Racism on display at University of Virginia

Ana the Ist said:

I don't know if this refers to me....but I certainly wasn't being smarmy or looking for debate points.

Click to expand...

It wasn't referring to you...

Ana the Ist said:

If some guy stands up on a bus and yells "There's too many black people here!" I don't necessarily think it's the responsibility of the people nearby to get his background and try and figure out why he's racist.

It's enough to highlight the incident, and point out the racism and discuss why it's wrong so others understand that isn't acceptable behavior.

The problem occurs when people hand wave and dismiss it like it's either not happening or not wrong.

Click to expand...

Ken-1122 said:

As she should be. If a white person said that, I will bet you would see it as unacceptable. If it's wrong for a white person, it's wrong for a black person.

Click to expand...

If you rewind all the way back to my first post I made in this thread, I said she was wrong and she should've found a better way to express discomfort.

My points were surrounding the fact that it's not a fair or rational assessment to take the approach of "All racism is bad startiiiinnnnng --- now!", and chastise two parties the same way without giving any consideration to historical or underlying factors.

If little Tommy has been punching little Billy, unprovoked, for 3 years...and I say nothing, then one day, after getting fed up and frustrated, Billy decides to punch little Tommy back, and that's the precise moment I decide to swoop in on my high horse to intervene and say "now now boys, ALL punching is bad!", then proceed to go on a diatribe about how "See, Billy has had no reason to complain because they BOTH have a punching problem, Tommy can be the victim of punching as well".

Whether it's intended or not, it comes across employing a "convenient timing" tactic. Laying in wait, primed to pounce, waiting for the first opportunity to highlight a case of the "other side" doing something bad as a means to discredit past & present complaints...and could certainly be perceived as me having a bias against Billy.

If you consider this post that was made earlier by another member:
It just goes to show that diversity, multiculturalism and equality are for everyone but whites. It's nice when they finally open up and become honest about it and stop hiding behind, "We just want equal rights!" when they actually see themselves as more "equal" than the rest of us.

...that seems to fall in line with what I'm talking about.

ThatRobGuy said:

If you rewind all the way back to my first post I made in this thread, I said she was wrong and she should've found a better way to express discomfort.

Click to expand...

You basically said “she was wrong to say that BUT….” and then you begin justifying everything she said thus dispelling everything you said prior to saying "BUT".

ThatRobGuy said:

My points were surrounding the fact that it's not a fair or rational assessment to take the approach of "All racism is bad startiiiinnnnng --- now!", and chastise two parties the same way without giving any consideration to historical or underlying factors.

If little Tommy has been punching little Billy, unprovoked, for 3 years...and I say nothing, then one day, after getting fed up and frustrated, Billy decides to punch little Tommy back, and that's the precise moment I decide to swoop in on my high horse to intervene and say "now now boys, ALL punching is bad!", then proceed to go on a diatribe about how "See, Billy has had no reason to complain because they BOTH have a punching problem, Tommy can be the victim of punching as well".

Click to expand...

That was a poor analogy. A more accurate analogy would be;
Little Tommy (who is white) has been punching little Billy (who is black) unprovoked for 3 years, then all of a sudden little Billy retaliates, not by attacking little Tommy, but by attacking random white people and I intervene.
This lady didn’t attack the specific people who did her wrong, she attacked all white people; people who had nothing to do with her past. THAT is wrong!

ThatRobGuy said:

If you consider this post that was made earlier by another member:
It just goes to show that diversity, multiculturalism and equality are for everyone but whites.

Click to expand...

Spoken like a true bigot.

Ken-1122 said:

You basically said “she was wrong to say that BUT….” and then you begin justifying everything she said thus dispelling everything you said prior to saying "BUT".

Click to expand...

It's not an either/or, mutually exclusive thing.

I can say that "all forms of assault are wrong", while openly acknowledging that
-a guy getting drunk in a bar and punching someone over a disagreement on a sports game
vs.
-a guy tracking down the man who raped his daughter once he gets out of prison, and beating him up

...are coming from two very different places and need to be looked at individually rather than simply dismissing both things as being "the same" and "all assault is bad". Especially if you're trying to solve the issue of assault.

The solution to the former is reigning in the excessive drinking, the solution to the latter is counseling and helping the person realize that vigilante justice is going to lead to further consequences.

Ken-1122 said:

That was a poor analogy. A more accurate analogy would be;
Little Tommy (who is white) has been punching little Billy (who is black) unprovoked for 3 years, then all of a sudden little Billy retaliates, not by attacking little Tommy, but by attacking random white people and I intervene.
This lady didn’t attack the specific people who did her wrong, she attacked all white people; people who had nothing to do with her past. THAT is wrong!

Click to expand...

Which is why I said she was wrong, targeting people who weren't personally responsible for said injustices certainly isn't productive. I'm just willing to acknowledge that fact that I understand why certain folks, in certain situations, may have a chip on their shoulder.

Even with your revised "more accurate" analogy, it still exhibits the tactic of "convenient timing" for intervention and laying out the "all XYZ is bad!" reasoning.

By your own analogy, nothing was done to intervene when Tommy was punching Billy randomly, intervention was seemingly reserved for that precise moment when Billy started doing it, as a means to dismiss any prior complaints Billy may have had.

...and then asking "I don't know why Billy is mad? I said all of it is wrong and nobody should be doing it".

And that "selective/convenient" timing is part of what fuels further animus.

Black people have watched for years while their community has been disproportionately targeted with certain forms of discrimination and a lot of people have either ignored it or dismissed it...but then the moment anyone from their community engages in that same behavior, then everyone comes out of the woodwork to shine a spotlight on it and lecture everyone about how "all racism is bad"...and some take it a step further and try to use it to justify the notion that "white people are actually the victims".

Ken-1122 said:

Spoken like a true bigot.

Click to expand...

If you're referring to the comments of the other poster that I quoted, then I would agree, they are bigoted comments.

Finding an instance of one college girl saying something on a cell phone video, then using that to justify the conspiracy theory that "equality and multicultural efforts are a hoax secretly aimed at treading on white people" can certainly be viewed as bigoted. But if you search for that user's name, and the word "racism" in the CF search tools, it certainly fits in with a pattern so I can't say I'm terribly shocked as their stance in this thread seems to match past posts.

ThatRobGuy said:

It's not an either/or, mutually exclusive thing.

I can say that "all forms of assault are wrong", while openly acknowledging that
-a guy getting drunk in a bar and punching someone over a disagreement on a sports game
vs.
-a guy tracking down the man who raped his daughter once he gets out of prison, and beating him up

...are coming from two very different places and need to be looked at individually rather than simply dismissing both things as being "the same" and "all assault is bad". Especially if you're trying to solve the issue of assault.

The solution to the former is reigning in the excessive drinking, the solution to the latter is counseling and helping the person realize that vigilante justice is going to lead to further consequences.

Click to expand...

My problem with your justification is you don’t know if she was harmed by white people or not! As far as you know, her attitude could be based on what white people have done to her ancestors, or even other black people, yet you are quick to make excuses for her. But if a white person expressed such bigotry, you would never consider perhaps his sister was raped by a black man, or robbed by a brown man; you would immediately condemn it.

ThatRobGuy said:

Which is why I said she was wrong, targeting people who weren't personally responsible for said injustices certainly isn't productive. I'm just willing to acknowledge that fact that I understand why certain folks, in certain situations, may have a chip on their shoulder.

