1. IrvingSnodgrass - Feb. 3, 1999 - 7:07 AM PT
An interesting discussion has developed recently in the Suggestions thread, based upon a comment by Slate's Scott Shuger in Today's Papers. Shuger's comment was ill advised, certainly, and not very good journalism at best. But was it racist?
The terms "racist" and "racism" get bandied about quite a bit in the Fray, and perhaps it is a good idea to explore their meanings. Where does stereotyping end and racism begin? Or is there any difference?
Have a look at the Suggestions thread, and offer up your comments here.
2. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 7:29 AM PT
Shuger's comment was accurately described by the NYT as racist. It was ill advised and not very good journalism and it was racist.
That does not necessarily mean Shuger is a racist. Based on this one example there is no way to know.
After Fuzzy Zoeller made his "ill advised" comments regarding Tiger Woods (when Woods won the Masters) he said he did not mean them to be racist. Woods and Zoeller were then shown on TV playing in another tournament and laughing together. I'm willing to take Zoeller at his word when he says he did not mean to make racist comments about Woods.
But Zoeller's comments were racist, whether they were made out of ignorance, a twisted sense of what is funny, or whatever.
The same is true of Shuger's comment.
3. dschmi - Feb. 3, 1999 - 7:33 AM PT
For those of you just joining us, the current debate (or at least the debate I want to have) centers on the difference (if any) between racism, ignorance, and insensitivity.
Surprisingly, I find myself alone in advocating the position that there IS a difference between these three.
The example I have given: A little girl who has never seen a black person except on TV shows says "I think all black people are in gangs." I think this girl is sadly misinformed (ignorant), not racist.
The other extreme: those guys (in Texas?) that dragged that man to his death behind their pick-up truck. That's racist.
My underlying point in this entire discussion is that the accusation 'racism' is thrown around like some sort of default rule - like, you're a racist unless you can prove otherwise. Back on the other thread, it ws clear that 'racism' was used by different people in different way. One person thought that stereotypes were the same as racism. One person thought that ignorance = racism.
Well, this is long enough. I suppose we should try to come up with a working definition of racism. Any takers?
4. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 7:36 AM PT
By your lights, Riv, only murderers qualify as racists.
5. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 7:39 AM PT
"Racist" is an adjective, nothing more.
It can be used to describe a person's basic nature, a single action, a series of actions, a law, a court decision, a constitution, an organized group, a disorganized group... the list goes on.
Just because this word is applied to a person's specific action should not automatically mean that person's basic nature is racist.
I would hate to see the versatility of this word restricted simply because of the discomfort of some people when they do stupid or ignorant things.
6. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 7:40 AM PT
cllr,
I need more of an explanation. I don't know what you mean.
7. JaDeGoLd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 7:46 AM PT
I agree, dschmi, if I read you correctly.
If the sterotyping is made out of *innocent* ignorance, such as a child making a slur without any knowledge of the connotations behind such a slur, that is clearly not racist.
OTOH, racism and ignorance are often inseparable. Yesterday, NPR did an interview with the head of the CofCC. The head of the CofCC repeatedly maintained that his group wasn't racist, but went out of his way to broadcast factoids that painted blacks and other minorities in the worst possible light.
8. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 7:56 AM PT
"Just because this word is applied to a person's specific action should not automatically mean that person's basic nature is racist."
Yes it does.
"I would hate to see the versatility of this word restricted simply because of the discomfort of some people when they do stupid or ignorant things."
Then don't be so chary of using it whne justified. All this talk about how horrible the "accusation of racism" is makes me laugh.
Then vomit.
D'Nesh D'Souza is a racist.
"But how can he be a racist? He's Pakistani isn't he."
Let me make myself clear: D'Nesh D'Souza is a racist.
"But wasn't he engaged to marry Laura Ingraham?"
And so forth.
9. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:03 AM PT
I'm waiting for someone to accuse me of "playing the victim"
Well?
What's the matter with you people? Not awake yet?
Pour them all some coffee Deev.
Wait:I'll help out.
(Ahem!)
There goes Cellar -- playing the victim again. I'm so tired of his going into this routine all the time -- accusing everyone of being a racist. Doesn't he realize no one will ever take him seriously this way?
(There!)
10. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:03 AM PT
I have not tried to say that it is horrible for one person to accuse another of racism.
I am not chary of using the word.
I think Bob Barr is a racist.
I think several people I know are racists.
I don't have enough information to form that opinion about Scott Shuger's personality. His comment was racist. That's all I can state with any certainty.
11. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:04 AM PT
I know that ignorance is a large component of the racism we most commonly come across in our everyday lives. Frankly, this doesn't bother me very much. It's the invidiousness and prejudice expressed by those who aren't ignorant that bothers me, the stances taken by paople who should know better that I find truly objectionable.
