Racism.

Post Reply New Topic

Whereas I have great reams of sympathy for any race which has members rise as far in power as Secretary of State for the US, despite being a woman and black, or a kid from the bronx who becomes a general AND secretary of state... and then proceeds to whine about how "the white man keeps them down." Obviously the white man is doing a s**t job of oppressing the black population if they can get that much power.

Or maybe the white man isnt "keeping them down" at all.

Its also worth noting that not everyone who lives or lived under colonial rule was a) a member of the ruling power and rich/content/happy, or b) a subject race and miserably sad.

There is still a hierarchy of privilege apparent in any colonial society, eg,
If my grandfather was able to educate and maintain in comfort his family as a result of his grandfather enjoying the benefits of cheap land and abundant resources as a colonist, don't you think that sets up his decedents just a little bit better than the person who has had their world turned upside down, been told 'this is how it is now - adapt or die' and then been on the receiving end of years of abuse and second class status?
Don't you think that digging out a couple of exceptional individuals as examples denies the experience of a far greater number of people?
I have seen how some of it works and I think people just need to get on with getting on, however that never really happens when we deny the past or refuse to accept difference.
A dog that has been kicked regularly will snap at heels or cower in resentment, I would rather enjoy my neighbours than struggle with them. If I desire acceptance and respect for my life and lifestyle isn't it my responsibility to extend that same courtesy to others?
I find that racist behaviour is often borne of ignorance and fear that has been manipulated by some nasties with real genuine bigotries underlying their entire world view, most of the time once people become familiar with each other they tend to relax and accept each others differences.
peace j

So you're saying I should take the blame for my ancestors of old who colonized Quebec? No, I won't. I had nothing to do with it. I don't deserve to be punished for being born.

I'm also part Czech. My people were ruled by 3 different empires in a period of 185 years, which is a long time (Austria-Hungary, Germany, Soviet Union). Do I think the descendants of those people deserve to be blamed for that? No, I don't.

I do not accept blame for slavery of anyone in the US. I was not there. I have not gained from it. If anything, my ancestors were the poor whites put out of work by slavery because they wanted a living wage. Debts are not passed on to the next generations, just problems to solve.

In the US there are whites trying to reach out to African-American people and help solve the problems of high murder rates, soul-grinding poverty, substandard education and unfair hiring practices. There are others trying to keep things as they are. It's a survival instinct to remember negatives more strongly than positives, so the haters are remembered while a lot of the helpers are forgotten. The answer is to keep helping in spite of the naysayers.

If anyone understands how much understanding is needed, it's us.

A couple of exceptional individuals chosen because as far as I know, thats about the highest you can get and not actually be president. Not because they are the only ones or any other reason.. just the highest up the chain. Assume that Obama chap gets in as president.. as a black guy.. will that mean that black people are still being driven down?

Not all the "slaves" were black, in any colonial society. The poor buggers who got transported to australia were invariably white, poor, lower class types. Barely a black person amongst them. They got the s**t end of the stick without being a different race. SOME people will profit from any situation, others will get s**t on.

A family history of mistreatment or being the shitty-stick holder does not garner anyone the right to act like a tosser though, and all that happens is the whole thing goes through a big cycle. Then its someone else getting treated like slaves, who then decide they dont want to be slaves.. and on and on it goes. Better to learn from history and not keep repeating the same dumbass mistakes.

I never said anything about 'taking the blame' for anything.
However to deny obvious historical truths because they are uncomfortable is moronic.
When we analyze general social statistics in regard health, education, crime and imprisonment we find the same story all over the world - first nation peoples will earn less, live shorter lives, are more likely to be imprisoned etc, etc...
Surely to say that all these diverse peoples and genetics are all failing because of anything other than their race, it's journey and their experience of peoples attitudes towards it, to say that somehow they must all change to suit a European world view and lifestyle is racist, to dismiss their traditions as 'mumbo jumbo' or 'irrelevant' is racist, to deny that there is a time period after colonisation which is transitional and not always an easy or healthy transition and to just shrug and say 'tough' is racist because all of this assumes that theirs was the inferior culture to begin with.
As long as minorities [who are often the first nation peoples] see injustice being dished out according to religion or race or class there will be resentment, if you want the black man to stop calling you honky, treat him like a brother and not the other, if you want Muslims to stop trying to blow you all up, stop invading their homes, stealing their resources and disrespecting who they choose to be.
peace j

Which is why people should be as aware of (for example) the black role in slavery, as the white role, or the arabic role. Noticeably, the white slave trade eventually died away, due in no small part to the efforts of the British, and black slaves in europe or america were emancipated, freed, returned etc. Anybody ever notice the Arab world doing the same thing with all the slaves they took and traded? I think not. Anybody ever question the black african tribes for selling their enemies to the slave traders as a convenient way to get rid of them? Rarely. So why are only whites lambasted for their role in slavery? Uncomfortable they may be, but these ARE historical truths, and it would be moronic and racist to ignore them completely.



