A very serious thread about race relations

[Pogo]

And that's the problem.

Neither side gives an inch to the enemy, and we just decay.
.

When the Right gives an inch, the left takes it and just keeps attacking.

If the Left ever gave an inch, well, I strongly suspect that once we recovered from the shock, that we would be very pleased and open to something constructive.

The same kind of talk that so derails race conversations, you did with politics.

You just criticized my whole side of the political spectrum.

Nice.

What derails any conversation on race, is the constant use of false accusations of racism, ie The Race Card.

I spoke of the Left as a general group. Unless specified, normally people understand that comments about a large group, does not mean universally.


If someone says that a city is very excited about their team making the Superbowl, you know that there are rare individuals in that city that, for whatever reason, don't give a damn.

Then you've just called out your own fallacy.

I'm just getting here but I can see by simply looking up two levels in the nest that you just used two broad-brush generalizations, "the right" and "the left". Unless you can prove that what follows applies literally to every member thereof, whatever follows will be a lie.

Nope. Generalizations are generalizations. YOur pretense that you don't understand that is silly.


noun
1.
the act or process of generalizing.
2.
a result of this process; a general statement, idea, or principle.
3.
Logic.

1. a proposition asserting something to be true either of all membersof a certain class or of an indefinite part of that class.

Wrong. It still remains a fatal fallacy, very possibly the most insidious one used on this board. When you declare "the right" or "the left" or any other blanket statement and follow it with an absolute, you accuse every member in it of whatever follows.

Again, unless you can show that that's true of the entire class, then your argument is a lie. And that makes the point useless.

It's also, and I don't know if this point has already been made, a fallacy that is an essential tool to develop racism (or any other kind of bigotry). "They all look alike to me". It belies a profound inability to see and hear. And when it's coupled with an absolute accusation against a race, which is what we call "racism" --- it's an exercise of the same fallacy.

That's exactly why I spend so much energy pushing against that fallacy on this board. It's the sociopathic equivalent of It says "you don't matter, I will now disrespect you by attributing traits to you that you never claimed and do not believe in". That's profoundly ignorant. And divisive.

 

[jillian]

I'm not quite sure how anyone who made half his appointments from Goldman Sachs and the other half for their contacts with Russia is fighting 'the establishment".

and one doesn't need to be a racist piece of garbage to oppose the so-called "establishment".

see if you find a single trumptard who stands up to the kkk and neonazi scum. good luck with that.

what is important now for people like you and people like me who don't agree on an awful lot but who agree that neo-Nazis are vile and should certainly shouldn't be enabled, to stand up and be as loud as possible.

I don't worry about making the bullies mad. I worry that we won't.

and I keep remembering "all it takes for evil to prevail is for decent [people] to do nothing".

I think it would be far smarter to completely ignore them.

And then have people who disagree, communicating, listening and slowly improving relations.

The idiots would be completely neutralized with no screaming, no attacking, no deaths.

Things are only getting worse with this approach.
.

Mac, I heard a guy on the news a few nights ago who has just written a book. His claim is that we can defeat racism by being MORE into our "identities," into being tribal, really building feeling of community around us and feeling of belonging in our own cultures, which defeats the reason for racist recruitment--needing a feeling of belonging, of a specific identity. If we have a strong sense of identity, of who we are, we will be more secure and less likely to be hostile or uncomfortable with other groups. Just being white isn't enough. It's way too global and ephemeral.
Wish I could remember where I heard him. It was an interesting and practical idea, actually. Some of the groups that try to "rehabilitate" racists claim the same underlying lack of a positive identity that sucks them in. The racist org gives broken folk a place to feel accepted and gives them a "tribe." Not so different from the lure of gang culture, actually.

That's not the ONLY factor or the only solution, but it was harmless and people have actually been talking about it for years--somehow recouping that feeling of belonging in something secure and positive.

Holy crap, that goes against all my impulses, but I'm open to anything at this point.

Let's not forget that it's Identity Politics, the division of people, that has so many (including myself) at odds with the Left.