Dinesh D'Souza has appropriate cover (on the face of things) for his views. He's an Indian, a "colored" minority in this country and thus is an appropriate token spokesperson for the racist organizations that fund his books. I'm among those who find his attitudes horrific, and his gleeful smug little books worthless- but is Stanley Crouch also racist? Is J. C. Watts racist? Is Louis Farrakhan racist? I'm not sure, frankly. And I'd hesitate before calling D'Souza racist per se, even if his books 'The End of Racism' and 'Illiberal Education' espouse stances that are repugnant to me.
12. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:06 AM PT
cllr,
Look for someone else to accuse you of being a victim. I can't see how the accusation would help me understand what you are saying.
13. JaDeGoLd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:07 AM PT
Cllrdr,
I agree. There is no question that D'Souza is a racist.
I, of course, take it a step further. I firmly believe that silence or inaction in the face of racism is a racist act.
14. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:08 AM PT
"I don't have enough information to form that opinion about Scott Shuger's personality. His comment was racist. That's all I can state with any certainty."
Absolutely correct, Riv. The problem is, where do we go from there? Generally there is a retreat into silence. I'd like to know more about Scott. I doubt we'll find out anything at all. The drawbridge has been pulled up, and entry into the castle will not be allowed. I've been e-mailing him about other matters,howeever. Maybe I can lure him in here somehow.
Riv -- What questions do *you* have for Mr. Shuger?
15. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:13 AM PT
Well, okay let's get it over with. Why (specifically) is Dinesh D'Souza a racist? I have his book on racism right here and I'd appreciate knowing why its author must necessarily be called a racist. Note: I agree that the book is wrong-headed, and occasionally mean-spirited and disingenuous.
16. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:14 AM PT
cllr,
I assume Shuger had a problem with the conclusion the NYT reached as a result of the survey they did of students attending traditionally black colleges.
I would like to hear his explanation of what he thought he would learn by adding his question to the survey. I would also like to know if he thinks his question was poorly worded and, depending on his answer, why or why not.
17. elliot803 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:16 AM PT
marj:
Are they racist?
D'Souza - Yes
Stanley Crouch - No
J.C. Watts - Probably not
Louis Farrakhan - Yes
18. TheDiva - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:18 AM PT
Hmmmm.....
First, I'd want to know what he was doing at Freaknik. Then, I'd ask him *why* exactly he thinks that the Freaknik people were representative of black college students. I mean, there were reports that women were being surrounded by groups of men, and divested of their clothing against their will. Would he then draw the conclusion, based on this, that all black men engage in that kind of 'sexual' behavior?
19. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:20 AM PT
He hates African-Americans, Marj. Clearly he's been misaken for one and wants to correct that impression. He wants to do away with all civil rights legislation. That, plus the fact that he so much as *considered* marrying Laura Ingraham make his racism crystal clear.
Excellent questions Riv.
I would hope as this thread develops, we could deal with the subject of black-on-black racism.
But there are far too many whites in the Fray to make such a discussion viable.
20. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:20 AM PT
Elliot.
Why?
21. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:20 AM PT
The problem is that "racist" is so broadly applied, I'm sure, for some, D'Souza fits the bill. To Jade, all Republicans are racist. When Jesse Jackson went on about hymies, boom, Racist. Under the expansive auspices of the day, so do Charles Barkley and Don Imus. But they are celebrities, so they don't count.
In the end, the term is largely valuable as a political club, devoid of any real moral authority, so when the real ones roll around, the brand is not quite so indelibel due to decades of misuse.
22. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:22 AM PT
"First, I'd want to know what he was doing at Freaknik"
Moi aussi! Jungle Fever perchance?
23. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:23 AM PT
indelibel=indelible
24. bubbaette - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:23 AM PT
I think that there is such a thing as unintentional racism, but the fact that the person uttering racist statements does so out of ignorance doesn't really lessen the negative impact that those statements make.
I think that racism can also mean an unthinking way of accepting cultural sterotypes and is not always ill-intentioned, but ignorant. Bt that type of racism is more insideous and hurtful in the long run, because it's ingrained. When you are carrying a stereotype around in your head and measure folks agains it, there is a tendancy to call any deviations from the sterotype an anomoly, rather than questioning the sterotype itself.
25. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:25 AM PT
Morality, 109?
What morality?
We're on the cusp of a new millenium and morality just doesn't cut it.
Except where sex is concerned.
26. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:26 AM PT
All sports is racist.
27. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:27 AM PT
I think that's wrong cllrdr. D'Souza came to this country only at 16/17 for a year of high-school, then went to Dartmouth. He's neither likely to be confused for a black man or to harbor resent for being mistaken as one. I think his stance towards African-Americans (ridiculous coming from a person with his background) stems from political and ideological opportunism, not some deep-seated emotional base.