And what of the lands where whites ARE the "first nation"? Either your social statistics only cover colonised nations, or whites are second class citizens in their own countries these days. So, which nations do these statistics cover? All nations? Also, in a colonised nation (say South Africa).. the "first nation" people are likely to be in the majority, so of course there are likely to be more in prison etc. Colonial territories where the indigines are in the minority are less prevalent. (Australia, Canada, NZ and the americas spring to mind.)




Rather dependent on what makes a culture "inferior" or not really. Who is to say that western culture is inferior to any other? To suggest that any culture is inferior, be it industrialised to the nth degree, or nomadic hunter-gatherer, is not only racist, but a touch moronic, as most cultures have developed in order to satisfy the requirements of living in a particular area. (Take the nomadic "steppe" lifestyle.. its enormously well suited to areas with poor forestation, limited resources, and open territory, allows a great spread for information and ideas, and in earier days was an excellent source of certain skills, especially those of an equestrian nature. But it limits technological advancement, and is very susceptible to environmental changes and disease-spreading over vast distance.) Every culture has its advantages and disadvantages. I dont think anyone suggested that colonisation and transition to and from it is easy, or pleasant, but by the same token, many people of both sides will profit and lose from it. Take the eviction of white farmers from their homesteads in various african nations as an example. After their removal, the farms have been looted and the arable land left to go fallow, rot and die. A truly sensible concept in a country often racked with shortages... So the loss is to the natives as much as to the whites there. Neither side has profited, and in the long term, the locals have lost out.

Same thing applies to religion etc.. Its JUST as racist for a practitioner of haitian vodu to say that western religion is a load of chanting and men in silly dresses worshipping two bits of wood as it is for a western vicar to say that vodu is superstitious nonsens with coloureds worshipping false gods, dancing round fires in the nude.



So discrimination against the local religion is perfectly fine then? Its quite fine for Muslims to have piggy banks banned because it offends them, whilst christians in their own nations are fired for wearing a simple cross?
So long as there is discrimination and favouritism over religion, class and race against the MAJORITY there will be resentment too. If we want Muslims to stop trying to blow us up, then maybe a better idea might be to STOP paying for them to live here, whilst they preach hatred and the annihilation of their host state? (This does happen. several imams notable for disrespecting who WE choose to be, who openly preach to their kin to hate and kill us, are claiming full state benefits.)

It all cuts both ways, and is NOT simply a matter of the white man oppressing everyone else. Racism and discrimination is NOT the sole preserve of the western world, nor is colonisation. Look to the far east for proof of that.

Consider this.. what if Stephenson had been from Zululand? He invents the steam engine, africa has an industrial revolution. Do you really believe that such a warlike nation as the Zulu would NOT have set about colonising and conquering as much as they could? Given that they were doing that ANYWAY, I find it highly likely that WE would have been THEIR colony.

piggy banks banned? So a couple of banks stop producing or using imagery of piggy banks in their advertising. I think its quite obvious this is because theyve pre-calculated that the move will attract more customers, or otherwise increase revenue. Just business - nothing to do with 'political correctness'

I agree.

....I don't look at a few token Latinos and black people in the public eye as some type of achievement for my people as a whole. Most of those successful individuals are sell-outs and house Negros. - Immortal Technique

@Macbeth

Firstly I have at no pointed displayed a bias against whites or denied the existence of so called 'reverse' racism. I made a bit of a glib remark and maybe stepped on some toes but, come on...?

I don't disagree with many of your points, however your communication style indicates a certain resentment towards immigrants in Britain and particularly Muslims. Have you thought of going next door and introducing yourself? I find the Muslims comming here to be good decent people who just want to get on with life.

I come from Polynesia, I don't know how much you know about the peoples of these Islands but they are particularly warlike and have a highly evolved martial culture. I often said when I was younger that give the Maori the tools of Britannia's Empire and the world would have been theirs, however I now have serious doubts, I have encountered so many different peoples and seen how truly differently core values can manifest and I think there are too many variables...