Click to expand...

Even white people with a chip on their shoulder?

ThatRobGuy said:

Even with your revised "more accurate" analogy, it still exhibits the tactic of "convenient timing" for intervention and laying out the "all XYZ is bad!" reasoning.

By your own analogy, nothing was done to intervene when Tommy was punching Billy randomly, intervention was seemingly reserved for that precise moment when Billy started doing it, as a means to dismiss any prior complaints Billy may have had.

...and then asking "I don't know why Billy is mad? I said all of it is wrong and nobody should be doing it".

And that "selective/convenient" timing is part of what fuels further animus.

Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? You think because I condemn this lady, that I am okay/silent with the atrocities of the KKK, Nazi’s and other crimes white people have committed or continue to commit? You have no reason to assume that of me; the problem is you don’t notice when the KKK are condemned, you only notice when black and brown people are condemned.

ThatRobGuy said:

Black people have watched for years while their community has been disproportionately targeted with certain forms of discrimination and a lot of people have either ignored it or dismissed it...but then the moment anyone from their community engages in that same behavior, then everyone comes out of the woodwork to shine a spotlight on it and lecture everyone about how "all racism is bad"...and some take it a step further and try to use it to justify the notion that "white people are actually the victims".

Click to expand...

If you are suggesting nobody has condemn white people when they do wrong, or even for past wrongs; you have not been paying attention. Do I need to give examples or are you gonna take my word for it.

ThatRobGuy said:

Finding an instance of one college girl saying something on a cell phone video, then using that to justify the conspiracy theory that "equality and multicultural efforts are a hoax secretly aimed at treading on white people" can certainly be viewed as bigoted.

Click to expand...

Yeah; and finding an instance of some guy saying something on a cell phone video, then using that to justify the conspiracy theory that "White agenda" rallies are a hoax secretly aimed at treading on black people can be viewed as bigoted as well..... TO A RACIST!!!

ThatRobGuy said:

It wasn't referring to you...

Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying that...

It didn't seem like your style so I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt.

If you rewind all the way back to my first post I made in this thread, I said she was wrong and she should've found a better way to express discomfort.

Click to expand...

Sure...but you also said this...

"Let's not be disingenuous here, folks... We know why the concept of "Whites are the victims of racism" and "Mens rights activism" are silly, don't we?"

I don't think it's silly, and of course whites are the victims of racism. I don't really follow "men's rights" so I can't really speak to the relevancy of that.

My points were surrounding the fact that it's not a fair or rational assessment to take the approach of "All racism is bad startiiiinnnnng --- now!", and chastise two parties the same way without giving any consideration to historical or underlying factors.

Click to expand...

This is the bizzare part of your position. You seem to think it's "unfair" or "unreasonable" to treat people as equals regardless of race.

Isn't that the goal of race relations? Isn't that what we should be working towards?

If little Tommy has been punching little Billy, unprovoked, for 3 years...and I say nothing, then one day, after getting fed up and frustrated, Billy decides to punch little Tommy back, and that's the precise moment I decide to swoop in on my high horse to intervene and say "now now boys, ALL punching is bad!", then proceed to go on a diatribe about how "See, Billy has had no reason to complain because they BOTH have a punching problem, Tommy can be the victim of punching as well".

Click to expand...

I've always taken the position that racism is bad....no matter who it's coming from or directed at. That's been the position of basically everyone I know and arguably most of the US for most of my life. The big shift in views on race came in the last ten years or so when a sizable group of people (mostly young, mostly liberal) began buying into a narrative that basically repurposed old ideas like "white privilege" and offered up new ideas (like the ever shifting definition of racism) to diminish racism against whites or flat out deny it's even possible.

I still remember plenty of incidents from before the internet and social media era that made headlines in their day. There's the John Rocker incident, Michael Richards, Don Imus...well before Twitter or "woke" were words anyone used, people had lost their careers to even casual racism.

Whether it's intended or not, it comes across employing a "convenient timing" tactic. Laying in wait, primed to pounce, waiting for the first opportunity to highlight a case of the "other side" doing something bad as a means to discredit past & present complaints...and could certainly be perceived as me having a bias against Billy.

Click to expand...

Try looking at it from my perspective...

Imagine that your whole life you believe racism is wrong, that we should reject it as a society, and that the only way to equality is to keep pushing back against it whenever it rears its head....regardless of who it's coming from or directed at.

Then as you get older, there's a small but loud group of people who find it not just acceptable to be racist against you....but they openly applaud it. Any incidents of racism towards you are minimized and you're actually mocked if you point it out.

Remember this one?

Texas student newspaper blasted over anti-white 'Your DNA is an abomination' column

People in here made excuses for that too....they suggested it must be satire or they downplayed it as not really hurting anyone.

How about this one?

Ohio State University Student Dead After Driving Into Crowd, Stabbing People at OSU Campus

The outpouring of sympathy and support for the attacker was actually recorded and can be viewed online. Students actually blamed white people for this guy's violent attack.

You see, that was the acceptable way to dismiss the racism or bigotry of a minority. If a white person was bigoted or racist....it's their fault. If a minority was bigoted or racist, it's probably because they have to deal with the bigotry and racism of white people.

Either way, the acceptable answer was to blame white people.

The reasons why this group of people believe this is a little complicated. The story of how they got to this point of justifying racism against whites is a bit simpler.

It more or less began with BLM and the Michael Brown/Trayvon Martin incidents and social media. BLM was the first big social movement for a lot of young people...and social media had become pervasive. Whether intentional or not....BLM constructed a basic narrative that shut down critical thinking and debate. If you wanted to get likes online, or get those retweets, you had to support BLM and not critically examine any of the shooting incidents they protested. You couldn't be both an "ally" and talking about whether or not the subject had a gun....whether he was assaulting police....or anything that might justify the way the police handled the incident. No...if you did that, you'd be labeled as "part of the problem" or worse "racist". The narrative constructed was that it was more important to support black people than it was to think critically. They wanted to shame/blame people who disagreed and not engage in dialogue or discussion.

This created an environment where a lot of racist ideas were allowed to go mainstream relatively unchallenged by half the country.

Ideas like...

White privilege has merit....but the woman who coined the term herself came to the conclusion that there are so many types of privilege that it's impossible to know which ones have a big impact or any impact at all. White privilege became an excuse to justify preferential treatment of non-whites.

Diversity became a racist dogwhistle for "less white people".

White fragility was an invented term to describe any white person who was defensive about being called racist...directly implying racial inferiority.

All white people are racist was a racist idea that stuck around a little while....but eventually fizzled out because the white "allies" felt it didn't apply to them.

The redefining of racism was always racist...and even the people who tried to push it fell back on the old definition. It is however, still invoked by some to justify racism against whites.

The idea that black people are always right about racism...again, a racist idea based on black superiority. Black people can be wrong about racism, just like anyone else. White people aren't less capable because they're white.

The idea that racial disparities exist solely or primarily because of white racism. This was one of the easiest to refute but it's a simple explanation and people prefer simple explanations over critical thinking.

Implicit bias...was for awhile used to justify calling white people racist in the absence of any overt racism. As it turns out, there's no real evidence of a link between behavior and implicit bias.

