All things Racist...USA edition (1 Viewer)

[Farb]

I was looking for a place to put this so we could discuss but didn't really find a place that worked so I created this thread so we can all place articles, experiences, videos and examples of racism in the USA.

This is one that happened this week. The lady even called and filed a complaint on the officer. This officer also chose to wear the body cam (apparently, LA doesn't require this yet). This exchange wasn't necessarily racist IMO until she started with the "mexican racist...you will never be white, like you want" garbage. That is when it turned racist IMO

All the murderer and other insults, I think are just a by product of CRT and ACAB rhetoric that is very common on the radical left and sadly is being brought to mainstream in this country.

Another point that I think is worth mentioning is she is a teacher and the sense of entitlement she feels is mind blowing.

https://news.yahoo.com/black-teacher-berates-latino-la-221235341.html

 

[DaveXA]

I don't get much into parsing language. It's just not my bag. White supremacy is a belief in the supremacy of the white "race", not a factual statement. A decent number of those "mundane" whites certainly believe they are superior. My father-in-law can barely spell and trust me he fully believes he's superior to me.

While I acknowledge this only extends to the extent of people I personally know, the only outward white supremacist I've ever known is my grandfather on my dad's side. Technically step-grandfather. He was a racist to the core, but my parents both never showed that and taught me to treat all people with respect and dignity. There are a few cousins, aunts and uncles who I suspect might be, but they've never really talked about it with me, so I really don't know for sure.

As for my kids and their cousins, it's non-existent. I think it's safe to say that, at least in my circle of influence, white supremacy isn't a thing any longer, and really hasn't been in a while.

I can't speak for other families. I know they're out there, and the attack on the Capitol put something of a face on the crazy Q-anon believers, and a crowd of white supremacists would look very similar.

The concept of white supremacy has always repulsed me and I don't understand why people think it's a legitimate world view. It is what it is I guess.

This isn't really directed at anyone. I'm just throwing some thoughts out there.

 

[Paul]

I don't get much into parsing language. It's just not my bag. White supremacy is a belief in the supremacy of the white "race", not a factual statement. A decent number of those "mundane" whites certainly believe they are superior. My father-in-law can barely spell and trust me he fully believes he's superior to me.

If my neighbor thinks he is better than me I could care less unless he causes me physical harm. I leave my feelings out of the equation. Whatever my neighbor feels does not make him superior.

I understand the new narrative is that the system is under the belief that whites are superior.

 

[brandon]

Throwing spaghetti and pizza to the Italians is very similar to throwing tacos and tortillas to the Mexicans. The main difference is the degree of reaction.

This only makes sense if you completely ignore historical and racial context, as has already been pointed out, and you ignored, in the timeless posting style of @Farb.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I am looking at this as an observer that does not have a dog in the fight. That is why I said i wanted to look at this in philosophical terms. Throwing spaghetti and pizza to the Italians is very similar to throwing tacos and tortillas to the Mexicans. The main difference is the degree of reaction. Which group has an ax to grind or which group has low self esteem or which group is more tribal attitude. Perhaps if they throw Sauerbraten (Roast Beef Stew) or Schweinshaxe (Pork Knuckle) to germans they just laugh and do not take it as an insult.

The typical narrative suggests a top dog and an underdog. I do not like that.

If a group has low self-esteem or an ax to grind, it's taken more as an insult. Got it.

I really wanted to believe you when you said you weren't blaming the victims, but I was wrong to do so. You aren't a neutral observer, you are a human being. As human beings, we should all want racism eradicated. Taking a neutral stance on it is cowardice, at best.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

I understand the new narrative is that the system is under the belief system that whites are superior.

Where is this narrative? I don't see this narrative anywhere. I think in your effort to keep things "philosophical" you grossly overcomplicate them sometimes.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

While I acknowledge this only extends to the extent of people I personally know, the only outward white supremacist I've ever known is my grandfather on my dad's side. Technically step-grandfather. He was a racist to the core, but my parents both never showed that and taught me to treat all people with respect and dignity. There are a few cousins, aunts and uncles who I suspect might be, but they've never really talked about it with me, so I really don't know for sure.

As for my kids and their cousins, it's non-existent. I think it's safe to say that, at least in my circle of influence, white supremacy isn't a thing any longer, and really hasn't been in a while.

I can't speak for other families. I know they're out there, and the attack on the Capitol put something of a face on the crazy Q-anon believers, and a crowd of white supremacists would look very similar.

The concept of white supremacy has always repulsed me and I don't understand why people think it's a legitimate world view. It is what it is I guess.

This isn't really directed at anyone. I'm just throwing some thoughts out there.

Like most catchphrases, white supremacy means different things to different people. I regret using it because we are now engrossed in more of a semantic discussion than anything fruitful. That's my fault.

You know my take on race issues all too well. We have to get out of the +/- racist or not racist paradigm and have a more nuanced conversation. My father-in-law is a stone-cold racist. My sister-in-law said some ignorant things including telling my wife she wasn't going to raise any n-word babies when her daughter was dating a black kid. However, she loved me and my kids and she and I were incredibly close. She died over a year ago and I'm still struggling with it because of how close we were. She wasn't a racist, she was just really ignorant, had never been around any black people, and couldn't understand why some of the things she said pissed people off.