But leaving D'Souza aside, cllrdr, I'm much more interested in the way race and racism works in Caribbean and other "creole" cultures, where the majority of people are mixed to some extent. And I'd like to know about black-on-black racism and black-on-white racism from your perspective. As far as I'm concerned, it would be very very hard to show that the latter even exists in this country.
28. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:29 AM PT
And celebrities count 109.
29. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:30 AM PT
cllrdr
Your post #25 is positively Bill Bennett.
Your post #26 is cruel and an attempt to bait me.
30. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:30 AM PT
Sports is the least racist aspect of this, and most other societies. That is the games, and the playing fields themselves. I agree that some established athletic institutional hierarchies (NFL, MLB to some exent) exhibit racist hiring policies. But football and baseball, the games, are gloriously anti-racism.
31. Jonesatlaw - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:31 AM PT
I would define racism as the belief that groups of human beings are significantly different in accord to some system of categorization based on physical appearance or characteristics, and that these groupings are predictive of anything beyond physical appearance or characteristics.
I realize that this flies in the face of everyday experience, but if you really think about it, its accurate. Racism cuts both ways, both in ways politically correct and non-pc. There is a difference between racism and other varieties of ignorance, and that is that is based on immutable (or nearly so) qualities of the persons involved.
A person can often change or deny their religion, heritage, politics etc, but race is almost always present.
It is interesting to me that in this colorblind forum, so many of us have clearly identified ourselves according to race. I'll acknowledge that the id's were in the context of some other discussion, (I don't know of anybody entering the Fray as "Bob, the white guy") but it is interesting that it's seen as necessary to give value to our posts.
32. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:33 AM PT
"He's neither likely to be confused for a black man or to harbor resent for being mistaken as one."
You've led a very sheltered life, Marj. I wouldn't be surprised if D'Souza wasn't at one time or another threatened with physical assualt for being a "nigger."
"As far as I'm concerned, it would be very very hard to show that the latter even exists in this country."
More naviete, Marj. Read "The Wedding" by Dorothy West for starters.
33. wonkers2 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:34 AM PT
I missed Scott Shugar's remark. Would somebody please quote it or tell me where to find it. It seems to me that ignorance and morally impoverished upbringing are an inherent characteristics of racism but not excuses for it.
34. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:36 AM PT
"Your post #26 is cruel and an attempt to bait me."
Bait you, Niner? *You* of all people? Jamais de la vie!
35. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:37 AM PT
Jonesatlaw,
Setting aside the fact that a number of us have seen each other either in person or in pictures - it's pretty hard, as in my case, to show anything by my posts other than a person who has never suffered from any significant form of bigotry.
36. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:39 AM PT
cllrdr
Actually, celebrities don't. Earl Butz makes a crack, or Bob Kerrey makes a lesbian joke, or Jesse Jackson talks of hymies, and people buzz and stir. But Don Imus makes a living of race-based humor, every day, day-in, day-out, and the same tutt-tutters who decry the racist comments or "Barney Fag" in deep consternation . . . they swarm to Imus to yuck it up, day-in, day-out.
Standard Imus fare:
"I built my house on a slope."
Followed by cackling rejoinder of person aping an Asian.
"Help. There's a house on my head."
Herein lies the rub. If you laugh, are you racist? If you go on the show of the man who does these bits regularly, are you racist? If you advertise on the show, are you racist?
37. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:41 AM PT
Please don't presume knowledge of the details of my life cllrdr. I'm sure the reality would confound your assumptions.
I think its completely ridiculous to ascribe D'Souzas articulated views to an assumed incident of mistaken identity. Let me tell you, categorically, it has nothing to do with that. They stem from political and economic opportunism, and the belief that this is a soft target. And several of his arguments in the book are well crafted and hard-hitting, if disingenuous. What refutation, for instance, do you have for his claim that racism is unlikely as a cause of American-born US blacks, because West Indian black immigrants do far better economically and educationally?
I'll look for the West book. Care to describe its contents?
38. JaDeGoLd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:42 AM PT
Nineboy;
Jesse's "Hymietown" comment was racist. He acknowledged it as such and apologized for it. AFAIK, Jesse J. has not repeated this behavior. Real Christians believe in redemption and forgiveness.
Marj;
Here's a neat little segment from "The End of Racism:"
"What do Americans today owe blacks because of slavery? Probably nothing [because]...slavery proved to be the transmission belt that nevertheless brought Africans into the orbit of modern civilization and Western freedom, so that future generations of black Americans would be far more free and prosperous than their former kinsmen in Africa.
[Therefore], if America as a nation owes blacks as a group reparations for slavery, what do blacks as a group owe America for the abolition of slavery?"
39. Jonesatlaw - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:45 AM PT
Rivendell- I acknowledge that personal experiences require expressing personal characteristics. I can't address the fear or hesitancy that many whites display on casual encounters with a young black man, other than to address it in what I have seen from outside. What I tried to say, poorly, is that sometimes race is used to authenticate some position that does not truly come from the individual's experience.
40. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:45 AM PT
Interesting questions, 109.
Laughter, to my mind, is often a useful cover. This in turn opens onto the whole arena of covert racism. Consider the Counsel of Conservative Citizens for instance. Nice polite front, then peer beneath the veneer and you find the hoods and burning crosses. Racism at this level is stealthy. But this is scarcely the only form of racism in this culture. The way people keep complaining about the "accusation of racism," you'd swear that only life-long Klan membership plus personal involvement in an actual lynching would qualify one to be "called a racist."
41. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:47 AM PT
Jade,
"Jesse J. has not repeated this behavior. Real Christians believe in redemption and forgiveness."
That's sums up what I was trying to say in making a distinction between a racist action and a person who can rightfully be called racist by nature.
You said it much better than I did.
42. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:48 AM PT
Jade,
Odious posturing on D'Souza's part. So he's a racist for those absurd rhetorical flourishes?
43. bubbaette - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:48 AM PT
I was identified this morning as a sleezy old white bitch. Is that racist?
44. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:50 AM PT
Jade
To the extent a word is racist, I don't have a problem if it is designated as such. To the extent an apology wipes away one's racist statement, how very Catholic of you. But your simplistic approach is of no use in the murky waters of race and racism. Jackson probably had and has a bone to pick with Jews. It slipped out. He apologized because he had to.
Or did he remove all vestiges of prejudice from his heart? Only a chump would buy that.
45. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:52 AM PT
"What refutation, for instance, do you have for his claim that racism is unlikely as a cause of American-born US blacks, because West Indian black immigrants do far better economically and educationally?"
What basis is he making for such a remark? He's pulling it out of thin air. I happen to know a thing or two about West indian immigrants thanks to my father. D'Souza is -- as is his wont -- lying.
"I'll look for the West book. Care to describe its contents?"
It's about upper-class light-skinned blacks on Martha's Vineyard.
Oprah made it into a TV movie that Charles Burnett directed.
46. TabouliJones - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:54 AM PT
"What refutation, for instance, do you have for his claim that racism is unlikely as a cause of American-born US blacks, because West Indian black immigrants do far better economically and educationally?"
MarjoriB,
Actually, a few years ago The New Yorker had an excellent article on the issue which you allude to here. The article forcefully argued that the superior economic standing of West Indian black immigrants over Afro-Americans is a cler cut example of racism. The article demonstrated that in New York City, at least, WI blacks tend to be hired for more jobs than Afro-Americans for the simple reason that they are not Afro-Americans. That is, many employers don't hire Afro-Americans because they are steretyped as high risk employees prone to theft, slacking, yayadayada. West-Indians, on the other hand, benefit from countervailing stereotypes regarding immigrants to the U.S. -- i.e. they are assumed to be industrious, hard working, esploitable, etc. Thus, Afro-Americans lose out and West Indian blacks gain as a consequence of racism. IOW, the superior economic standing of West Indian immigrant blacks does not refute the existence of white-on-black racism but, rather, demonstrates its operation.
47. JaDeGoLd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:56 AM PT
Marj;
D'Souza goes far beyond mere "rhetorical flourishes."
He is promoting an agenda on the basis of knowingly false premises. I think people can argue against affirmative action without having to rely on falsehoods and outright lies.
D'Souza advances the argument that slavery wasn't all that bad; in fact, it may have a good thing for which blacks are surprisingly ungrateful. D'Souza, of course, ignores Jim Crow laws and discrimination that exists today.
48. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:56 AM PT
cllrdr
In the end, Imus' program is a litany of very funny, very hard-hitting, very tough race-based humor. It cracks on blacks (a Vernon Jordan mimic does his best "mmmm,mmmm good eatin'ermelon") and American Indians and Asians and anyone else.
But no one says a word. Why? Because they need him. Clinton made his move in the 1992 NY primary on Imus' morning show. Dole and Imus are hunky-dorey.
But, in reality, the show is heavy on the black as buck and shuffle. Maya Angelou is protrayed as follows: "Get me my Cheetos!"
Yet the rank and file, from Clinton to Carville to Dole to Frank Rich, they gladly join in the fun.
Result - the hue and cry over racism based on comments is crapola, and used mainly to nail someone for political points. No one buys it
49. wonkers2 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:56 AM PT
bubbaette, That depends!
50. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:57 AM PT
Cllrdr,
You'll find that Caribbean blacks in the USA have done markedly better than the mainstream of descendents of US slaves. It's not a lie, it's the most accurate part of D'Souza's book.
You want to hear the most vicious broadsides about American blacks? Speak to the Trinis and Jamaicans in the middle class in the USA. "Lazy," "shiftless"? I've never heard a white person dare to use those terms, but Caribbean blacks use them all the time. I work with several.
