble bees too, not that they are any threat. People react to percieved threats sometimes they are white sometimes they are black.




posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikellmikell
Don't get me started! As someone who hires and fires I have quit hiring some groups because it's easier to avoid problems than deal with them.Should be enough said but it's not. The last laborer I had made 18$ per hour and missed 56 working days last year and then got mad because he didn't get any raises. I told him you keep missing time your ovdiously not here for the money. 4 working days later he called me and said he would be in the middle of next week. I told him human Recources cleaned out his desk and took his computer the day before. He blew up and made threats. DUHHH!!! Go to work!!! what part of that don't people understand!!!


AAAHHHHHH!!!!
mikell

Probably the least racist white man you ever met.


You bring up an interesting point which is somewhat off topic in that anti-discrimination laws may actually hurt minorities. It is difficult to fire a minority employee, as doing so not only exposes you to a risk of law suit, but in that suit the burden of proof will be on the employer. Since it is more difficult to fire minorities, employers may be reluctant to give young, inexperienced and unproven minorities who may otherwise show some promise, the chance to prove themselves, while they may extend an opportunity to a white employee knowing that they can fire the white employee if things do not work out.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Sorry, I hate to knock you off your politically correct high horse, but a lot of White people feel uneasy about Black people. This is not to say these people are all bad, but rather they have been conditioned to feel that way. If virtually every white person had no qualms with minorities, why would are so many white people putting themselves through hellish commutes just so they can live in lilly white suburbs miles away from where they work?


Because the inner city sucks to live in. Thats a fact. Unless you are rich and live in the Good safe clean area watch your car watch you wallet protect your assests. That is not predjudice that is fact. Here is another fact poor people come in different flavors. There are plenty of poor white people. The inner city isn't populated exclusively by black people.

As for your lily white comment thats pretty racist.

I live 15 minutes from the BROnX in NY. I've been their I've seen it. When I was thirteen I took the train to buy pot their, because in the lily white communities its harder for kids to get drugs, so we go to the ghetto because they don't care.

Trash comes in all colors.

Also its cheaper for instance to buy land and a home for instance upstate in new york then in NY or westchester.

[edit on 4-1-2007 by American Madman]



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Madman
How about the fear of whitey and cops? Most people do not trust people they don't know black or white. Minority/Majority

A person might be afraid of "their opinion" rough looking people black or white.

Whereas they might not be afraid of "their opinion" civil looking people black or white.

People swat at bumble bees too, not that they are any threat. People react to percieved threats sometimes they are white sometimes they are black.





We would both agree that a Black person who is impeccably dressed, speaks eloquently, and is clean, like Sydney Poirtier cut will be viewed by many as not rough looking, while a White person who looks like a stereotypical Hell's angel would be viewed as rough looking.

An interesting thought experiment would be what we can do to the Black person to make him rough looking, and what we can do to the Hell's angel to make him look non-rough looking. For example, if we gave tthe Hell's angel a haircut or removed his tattos, would he become non-rough looking. Let us take Sydney Poirtier. If we gave him a tattoo, or corn roes, or took off his suit, would he then become rough looking. My guess is that if we ran this experiment, it would only take a few minor changes to make Sydney Poirtier rough looking in the eyes of many, and it would take a few minor changes to make the Hell's angel to make him not rough looking. From a purely color blind perspective, these two men would be on opposite sides of the spectrum. Yet, since it would take to just a few minor changes to make them both equal on a scale of "roughness," it suffices to say that race plays a large part in determining whether someone looks threatening.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint

First, I think you should be aprreciated for your candor. It is needed and contributes to this debate. The wonderful thing about the internet is someone like you can speak candidly without fear of reprisal.

I will not label you anything, as the "racist" label is too loaded, and the evils it represents do not apply to a person such as yourself. At the end of the day, you are a probably good person who is doing what you think is best for yourself and your family. You probably do not advocate enslaving all the minorities, or ethnicaly cleansing them, or any other atrocities, thus it would be unfair to compare you to KKK members, Nazis, and other like people.

What I do question is how you evaluated the risks. Perhaps when you weighed the pros and cons of moving to the exurbs, the cons of living within earshot or gunshot of minorities was given too much weight. Perhaps this was fueled by the strereotyupe of the Minority thug we are constantly bombarded with in the media. We should all question how the stereotype is created, and how and why it is presented?