I'm not trying to make this personal, but I could easily add this idea that "because of history" we need to have one set of morals for white people and another set of moral values for black people. The idea that it's somehow unfair to hold everyone to the same standards.

I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea....15-20 years ago most of these ideas would have been rightly viewed as just excuses that racists use to justify their views. Now they have a degree of mainstream acceptance from the left side of the country. It's the main reason why I stopped calling myself liberal, I can't possibly support people who are racist against me. I can't side with people who hold me to a different standard because I'm white.

I think it's had a lot of other unintended negative consequences as well. I think the growth of both white and black racist hate groups is due to this idea that it's perfectly acceptable to promote the interests of your own race at the expense of others. I think it's lowered societal expectations of non-whites (for example, the almost universal and massive praise for Black Panther when it was released). I think the next decade or so is poised to be the most racist and divisive time since the 50s or 60s.

It's a shame really.

Ken-1122 said:

My problem with your justification is you don’t know if she was harmed by white people or not! As far as you know, her attitude could be based on what white people have done to her ancestors, or even other black people, yet you are quick to make excuses for her. But if a white person expressed such bigotry, you would never consider perhaps his sister was raped by a black man, or robbed by a brown man; you would immediately condemn it.

Click to expand...

Like I noted before, Charlottesville was the site of that whole "unite the right" rally that took place, and many students, currently still attending there, were on hand to see it and experience it up close.

...and the multi cultural center in question was created in response to an incident of a white guy physically assaulting a black woman because she was running for student council.

Ken-1122 said:

Even white people with a chip on their shoulder?

Click to expand...

Sure, that's why I mentioned history and context in my other post.

A guy who tracks down his daughter's rapist and beats him up isn't going to get the same level and type of judgement from me as some guy who got drunk at a sports bar and picked a fight with someone cheering for the other team.

I still think all assaults are wrong, and that vigilantism is wrong (regardless of who's doing it), but I can certainly sympathize with how certain traumatic things may drive (otherwise rational) people to an irrational action.

Ken-1122 said:

Are you kidding me? You think because I condemn this lady, that I am okay/silent with the atrocities of the KKK, Nazi’s and other crimes white people have committed or continue to commit? You have no reason to assume that of me; the problem is you don’t notice when the KKK are condemned, you only notice when black and brown people are condemned.

Click to expand...

I was responding to the way you worded your version of the analogy...If you've always been even handed in your condemnation of racism, then that's great. That's a trait that would set you apart from a lot of other folks.

Ken-1122 said:

If you are suggesting nobody has condemn white people when they do wrong, or even for past wrongs; you have not been paying attention. Do I need to give examples or are you gonna take my word for it.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying nobody has condemned it...obviously it's been condemned on a large scale. If it weren't, then we wouldn't have the types of laws we have on the books today aimed at protecting marginalized communities.

It's just that some of the most vocal advocates of the ideas that "white people are actually the victims of racism" and "men are actually the victims of sexism" are often very transparent in their approach.

Ana the Ist said:

Sure...but you also said this...

"Let's not be disingenuous here, folks... We know why the concept of "Whites are the victims of racism" and "Mens rights activism" are silly, don't we?"

I don't think it's silly, and of course whites are the victims of racism. I don't really follow "men's rights" so I can't really speak to the relevancy of that.

Click to expand...

Perhaps instead of using the phrase "historical context", it'd be more accurate to use the phrase "historical prevalence" instead.

From a general sense, I stand by my statement. You can find scenarios of anything, in reality. If I had the time and inclination, I could probably track down a case of a Scottish person attacking a Korean person because they were prejudiced against Koreans. However, an isolated incident of that occurring wouldn't equate to any sort of pattern, and most of us would rightfully be somewhat dismissive of any sort of effort for a collective group of Koreans generating an entire movement around the notion of "we need to stop the Scottish oppression!!!"

My commentary about some of the efforts like "Men's rights", "Straight Pride", etc... centers around the fact that many of those groups aren't really aimed at trying to correct some kind of historical oppression or societal inequity, and are more focused at just agitating and being reactionary toward what they view as "the other side".

Ana the Ist said:

This is the bizzare part of your position. You seem to think it's "unfair" or "unreasonable" to treat people as equals regardless of race.

Isn't that the goal of race relations? Isn't that what we should be working towards?

Click to expand...

Ana the Ist said:

Try looking at it from my perspective...
Imagine that your whole life you believe racism is wrong, that we should reject it as a society, and that the only way to equality is to keep pushing back against it whenever it rears its head....regardless of who it's coming from or directed at.

Click to expand...

I don't think that it's unreasonable to treat people as equals, I do think it's unreasonable to treat all forms of animus equally, and the overall notion of "the slate's been wiped clean, I don't know why they're complaining" or "I didn't personally do anything wrong, so they've got no reason to be mad"

Striving for equality is great, but their needs to be some substance there that actually works towards that goal.

If someone's family was wrongly put in a position that sets them off on a pattern toward 4 to 5 generations of being "behind the curve", that needs to be acknowledged at the very least. Failure to do so only increases animus.

One can't sincerely claim that they're committed to fighting racism without acknowledging the residual generational effects of racism.

For instance, if my great great grandpa wrongly did something to your great great grandpa, that resulted in my ancestor getting rich, and your ancestor being poor (which obviously has residual generational effects, kids born into families that have money end up getting better educational and career opportunities than ones who aren't).

And in present day, you were angry about that. While it's 100% true that I personally didn't do anything to you, that doesn't change the fact that you're in a worse position than me as a result of actions that weren't your own.

For me to take a dismissive tone and claim "I don't know why you're mad, I didn't personally do anything bad to you" is going to make things worse as opposed to if I sat down with you and really sympathized and tried to understand that you're in a tough position through no fault of your own.

A simple acknowledgment of your tough situation is going to go farther in promoting positive relations vs. me getting defensive because I personally didn't do anything wrong.

ThatRobGuy said:

Like I noted before, Charlottesville was the site of that whole "unite the right" rally that took place, and many students, currently still attending there, were on hand to see it and experience it up close.

...and the multi cultural center in question was created in response to an incident of a white guy physically assaulting a black woman because she was running for student council.

Click to expand...

Are you suggesting we should be less critical of black racism than we are of white racism?

ThatRobGuy said:

I still think all assaults are wrong, and that vigilantism is wrong (regardless of who's doing it), but I can certainly sympathize with how certain traumatic things may drive (otherwise rational) people to an irrational action.

Click to expand...

What about those bigots at the “Unite The Right” who were carrying tiki torches chanting racist and anti Semitic phrases? Would you sympathize with the possibility that they may have been just a bunch of rational people driven to do an irrational action due to some traumatic event? Or would you condemn them the way I condemn that lady?

ThatRobGuy said:

I was responding to the way you worded your version of the analogy...If you've always been even handed in your condemnation of racism, then that's great. That's a trait that would set you apart from a lot of other folks.

Click to expand...

It also puts me in line with a lot of other folks too! It all depends on where you choose to look.

ThatRobGuy said:

I'm not saying nobody has condemned it...obviously it's been condemned on a large scale. If it weren't, then we wouldn't have the types of laws we have on the books today aimed at protecting marginalized communities.

It's just that some of the most vocal advocates of the ideas that "white people are actually the victims of racism" and "men are actually the victims of sexism" are often very transparent in their approach.

Click to expand...

