So, are black people really more racist than whites?

[Dr Adequate]

Erratum: that should of course read: "Still with 80% of blacks for Obama" in paragraph 7, not "90%" as I typed, my bad.

 

[Elind]

Elind, the point remains that until you can prove that 80% of Black voters vote for Obama because they believe that white people are the inferior race, it is simply not racism. It is not my definition, it is the definition from history.

We are becoming reduced to word definitions again, which may in the end be the only way this discussion can go.

History does indeed define racism in the harshest terms to refer to, but my experience of modern day America is that it can be ANY preferential bias based solely on skin color; except that it is typically only applied to whites and is considered politically incorrect to apply to blacks. That many think blacks are essentially immune to that accusation under any but the most extreme expressions was partly the reason to solicit opinions, and judging from the indignation of some responders this forum has quite a share of indignant politically correct people.

The Black Power movement certainly had members in it who would sometimes say the above, but they were largely in the minority, and there is a reason 'Black Power' is not a racist chant, whilst 'White Power' is.

Any reason you don't mention the Nation of Islam, who are alive and probably more racist your your nearest Klan?

However, I am not really bringing them up as the example because they probably don't vote much, and they are much more extreme than a typical black American who probably doesn't vote black because of animosity towards whites, but because of "preference". If I said I voted white (when I'm white) just because I "preferred" a white president, I haven't the slightest doubt that all these indignant and sometimes insulting posters here would call me a racist.

Your OP, and further comments clearly demonstrate some desperation to rip the ripe and ready badge of racism off white people, and stick it firmly onto the black population.

See what I mean? You are now expressing the same politically correct mantra that seems to think blacks and whites are not equal as humans, warts and all. You too seem to think that only whites can be bad, or discriminatory.

I'm just trying to point out that all humans are prone to the same biases.

Don't be so fast to assume there is some politically correct conspiracy.

Where do you get conspiracy in this?

As for your comments about being impressed by my posts, I am humbled.

Welcome

 

[Elind]

Just becareful, your whole entire premise is completely marginalizing the black vote.

Don't be silly. It does not in the slightest.

 

[Dr Adequate]

I'm just trying to point out that all humans are prone to the same biases.

 

[chris epic]

There is no need for racism to come complete with oppression at all. racism is an ideology and ideologies don't change just because those that hold them are incapable of implementing their desired policies.

Your definition of racism is incorrect also. It is NOT racism if the behaviors or attitudes that seem "racist" are represented by a minority; or if they are not backed by political or cultural dominance.

You can call it prejudice, you can call it biggotry, you can call it ignorance, but it is not the accurate definition of racism.

 

[chris epic]

We are becoming reduced to word definitions again

That just means that you have a responsibility to use the right words that don't lead to so much confusion

my experience of modern day America is that it can be ANY preferential bias based solely on skin color;

History does indeed define racism in the harshest terms

I'll take History's definition, its more objective and precise than one person's experience of modern-day America.

That many think blacks are essentially immune to that accusation

They are not immune from being prejudice, ignorant, or biggotted; they are immune from being racist until they are the majority, and have the political and cultural ability to be oppressive.

I haven't the slightest doubt that all these indignant and sometimes insulting posters here would call me a racist.

thats the second time you've put yourself on defensive for being called a racist when no one has called you such? What are you so worried about?

 

[LostAngeles]

That just means that you have a responsibility to use the right words that don't lead to so much confusion



I'll take History's definition, its more objective and precise than one person's experience of modern-day America.

They are not immune from being prejudice, ignorant, or biggotted; they are immune from being racist until they are the majority, and have the political and cultural ability to be oppressive.


thats the second time you've put yourself on defensive for being called a racist when no one has called you such? What are you so worried about?

No. Sorry.

Racism is deciding the worth of a person based solely on skin color and has nothing to do with who's being oppressed by the majority.

My Korean grandmother is racist because she hates white people.

The student who told me, "Mexicans are better people, no offense," is racist.

The woman who screamed at me to go back to the country I came from and told me I was lying when I said I was born in NJ is racist.

Bigotry is the larger set of which racism is a subset.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Excuse me, I am the Grand Definer, and I declare that racism is the belief in the existence of races of humans.