51. Jonesatlaw - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:59 AM PT
Bubbaette-Yes, unless it was an attempt to distinguish you from some other "sleazy old bitch" of different physical charateristics near you. And then, its just ignorant.
52. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 8:59 AM PT
"Or did he remove all vestiges of prejudice from his heart? Only a chump would buy that."
And only a chump would buy Trent Lott's excuses for his CCC appearances.
"Los Angeles Times" cartoonist Michael Ramirez -- another CCC fan -- is a racist. And he's a Mestizo Indian (Reagan's favored minority, you'll recall.)
53. ChristiPeters - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:00 AM PT
When I was a young child and it was explained to me that some people hated other people simply because their skin was a different color or they went to different houses of worship, I didn't believe it. The concept was too ludicrous.
By the time I was in Junior High School, I had seen enough evidence of this ludicrous concept to accept it's existence. However, I don't think even then that I truly believed it on a 'gut level'.
When I was in high school I had my first encounter with a black person who expressed hate to me at our first meeting based on my skin color. I also had a friend stop hanging out with me because her boyfriend had forbidden her to be my friend on the basis of my skin color. I met people who expressed all sorts of ridiculous opinions based on skin color, each beginning with "everybody knows..." It was also in high school that I encountered people whose whole view of the world consisted of stereotypes and any person they actually knew who didn't fit the stereotype was an exception. Finally, high school is where I first encountered 'close up' institutional racism when a very talented, brilliant friend of mine was automaticaly shunted into the 'General Program' rather than the 'College Prep Program' based on his skin color. (BTW, he won the court fight.)
So, I'll have to say that 1968 to 1971 is when I accepted the existence of racism on a 'gut level'. Even so, I must say I still don't understand it.
I have spent my life trying to see everything through everybody elses viewpoint as well as my own. The racist viewpoint is beyond my grasp. It just doesn't make any sense!
54. JaDeGoLd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:01 AM PT
Nineboy;
An apology wipes nothing away. It is an expression of remorse; we never know if one's apology in sincere or not. One's subsequent actions can only mitigate or exacerbate the offense. We can never know what is in the hearts of others. However, by their actions and words, we will know them.
55. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:03 AM PT
"I've never heard a white person dare to use those terms, but Caribbean blacks use them all the time. I work with several."
How dark are they Marj?
*That* is the question!
I don't accept D'Souza's claims about West Indians, and you can throw all the charts and surveys at me that you like. *Which* West Indians,Marj? (Hint! Hint!)
56. elliot803 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:03 AM PT
109109:
"The problem is that "racist" is so broadly applied, I'm sure, for some, D'Souza fits the bill."
It doesn't have to be very broad for D'Souza to qualify.
Of course, we could always go with the 109109/CalGal standard: unless someone actually explicitly expresses hatred towards another person on account of his race, they cannot possibly be considered racist, and to label them as such is profoundly unfair.
57. BobaFett - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:05 AM PT
Irony of Ironies Department:
"An apology wipes nothing away. It is an expression of remorse; we never know if one's apology in sincere or not. One's subsequent actions can only mitigate or exacerbate the offense. We can never know what is in the hearts of others. However, by their actions and words, we will know them."
Well, an apology wipes out the crimes of at least one man, according to Jade. Odd that this dispensation does not apply to her ideological opponents as well.
58. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:06 AM PT
cllrdr
Re Lott and Jackson.
Exactly. Jackson still doesn't dig Jews and Lott is probably not all that hot on the brothers. But they make their apologies or their vows of "I did not know" and move on. And they are representative of 99.9% of the population that holds prejudiced views.
Jade
You are noticeably silent on my queries regarding the Imus program. In that you are a street fighting liberal Democrat, and taking into account your very bold "silence=racism", and in that the media, the democrat and the GOP establishment all pitch tents in his racist corner, your thoughts please. Silence, as you know, doesn't do.
59. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:09 AM PT
cllrdr,
They range in color. I'm not talking here about the skin-color-and-hair prejudices that exist among Caribbeans as well as US blacks, I'm talking about the general belief among Caribbean blacks that they are different from their American counterparts. D'Souza uses this (and accounts of their generally superior economic achievement) to demonstrate that racism is a non-factor in the lives of American blacks.
In any case, maybe we'll return to the West Indies later in this thread discussion. There are probably larger issues to be hashed out right now if this thread is going to be a good one.
60. ChristiPeters - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:09 AM PT
"What do Americans today owe blacks because of slavery? Probably nothing [because]...slavery proved to be the transmission belt that nevertheless brought Africans into the orbit of modern civilization and Western freedom, so that future generations of black Americans would be far more free and prosperous than their former kinsmen in Africa."
Doesn't this statement carry behind it the assumptions that 1)only with white help are black people able to achieve civilization, freedom, and prosperity, 2)any poor conditions in African countries is due to the inferiority of black poeple ?