And some of the most vocal protesters of white racism are so willing to kinda look the other way when racism is done by non whites. Kinda funny how all that works huh?

ThatRobGuy said:

A guy who tracks down his daughter's rapist and beats him up isn't going to get the same level and type of judgement from me as some guy who got drunk at a sports bar and picked a fight with someone cheering for the other team.

Click to expand...

That's understandable because the rapist committed a crime. If the father beats up the guy who asks his daughter on a date because some other guy raped her, he is just a violent and dangerous person who deserves to be prosecuted for assault (which would be accountability in those circumstances).

It feels weird to point this out...but at this point it seems necessary...

There's no "self defense" version of racism.

I can understand someone attacking someone who is attacking them. One can arguably use violence to stop an incident of violence.

I can't even imagine a hypothetical scenario where being racist against a group of people will somehow magically stop racism from occurring. It's just committing more injustice and ultimately, justifying the original racism.

Perhaps instead of using the phrase "historical context", it'd be more accurate to use the phrase "historical prevalence" instead.

Click to expand...

No...I don't understand why you consider history at all regarding the morality of a particular behavior. I can't even come up with a hypothetical scenario where I have to consider history to decide the morality of a particular behavior.

Here's a pretty direct apples to apples comparison. Decades ago...back when racism was institutionalized and arguably affected each and every person of color...domestic violence against women was also normalized to a rather astonishing extent. "Wife beating" was so commonplace that it was used as comic relief on TV and other media. Certainly not every wife was beaten by her husband...but it certainly wasn't unusual.

Slowly but surely, attitudes toward this behavior changed over time. Nowadays it's significantly less common (though obviously it still happens) and it's certainly not viewed as acceptable behavior by society.

Now imagine, hypothetically, that wives today were beating their husbands in increasing numbers. Not only that....but you're seeing them celebrate beating their husbands (getting high fives from other wives, making viral videos and pics of their battered husbands). Husbands are out there telling people that they're being beaten....but instead of widespread condemnation of beating up husbands....the opposite happens. People tell them that "by definition" husbands can't be the victims of domestic violence because they have all the "power". That, or people claim that it's actually the husband's fault...and these women are justified in beating their husbands because their grandmothers were beaten by their grandfathers. Professors teach students that women are justified in beating their husbands if they get out of line because the wives of decades ago were "historically oppressed". What's worse....a disturbingly large portion of the population tells that the problem has to become much much larger before they'll acknowledge or condemn it.

I would hope that in the above situation....you'd be genuinely concerned about the direction society is going. I'd like to think that you'd say that domestic abuse is always wrong and no one should minimize it or dismiss it just because it's happening to men. I'd hope that if someone told you it's not a problem because women were the predominant victims of domestic violence in the past....you'd at the very least understand why that doesn't change the fact that it's completely immoral for women to beat up their husbands. There's no "leveling the playing field" or "settling the score" or "making things fair". Either beating up your spouse is wrong and immoral....or it isn't.

I know that if I were experiencing the above scenario....the people who are diminishing or excusing the women who are beating up their husbands would appear to be in favor of domestic violence as long as it's happening to the people they think deserve it. If they told me they're actually against domestic violence....I'd think they were total hypocrites. I'd think they're making excuses for beating husbands because they are domestic abusers.

From a general sense, I stand by my statement. You can find scenarios of anything, in reality. If I had the time and inclination, I could probably track down a case of a Scottish person attacking a Korean person because they were prejudiced against Koreans. However, an isolated incident of that occurring wouldn't equate to any sort of pattern, and most of us would rightfully be somewhat dismissive of any sort of effort for a collective group of Koreans generating an entire movement around the notion of "we need to stop the Scottish oppression!!!"

Click to expand...

Ok...

You understand that I didn't mention anything about "generating an entire movement"? I don't think that's necessary.

I do think there's several indications that her racist views are being normalized and to a disturbing degree. The fact that she was comfortable doing this publicly, that she considered being racist towards whites a "public service", the fact that she was applauded, recorded, and proudly posted online....these are all indicative of the normalization of racism against whites. It's becoming socially acceptable....when it should be the opposite.

My commentary about some of the efforts like "Men's rights", "Straight Pride", etc... centers around the fact that many of those groups aren't really aimed at trying to correct some kind of historical oppression or societal inequity, and are more focused at just agitating and being reactionary toward what they view as "the other side".

Click to expand...

Ok...I would have to look into what issues they're concerned about to even comment on it though...

I don't think that it's unreasonable to treat people as equals,

Click to expand...

Oh good...me too. I'd go as far as to say that race shouldn't matter at all in regards to how people should treat each other.

I do think it's unreasonable to treat all forms of animus equally

Click to expand...

Oh I agree...to be clear, I do believe in nuance. For example, here's a very general list of kinds of racism from least harmful to most harmful (and there are exceptions of course)...

- generally stating something racist to no one in particular or the general public
-verbally attacking someone with a racist statement or slurs
-generally treating someone differently because of their race (ie walking to the other side of the street)
-deliberately discriminating against a race (ie, the girl in the OP, or an employer who discriminates against black people)
-hate crimes (ie assaulting someone because of their race)
-racial discrimination by law or policy.

So please...don't get the impression that I just see every act of racism as "equally bad". They're all bad, but some are worse than others.

and the overall notion of "the slate's been wiped clean, I don't know why they're complaining" or "I didn't personally do anything wrong, so they've got no reason to be mad"

Click to expand...

This is where you're losing me....because I don't know what the "slate" represents here...and no one has a valid reason to be mad at me if I haven't wronged them. To use your analogy from earlier....the father of the daughter who was raped at a party has no valid reason to hate or beat up her current boyfriend. If he thinks he does....people should be encouraging him to seek help in dealing with his issues so he doesn't have those feelings anymore.

Striving for equality is great, but their needs to be some substance there that actually works towards that goal.

Click to expand...

There is...whenever I see incidents of racism like this, I call it out for what it is. Hopefully she has people in her life doing the same. I also wouldn't have any problem with the university taking action in situations like this and, for example, suspending her for a semester.

That way she serves as a potent reminder that racial discrimination isn't acceptable or tolerated.

That said....I don't think we can ever get rid of racism entirely. All racism is rooted in racist ideas...and there's no way to eliminate ideas. We can however, minimize the effects of those ideas as a society by showing that we don't accept them and arguing against them.

If someone's family was wrongly put in a position that sets them off on a pattern toward 4 to 5 generations of being "behind the curve", that needs to be acknowledged at the very least. Failure to do so only increases animus.

Click to expand...

No offense....but I've acknowledged the impact of things like slavery and Jim Crow more times than I can count. I don't think it's helping anything at this point.

Maybe I'm wrong? Maybe acknowledging these things helps in some unseen ways that I'm not aware of...

...but what I have noticed is that after acknowledging these things, it seems like expectations change. It's as if suddenly after acknowledging the impact those things had...I should suddenly be willing to make concessions or express some sort of white guilt.

I think perhaps it might be more useful to see people acknowledge that if you're a white person under 50 (arguably 60) not only have you never engaged in slavery....but you didn't support Jim Crow either.

One can't sincerely claim that they're committed to fighting racism without acknowledging the residual generational effects of racism.

Click to expand...

All history has residual generational effects. The creation of the US and its values can be traced back, and is a result of a series of events that began thousands of years ago.

