From 1619 to 2019: 400 years of racial progress?

[durangodawood]

Well, that may be, brother, but IF the Bible says that God separated the races and didn't intend for them to comingle, well then, what are you going to do about that fact?

Where in the Bible would people get that idea from? (sorry if you posted it earlier and I missed it.)

 

[essentialsaltes]

We might want to see if we can find out who the judge presiding over the grand jury was in that case, because as your document notes, the comment you've posted above was his 'opinion,' which leaves me to think that he had terrible hermeneutical ability, next to nil even.

Maybe so, but many Americans of that day and age shared that opinion.

The judge was Leon Bazile.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Where in the Bible would people get that idea from? (sorry if you posted it earlier and I missed it.)

As with many supposedly 'biblical' ideas, the religious folks who get this idea typically do so by referring to an interpretation [a misinterpretation] involving Ham's sons, the Tower of Babel, along with the division of the world under Peleg, among a few other spots in the Old Testament.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Maybe so, but many Americans of that day and age shared that opinion.

The judge was Leon Bazile.

Thank you, essentialsaltes! I think it helps us to know that Leon was known to be a White Supremacist as he proposed his opinion upon the Loving vs. Virginia case and I think his political and personal predilections played a role in his attempts to interpret what he thought he had read in the Bible.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Where in the Bible would people get that idea from? (sorry if you posted it earlier and I missed it.)

Here's another:

Deuteronomy 7:2-5 – “…and when the Lord your God delivers them over to you and you defeat them, you must completely destroy them. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy. Do not intermarry with them. ”

If course, if a fellow Christian thinks that simply quoting this provides biblical grounds for racial discrimination and that it should also be applied to potential 'mixed' spouses, then I'd be prompted to say to him what I say to atheists here, "Now slow down and make sure you're actually accounting for the multiple contexts in the entire book of Deuteronomy and those which are present within the intertextual play of meanings that reside within the whole of the Pentateuch." It's really not about race; it's about not intermingling one person who lives within the Culture of God with another person who lives within a competing Culture of Ungodliness. But it has little or nothing to do with diverse ethnicities as such.

And if there are Christians who can't stomach what I'm saying above, .... well, I'm just going to be horrified when they then attempt to choke down the New Testament which just continues to clarify that race and ethnicity has little or nothing to do with God's social choices for His People (or for anyone, really).

 

[public hermit]

Well, that may be, brother, but IF the Bible says that God separated the races and didn't intend for them to comingle, well then, what are you going to do about that fact?

Yeah, that's a big "if." If you are referring to passages such as Deut. 7.3-4, I would question that we should we take a command given to ancient Israel regarding intermarriage and comingling and then extend it across all of humanity. Especially since Christ has abolished the dividing wall between the Hebrews and everyone else, making one humanity out of the two (Eph. 2.14-15). If anything, the new humanity in Jesus Christ is intended to cast aside the various ways that humans carve each other into groups (Gal. 3.28; Col. 3.11; Rom. 10.12).

Besides, reversion to those passages relating to the Hebrews not intermarrying has contributed to racism in the States. Unless we are trying to promote racism, we need to be willing to see those passages through the lens of Christ and what God is doing through him.

 

[Albion]

There's "identity politics" and then there's "racial identity politics," and this latter kind of thinking really shouldn't manifest among those who call themselves "Christian."

That's true enough, but when the political system tolerates a certain practice (identity politics, in this case), it poisons the culture.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

That's true enough, but when the political system tolerates a certain practice (identity politics, in this case), it poisons the culture.

Yes, I agree, but in the U.S. "identity" has always been a political issue, even before that dratted Stamp Act came along in 1765. No, as my article in my OP briefly describes, we've had at least 400 years of "identity" politics in the political bag here in "America." I imagine that to my chagrine, there shall be more.

 

[durangodawood]

That's true enough, but when the political system tolerates a certain practice (identity politics, in this case), it poisons the culture.

When people dare speak up about the long legacy and continued effects of legislated and cultural white supremacy.... yeah they can just be dismissed with "but identity politics!".

 

[2PhiloVoid]

When people dare speak up about the long legacy and continued effects of legislated and cultural white supremacy.... yeah they can just be dismissed with "but identity politics!".

In the U.S., this whole thing is double-problematic since there are so many guns in the mix; it's not just one group verbally spouting off to another and vying for political dominance. Some of them are unfortunately ready to pull out implements of force at a moments notice to reinforce their 'ideas.' But I guess that's what some folks do when their ideas don't have enough truth or merit inherent within them to convince anyone else--pull out a gun! Needless to say, one say see how Romanesque this whole thing can get. It's not just identity politics at play but actual, overt power politics.

