Does systemic racism against blacks even exist anymore?

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah I know about equity scholarships, alternative entry, government assistance. In the US aren't they competitive?

I'm not American, but my daughter wanted to go to Princeton. We looked into the cost, and it would have been cheaper than our public University down the street. That's because American schools use a sliding-scale based on income. Because I'm a single mother on disability, with a deadbeat exhusband, my daughter's tuition would essentially be waived. She was also encouraged to apply for private scholarships through our community. For example, she has Lupus. The Lupus Society gives bursaries and grants to students as a support. Nearly all community agencies have some sort of scholarship program available. They use them as tax write-offs, so it's a win-win situation for many students.

I don't know the terms "equity" scholarship, or "alternative entry". I'm assuming the equity scholarship is merit-based like all scholarships. Does the "equity" qualifier mean that it's accessible for students of colour? If I'm correct in that assumption, it would mean that POC students are given access to scholarships which would be merit-based (by achievement). That might be competitive, but so are academics. Students who don't win a scholarship can still attend a sliding-scale school. Big name schools can afford the sliding-scale even more than small town colleges, so they become accessible to those deemed most needy.

In Australia this only applies to indigenous students (not other PoC's).

Otherwise equity scholarships are open to anybody from a lower SES background regardless of their ethnic/cultural/religious background,

What does any of that have to do with the fact that many minority groups in the US are in fact doing better than whites on average? If your entire thesis is that racism is responsible for the various income gaps, how can you explain the success of all of these non white groups? I don't think your average racist is making a distinction between a Mongolian and a Chinese person when deciding who to oppress, which points to something other than racism as the culprit, e.g. cultural differences and approaches to work and educations. McWhorter explores this extensively in Losing the Race, and also critiques concepts such as stereotype threat in that an other works; they're very worth reading if you're interested in expanding your understanding of these issues and how they play out in the US.

There is selective bias specifically against African-Americans which includes bias practiced by other PoC against them so they are almost certainly on the bottom rung. You are forgetting there is a heirarchy among PoCs (Aunt Blabby mentioned this too and he is part-Japanese). This isn't lost on whites who have their own preferences as well,

The argument about model minority groups is an old myth. I mention that 12 of the 19 Asian groups are experiencing the same poverty as other groups because they are made up of refugees/green card migrants (Vietnamese, Laotians, Tibetans, Mongolians). I'm not putting these groups down this is the data, The same ethnic groups also tend to be in lower SES groups in Australia.

The PoC groups who are "tiger parents" doing better than mainstream are Indians, East Asians and certain African migrants (South Africans, Nigerians). This is really not surprising since many of these migrants represent the most highly educated, economically successful tail of their respective population.

That sounds an awful lot like saying it's cultural rather than a racist system. If African and Caribbean immigrants are doing better than our native black population, that points to some factor other than pure racism accounting for the income and education gaps, which, again, are explored by in great depth by the authors I've linked. Kmele Foster, who is the child of Jamaican immigrants, makes a particular point of how he is not burdened at all by his race due to his economic class, and he finds it incredibly condescending for white people to assume that he's disadvantaged merely by his skin color. He also refuses to identify as black because he does not believe in race, but that's a whole other thing.

Yes I accept that its a number of factors that contribute to African American social disadvantage. One of them is intergenerational trauma. Something Kmele Foster maybe doesn't have an appreciation for as a first generation migrant.



As a new migrant he is making projections against African-Americans. BTW a lot of second generation Jamaicans do self-identify as black and don't be surprised if Foster's kids decide to self-identify as black.

So is CRT the authentic Black Experience? How do you know this? Why are even the black persons who disagree with it in error?

I agree but not in the way you are viewing it.
Those who don't want racism to go away are the race grafters and the professionally offended who make a living of the Race Grievance Industry. CRT is meant to keep racism strong and healthy for many years.

If being black is so disadvantageous in American society, how do we account for persons like Rachel Dolezal or Shaun King? These are white people attempting to pass as black. Or "Identify" as black. What could possibly be their motivation?
Answer: Being black in America is not a disadvantage.

Basically what you're saying is that Foster doesn't yet know that he is oppressed and it will take a few years for American culture to "educate" him on how bad he has it here? RRRRRight..........

I don't know if I'd go so far as to says it's meant to, but it certainly will. The single most dangerous thing it does is make whites race conscious in a way that they haven't been before, thinking of themselves as part of an interest group when previously that had been largely confined to fringe white supremacy groups (back before that word became so debased through over-application) that were held in contempt within greater white society. Say what you will about the "privilege" of not having to be race conscious, but I don't think the people pushing CRT are going to like what happens if whites start actively acting as an interest group, that could get ugly in a hurry.