To acknowledge and respect another's culture should not require any surrender of your own, a guest should always show as much respect and grace as the host, however with migration you have people who are born native of lands that the people there say they have no claim to and these people are now neighbours not guests - how we deal with this is the key point, not who is right or wrong or has more or less rights.
You have cited yet more very specific examples to illustrate your point, however time contains the tales of many and to deny the very successful post colonial transitions in order to score a point is disappointing, because one African despot fails to deliver does not mean a thing when so many other countries have made very successful land reforms and changes in their socio political character more suited to their culture, when they fail it is not because they are black, white, yellow, brown red or whatever, it is because they are humans, humans can be pretty bad at working together.

At the start of this thread I explained my mixed race and how I have seen many forms of racism, I have also learned a lot about the character of racism, prejudice and presumption and almost every time the collision is occurring because of ignorance, be it willful or accidental.
It is actually possible to acknowledge difference without cheapening, belittling or in any way reducing the Mana of those who are different, it is possible to agree to disagree. It is possible that for some cultures 'surrender to the greater good' will come more comfortably than it will to others and for some 'rugged individualism' is a lonely and hostile way to live.
I am lucky for the most part we get along down here, sure there are some issues relating to immigration, but as a land of migrants we are more intrigued than insulted by strange and new ways, for most of us learning a little about each other smooths the road.

Another thing that can be found throughout the colonial/post colonial nations is a genetic characteristic called 'hybrid vigour' a good bit of mongrel gene jumbling actually throws up fine strong physical specimens which due to the challenge of the strange environment nurtures an adaptive and resourceful culture, good natural reasons to think racism is a dead end? pedigree dogs are just plain degenerative gene pools full of morons, look at the English aristocracy, they aren't much brighter than sheep, for the same breeding related reasons, let all the biggots keep to themselves the rest of us are here to party, lol, peace j

when i lived in yuma, i was picked on for being white by mexicans.

Well it sure seemed like you were implying that we should just sit back and take the brunt for what our ancestors (or someone else's ancestors) did to other people without complaint....for the sole reason of being born.

Can we not agree then, that denying the Holocaust is a victimless crime?

Its true that financial motives play a part in these things, but consider this.. a perfectly harmless item is denied one group, in order to gain something from another. That in itself is wrong, regardless of the exact motives. Race (or in this case religion) has been used in a cynical fashion, which to my mind is just as bad as if it were entirely motivated by "offence."

I'll just clarify this AGAIN. There was no "digging out" of anything. I simply chose the first two examples of black americans who have been successful in the system, and got about as high as it gets, short of being president. You could say the "most" successful.
I could just have easily listed the VAST number of black musicians who are incredibly rich and successful (though I'm not overly familiar with the rap genre for example, so it would have been a little tougher to name them for me.) Or, failing that, I could have said Halle Berry, Morgan Freeman, and Samuel L Jackson, picking a few black actors at random. (FFS Morgan Freeman as a BLACK man has now played God twice. If the system was THAT race-biased, would white christian america have tolerated that for a minute, even in a comedy?)

Also, the term "sell-out" is loosely applied to almost anyone who gains commercial success. It is apparently impossible to become rich and famous just by being a skilled musician, or a bloody good actor, or simply by being popular. Its a BS term. Theres a reason why many garage bands dont get anywhere.. its because they are s**t. Its got nothing to do with selling out. Its got to do wth production values, public appeal, advertising, and talent.

House Negro: So thats an allusion to that whole "yes massah, i pick yo cotton" thing. Any black man who is rich or successful MUST have done it by climbing up a white guys ass, or being subservient. OK. It cant possibly be because they are intelligent and well educated can it? It cant possibly be because they happen to be the best at the job. To my mind, thats virtually racism towards their own race.

The UK IS a post colonial nation.. we just got colonised a lot earlier, is all. We have been conquered, enslaved, interbred with, carried off to distant parts of the world and all the rest. Likewise we have conquered, enslaved, interbred with, and wandered off around the world by choice. We have been a mongrel race for a long long time. (I can locate celtic, pictish, norse, italian, saxon, and angle in my bloodlines alone.) We went from a pokey little damp grey bit that dropped off europe, populated by interwarring tribes living in huts, to turning two thirds of the world map pink (not the colour I would have chosen.) and influencing the course of history on a grand scale. Theres no reason to suppose that Polynesia couldnt achieve the same thing, or Africa, or Asia, or anywhere else on the planet.

Racism is essentially pointless. Unless you're about to go to war with someone, and then its handy to rile up the population against the foe at the time. Doesnt mean you cant get on with them again later though.. after all we despised the french, but we still went to war for them.

What we need is a good interstellar invasion. Get some proper aliens to hate, and we can all work together, Independence Day style. (And then have arguments about whether we are superior to the eight-armed klatterbeasts of Krall 6 no doubt.)