Well to be honest the media no doubt is a factor. I know enough to read between the lines and yes the media does portray minorities in a demoralizing fashion. However statistics are there aside from the media and those do clearly indicate a growing problem so I don't think stereotyping is the concern. Is that the fault of minorities? Perhaps not but in most cases I see very little at a grassroots community level to better the situation. Everyone says it has to start somewhere and I think from within the respective minority communities is the key.

Just to add part of my evaluation involved being in situations firsthand. Situations that, to me, had no positive gains or outlook only trouble. In fact one was life threatening involving a minority. Does that put all minorities under the same umbrella ? Certainly not, but it simply re-enforced what I already thought I knew.

brill

[edit on 4-1-2007 by brill]

[edit on 4-1-2007 by brill]



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Madman

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Sorry, I hate to knock you off your politically correct high horse, but a lot of White people feel uneasy about Black people. This is not to say these people are all bad, but rather they have been conditioned to feel that way. If virtually every white person had no qualms with minorities, why would are so many white people putting themselves through hellish commutes just so they can live in lilly white suburbs miles away from where they work?


Because the inner city sucks to live in. Thats a fact. Unless you are rich and live in the Good safe clean area watch your car watch you wallet protect your assests. That is not predjudice that is fact. Here is another fact poor people come in different flavors. There are plenty of poor white people. The inner city isn't populated exclusively by black people.

As for your lily white comment thats pretty racist.

I live 15 minutes from the BROnX in NY. I've been their I've seen it. When I was thirteen I took the train to buy pot their, because in the lily white communities its harder for kids to get drugs, so we go to the ghetto because they don't care.

Trash comes in all colors.



I lived in a variety of areas, from the inner city, to the suburbs. The city is not all bad. It is interesting and stimulating. What a lot of people who live in exurbs (outer suburbs) are not realizing is that their kids are turning out worse than they would have if they grew up in the city because their kids are bored, and have nothing better to do than get drunk or high. Unfortunatley, kids today are not just drinking and/or smoking weed, but have access to crystal meth, which is highly destructive.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint

I lived in a variety of areas, from the inner city, to the suburbs. The city is not all bad. It is interesting and stimulating. What a lot of people who live in exurbs (outer suburbs) are not realizing is that their kids are turning out worse than they would have if they grew up in the city because their kids are bored, and have nothing better to do than get drunk or high. Unfortunatley, kids today are not just drinking and/or smoking weed, but have access to crystal meth, which is highly destructive.


Not so sure about that. I don't think it matters big city or small rural town. What matters is who and what kids are exposed to as typically dictated by their peers. However this is way off the main topic so I'll quit while I'm ahead.


brill


[edit on 4-1-2007 by brill]



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by brill

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint

Well to be honest the media no doubt is a factor. I know enough to read between the lines and yes the media does portray minorities in a demoralizing fashion. However statistics are there aside from the media and those do clearly indicate a growing problem so I don't think stereotyping is the concern. Is that the fault of minorities? Perhaps not but in most cases I see very little at a grassroots community level to better the situation. Everyone says it has to start somewhere and I think from within the respective minority communities is the key.

Just to add part of my evaluation involved being in situations firsthand. Situations that, to me, had no positive gains or outlook only trouble. In fact one was life threatening involving a minority. Does that put all minorities under the same umbrella ? Certainly not, but it simply re-enforced what I already thought I knew.

brill

[edit on 4-1-2007 by brill]

[edit on 4-1-2007 by brill]


You are correct in that the statistics are not colorblind. A black person is more likely to have gone to prison than a white person, a white person is more likely to go to college than a Black person. I just question what weight you give those statistics and your analysis of them.

First, your understanding of the statistics might be wrong. For example, violent crime peaked in the 80's. Their is less violence today, then 20 years ago. Similarly, child abductions are lower in number today, then they were 20 years ago, its just that these child abduction stories are getting more attention.

Secondly, are you giving up a lot of the benefits of urban living for a 1 in 10,000 chance of getting shot for a 1 in 20,000 chance of getting shot and a 1 in 10 chance of getting pick pocketed for a 1 in 50 chance of getting pick pocketed? I do not know the specifics of your particular situation, but there are people like you who are suffering miserably during long commutes and giving up career opportunities just for a decreased risk of something that is not a major problem to being with.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint

We would both agree that a Black person who is impeccably dressed, speaks eloquently, and is clean, like Sydney Poirtier cut will be viewed by many as not rough looking, while a White person who looks like a stereotypical Hell's angel would be viewed as rough looking.