 

[Albion]

Yes, I agree, but in the U.S. "identity" has always been a political issue, even before that dratted Stamp Act came along in 1765. No, as my article in my OP briefly describes, we've had at least 400 years of "identity" politics in the political bag here in "America." I imagine that to my chagrine, there shall be more.

Okay. That's what I was saying.

 

[Halbhh]

It is simply untrue that "getting to know people" leads to less racial and ethnic division. Familiarity breeds contempt as surely as understanding. For instance, Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda lived together in the same neighbourhoods, yet Hutus hacked their neighbours to death in bloody genocide; or Serb and Bosniak in 1995; or Germans and the Jews in their midst prior to WWII.

What has been shown is that education diminishes racial and ethnic tension, but again depends what you are taught. If you are taught that one race is the Master, or that your land was stolen by your neighbour, inevitably that would worsen division.

It is natural for man to create an Us and Them. Even musical appreciation lines up to identity, with conservatism more likely to favour country and liberalism hip-hop and such, or ethnic musical appreciation. Often, the fact of labelling something as belonging to X, is enough to create identity differences. Studies have been done that show that even arbitrarily grouping people together for whatever reason, increases empathic response; and conversely decreases it for the outgroup individuals.

A reasonable idea, since we know some that seemed friendly later betrayed those Jewish neighbors in Germany, at least some accounts.

But how many persecuting the other race in the genocidal times (like Germany in the late 30s, early 40s) were the particular individuals that got to know as close friends those same, instead of only superficially being 'friendly'?

I bet the answer is very few.

We do know instances of close German friends protecting Jews.

 

[Halbhh]

True enough. But what ideology do you think specifically drives the impetus to still refuse humanitarian, let alone equal, treatment to other folks who just happen to have different skin pigmentation or slightly different physical features?

Well, in the Germany genocide it was a master race, right wing ideology, but in the Cambodian genocide it was a left wing ideology.

As i think of it, the core problem is ideology itself -- since ideology replaces humans with abstractions about humans.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Well, in the Germany genocide it was a master race, right wing ideology, but in the Cambodian genocide it was a left wing ideology.

As i think of it, the core problem is ideology itself -- since ideology replaces humans with abstractions about humans.

So, what's the American version of 'ideology' that you think is still the problem even today? Why can't some Christians (and even, I suppose, some non-Christians) get over their continued rejection of other people who have diverse ethnic [racial] backgrounds?

 

[usexpat97]

Racial relations in the United States are certainly not the worst they've ever been. You always want to strive to be better. Right now I think what's holding back the US from being better are the people playing the race card without merit. Just because this-or-that is allegedly racially disproportionate doesn't necessarily mean you were treated unfairly. Or that you have not been treating people unfairly yourself.

 

[Halbhh]

So, what's the American version of 'ideology' that you think is still the problem even today? Why can't some Christians (and even, I suppose, some non-Christians) get over their continued rejection of other people who have diverse ethnic [racial] backgrounds?

We have the always present, but not always so malignant, evil of Us-vs-Them -- awakened by Trump for what looks (a guess) like it may be only for political advantage (not even a personal feeling?).

Kill or persecute or harm the foreigner, because they are not Us. Opposite God's command:
Leviticus 19:34 You must treat the foreigner living among you as native-born and love him as yourself, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

(Speculation: Perhaps Trump didn't even feel it might be wrong, but it seemed merely advantageous to him? (He might not even have awareness of it being wrong even intellectually in some distant vague way for all we know.))

An ideology driven (supported) by Us-vs-Them though has a life of its own then. It evolves some over time. It looks to me that instinctual fleshly fear of the Other overwhelms the moral consciences of some who think or believe themselves "Christian" (without actually doing what is Christian -- 'love your neighbor as yourself').

 

[rjs330]

Well, that may be, brother, but IF the Bible says that God separated the races and didn't intend for them to comingle, well then, what are you going to do about that fact?

Where does the Bible say that?

 

[rjs330]

Racial or cultural problems have been around since the dawn of civilization. I would say that America has conquered most of the racist and presjudiced ideas of the past. It does raise its head with groups like the KKK or black Panthers but they all are a pretty small minority of people. The majority of Americans don't really care what color you are. They are more interested in your character and whether or not you are obeying the laws.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Where does the Bible say that?

It doesn't, rjs330. My comment to the previous poster was made tongue-in-cheek in order to mock the claim which some folks make. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Another Thanksgiving has come and gone and after having visited Williamsburg, VA this past week, looking upon small masses of my fellow Americans who were, like me, out and about with family, I thought about how far our supposed 'Christianized' and even 'Enlightened' nation has come in its own racial relations.

From a quickee lookee see-ee at the posts today , I wonder if there has been any progress "forward" towards truth, towards God's Kingdom, at all?
The book of Timothy, I think, from memory, for now, says what people will be becoming like - and it certainly is not a good description! (er, "description of good") rather shows a lot more sin growing.... basically everywhere....