For instance, if my great great grandpa wrongly did something to your great great grandpa, that resulted in my ancestor getting rich, and your ancestor being poor (which obviously has residual generational effects, kids born into families that have money end up getting better educational and career opportunities than ones who aren't).

Click to expand...

Let's say that your ggp killed my ggp....and my family continued to slide further into poverty from that point until this very day.

Would I be justified in killing you? I don't think I would....because regardless of what happened in the past and whether or not your ggp ever faced justice for it...

You haven't done anything wrong. To try and enact justice upon you wouldn't be justice at all....it would just be a crime.

For me to take a dismissive tone and claim "I don't know why you're mad, I didn't personally do anything bad to you" is going to make things worse as opposed to if I sat down with you and really sympathized and tried to understand that you're in a tough position through no fault of your own.

Click to expand...

I can already say I wouldn't be mad at you with 100% confidence. In fact, I don't think I could even entirely blame your ggp....it's 3 generations later...a lot of things would have happened between then and now and they all would have some influence on the state I'm in today.

I understand that feelings don't necessarily follow logic or reason...but the analogy becomes far more absurd when you realize that the OP isn't homeless in the gutter....she's a student at the same college as the peers she's racist against. On top of that, they and their families didn't do anything to her or her family....they just have the same skin tone as racist white people from the 50s.

Ana the Ist said:

That's understandable because the rapist committed a crime. If the father beats up the guy who asks his daughter on a date because some other guy raped her, he is just a violent and dangerous person who deserves to be prosecuted for assault (which would be accountability in those circumstances).

It feels weird to point this out...but at this point it seems necessary...

There's no "self defense" version of racism.

Click to expand...

...but there's also no "self defense" version of vigilante justice either, but we've both acknowledged that we'd sympathize more with the father of the victim than just some random guy who picked a drunken bar fight over a petty sports argument.

Ana the Ist said:

I know that if I were experiencing the above scenario....the people who are diminishing or excusing the women who are beating up their husbands would appear to be in favor of domestic violence as long as it's happening to the people they think deserve it. If they told me they're actually against domestic violence....I'd think they were total hypocrites. I'd think they're making excuses for beating husbands because they are domestic abusers.

Click to expand...

The residual effects of previous normalized domestic violence against women in the past haven't had the same "bleed over to the future generations" effect that certain forms of normalized racism have.

From a societal perspective, if a person's ggp beating their wife hasn't led to things like generational poverty, police discrimination, hiring discrimination, disproportionate sentencing, etc...

Society has done a much better job correcting for past gender discrimination than it has racial discrimination.

Ana the Ist said:

I do think there's several indications that her racist views are being normalized and to a disturbing degree. The fact that she was comfortable doing this publicly, that she considered being racist towards whites a "public service", the fact that she was applauded, recorded, and proudly posted online....these are all indicative of the normalization of racism against whites. It's becoming socially acceptable....when it should be the opposite.

Click to expand...

Like I've touched on in various other places, some of the backlash, I feel, can be attributed to a large number of people being dismissive of issues, or trying to lay the responsibility back at the feet of the people who are have the issues as the result of the residual effects that were being discussed before.

I've never seen you, personally do that, but I'm sure we've both in debates where a black person is trying to vocalize some of the challenges that come along with the multi-generational poverty that can be attributed to past systemic racial issues, and rather than actually evaluate any of it, people instantly resort to posting black crime statistics, single-parent home statistics, etc...

I can certainly understand why that kind of uncivil discourse could reach a boiling point.

Any group that feels that they're being attacked, or unfairly targeted...and feels like nobody is taking their complaint seriously (or immediately tries to flip the script and make it seem like it's their own fault) seems to exhibit that "there's a war on us, it's time to fight back" mentality after a certain amount of time.

Ana the Ist said:

Let's say that your ggp killed my ggp....and my family continued to slide further into poverty from that point until this very day.

Would I be justified in killing you? I don't think I would....because regardless of what happened in the past and whether or not your ggp ever faced justice for it...

Click to expand...

Absolutely not...however, I would also be "in the wrong" if when you made a public plea that your situation was the result of a lot of things that were out of your control, I was dismissive of that, rather than a simple acknowledgment or an effort to show empathy, or to support ideas and policies that would attempt to correct for the current inequity that was created by prior generations.

Ken-1122 said:

Are you suggesting we should be less critical of black racism than we are of white racism?

Click to expand...

Not less critical of the racism, just more understanding of the underlying reasons behind it as to correct any issues that may be "fueling the fire" so to speak.

Ken-1122 said:

What about those bigots at the “Unite The Right” who were carrying tiki torches chanting racist and anti Semitic phrases? Would you sympathize with the possibility that they may have been just a bunch of rational people driven to do an irrational action due to some traumatic event? Or would you condemn them the way I condemn that lady?

Click to expand...

It's quite possible that a few of them may have showed up because at some point they experienced something that shaped their world view in a negative way.

However, when the stated purposes of the rally were to fight back against the removal of confederate monuments and unifying the "White Nationalist Movement", victim-status is going to be a much tougher case for them to make.

Ken-1122 said:

And some of the most vocal protesters of white racism are so willing to kinda look the other way when racism is done by non whites. Kinda funny how all that works huh?

Click to expand...

Again, the distinctions I'm making aren't about "looking the other way", they're about deep diving into the underlying reasons for why people are feeling angry, and determining if those reasons are simply baseless, vs. reactionary and may have some merit.

Like in the example @Ana the Ist and I were discussing...

Let's say, 3 generations ago, my family did something wrong to your family that ended up setting my family off to a path of success, and setting your family off on a path to struggles and poverty.

Fast forward to now...we're both having very different lives as a result of it, even though neither of us, as individuals, had anything to do with it.

You'd rightfully have some feelings of frustration. That frustration has the propensity to turn into resentment (and even hatred) if every time you express the frustration and advocate for policies to try to correct some of the damage, I, and half of the rest of the population, dismiss your frustration as being invalid, and claim that your life is the entirely the result of your own doing, and the only reason you're poorer than me is because you didn't work hard enough, and then take it a step further attribute everything to a "culture problem" without acknowledging the fact that external factors, outside your families control, were responsible for creating some of those culture issues.

Ana the Ist said:

Wow...ok...this is good, we're making progress here.

This a pretty bad argument for a number of reasons...but I'll just try to stick to the big ones.

Firstly, since you're invoking the history of racism here I'll do the same. Slavery, Jim Crow, redlining....these oppressive practices didn't magically spring into existence on their own. They all began with the general acceptance of racist ideas. What do you think this girl is going to do when she graduates? Magically stop being racist? Why? She's openly racist...and she's got people applauding her. She's got people like yourself downplaying and dismissing her racism. She probably doesn't even believe she can be racist.

When is the time to push back against her racism? After she's the head of HR, a manager, recruiter, cop, judge, mayor, or legislator? What exactly is the argument going to be then?

"Hey, you know how everyone was cool with you being racist against whites while you were in college?...Well...kindly stop now."

Dismissing and downplaying this kind of racism now is how it becomes a societal norm....and once it's a societal norm, that's when all that oppression that you're concerned about happens. Surely you're aware of this and I don't need to give examples of racist ideas from the past.



This is a bizarre rationale that I don't think you'd accept for any other racist behavior. If a black student attacked a white student....would white students suddenly be entitled to a safe space from black students? Would they be justifiably "uncomfortable" around black students?