An interesting thought experiment would be what we can do to the Black person to make him rough looking, and what we can do to the Hell's angel to make him look non-rough looking. For example, if we gave tthe Hell's angel a haircut or removed his tattos, would he become non-rough looking. Let us take Sydney Poirtier. If we gave him a tattoo, or corn roes, or took off his suit, would he then become rough looking. My guess is that if we ran this experiment, it would only take a few minor changes to make Sydney Poirtier rough looking in the eyes of many, and it would take a few minor changes to make the Hell's angel to make him not rough looking. From a purely color blind perspective, these two men would be on opposite sides of the spectrum. Yet, since it would take to just a few minor changes to make them both equal on a scale of "roughness," it suffices to say that race plays a large part in determining whether someone looks threatening.


I would say its more appearance and attitude. Pigment does not scare me hostile attitudes do. hostile 100 pounds wimpy guys do not scare me "unless a gun is involved" hostile 300 pound muscular guys do. They come in all colors. Agressive desperate looking people put me on alert again they come in all colors.

The way people portray it, it should be called blackophobia. I'm white when I see a black person I size them up just like I do everyone else. I don't start with some inate fear that they are evil. If I were to believe rumors I would ask why do all black people have a fear of evil whitey... The man... duh duh duh... And before you talk about the past remember no people are innocent all have commited travesties in the past and still so.

[edit on 4-1-2007 by American Madman]



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by brill

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint

I
Not so sure about that. I don't think it matters big city or small rural town. What matters is who and what kids are exposed to as typically dictated by their peers. However this is way off the main topic so I'll quit while I'm ahead.


brill


[edit on 4-1-2007 by brill]


The peer group is influenced by its environment, though. A group of kids who live in Alaska may decide to walk around with red scarves, following their group's fashion. The fact they are wearing red scarves, as opposed to blue, white, or any other color may be a function of the group, but the fact they are wearing scarves is a function of their environment. That same group of kids may not even own scarves if they lived in Florida or California. Similarly, a group of kids living in a bland, sterile exurb will behave differently than if they were transported to an urban environment.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint

Originally posted by brill

Not so sure about that. I don't think it matters big city or small rural town. What matters is who and what kids are exposed to as typically dictated by their peers. However this is way off the main topic so I'll quit while I'm ahead.


brill


[edit on 4-1-2007 by brill]


The peer group is influenced by its environment, though. A group of kids who live in Alaska may decide to walk around with red scarves, following their group's fashion. The fact they are wearing red scarves, as opposed to blue, white, or any other color may be a function of the group, but the fact they are wearing scarves is a function of their environment. That same group of kids may not even own scarves if they lived in Florida or California. Similarly, a group of kids living in a bland, sterile exurb will behave differently than if they were transported to an urban environment.


Possibly but personal experience has shown to me that urban living is not for me nor would I introduce my children to it. Stereotyping non-urban environments, as you've done is a waste of time. You obviously have an agenda with living in big cities and thats fine but rural living has its merits as well. Both are suited to different tastes and both can produce different results I just won't go back, no matter what.

brill



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Racism in employment is actually exacerbated by anti-discrimination laws. It is very difficult to fire a Black person in America. If you fire a Black person for any reason, no matter how justified you were in firing him or her, he or she will have a prima facie case against you in court, meaning the burden of proof will be on you the employer to prove you did not fire them for racist reasons.

This being said, a lot of companies will put Black people in positions where there performance will be irrelevant, like bureacratic departments. That way, if the person is underperforming, the company will not be severely harmed if the person underperforms. If Black people are put in positions where there performance is critical to the success of the company, and the person underperforms, the company will not be fire and replace the worker easily.

I've worked in a few large companies and I'm honestly not seeing this practice of putting black employees in irrelevant positions. I agree that it's more difficult to terminate a minority employee. I also take issue with the involuntary reactions talked about.

The market is so competitive for minority candidates from the universities, my company routinely pays a good deal more in salary to win them over. It's justified by HR as meeting the market level.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 09:59 PM
link   
I live in the Detroit area we are one of the major melting pots in the US. We have many african-americans, Arabs, Polish, Asian, Italian, Irish, Greek and probably every other nationality in the world.

Detroit is a mess the city is out of control, economically bankrupt near state receivership, lawless and in chaos and run by a corrupt mayor. People in the suburbs are afraid to go there, just this week we had 5 murders just in the downtown area and 15 total in the city of Detroit. Detroit was a great city up until the start of 1967 riots. The people that really could help got the hell out because they were scared $hitless to live in a city of hate, anger and corruption.

