From a member in one of the Martin v. Zimmerman threads:
This case has opened up the need for discussion. You may disagree and that is your right. But this discussion WILL happen. You can rant and
rave about it and hate it all you want, but this discussion WILL happen. And I think it NEEDS to happen.
What I'd like to do is explore whether such a discussion is possible, and whether it is being strongly resisted by our administration, pressure
groups, and various media. My initial opinion (and I beg you to show me I'm wrong) is that few people want a true discussion on race, and that
reluctance for a discussion was created and encouraged by people who would prefer to keep us separated into groups. Therefore, a discussion on race
seems as likely as world peace in our time.
A true discussion means, in my mind, that people are able to express themselves honestly, that they intend to listen and understand the other side,
that when either side is presented with facts which contradict their opinions they change their opinions instead of ignoring the facts, and that it is
agreed that the purpose is to find understanding and mutually agreeable solutions to the problems expressed.
Let me explain why I think such a conversation is impossible. At the first use of the word "racist" the conversation is over. It's an attack on a
person instead of on a belief, and it's a serious enough charge to end a person's career. Yet, I can't imagine a conversation on race in which the
word isn't used. And if not directed against a person, you will certainly hear that "America is a racist country." That is simply a quick way of
saying the majority of Americans are racist, and we're back to attacking people.
Second, does our poster really want a discussion, or does he want a lecture? I can imagine that in many people's minds the idea of listening to eight
hours of Al Sharpton, Maxine Waters, Louis Farrakhan, and Jesse Jackson, Jr., is a torture to be avoided at all costs. Thus is created the legend
that non-blacks aren't interested in a discussion.
Third, what can Whites say? You've probably seen this video:
A White saying this publicly would be punished in half a dozen different ways. ATS would probably delete the thread if I wrote the words he spoke.
Do you remember the young lady who testified at the Zimmerman trial, the one who had trouble with cursive? She just gave an interview in which she
said that the word 'n-word' is perfectly inoffensive, and simply means "person." The term 'n-word'," she explained, may be seriously offensive,
depending. So if your accent is strange, you may very well get beaten or killed.
Are both sides in this discussion equally concerned to use inoffensive terminolgy? Not as long as "Creepy A-- Cracker" is acceptable.
Fourth, about uncomfortable facts. Things like the great disparity in crime rates and unemployment among the youth of each race. If a White says its
because of biological differences, or a Black says it's because of racism, its pretty safe to say there will be no discussion.
So why are we at this point where discussion is extremely difficult if not impossible? Lots of reasons. Since this is ATS, I'd better start with
money. The media, especially the networks, see this story as a way of boosting viewership and ad revenue. If there had been no charges there'd be no
story, therefore, no extra money.
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, Jr. also recieve increased donations for their various funds and foundations. If they weren't on the news, their
doanations would not be as large.
Next, power. If Sharpton and Jackson can call up a demonstration of thousands, they are seen as more powerful and influential. They can get favors
and money in exchange for their services. The Administration is also concerned about power. They have learned, and have applied, the rule of divide
and conquer. This President promised to be a uniter, but he has learned to profit from a war between men and women, immigrants and citizens, poor and
rich, Union and management, Gay and Straight, and Black and White. He sets people to fighting, then promises one of the two groups his support with
the hopes of getting their vote. In this way he wins the vote of women, Blacks, gays, immigrants, union members, poor. He has been succesful in
creating a majority by combining minorities. Straight, White, males can be left aside as they tend to vote Republican anyway.
Unifying the country on any of these issues weakens the President's power base, and that of his party, so he has no desire for a serious discussion on
this issue.
Also, there are people who say "Sure, I'm a complete failure in life, but none of it's my fault, I've been discriminated against." That's a
comforting thought, but not true as often as some think. There is created an internal force driving them to hold on to discrimination as an excuse
for their failures.
And, finally, (off the top of my head) there is group pressure to hold onto the idea of discrimination. You can see it in the attacks on Black kids
who are condemned for "Acting White" because they study or speak standard English.
OK, enough of that. What's going on on the White side of the issue? For the people in power, especially the liberal side of the structure, I think
it's a slave owner mentality. Blacks can't give them much money, but they can, and do, vote like a solid bloc. 90%+ every election. That's a great
reason to see them as mindless slaves performing as required, provided they are provided with a little more money now and then, and some really good
speeches. (Throughout this, as you should have figured out, I'm over generalizing, but the subject and space limitations require it.)