The logic here is so distorted, you can replace the words with almost anything and it still presumes to make sense.

If being disabled is a disadvantage, then why do some people pretend to be disabled? Therefore, being disabled is not a disadvantage.

If having autism is a disadvantage, then why do some people pretend to have autism? Therefore, autism is not a disadvantage.

If dying of cancer is a disadvantage, then why do some people pretend to be dying of cancer? Therefore, dying of cancer can't be a disadvantage.

If being homeless and broke is a disadvantage, then why do some people pretend to be broke and homeless? Therefore, being broke and homeless can't be a disadvantage.

Could it be, that pretending to be something, doesn't actually make you that thing? And that if you're pretending to be something, you can stop pretending as soon as it becomes inconvenient? Someone merely pretending to be homeless can always stop pretending and go HOME.

Generally, people pretend to be these things for the attention. They do so to gain the additional attention and support these people get, because they're disadvantaged. After all, how great would it be to be pampered like you're dying of cancer, but not actually dying of cancer? Or disabled. Or homeless. Or autistic. Or anything else.

"Oh, but, there ARE successful black people, so, they can't be disadvantaged!"

Ok, but, there are successful autistic people, so autistic people can't be disadvantaged.

Hellen Keller was successful, therefore being blind and deaf can't possibly be a disadvantage.

DaVinci paintings are still popular, therefore he is still a success, therefore being dead is not a disadvantage.

Yes, I'm being silly. That's the byproduct of the thing I'm mocking also being silly.

"But, race grifters and professionally offended!"

Ok, but what about all the other kinds of grifters and the professionally offended? Just cos people take advantage of something doesn't mean the thing they're taking advantage of is fake. In fact, it works better if it is a real thing, cos then the source of it can't be undermined. Claiming to have a fake disease stops working if they find out the disease is fake. Claiming to have a REAL disease works much better.

The idea that racism MUST BE kept alive as a fake idea seems like a waste of effort, since there's usually plenty of REAL problems to try to swindle people over. Hello, I'm from the IRS and we've been trying to contact you about your car's extended warranty...

But yes, lets keep a fake idea alive rather than use any number of other cons available. Could I interest you in some snake oil? How about some pills that will add 3 inches and make you an animal in bed? Buy this book, and you'll be successful!

CRT is not specific to american culture - not in where it's being taught, and not in what it focuses on. CRT is being taught many places around the world, and covers many cultures from around the word and throughout history.

A minority of white people decide that racism isn't real, and that's the end of it. Who cares what all the POC say, the white people have decided. Unless the POC agree that racism isn't real, then they're worth listening to. But if they disagree, they're just wrong. Cos white people said so. Funny that.

Many people are in denial that claiming to be part of an oppressed group confers certain social advantages, especially in left leaning environments; the sudden explosion of people claiming unverifiable mental illnesses, or people who don't change their outward presentation in any way but come out as non binary (especially celebrities experiencing a scandal...) are both excellent examples. Class is so much more important to your life trajectory in America than race is, and so many of the various racial gaps can be much better explained by class than by assuming society must be horrifically racist. None of that is to say that racism doesn't exist and isn't still a problem, but that many of the ills attributed to it could better be addressed through anti poverty measures and other means of helping people ascend from the under and working classes.

Also, since Shaun King was mentioned:



and:

I used to watch podcasts from young African American journalists where they debate this very topic (since COVID I am not sure this exists anymore), The podcast is called "the Grapevine"

An interesting point of debate was on the disparity in perceptions between African-Americans and first generation immigrants of colour in terms of whether they were really allies or not. It was common for guests of native African or Caribbean origin to diverge on matters of social identity, not seeing themselves as part of the wider topic of being black because it means completely different things that are non-political.

It gets back to this awful ideological divide where right wingers conveniently lump all Asian, Hispanic and black people into monolithic groups and assume within these arbitrary categories (they created) the behavior of individuals can be predicted. The truth is hides a diverse range of ideas, beliefs, cultures and politics.

Why should people sort themselves by skin color at all? It seems like the immigrants have the better idea, not lumping themselves together with groups who have nothing in common with them save some superficial aspect of their appearance.



Right wingers? Do you not read your own posts when talking about blacks or other minorities with heterodox (read: not DNC liberal) views? Have you not noticed the special contempt the left wing has for any minority who dares to think for themself? Uncle Tom is one of the milder epitaphs such a person can expect to have directed their way from the left.