I find the whole argument about the definition of racism to be a semantic sidetrack to try to apply the label with the most emotional baggage.

(The definition that chris epic is using is one that I have read commonly in the social sciences)

 

[Elind]

That just means that you have a responsibility to use the right words that don't lead to so much confusion

Surely you have been around here long enough to know the significance of semantics in these debates?

I'll take History's definition, its more objective and precise than one person's experience of modern-day America.

Hardly one person's experience. Do you not read newspapers?

They are not immune from being prejudice, ignorant, or biggotted; they are immune from being racist until they are the majority, and have the political and cultural ability to be oppressive.

So we are back to semantics again. That is your definition. The commoner one in everyday usage can also be; "[SIZE=-1]discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion". That is a truth, but if you wish to take the stance that you disagree with all but the one that you choose, feel free. Creationists use that approach about another word daily.


[/SIZE]

thats the second time you've put yourself on defensive for being called a racist when no one has called you such? What are you so worried about?

Worried? I don't like your tone when I am attempting to be rational. Seems to me you are the one being defensive, or should I say indignant? As to the accusation, I made the statement, in passing, that it was from another thread, but if you are interested it was from the one who insults the term Atheist.

 

[Elind]

Excuse me, I am the Grand Definer, and I declare that racism is the belief in the existence of races of humans.

I find the whole argument about the definition of racism to be a semantic sidetrack to try to apply the label with the most emotional baggage.

(The definition that chris epic is using is one that I have read commonly in the social sciences)

If it pleases the grand definer, I will replace the word racist with the term "voting sentient beings biased on skin color". (Cool that you commonly read social sciences, however. When do you start logic?)

 

[Elind]

No. Sorry.

Racism is deciding the worth of a person based solely on skin color and has nothing to do with who's being oppressed by the majority.

My Korean grandmother is racist because she hates white people.

The student who told me, "Mexicans are better people, no offense," is racist.

The woman who screamed at me to go back to the country I came from and told me I was lying when I said I was born in NJ is racist.

Bigotry is the larger set of which racism is a subset.

Wow

I haven't had agreement with you for a while. Glad to see we seem to be in the same universe on some things after all.

 

[332nd]

Worried? I don't like your tone when I am attempting to be rational. Seems to me you are the one being defensive, or should I say indignant? As to the accusation, I made the statement, in passing, that it was from another thread, but if you are interested it was from the one who insults the term Atheist.

You're attempting to be rational? How is assuming that Black people are voting for Obama just because he's Black, thus Blacks are "more racist" rational?

 

[quixotecoyote]

Excuse me, I am the Grand Definer, and I declare that racism is the belief in the existence of races of humans.

I find the whole argument about the definition of racism to be a semantic sidetrack to try to apply the label with the most emotional baggage.

(The definition that chris epic is using is one that I have read commonly in the social sciences)

You're completely correct about it's usage in the social sciences. That's why I took the university's side in the thread awhile back about a school saying disempowered minorities can't be racist; because given the definition of the word in its context, they can't. However, while that meaning of racism is fairly well accepted inside academia, this forum is outside academia, as is the OP and topic of the thread. Thus, while I agree with you, we all know how 'racism' is being used in this thread and it doesn't hurt anyone to accept the colloquial definition for the purposes of the discussion.

 

[Elind]

You're attempting to be rational? How is assuming that Black people are voting for Obama just because he's Black, thus Blacks are "more racist" rational?

I assume that you haven't been reading backwards in this thread, because you repeat others comments.

First I'm not assuming. The surveys say so quite unambiguously. As to why, you tell me. As far as I know he has made no promises that preferentially benefit blacks.

If it sets your mind at ease any, I haven't said that no whites can have the same "racial" biases, but by the numbers they appear to be less so, and for what that is worth I think Obama's candidacy (as opposed to earlier ones by the usual ambulance chaser black candidates) is a very good thing for this country, whether I choose to vote for him or not.

 

[Elind]

You're completely correct about it's usage in the social sciences. That's why I took the university's side in the thread awhile back about a school saying disempowered minorities can't be racist; because given the definition of the word in its context, they can't. However, while that meaning of racism is fairly well accepted inside academia, this forum is outside academia, as is the OP and topic of the thread. Thus, while I agree with you, we all know how 'racism' is being used in this thread and it doesn't hurt anyone to accept the colloquial definition for the purposes of the discussion.