By seeing Blacks as vote machines, their worth as individual humans with human problems is neglected. There is no reason for White politicians to see
them as fully human, that would result in their more complete blending into American society, and make them less easy to control. They would be
independent, productive citizens free of reliance on D.C. for their livelihood and thoughts.
So, who really wants a serious discussion, and what does that mean?
I am sincerely hoping that one of our more brilliant members can show me a way out of this mess, to a true discussion that starts us on our way to
progress in this area.
I am always willing to talk about anything, even race. But there are to many who are to entrenched in their opinions and are unwilling to hear another
angle. Or there is a loss of income if the issue would go away.
Wait...I think I just typed a summary of your post, didn't I? Sorry about that.
But I will say that I am prejudiced, not racist. So in that context, I am a minority it seems, or maybe, part of the silent majority. Wouldn't that
be something?
I do believe in what Martin Luther King said. To judge a man not by the color of his skin, but rather by his character. It’s not either or depending
on how I feel at the moment either.
As long as we have the politicians and media trumping up things for ratings and votes. It’ll sadly continue. And it will be a taboo subject for
most.
The problem isn't so much a problem of the people, but a problem of the message that the MSM continues to pound down our throats in collusion
with the Gov't and the NAACP. They want division and animosity... it makes for compelling television and the MSM will keep milking it as long
as they can.
world meet sick society, sick society meet world, yeah it's no secret our complete and utter lives are globally filled with whatever the elite want
us to have and that's it. oh and everything bad in this world can be directly linked to the elite, through the lives lost, oppressed, tortured,
enslaved, starved, diseased, polluted, demoralized and so on, so why is anyone surprised the elite wish to segregate us now through every means
possible??
people have been prejudice for tens of thousands of years, propaganda has been around just as long, i can't even believe i'm discussing this as i
usually don't get involved with this type of thing.
Okay, the topic is how to get an open and honest (and intellectual) discussion going on race. I don't think we can, Charles. Racism is ignorance that
dwells in the irrational part of the mind. I don't think mere words can cure such a disease.
edit on 7/16/2013 by jiggerj because: (no reason
given)
Let me explain why I think such a conversation is impossible. At the first use of the word "racist" the conversation is over. It's an attack on a
person instead of on a belief, and it's a serious enough charge to end a person's career.
This is exactly what I have seen on the news. I have also notice that some of the white commentators are very hesitant to say what they are really
thinking about this issue for fear of being called racist. IMO discussion isn't going to solve this problem. The only way it will be solved is if
people start seeing each other as humans instead of color.
My only question is this: why would you embrace a language and behavior that is known to cause economic hardship, then complain because your
opportunities are limited? Poor English is a key indicator to an employer that you may lack the insight needed to do a job, unless you don't speak
English as a first language. And you certainly need both hands and a belt to do any job. I have seen all races guilty of the above, by the way.
There is plenty of blame to go around. But you would have to be a fool to believe that only white people stoke the fires of racism. This isn't the
60's any more. As long as people have a reason to continue being prejudiced, nothing will likely change.
All I can do is be reasonable and accepting myself, and teach my kids to be the same. Outside that, not much else is within my reach.
edit on
16-7-2013 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)
this same thing is happening in south africa. the new government has said that until the black population represent the largest percentage of the
working force, no new white people are allowed to be hired. this is by law. however, since the majority of the country is black and unemployed, this
means white people who are not self employed there, will never have a job. the white people working government jobs, have all been fired and
replaced by blacks. unfortunately, the economy is in really bad shape and is showing no signs of repairing itself. when the unemployed start to
complain, their politicians blame the only remaining whites -- the farmers. this is causing violence against white farmers, who are often slaughtered
in their homes, and their farms confiscated by gangs of blacks who don't know how to farm. in addition, the white farmers were employing groups of
blacks, who summarily lose their jobs and their homes, which were often on the farms. this has resolved to an even worse unemployment amongst the
black community, and it is also slowly destroying the bread basket of their country.
it's like a huge people eating destroyer. it kills the remaining white members of the population while also causing thousands of blacks to not only
become unemployed but homeless. and when the newly umemployed and homeless complain, the politicians, repeat the process -- blame it on the remaining
white farmers, and so it spirals downward, deeper into misery.
one reason i think why racism seems to be such a big issue still is because all the race awareness stuff schools started teaching in the early 90's
till today, all it has done is made people hyper-aware of differences between them and has made whites feel ashamed and like they as individuals did
something wrong just for being white and that shame and wrongness has caused frustration, resentment and anger to build up, it's then made into
hatred and other negative emotions and thoughts towards other races as a result.
I still believe that there are forces at play at the group level. The NAACP, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Holder's DOJ, etc.