Isn't that racist? Doesn't that ignore the way black people (and other non-whites) have been treated in the US? Doesn't that ignore any history of civilization on the African continent? Do current conditions in African countries have nothing to do with the effects of white colonialism?
61. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:10 AM PT
elliot
"109109/CalGal standard: unless someone actually explicitly expresses hatred towards another person on account of his race, they cannot possibly be considered racist, and to label them as such is profoundly unfair."
I can't speak for CalGal. But I would revise the maxim:
"unless someone actually explicitly expresses hatred towards another person on account of his or her race, I wouldn't consider them a racist, because I (as Jade says) don't know what is in their hearts. Their deeds and explicit expressions do tell more."
62. JaDeGoLd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:11 AM PT
Nineboy;
To tell the truth, I don't listen to Imus. I'm pretty much tuned into NPR at that time of the AM.
63. ChristiPeters - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:13 AM PT
I've never listened to Imus.
From what I've heard of him, I have no desire to ever listen to him.
I refuse to listen to any "hate radio" of any flavor or any mean-spirited joking. Heck, I won't even listen to Don Rickles. I find nothing funny about insults. I have been told I am either too sensitive or have 'no sense of humor'. (shrug)
64. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:15 AM PT
"But they make their apologies or their vows of "I did not know" and move on."
There's a *huge* difference between Jackson's apology and Lott's "I did not know," Niner. Jackson has at the very least an entry-level degree of sincerity. Lott is simply a liar.
65. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:16 AM PT
Jade
Good for you. If you did, you would have to conclude by your own tenets that all Repugs and most Democrats (including the President) are racists.
Your listening choices are apt for your political ambitions. By all means, do not investigate. To you, it would be the equivalent of Clinton and Carville sewing sheets for the CofC rally.
66. elliot803 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:18 AM PT
109109:
"unless someone actually explicitly expresses hatred towards another person on account of his or her race, I wouldn't consider them a racist, because I (as Jade says) don't know what is in their hearts. Their deeds and explicit expressions do tell more"
Their deeds and their expressions, explicit or otherwise, show us what is in their hearts. Explicit public expressions of racist sentiments have become comparatively rare, so you have to look beneath the surface. Even White Supremacists are usually careful to say that they don't "hate" black people--even as they call them inferior (like Charles Murray) and advocate "sending them back to Africa."
67. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:18 AM PT
cllrdr
"There's a *huge* difference between Jackson's apology and Lott's "I did not know," Niner. Jackson has at the very least an entry-level degree of sincerity. Lott is simply a liar."
Not really. Both are liars. One is more deft. Only a true bozo tries the "I didn't know" bit. The reality is that Jackson probably dislikes Jews deep in that heart of his, and Lott is none to fond of blacks. How they wriggle out of such revelation is unnecessary parsing.
68. ChristiPeters - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:20 AM PT
Does anyone have any opinion re the questions I asked in Message #60 ?
69. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:20 AM PT
Imus, by the way, is a big fucking racist. And so is Howard Stern. It pains me to notice that political leaders of both parties flock to be on their pathetic and prurient shows.
70. Pseudoerasmus - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:21 AM PT
The disparity in economic achievements between native-born Blacks and Caribbean immigrants is a fact. However, D'Souza (the Catholic boy liberal arts graduate that he is) never quite had the analytical acumen to realise that immigrants constitute a self-selection bias. Not only does their migration already evidence a certain amount of self-striving and work ethic, but many of them come to the United States already better educated and also with their family structures intact.
71. Pseudoerasmus - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:23 AM PT
The disparity in economic achievements between native-born Blacks and Caribbean immigrants is a fact. However, D'Souza (the Catholic boy liberal arts graduate that he is) never quite had the analytical acumen to realise that immigrants constitute a self-selection bias. Not only does their migration already evidence a certain amount of self-striving and work ethic, but many of them come to the United States already better educated and also with their family structures intact.
cllrdr (Message #19)
"He hates African-Americans, Marj. Clearly he's been misaken for one and wants to correct that impression."
I once heard D'Souza speak. (He is, like Marzipranks, a Goan, I think. At least he has an Indo-Portuguese name.) And he talked a lot about how many times whites, including white liberals, made this very charge, i.e., that he wrote his book on account of racial insecurity and in order to "prove" that he isn't black. A caller on a radio show with D'Souza as guest that I was listening to once even suggested that Indian women drape themselves in saris in order to hide their resemblance to Africans!
Personally, I don't find it difficult to believe that some Indians are "racially insecure", but I don't think D'Souza is one of them. Could someone spell out why D'Souza is a racist, as opposed to gratuitously provocative and misguided? (But unlike Marzipranks I really have no problems at all with his "Illiberal Education", a fine book.)
Now, how about the explosive subject of the phenomenon found around the world of preference for light skin among darker-skinned peoples?
72. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:24 AM PT
elliot
"Their deeds and their expressions, explicit or otherwise, show us what is in their hearts."