I think more people are like my sister-in-law than my father-in-law. I also think a lot of people genuinely believe they are the victims of the pursuit of diversity because that's the bill of goods they've been sold. There are all sorts of reasons people believe ignorant nonsense. Too often we try and find one answer and tag it with a catchphrase than look at things along a broad spectrum of ideas and experiences that may all end with the same result.

 

[DaveXA]

Like most catchphrases, white supremacy means different things to different people. I regret using it because we are now engrossed in more of a semantic discussion than anything fruitful. That's my fault.

You know my take on race issues all too well. We have to get out of the +/- racist or not racist paradigm and have a more nuanced conversation. My father-in-law is a stone-cold racist. My sister-in-law said some ignorant things including telling my wife she wasn't going to raise any n-word babies when her daughter was dating a black kid. However, she loved me and my kids and she and I were incredibly close. She died over a year ago and I'm still struggling with it because of how close we were. She wasn't a racist, she was just really ignorant, had never been around any black people, and couldn't understand why some of the things she said pissed people off.

I think more people are like my sister-in-law than my father-in-law. I also think a lot of people genuinely believe they are the victims of the pursuit of diversity because that's the bill of goods they've been sold. There are all sorts of reasons people believe ignorant nonsense. Too often we try and find one answer and tag it with a catchphrase than look at things along a broad spectrum of ideas and experiences that may all end with the same result.

Yeah, I can see some of that. Honestly, I think part of it was when I was younger, I deliberately avoided any discussion of race with people because the topic made me uncomfortable, due in no small part to my grandfather's transparent racism.

But yeah, I've heard comments, not really any n-word usage, but more subtle comments like "he's too dark, I can't see myself with him" or "why don't black people stop killing each other". Every time I hear stuff like that, I notice it and it makes me cringe, but usually, the person saying it doesn't think there's anything wrong with their comments.

But yeah, it's likely a significant number of the ones I know are more like your SIL than FIL.

One of my cousins definitely feels like he's a victim of the diversity movements. Clearly he's having a hard time with all of the changes. Part of that is because his old world view is being challenged and, well, all he watches is FNC. Lol.

 

[zztop]

Just popping in to post this that I read about today

Ohio police chief out after leaving 'Ku Klux Klan' note on Black officer's coat

"There's no one word to explain how disgusting this is,” Sheffield Lake's mayor said of the incident involving the city's longtime police chief.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Paul]

While I acknowledge this only extends to the extent of people I personally know, the only outward white supremacist I've ever known is my grandfather on my dad's side. Technically step-grandfather. He was a racist to the core, but my parents both never showed that and taught me to treat all people with respect and dignity. There are a few cousins, aunts and uncles who I suspect might be, but they've never really talked about it with me, so I really don't know for sure.

As for my kids and their cousins, it's non-existent. I think it's safe to say that, at least in my circle of influence, white supremacy isn't a thing any longer, and really hasn't been in a while.

I can't speak for other families. I know they're out there, and the attack on the Capitol put something of a face on the crazy Q-anon believers, and a crowd of white supremacists would look very similar.

The concept of white supremacy has always repulsed me and I don't understand why people think it's a legitimate world view. It is what it is I guess.

This isn't really directed at anyone. I'm just throwing some thoughts out there.

Most white people that are ancient have that sense of superiority. That is going away very fast and most people i know want the black community to have success and prosperity. The question that begs an answer is who benefits from having an oppressed class? The Democrats or the Republicans?

 

[Paul]

This only makes sense if you completely ignore historical and racial context, as has already been pointed out, and you ignored, in the timeless posting style of @Farb.

Yes, context is important, but at sometime point the context becomes ancient history. I suggest unity and to strive for common goals that benefit all. This tribalism thing does not work.

 

[Paul]

If a group has low self-esteem or an ax to grind, it's taken more as an insult. Got it.

I really wanted to believe you when you said you weren't blaming the victims, but I was wrong to do so. You aren't a neutral observer, you are a human being. As human beings, we should all want racism eradicated. Taking a neutral stance on it is cowardice, at best.

I am analyzing the issue as a neutral observer. I did not grow up in America and this tribalism is odd and detrimental (at least for me). When Obama won I thought America would unite. Today it is more polarized than in the 1960s when racism was much worse. So why more polarization in the face of progress?

Racism will not go away because some people point it out 24/7. Racism will go away when the negative stereotypes become positive stereotypes.

 

[Paul]

Where is this narrative? I don't see this narrative anywhere. I think in your effort to keep things "philosophical" you grossly overcomplicate them sometimes.

The left assumes the USA is intrinsically racist. That is the narrative.

 

[V Chip]

And we know is just a word because among POC the N word is no big deal.

This is completely wrong. I dare you (or anyone) to walk up to a black person you don’t know and call them a "brother" (n-word got replaced with “brother”) or just use that word in any sentence.

Amongst people with familiarity, certain words are ok. Without that familiarity, they are not.