The existence of some racist white people somewhere doesn't justify racism against whites....nor does it entitle anyone to exclude white students from university spaces. It's just a bizarre argument. She wasn't even a student when this supposed attack happened on campus, was she?

I daresay you'd think it racist if someone told you "Hey, I was once mugged by a black guy so now I'm uncomfortable around black people." Right? You certainly wouldn't say they're entitled to exclude black people in general because of it?

This is never going to be a valid excuse for racism. As for the statement of purpose for the MSC...it doesn't exclude any student for their race or any other reason. I can only assume you're aware of that so I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up. If black students mistakenly thought it was intended to exclude whites....that's their fault....not the fault of white students.



The irony that seems to be going over your head is that it's extremely unlikely that any of those non-white students have ever been excluded from anywhere in the university solely because of their skin color. I also sincerely doubt they've had one of their peers openly express racist feelings towatds them and be applauded for it.

If the college culture is openly accepting and even applauding or dismissing racism against whites....what other group is more deserving of a safe space? Isn't that exactly what being marginalized is all about?



I hope this is just a really sloppy and poorly thought out analogy. Surely you don't mean to compare sexual assault with being in the mere vicinity of white people.

I'll play along though...if said woman were to then proclaim that she was uncomfortable around men in general from the point of her sexual assault on....then the appropriate response is for her to seek psychiatric or therapeutic treatment so that she's no longer uncomfortable around men. She should be trying to change her negative viewpoint and move past her sexual assault. She certainly wouldn't be entitled to discriminate against men from that point on.

If the student in OP was genuinely trying to change her racist feelings...that might be worthy of some consideration. That's not the case though...she appears to be proud of her racist feelings and judging by her tweets and the tweets from her friend, it seems far more likely that they just want a place to be racist against whites without any concern for being confronted by them.




You and anyone have very different life experiences...it doesn't matter what race they are.

Click to expand...

This is such an amazing well thought out response. I wish I was this articulate! Well done.

ThatRobGuy said:

I think some of the replies in this thread highlight exactly why productive conversations about this topic seem to escape us as a society.

It's kind of telling that we have a scenario in which people in marginalized groups try to express their feelings/discomfort/issues/etc... and rather than listening to them and trying to understand why they're feeling the way they're feeling, instead it's immediately met with smarmy attempts to either A) out-debate them on technical/semantic terms, or B) presenting them with loaded questions in order to trap them and somehow prove that they're the ones at fault and "they're actually the bigots" or that they're somehow not justified in feeling the way they're feeling.

Click to expand...

Racism and bigotry should never be accepted regardless of the "reasons". If racism and bigotry is wrong it's wrong. It was wrong 100 years ago and it's wrong now, no matter who is involved. Excusing it because someone doesn't "understand" works at all levels. My wife was treated horribly by black people in Virginia. Is she then entitled to be racist and bigotted towards blaxk people? After all we have to understand. There have been plenty of white girls assaulted by black girls. Are they entitled to be racist? While I think we DO need to be willing to say that we don't know what someone has suffered, we also should be saying, bigotry should not be tolerated by anyone.

In order for the racial divide to end is condemn racism whereever it is found by everyone who sees it. Instead of trying to understand it. Non-racist white people should condemn racism whereever it is found. Non-racist black people should condemn racism wherever it is found. As long as any of us tolerate it, excuse it or hand wave it away, the divide will continue. I believe the answer is overcome evil with good and not overcome evil by excusing evil.

rjs330 said:

Racism and bigotry should never be accepted regardless of the "reasons". If racism and bigotry is wrong it's wrong. It was wrong 100 years ago and it's wrong now, no matter who is involved. Excusing it because someone doesn't "understand" works at all levels. My wife was treated horribly by black people in Virginia. Is she then entitled to be racist and bigotted towards blaxk people? After all we have to understand. There have been plenty of white girls assaulted by black girls. Are they entitled to be racist? While I think we DO need to be willing to say that we don't know what someone has suffered, we also should be saying, bigotry should not be tolerated by anyone.

Click to expand...

Like I said before, if you the approach you want to take is simply vocalizing an "all racism is wrong" position (after one group has suffered disproportionately and is still feeling some of the lasting effects to this day), then while you may believe it's all wrong, don't expect any fences to be mended by that.

If I spent 10 years vandalizing your property (costing you thousands of dollars that you were still trying to pay back to this day), because the city didn't have any rule against it...and in some cases, embraced it, a new township ordinance cracking down on vandalism moving forward, alone, isn't going to do much to correct any past damage or give you any sort of satisfaction or make your current situation any better.

Everyone in the town saying "we realize now, that all vandalism is wrong" isn't going to make you feel much better either.

It's going to make you feel even worse when you try to advocate for policies that will help you out, and everyone patronizingly tells you "if you would've worked harder, you'd have more money to get your windows fixed and wouldn't be in this situation"

It's not going to take long before the thought crosses your mind of "hmmm...I wonder how they'd like it if someone vandalized their home and they had to cover the costs"

...like I said, it wouldn't make it right, but it certainly doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how that progression of animus could occur.

rjs330 said:

In order for the racial divide to end is condemn racism whereever it is found by everyone who sees it. Instead of trying to understand it. Non-racist white people should condemn racism whereever it is found. Non-racist black people should condemn racism wherever it is found. As long as any of us tolerate it, excuse it or hand wave it away, the divide will continue. I believe the answer is overcome evil with good and not overcome evil by excusing evil.

Click to expand...

...it'd be one thing if that were occurring.

For instance, if the vast majority of society was doing everything possible to right racial wrongs, and trying to take steps to undo damage, and you still had people bitter and engaging in, let's call it, retaliatory-racism for past wrongs, then I'd probably be on the opposite side of the debate along with you guys.

But that's not what's happening, and we shouldn't pretend that's what's happening.

In reality, the "all racism is bad" idea is one that's vocalized, but many folks (particularly on the far-right) only seem to invoke that talking point when they can pinpoint a case of black-on-white racism.

When folks in the black community try to highlight issues and current instances of racism targeting them, many of the "all racism is bad" folks on the far-right seemingly do everything they can to find a way to prove that "it's not racism, you're just being oversensitive" or "it's not racism, this is technically just your own fault because of XYZ"

Or, they make one of these disingenuous counter-movements or slogans (like the type I was describing before) like "All Lives Matter" or "Blue Lives Matter".

Basically, a portion of the country gives lip-service to that idea when think they can use it to prove some sort of point, but attempt to rationalize it or make it seem unimportant or secondary in many other cases.

For instance, many folks (not picking on you, Ana, or Ken here...I've never seen this behavior from you 3), who are quick to use the "all racism is bad" and use it as a central focal point when things like this story happen when they're trying to make a point...but when things like instances of racially motivated police action occur, the talking points are very different.

"What did they do wrong that made the police officer shoot?"
"We need to see the rest of the video"
"It's important to keep in mind that not all cops are bad"
"There's a culture problem, if they didn't dress & act like thugs, they wouldn't draw so much attention from cops"

Or my favorite, when someone mentions disproportionate sentencing for the same crime, the response of "well, the solution is simple, just don't break the law and you won't have to worry about it"

ThatRobGuy said:

...but there's also no "self defense" version of vigilante justice either, but we've both acknowledged that we'd sympathize more with the father of the victim than just some random guy who picked a drunken bar fight over a petty sports argument.