A rational academic analysis, which perfectly illustrates the ivory tower mentality of many academics.

I have been around for more years than many who can use the internet, and anyone who tells me "disempowered minorities" can't be racist, is a fool (sorry, not intending to be personal).

Define disempowered to someone when who is on a disempowered person's turf.

Seems to me that you are talking not of peoples' attitudes, but the geographic scope of their influence in one context or another. That has nothing to do with their actual state of mind, and as far as I'm concerned "racist" is a state of mind.

 

[332nd]

I assume that you haven't been reading backwards in this thread, because you repeat others comments.

You assume wrong.

First I'm not assuming. The surveys say so quite unambiguously. As to why, you tell me. As far as I know he has made no promises that preferentially benefit blacks.

And what surveys say that we are voting for him just because of the color of his skin?

If it sets your mind at ease any, I haven't said that no whites can have the same "racial" biases, but by the numbers they appear to be less so, and for what that is worth I think Obama's candidacy (as opposed to earlier ones by the usual ambulance chaser black candidates) is a very good thing for this country, whether I choose to vote for him or not.

By the numbers it appears you made the connection that Blacks are voting for Obama based on skin color. How many of these people have you talked to?

 

[quixotecoyote]

A rational academic analysis, which perfectly illustrates the ivory tower mentality of many academics.

I have been around for more years than many who can use the internet, and anyone who tells me "disempowered minorities" can't be racist, is a fool (sorry, not intending to be personal).

Define disempowered to someone when who is on a disempowered person's turf.

Seems to me that you are talking not of peoples' attitudes, but the geographic scope of their influence in one context or another. That has nothing to do with their actual state of mind, and as far as I'm concerned "racist" is a state of mind.

That's fine. And on this forum that's how the word is generally used. In fact, that was my point in the previous post. However, people used to making finer distinctions in the social sciences use the word in a different sense. There's no point insisting that your definition is the 'one true definition' so long as everyone knows what you're talking about. In fact, its fairly pointless. In general discussion it means one thing, in a scholarly setting it means another.

No (ok, very few) academics would say that disempowered minorities cannot be what you refer to as racist; they would simply use different words to describe it.

 

[chris epic]

There is no need for racism to come complete with oppression at all. racism is an ideology and ideologies don't change just because those that hold them are incapable of implementing their desired policies.

I just wanted to let you know that I jumped the gun on your response without giving it a fair evaluation. I was stuck in the mode of telling Elind he was wrong, so I just sort of impulsively jumped on you. Sorry about that.

I went to work and realized it wasn't very fair, so I apologize.

I understand racism is an ideology. I guess the part I don't agree with, or maybe haven't come to understand fully yet, is that although I, an individual white person, don't have the capability to implement racist policies doesn't exclude me from the fact that because I am white, my biggotry toward minorities is racism; whereas an individual ethnic minority's biggotry toward me is never racism.

And to circulate back to my hypothetical, my racism, even as an individual, because I am backed by the majority, ethnically, only perpetuates or contributes to that oppression.

 

[chris epic]

No. Sorry.

Racism is deciding the worth of a person based solely on skin color

isn't that oppressive? Culturally? Socially? Historically?

Bigotry is the larger set of which racism is a subset.

I hadn't thought of that. I think I always thought it was the other way around. I guess I'm not too familiar with the word "bigotry."

 

[chris epic]

Surely you have been around here long enough to know the significance of semantics in these debates?

mmn'yes, that's why I said that

Hardly one person's experience. Do you not read newspapers?

You were the one that provided the definition of racism from your "own personal experience of modern-day America.

Creationists use that approach about another word daily.

Scuse, but what the heck do Creationists have to do with this conversation?

Seems to me you are the one being defensive

Well if you want to nit-pick, we've all got something to defend here.

or should I say indignant?

Say what you want, dude, I'm just disagreeing with you. It happens sometimes in life, you know?

As to the accusation, I made the statement, in passing, that it was from another thread, but if you are interested it was from the one who insults the term Atheist.

So you were just being passive-aggressive toward someone that's not even actively on the thread.