With your certitude, I'm sure you believe this. I'm less cure. Jackson called Jews "hymies." I can guess that he doesn't dig Jews, but is he an anti-Semite? Must I judge him thenceforth so he meets my criteria or properly atones? No thanks. I'll leave it at he probably has some problems with Jews, he slipped up, it is standard fare for most everyone, no big deal.
"Explicit public expressions of racist sentiments have become comparatively rare, so you have to look beneath the surface. Even White Supremacists are usually careful to say that they don't "hate" black people--even as they call them inferior (like Charles Murray) and advocate "sending them back to Africa.""
No one is suggesting that you can't make your own judgments.
73. JaDeGoLd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:25 AM PT
Nineboy;
Having not listened to Imus--are you saying that Dems participated in Imus' racist skits? Is Imus portraying himself as a journalist? With what little I know of him, I always heard that he was a shock jock.
Are you implying that because Dems belong to the same Congress as the Repugs--that fact makes them racist?
74. Pseudoerasmus - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:27 AM PT
Much of the so-called "Asian model minority" thing is a myth too. Except for the Indochinese (most of whom are poorer than other Asians), the vast majority of Asian immigrants came to the United States either already educated, or relatively affluent, or both, and with their family structures more or less intact. So I hardly think the case of Asian immigrants tells us anything about American blacks, as so many right-wingers are wont to think.
75. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:30 AM PT
"Personally, I don't find it difficult to believe that some Indians are "racially insecure", but I don't think D'Souza is one of them."
On what bsis do you make that statement, Pseudo? "The End of Racism" is Exhibit A to the contrary.
As a light-skinned African-American with many West Indian friends and family relations of varying hues, I can testify to the fact that race is a minefield the likes of which the Fray hasn't the vaguest idea.
Of course by saying that I'm being "emotional" as opposed to "rational" and "realistic,' blah, blah, blah.
76. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:31 AM PT
"Jackson probably dislikes Jews deep in that heart of his, and Lott is none to fond of blacks."
Lott has made no attempt to do anything other than stick to his stupid lie about his address to the CCC.
What, specifically, has Jesse Jackson done to show he dislikes Jews since he made his now several years old "hymie" statement?
77. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:32 AM PT
less cure=less sure
78. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:34 AM PT
Actually, JadeGold put it well when she said "He is promoting an agenda on the basis of knowingly false premises. " I think that's a fair argument, and one that I can endorse. He's far too smug and clever to be easily called "racist" though.
79. Pseudoerasmus - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:35 AM PT
Message #75
Well, I've read "The End of Racism". I don't see it as an exhibit for anything other than a conservative view of race.
Some of his observations in the book are correct, some are misguided, and some are lunatic.
The correct ones include some in the chapter about "rational racism"; the misguided ones, on immigration; and the lunatic ones about permitting private sector discrimination.
80. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:36 AM PT
Riv
Nothing. he's even kissed a few on the forehead. Big deal. He said it, I'm guessing it came from some resentment, that is not the end of the world, and unless you believe in Swaggart-like changes (I don't), he probably still has some of it.
Jade
Silence=racism. Your boys say nothing. And while Imus plays the skit with the "slope" doing Charlie Chan, Carville sits and grins and comes back for more.
I am off. Later.
81. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:36 AM PT
Not in my book, Marj.
D'Nesh D'Souza is a racist.
It's a simple statement of fact. Period. End of story.
82. elliot803 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:37 AM PT
109109:
"Jackson called Jews "hymies." I can guess that he doesn't dig Jews, but is he an anti-Semite?"
No, I don't think so. But given the number of times you've hauled out this one remark by Jackson, which must now be approaching several million, one could be forgiven for thinking that you are deeply prejudiced against him personally.
"No one is suggesting that you can't make your own judgments."
I do.
83. Pseudoerasmus - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:39 AM PT
What are the "false premises" that Jadegold alluded to?
84. JaDeGoLd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:39 AM PT
Marj;
Please don't misunderstand. My belief is that promotion of an agenda on the basis of false premises-- in this case notions of racial superiority and mitigating the effects of slavery and segregation--is racist.
85. BobaFett - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:39 AM PT
I think all stereotypes are ridiculous and irrational.
Now excuse me. I have to rush out to the store to buy some Grape Soda, some Menthol cigarettes, and some Loose Shoes.
86. marjoribanks - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:41 AM PT
Jade,
I got your point.
87. JaDeGoLd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:42 AM PT
Here's another snippet from "TER:"
""Racial victimization supplies a license for bigotry which is disguised as a campaign for equality and social justice. It is no surprise, therefore, that white racism seems less overt and less threatening to the life chances of other groups, while black racism is more explicit and more menacing."
88. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:44 AM PT
109109,
If you want to call both racists - fine. But what each has done since such public statements does make a difference.