Click to expand...

Right...but you acknowledged it's wrong for him to assault people. You aren't sitting there saying that it didn't really happen, or it's not really a problem, regardless of how sympathetic you be.

The residual effects of previous normalized domestic violence against women in the past haven't had the same "bleed over to the future generations" effect that certain forms of normalized racism have.

Click to expand...

That's interesting....I think most psychologists, particularly child psychologists, would disagree. Domestic violence can have a profoundly traumatic impact on children and even links to higher rates of domestic violence and being a victim of domestic violence as an adult.

From a societal perspective, if a person's ggp beating their wife hasn't led to things like generational poverty, police discrimination, hiring discrimination, disproportionate sentencing, etc...

Click to expand...

Why would it have to specifically lead to those things to be bad?

Let's imagine for a moment that it did lead to those things....would you suddenly be dismissing claims of battered husbands as not a real problem?

Society has done a much better job correcting for past gender discrimination than it has racial discrimination.

Click to expand...

Has it? As far as I can tell....roughly the same thing has happened. We made sure it was illegal to beat your spouse and we made it illegal to discriminate based upon race. Sure, those things still happen....though less often...but now victims have a path for seeking justice in a court of law.

Like I've touched on in various other places, some of the backlash, I feel, can be attributed to a large number of people being dismissive of issues, or trying to lay the responsibility back at the feet of the people who are have the issues as the result of the residual effects that were being discussed before.

Click to expand...

Dismissive like this?

"Let's not be disingenuous here, folks... We know why the concept of "Whites are the victims of racism" and "Mens rights activism" are silly, don't we?"

It's weird to see you say that people shouldn't be dismissive about claims of racism after making that statement.

I've never seen you, personally do that, but I'm sure we've both in debates where a black person is trying to vocalize some of the challenges that come along with the multi-generational poverty that can be attributed to past systemic racial issues, and rather than actually evaluate any of it, people instantly resort to posting black crime statistics, single-parent home statistics, etc...

I can certainly understand why that kind of uncivil discourse could reach a boiling point.

Click to expand...

You may not have noticed this in my list of false ideas about race that have been rather blindly accepted in the past 10 years or so by a segment of the population...

"The idea that racial disparities exist solely or primarily because of white racism. This was one of the easiest to refute but it's a simple explanation and people prefer simple explanations over critical thinking."

Honestly, I don't know where this idea comes from in particular. Can widespread systemic racism affect the finances of the oppressed? Sure. The more generations we are removed from that systemic racism though....the less of a factor it's going to be.

Imagine me claiming that my current economic status is result of the King of England stripping my great great great great great great great great great great great grandfather of his lands, incomes, and title. That would be ridiculous. A lot of people have come and gone since then and they made a lot of choices.

As it stands, my parents had a pretty big impact on my economic status...but my grandparents? Not so much. By the time we get to great grandparents....it's entirely negligible.

Any group that feels that they're being attacked, or unfairly targeted...and feels like nobody is taking their complaint seriously (or immediately tries to flip the script and make it seem like it's their own fault) seems to exhibit that "there's a war on us, it's time to fight back" mentality after a certain amount of time.

Click to expand...

Feels like nobody is taking their complaints seriously? You mean like this?

"Let's not be disingenuous here, folks... We know why the concept of "Whites are the victims of racism" and "Mens rights activism" are silly, don't we?"

Again, it's weird to see that you understand why it's wrong to be dismissive but do it anyway.

Absolutely not...however, I would also be "in the wrong" if when you made a public plea that your situation was the result of a lot of things that were out of your control, I was dismissive of that, rather than a simple acknowledgment or an effort to show empathy, or to support ideas and policies that would attempt to correct for the current inequity that was created by prior generations.

Click to expand...

In the last post I mentioned that I'm reluctant to just acknowledge things lately because it seems as if acknowledging things changes expectations suddenly. It's as if the person asking you to "acknowledge" suddenly wants you to sign a petition, donate your money, support their candidate, etc.

Let me be perfectly clear...I don't owe anyone anything...not even my support...just because I acknowledged history. Did slavery happen? Sure. Was it awful? You betcha. Do white people today owe black people reparations for it? No...not a dime.

Now, if someone is upset about that...they need to grow up. There's a million issues in this world and people are entitled to support and care about the issues they care about. It doesn't make me, or anyone else, a bad person if we care about different issues and causes.

There was a backlash against All Lives Matter that I felt was undeserved. The fact is, more white people are shot by police than black people....and by including them, there was an opportunity to include everyone on the issue of police shootings. The leaders of BLM turned this opportunity down...they made it clear that they weren't going to include white victims in their protests or movement. As they put it, it was about black lives. That's their choice and their right. The argument you heard people make was that the Susan G Komen foundation wasn't wrong for just focusing on breast cancer instead of all cancer. Right?

Well I'm white Rob. As it stands, there's a lot of people dismissing and downplaying racism against whites (which you seem to think is a bad thing) and few people calling it out as racist and wrong. Black Lives Matter has already made it clear they won't be helping to fight against racism directed at whites....so as it currently stands, it's every race for themselves.

Like I said, race relations have taken several big steps backwards recently. Then again, who knows? Maybe they'll realize you can't fight racism with more racism and we'll get back on the right track.

ThatRobGuy said:

Like in the example @Ana the Ist and I were discussing...

Let's say, 3 generations ago, my family did something wrong to your family that ended up setting my family off to a path of success, and setting your family off on a path to struggles and poverty.

Click to expand...

Jim Crow laws and racism from the past did not make white people financially successful, it only financially harmed black people of that day.

ThatRobGuy said:

Fast forward to now...we're both having very different lives as a result of it, even though neither of us, as individuals, had anything to do with it.

You'd rightfully have some feelings of frustration. That frustration has the propensity to turn into resentment (and even hatred) if every time you express the frustration and advocate for policies to try to correct some of the damage, I, and half of the rest of the population, dismiss your frustration as being invalid, and claim that your life is the entirely the result of your own doing, and the only reason you're poorer than me is because you didn't work hard enough, and then take it a step further attribute everything to a "culture problem" without acknowledging the fact that external factors, outside your families control, were responsible for creating some of those culture issues.

Click to expand...

To what end? How many generations after segregation is it gonna be used as an excuse for a lack of success, bad behavior, and bigotry from black people? When are you gonna start applying the same standards to us that you apply to everybody else? IOW when are you gonna start treating us as equal?

I remember when I was a kid working at McDonalds, a white friend of mine who was a bit of a loser said black people are lucky because when we lose, fail to meet the mark, or don’t accomplish anything in life, everybody makes excuses for us claiming institutional racism is keeping you down, trauma from America’s racist past puts you at a disadvantage even today, etc. etc. but when you’re a white male working at McDonalds living in your mothers basement at age 26, your own people turn against you and call you a loser and claim because you are white you have no excuse to fail.

IMO the worse thing you can do for a people is to justify their bad behavior, make excuses for their lack of success, and lower your expectations of them because there will always be too many of them who will meet those lowered expectations, then complain that they feel like second class citizens. White people are doing black people no favors by handling them with “kids gloves” or making excuses for them that you wouldn’t make for anyone else. The best thing you guys can do for us is to treat us as your equal.

None of those students are colleging right if their idea a good time with friends is hanging out in a school building.