But you are absolutely right that the ultimate focus of any discussion is the individual, his dignity, advancement, and removal from as many
hate-filled stereotypes as possible.
Are you suggesting that we postpone or eliminate discussions on race in favor of discussing policies concerning the individual? I like the sound of
that, if that's what you meant. Would they have to be at a considerably more local level, county or smaller, because of the different situations
people find themselves in? I still like it.
Many feel more comfortable within a category. (There is safety in numbers) And tend to act accordingly when within a certain category or
group.
Hmmm, thought provoking again. Assuming that's right, can we replace skin color with some other categorization? Perhaps
neighborhood?
Being an individual means stepping out of a comfort zone and having to take responsibility for your (the individual) actions. Perhaps people
are just too afraid to be a single individual.
Like, bummer, man. (Did I say that right?) I see two options from this. One, the spirit of
independence is dying. Two, maybe we have to make it less comfortable to be part of a group. Stop all benefits based on skin color?
Thank you for joining in, I hope you have more to add.
Wait...I think I just typed a summary of your post, didn't I? Sorry about that.
You've highlighted one of my many failings. I do get pretty wordy. Thanks for the reminder.
As long as we have the politicians and media trumping up things for ratings and votes. It’ll sadly continue. And it will be a taboo subject
for most.
Do you think then that the people calling for dialogue or discussion know it can't happen? Or do they innocently believe that it
can happen and that it will be a good thing?
And if it is as unlikely as you suggest, is there any way of breaking free from the cycle, or will this be a more or less eternal issue?
If you're so inclined, I'd like to follow a discussion between you and jiggerj who said, a few posts after yours, that it's not words or messages,
but pure human irrationality.
Could you both be right? Perhaps there is an innate fear of different people, but various groups try to intensify that fear for their own
purposes?
Originally posted by madmac5150
The problem isn't so much a problem of the people, but a problem of the message that the MSM continues to pound down our throats in collusion
with the Gov't and the NAACP. They want division and animosity... it makes for compelling television and the MSM will keep milking it as long
as they can.
i can't even believe i'm discussing this as i usually don't get involved with this type of thing.
I am sincerely honored and
pleased that you decided this conversation was worth getting involved in. Thank you.
people have been prejudice for tens of thousands of years, propaganda has been around just as long,
I wonder if this prejudice can be reduced over time. Allow me to use myself as an example.
What seems like a hundred years ago I was in a military drill competition at a college in South Dakota. We knew there was a hostile audience, as the
stands were filled with members of SDS. (Does anybody even remember them?) When we first went out, the students swarmed the floor and our team
commander ordered us back into the locker room. He did that the next time as well. We were told, that whatever else happened, we were not to give up
our grip on our rifle.
We were swarmed again, I was knocked to the floor, stepped on and kicked a few times, and basically froze with a death grip on my rifle. I was pulled
out of the mob by the biggest, most beautiful black man I had ever seen. He was 9 1/2 feet tall, looked like a god, and could pull 50 box cars with
one finger. (Of course, I was under a little stress.)
I recently thought about people in life I really admired. I was surprised to see that six out of seven were Black. These things make me think that
change is possible, I just don't know how to make it happen, especially against the forces who want race relations to stay bad or get
worse.
I agree with the poster who applauded you work, nice going.
I'm going to take a risk, though, and treat what I thought was a rhetorical question as a literal one.
My only question is this: why would you embrace a language and behavior that is known to cause economic hardship, then complain because your
opportunities are limited? Poor English is a key indicator to an employer that you may lack the insight needed to do a job, unless you don't speak
English as a first language. And you certainly need both hands and a belt to do any job. I have seen all races guilty of the above, by the
way.
To start, I think you have part of the answer yourself when you write:
As long as people have a reason to continue being prejudiced, nothing will likely change.
I'm really interested in those reasons, because if we can remove them, we'll have gone a long way.
Acceptance by one's peers is a pretty strong factor. And I think the school system could be but is nowhere near contributing to the solution.
Provide disincentives for the haters, and provide benefits for those with more or less standard behavior. But what keeps the haters from pounding
the others into submission? I know it's radical, but seperate the two groups into different schools. My problem is that they may all come from the
same community, and when they get home, the beatings begin.
Those in positions of power will never stop stirring the pot long enough for people to put their differences aside and rationally discuss issues
concerning race. They are too afraid that if everyone stopped bickering for too long we might as a nation finally come to realize who the real enemies
are, and the enemies certainly aren't the citizenry of any race, sex, religion, income, creed or orientation. The enemies are the very ones stirring
the pot!