 

[Optimus Prime]

More discrimination because of hair. John Oliver had a good segment on it a few weeks ago
===================

FINA, the international swimming federation, has decided to ban Soul Cap, a swimming cap designed to accommodate natural afro-hair, in the upcoming Olympics.

To make matters worse, FINA’s reasoning for the prohibition sounds like something straight out of an 1890s phrenology manual: The caps do not “fit the natural form of the head.

”
The ruling came days after British swimmer Alice Dearing, who had partnered with Soul Cap, became Britain’s first Black female swimmer to qualify for the Olympics, a feat that FINA itself duly highlighted on Twitter.


FINA says one of its goals is to encourage a worldwide campaign for “Swimming for All, Swimming for Life.” But this dunderheaded move encourages swimming for some. It sends the message to Black people that the world of swimming isn’t for them — that our kinky, coily, braided or dreaded hair is not a “natural form.”


And by the way, no one’s asking for special advantage here. As many angry swimmers pointed out on Twitter, a larger cap produces more drag in the water.

FINA’s argument that, to its “best knowledge, the athletes competing at such international events never used,” nor required, “caps of such size and configuration” is infuriatingly tautological. The caps weren’t needed because there weren’t that many (Black) swimmers who needed them.


By banning accommodations for Black hair, FINA’s efforts look less like inclusion and more like the aquatic apartheid of the past. Here in the United States, Black people and pools have had a fraught history.

In many places, Black people were prohibited from swimming in pools with White people up until the late 1950s. And when public pools were finally integrated, White people in various cities did what they could to keep Black people out of the water, including putting nails in the bottoms of pools, or pouring bleach and acid into the water………..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/03/international-swimming-federation-just-gave-black-swimmers-everywhere-wet-slap-face/

 

[Optimus Prime]

Here’s the segment

nsfw language

 

[Paul]

More discrimination because of hair. John Oliver had a good segment on it a few weeks ago
===================

FINA, the international swimming federation, has decided to ban Soul Cap, a swimming cap designed to accommodate natural afro-hair, in the upcoming Olympics.

To make matters worse, FINA’s reasoning for the prohibition sounds like something straight out of an 1890s phrenology manual: The caps do not “fit the natural form of the head.

”
The ruling came days after British swimmer Alice Dearing, who had partnered with Soul Cap, became Britain’s first Black female swimmer to qualify for the Olympics, a feat that FINA itself duly highlighted on Twitter.


FINA says one of its goals is to encourage a worldwide campaign for “Swimming for All, Swimming for Life.” But this dunderheaded move encourages swimming for some. It sends the message to Black people that the world of swimming isn’t for them — that our kinky, coily, braided or dreaded hair is not a “natural form.”


And by the way, no one’s asking for special advantage here. As many angry swimmers pointed out on Twitter, a larger cap produces more drag in the water.

FINA’s argument that, to its “best knowledge, the athletes competing at such international events never used,” nor required, “caps of such size and configuration” is infuriatingly tautological. The caps weren’t needed because there weren’t that many (Black) swimmers who needed them.


By banning accommodations for Black hair, FINA’s efforts look less like inclusion and more like the aquatic apartheid of the past. Here in the United States, Black people and pools have had a fraught history.

In many places, Black people were prohibited from swimming in pools with White people up until the late 1950s. And when public pools were finally integrated, White people in various cities did what they could to keep Black people out of the water, including putting nails in the bottoms of pools, or pouring bleach and acid into the water………..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/03/international-swimming-federation-just-gave-black-swimmers-everywhere-wet-slap-face/

That the people in charge of swimming organizations come up with this is a sign of stupidity and yes racism. Or perhaps they are ignorant purists that are totally disconnected from the real world. Swim caps are designed to reduce drag by the hair during competition. A larger swim cap likely increases drag and could slow down the swimmer. Sometimes a fraction of a second is all that it takes to win a race. However, if a swimmer needs a larger cap, so be it. It only affects the swimmer and no one else.

 

[samiam5211]

I don't think it's a chicken or egg scenario. The system clearly came first. The system created institutionalized poverty and a sense of otherness in minority communities which led to the culture. Now the system is trying to combat the culture it created. We are in the vicious circle you defined now, but it clearly started with the system.

The last time we left the black community to their own devices, we ended up with MLK, freedom riders, and a civil rights act.

We can’t have that again.

Now it is easier to convince people born into the current situation that black communities have a cultural problem, because they weren’t around before the prison pipeline put black men back in captivity.

 

[Paul]

The last time we left the black community to their own devices, we ended up with MLK, freedom riders, and a civil rights act.

We can’t have that again.

Now it is easier to convince people born into the current situation that black communities have a cultural problem, because they weren’t around before the prison pipeline put black men back in captivity.

The black community has made huge progress.

here is a recalcitrant segment that remains very poor in both economic terms and spirits. Young men that are nihilist because they see no hope. Sadly, this hopelessness is affirmed by their leaders. They come from highly dysfunctional homes where there is no father figure. This is much more than just systemic racism. There are other problems that no one in the Democratic party wants to address. They do not want to sound conservative and hence go along with the current narrative.