Prejudice and racism exists even in blacks. What I mean is that they are prejudice against someone that is not black enough or maybe even to black. Doesn't talk black enough or talks to white...you get my point

It happens amoungst whites, Asians, your to fat, to ugly, to smart, to stupid, to pretty, to rich, etc......we all judge each other based on actions, looks, intellegence or whatever else we can dig up to take the heat off ourselves. This is how human nature is we judge.

My father and mother came to the USA with nothing in the mid 50's WWII had left their country in shambles and they were near starving. My folks didn't take any hand outs, followed entrance laws even though it took them 2 years to get into the USA. They worked hard and made a great life for themselves and their children. Now why is it that people that have been in the US for many years with opportunities surrounding them never get ahead? Why do they blame others? Why do they blame the government?

I think it is time for people to stop pointing fingers and take some personal responsiblity and do the best they can with the "hand of cards they have been dealt."

Also in our November elections Affirmative Action was banned State wide overwhelmingly, which I think is a good thing. People should get jobs and positions based on merit not skin color.

[edit on 4-1-2007 by Realtruth]



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 06:19 AM
link   
Great post Realtruth.

You're spot on about how everyone is judged on appearance. I'm talking weight, clothes and the like. It all contributes to our image, which is actually more important than performance in climbing the corporate ladder. By far, the most important factor in advancement is exposure (i.e. internal networking). This sounds common sense but it's the hardest lesson for kids coming out of college who think if they put in 80 hours a week and "perform", they'll almost automatically advance. Nope.




Originally posted by Realtruth
Also in our November elections Affirmative Action was banned State wide overwhelmingly, which I think is a good thing. People should get jobs and positions based on merit not skin color.

[edit on 4-1-2007 by Realtruth]

Maybe off-topic somewhat, but I'm not willing to eliminate all forms of affirmative action until universities stop dishing out preferences for legacies (daddy attended so daddy's boy gets preference). This is a clear advantage based on social status.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint

Today's racism is highly pervasive, but more subtile. For example, virtually all white people have a fear of Black people they do not know. They may feel the Black people they know are alright, but they are affraid of strange Black people. They will clutch their purse tighter when a Black person they do not know is in the same elevator as them. White people are ashamed to admit they have these attitudes, but as many people of color will attest, this is true.

The reason why these attitudes exist is that they are implanted in people to control them. Fear of Black people and other minorities drives people to do strange things.


Ok i'm no expert on this matter but feel i must add my two cents to this thread.

Firstly what you are calling racism may not be a concious act of racism/prejudice or fear of minorities, We as humans are very impressionable from an early age, now if we take a look at the media and all socio/political/military/schools etc i see a distinct pattern where whites are dominant in the world.
I believe white dominants gives rise to excellent role models for young white children, but it also does have the subconcious effect of making a percentage howevevr small or large have a superiority (to expect better from whites than none whites etc) complex over none whites, added to that the constant years of negative images of the black male in the media and very few good role models causes young black males to have an inferiority complex inasmuch thier view of thier place in the world is not particularly ambitous and in turn don't persue high positions in society as much as thier white counter parts would.

And who do Black males see living luxurous lives e.g p-diddy,dr dre,dmx,master p, micheal jordan to name a few and they are not exactly positive role models, hence young black males grow up beliving thier best bet is to do somthing a rapper said to get somwhere in life. As many black males are not in position in society which has nothing to do with sports or music most young black males percieve most or all other doors are shut to them which is the case in many an organization.
This also causes whites to see black males in a negative light wether it be concious or subconciously. I must also add that the effect of the bee sting syndrome, which is if one is stung by a wasp then both all wasps and bees are villians happens to both blacks and whites. and judging by your first post you may have been stung by a wasp, but dont take it out on all.

Well i dont want to write a novel here, but what im trying to point out is these whites you call racist are not neccessarily racist cause for the reasons stated above i can see that both many Blacks and Whites are misguided and ignorant to what motivates them and in turn causes a vicious circle of finger pointing and true racism and or fear.

no country has a clean record but america is making progress as chissler stated and we sould focus on that and run with it, being a shining example to all and sundry.

If i have made any boo boos please do correct me.

My two cents



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Racism is alive and well in America.

Clearly.

Today's racism is highly pervasive, but more subtile.

Is it as subtle as creating a thread purely to bash all white people?

For example, virtually all white people have a fear of Black people they do not know.