It's pretty simplistic to assume that a desire to see a significant reduction in racist actions (and their effects) in the U.S. can only be brought about if miraculously all are freed of any prejudices in their heart of hearts. I don't believe in Swaggart-like changes either.
But Jade is right, ultimately it's the actions that count.
89. JaDeGoLd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:51 AM PT
Honestly, reading Nineboy's posts are often like watching a Beavis and Butthead cartoon.
Beavis: He said 'but.'
Butthead: Heh, heh, heh-heh.
Imus is a shock jock, a comedian. Are we really going to vet elected officials on the basis of whether or not thy've seen a Richard Pryor concert or some other comedian?
90. msivorytower - Feb. 3, 1999 - 9:57 AM PT
The issue of immigrants being self-selected shouldn't be underestimated when comparing the success of immigrant populations to native, marginalized populations. Even among Asian immigrants, however, there is disparity wrt their economic and educational successes. Those immigrants who came into this country as refugees at the end of the Vietnam war, those who came from Laos and Cambodia, have had a harder time integrating than other asian immigrants.
The issue of immigration and economic success is more complex than one usually thinks, and the socioeconomic class and family educational background of the immigrants family matter a great deal.
91. msivorytower - Feb. 3, 1999 - 10:01 AM PT
My last post was totally out of step, I see....
92. 109109 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 10:02 AM PT
Jade says . . .
"I, of course, take it a step further. I firmly believe that silence or inaction in the face of racism is a racist act."
Jade means
"except when folks I dig regularly habituate a radio show that persistently portrays blacks in demeaning, buck-and-shuffle modes, that persistently denigrates American-Indians as drunks, that is homophobic to the point of suggesting that all gay men have AIDS, that refers to Asians as slopes, etc . . . because THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT!"
Silence=racism. my ass.
Now, I do have to go.
93. thomasd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 10:03 AM PT
Clowntoon's left wing 'defenders' suggesting that he is a 'black man' because of his adulterous and felonious behavior is clearly racist.
94. cllrdr - Feb. 3, 1999 - 10:12 AM PT
You mean it's a bad thing to be black, Judge d?
95. CalGal - Feb. 3, 1999 - 10:17 AM PT
Riv,
"But Jade is right, ultimately it's the actions that count."
It seems very much like a menu in a Chinese (or any other Asian) restaurant.
Lott is a racist because he is a Republican (you *did* say Jade was right, did you not?), then nothing further should be needed. Nonetheless, every word of Lott's is scrutinized carefully and cited happily as further "proof". Jade, and others, bring up the CoCC incident at every opportunity.
Jackson, on the other hand, is a Democrat who has kissed Jews. His words are exempt from scrutiny. Because his actions are proof of his intentions. And anyway, he *said* he was sorry. He doesn't think those mean nasty things anymore. So why would anyone continually bring up that incident?
One from Column A, two from Column B.
Niner's correct. I doubt either Lott or Jackson are racist. They both harbor less than politically correct opinions and feelings towards certain groups. And Jackson is considerably better at recovery than Lott, Barr, and others.
96. thomasd - Feb. 3, 1999 - 10:20 AM PT
Re. 94 -
cllrdr -
I'm reporting the aspersions that Clowntoon's 'defenders' are willing to cast on african americans, not reporting any opinion of mine. Isn't that clear?
97. Adrianne - Feb. 3, 1999 - 10:21 AM PT
Thomas
Sometimes I really don't know if you are just a total and complete dolt or if you post crap like that to "innocently" forward your own bigoted thoughts.
FWIW, the people who said that the President was being treated like a black man were BLACK, Maya Angelou, f'rinstance. I can't think of any "defenders" who were white that said that - they might have, but I doubt it.
They weren't referring to his "adulterous and felonious" behavior as being "black", they were referring to the way he is being pursued by the right wing. Also, there were specific references to his perceived ability to empathize with the downtrodden that were "black". That you would twist it to read that Maya Angelou was saying that it's "black" to be an adulterer says reams about you.
Firf.
98. elliot803 - Feb. 3, 1999 - 10:22 AM PT
Well, as I said earlier, in CalGalland it's wrong to call someone a racist unless they express explicit racial hatred, just like it's wrong to say that the contributions of some Fraygrants are more valuable than the contributions of others.
99. Rivendell - Feb. 3, 1999 - 10:24 AM PT
CalGal,
My endorsement of Jade's statements is strictly limited to what I paraphrased.
I did not intend it to extend to any of her other views. And as such the statement can stand on it's own as my own. Ultimately it's the actions that count. On that basis alone I stand by my own statements regarding Lott and Jackson.
100. CalGal - Feb. 3, 1999 - 10:26 AM PT
Adrianne,
More than one black columnist pointed out the stereotypes Angelou referred to.
Being raised poor, being raised by a single mother, etc.
And how does her being black make it any more or less acceptable?