Ana the Ist said:

Honestly, I don't know where this idea comes from in particular. Can widespread systemic racism affect the finances of the oppressed? Sure. The more generations we are removed from that systemic racism though....the less of a factor it's going to be.

Click to expand...

Ana the Ist said:

As it stands, my parents had a pretty big impact on my economic status...but my grandparents? Not so much. By the time we get to great grandparents....it's entirely negligible.

Click to expand...

We're not that far removed from some of those dreadful policies though. And certain forms take more degrees of separation to alleviate and correct for.

For instance, laws in the south that were aimed at taking simple misdemeanors and turning them into felonies to deny voting rights and have an excuse to lock up black men created single parent homes, and as a result poverty. We know that kids in poverty stricken, single parent homes are more likely to engage in behavior that will repeat that pattern for the next generation. That's especially true if the neighborhood you grow up in has a lousy school and not much in the way of vocational opportunities.

...and with the skyrocketing college prices, and the fact that meaningful employment is requiring a degree more often than 30 years ago...combined with the fact that the more manual non-college jobs will be going the way of automation in the not too distant future. Generational poverty is going to be more impactful in the future than it was in the past.

40 years ago, even if your parents didn't have much money, you could always get a job at a factory, machine shop, etc... and make a middle class living even if you couldn't afford college. There's a good chance that may not be true 20 years from now.

Ana the Ist said:

Feels like nobody is taking their complaints seriously? You mean like this?

"Let's not be disingenuous here, folks... We know why the concept of "Whites are the victims of racism" and "Mens rights activism" are silly, don't we?"

Again, it's weird to see that you understand why it's wrong to be dismissive but do it anyway.

Click to expand...

...it's because the underlying message or purpose of those movements aren't a serious complaint to begin with.

Like I noted way back on page one. Not all forms of activism are sincerely aimed at solving a problem, some are merely done to agitate or discredit another form of activism.

For instance, the Men's rights movement or "White pride" or "straight pride", or "All lives matter" don't seem to be centered around solving any sort of issue or highlighting any sort of perceived systemic injustice that's disproportionately affecting their groups, they're merely there as a rebuttal to express outrage over Women's rights, black rights, gay rights, and black lives matter movements.

That's why I mentioned before that there are two forms of activism:
One with a stated goal and purpose of solving a perceived issue

And the other, aimed at doing nothing more than undermining another form of activism.

Ken-1122 said:

Jim Crow laws and racism from the past did not make white people financially successful, it only financially harmed black people of that day.

Click to expand...

I'd argue that it did in a way. Obviously during the Jim Crow era, job competition wasn't exactly the same was it? (obviously there was going to be preferential hiring practices employed).

When businesses had signs listing out all of the types of people who "need not apply", if you're not one of the ones on that list, that certainly gives you a leg up on the job hunt.

Ken-1122 said:

To what end? How many generations after segregation is it gonna be used as an excuse for a lack of success, bad behavior, and bigotry from black people? When are you gonna start applying the same standards to us that you apply to everybody else? IOW when are you gonna start treating us as equal?

Click to expand...

Racial disparities didn't end when segregation did. Equality on paper doesn't equal societal equality and certainly doesn't equate to equal opportunities. Even after those racist laws in the south were shot down, hiring discrimination was still a very real thing (it was even in the northern states as well).

Recent studies have showed that even as recent as 10 years ago, "black sounding names" are less likely to get callbacks for interviews than "white sounding names"

As far as how many generations can you attribute lack of success to as a result of generational poverty...that largely depends on the policies in place in the region you live in.

OECD suggests that for the US, the average is 5. In countries where poverty is very widespread, that number goes up dramatically, in the Nordic countries that have more generous safety nets and fiscal equality measures in place, that number does down to 2-3.




...and these numbers seem to gel with other data I've seen suggesting that in terms of income mobility, ~85% of people end up in the same income class as their parent(s), with only ~10% going up, and ~5% going down.

And that makes sense especially when taking into account that vocation/career is the key to getting out of poverty, and more often now, getting that kind of job requires college. So it makes sense that the kids who have parents who can afford to send them to college are going to be more likely to continue the cycle of doing well, than the kids whose parents can't afford it, and as a result, will likely end up a lower paying job like their parents.

If the data is accurate, and only 1/10 people take a step up in terms of income class compared to their parents, then it makes perfect sense that in the US, it can take 4-6 generations to make any real headway on that.

It also makes sense than in a country like Denmark or Finland, that makes sure that a kid can get college no matter how much money their parents have, and that offers safety nets that are directly aimed at prevent extreme poverty, that breaking the cycle of generational poverty only takes half the time that it does is in the US.

Ana the Ist said:

Let me be perfectly clear...I don't owe anyone anything...not even my support...just because I acknowledged history. Did slavery happen? Sure. Was it awful? You betcha. Do white people today owe black people reparations for it? No...not a dime.

Click to expand...

...a lot of the movements I've looked at don't seem to be seeking reparations, and are more aimed at combating current forms of discrimination, particularly in the criminal justice system.

Ana the Ist said:

There was a backlash against All Lives Matter that I felt was undeserved. The fact is, more white people are shot by police than black people....and by including them, there was an opportunity to include everyone on the issue of police shootings.

Click to expand...

...and the people who were most vocal in their "All Lives Matter" stance didn't seem to say a peep about it until the BLM movement showed up. Timing is everything. They also have a high level of overlap with the people who support "Blue Lives Matter". Seems to me they're more concerned with simply opposing black lives matter more than actually advocating for anything. Especially the blue lives matter...society already acknowledged how much the "blue lives" matter by giving them objects of lethal force to carry on their hip, giving them cars to drive around in, and putting laws on the books that disproportionately penalize someone for a crime against an officer vs. what they'd get for doing the same thing to an ordinary citizen.

In terms of total numbers yes, more white people are shot, when you adjust for population sizes, that's a different story. Black men are 2.5 time more likely to be shot by police in their lifetime than their white counterpart.

The reason for the BLM movement, from the feedback I've gotten from talking to advocates for that movement, wasn't that they weren't aware that white people were also being shot by police, it's that
A) they were being shot a disproportionate rate (even though white people are statistically more likely to be armed when police shoot them)
B) they didn't feel that the black shootings were being taken as seriously as the white shootings, thus the expression about "mattering".

They felt that the white shootings already "mattered" in society's eyes, but shootings against them did not. And it's not an unfair point to make. When concern is expressed over these shootings, there are an awful lot of people who immediately try to figure out "what the person did wrong to make the cop shoot them".

Philando was shot while reaching to get his CCW permit and license to show the officer, after the officer instructed him to do so, and some peoples' first response wasn't to condemn the officer for being trigger happy, it was to say that "the officer was just doing his job, Philando should've moved slower".

Kid gets shot by an officer after shoplifting, rather than saying "someone shouldn't be getting the death penalty for petty crime", they say "well that kid shouldn't have been shoplifting.

Even non-police encounters play out the same way in a lot of cases...look at the staggering number of Zimmerman supporters there were during that whole thing. An adult male, deliberately defies police instructions and exits his vehicle to pursue a kid in his neighborhood. Intentionally escalates a confrontation with the kid, then uses the result of that escalation to justify killing the kid because he started losing the fight that HE started.

It's great that society has moved in the right direction, overall, for the last 50 years, but there is still progress to be made.