..an outright lie.
Btw. I don't trust any people I don't know.. that doesn't mean I fear them.

They may feel the Black people they know are alright, but they are affraid of strange Black people.

So it's gone from a fear of strange black people in general..

They will clutch their purse tighter when a Black person they do not know is in the same elevator as them.

to a knee jerk bag clutching reaction thats common only to white women.
Oh no.. does this mean I'm going to starts screaming and start getting hysterical if the lift gets stuck?
Utter bs.. I'm pretty sure there were 'people of colour' on the last elevator I was in but.. you know what? I had to struggle to remember that. "So what?" comes to mind. People are people.

White people are ashamed to admit they have these attitudes,

'We' do not have these attitudes. Yours is what is known as a racist attitude.. proven, not by your skin colour [that would be racist] but by the things you've said. You have absolutely no proof to back this except for your own wishful thinking.

but as many people of color will attest, this is true.

Well people of colour who happen to be racist.

Fear of Black people and other minorities drives people to do strange things. They buy homes in far away suburbs to avoid minorities,

"They"..? :shk:

[edit on 5-1-2007 by riley]


DCP

posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:29 AM
link   
oprah would rather spend 40 million in south africa then the inner city.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:45 AM
link   
PV,

Off the topic maybe, but in my opinion no because the rich, affluent will always get the top spots in any college they wish, period, whether or not affirmative action is there. Grades don't matter for them only that their daddy has enough money to make donations to get them in, anywhere.

What affirmative action does, in a school situation, takes smart kids, in an equal situations, from poor families, of different colors and pits them against each other, the ones that have the affirmative action on their side get in.

Now is that fair? It is the same or worse in corporate america. I have seen it first hand devasate a working environment in General Motors. A female hispanic was given a top position at one of the local automotive plants based on AA, and not qualifications and there where individuals that had much more experience, credentials, years in and wisdom for the job. This women made a huge mess of things, but no one could say a thing. Individuals that were in positions for the job were passed over, some quit, some asked for transfers. It breaks the will of those that work hard and are loyal. If a person of color or gender deserves a position then by all means they deserve it, but not by force this only brings hatred and anynomosity for people that truly pay their dues by hard work and loyalty.

RT





Originally posted by Political Veto
Great post Realtruth.

Originally posted by Realtruth
Also in our November elections Affirmative Action was banned State wide overwhelmingly, which I think is a good thing. People should get jobs and positions based on merit not skin color.

[edit on 4-1-2007 by Realtruth]

Maybe off-topic somewhat, but I'm not willing to eliminate all forms of affirmative action until universities stop dishing out preferences for legacies (daddy attended so daddy's boy gets preference). This is a clear advantage based on social status.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Realtruth
PV,

Off the topic maybe, but in my opinion no because the rich, affluent will always get the top spots in any college they wish, period, whether or not affirmative action is there. Grades don't matter for them only that their daddy has enough money to make donations to get them in, anywhere.

What affirmative action does, in a school situation, takes smart kids, in an equal situations, from poor families, of different colors and pits them against each other, the ones that have the affirmative action on their side get in.

Now is that fair? It is the same or worse in corporate america. I have seen it first hand devasate a working environment in General Motors. A female hispanic was given a top position at one of the local automotive plants based on AA, and not qualifications and there where individuals that had much more experience, credentials, years in and wisdom for the job. This women made a huge mess of things, but no one could say a thing. Individuals that were in positions for the job were passed over, some quit, some asked for transfers. It breaks the will of those that work hard and are loyal. If a person of color or gender deserves a position then by all means they deserve it, but not by force this only brings hatred and anynomosity for people that truly pay their dues by hard work and loyalty.

RT

RT,

I don't disagree and I think we're on the same page. On university admissions, the AA should focus exclusively on the economics, not the color of skin. I think this shift will continue.

Regarding corporate America, I see the same thing happen when the push for diversity is disproportionate. It can and should be a consideration but not at the expense of all others.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 01:12 PM
link   
i must admit due to the fact america being an immigration country, theres sooo many racist people around its quite shocking


of course everybody knows about america in the 50's/60's, but on the net you see it quite a lot from americans 50 years on (not just ats) i go on many chat forums and about 20 mins ago actaully ive just saw a white american male saying "its probably a negro" talking about a picture of a white women holding her baby, because she's censored the babys face out.

in england we don't really see too much of it, of course some european countrys are quite racist spain for one, but in england it isn't really an issue.

[edit on 5-1-2007 by st3ve_o]




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join