Maybe the author might argue that it would depend on the way it's done. If it's done in a combative, divisive way, it simply can't work, because that's what got us here. If there's a way to do it in a civil, cooperate way, then maybe. Of course it takes two to tango...
.

The tribe is the community IMO. No white or black tribes necessary. Local tribes, neighborhood tribes, school group tribes, sports/extracurricular tribes, religious tribes and so on. All of these are well integrated where I live and it is working well.

There are some things predominantly one race or the other, churches for example. There are none that I know of that are exclusively one race. The other race is welcomed (even appreciated), but church music is an acquired taste and we don't seem to acquire other flavors of music so readily. There are whites that prefer black churches (mostly 20 to 30-somethings) and black people who prefer white churches (mostly 60+ and Catholics).

We identify with common interests and common ties more than skin color. We had a rocky time for a bit after Katrina, but the haters mostly moved back to NO, into BR or across the river. The rest seem to have acclimated well and are with the program.

Like politics, IMO, race relations is a local thing until you turn on the TV.

Here's the big picture problem from my perspective: (1) Race has (obviously) become politicized, and when that happens, all arguments get dumbed down to bumper-sticker level and no one wants to get in the weeds. We just want to keep stuff simple enough to fit on a sign. Well, that approach ain't gonna work here. (2) There are too many people who have a vested professional interest in keeping us angry and divided - I'm call them the Division Pimps - and their flocks are all too happy to dance to their tune.

Look at his thread. Accusations and insults, accusations and insults. This is what they want, and it's clearly working.
.

mac, I'm still not sure how heavily armed Nazi's screaming "blood and soil" and "jews won't replace us" and a president who thinks some Nazis are "fine people" isn't political.

it's not made political. it IS political. because someone wanting me dead isn't a difference of opinion where we can all live happily ever after together. is it?.

I'm also not sure how if you're black.... an unarmed man being shot like a dog by police isn't political.\

how was it not political for someone with a licensed gun, who advised the police officer that he had a licensed weapon, was told by the policeman to get his ID and then shot dead for no reason while his girlfriend and her child in the car?

how was it not political when a young man walking through a community drinking a drink and eating a snack getting followed and gunned down by a self-styled "neighborhood watchman" who was told by 911 NOT to follow isn't political?

and therein lies the problem.

 

[monkrules]

I do not think many black people are looking for improved race relations. I think we are simply looking to be RESPECTED, which blacks have never been in this country. From respect comes improved relationships.

I don't mean to make a trite response. But, respect has to be earned.

And it is earned by proving we deserve it. Showing we've worked hard to educate ourselves, maintaining and doing a good job, showing that we are honest and trustworthy, treating others with respect, and so on. There is no magic to it.

Except, that simply "demanding" respect, or acting tough, is stupid; it doesn't work. And it shouldn't. Again: respect has to be earned. Then, respect will be given, and it will be genuine.

The "respect" random people or casual acquaintances want is usually "common courtesy" or "manners." I don't think we are talking about the kind of respect that is earned. We are talking about how you speak to someone, your tone and your words and your body language. I'm sure there are exceptions, but The Golden Rule has served me well.

If I need to rant or vent, that's what political message boards are for lol.

I agree with everyting you've written. Of course people should treat other people with simple respect. In casual meetings, etc. That's just part of having decent manners and knowing how to conduct ourselves around others.

In my earlier post I was talking about the kind of serious respect that people often yearn for. That kind of respect has to be earned.

But you can't go around rioting and looting and expect anyone to respect you. It's not gonna happen. All that will accomplish is to convince decent people that they should move as far as possible from you.

Who are you talking to? Who is doing the rioting and looting?

Maybe you didn't mean to, but you seem to be accusing people of rioting and looting, and witholding respect until they can prove their innocence in such activity.

When you wrote "you," who was your intended audience?

Read the thread. All of the answers are there. Why did you post before trying to understand what you are posting about.

 

[Correll]

So, that's the model I will be using instead of "one on one".


And the above position has gotten me called racist, probably literally thousands of times.

Don't expect that model to accomplish much.

You do know that there are single parents whose children do NOT succumb to crime, drugs, and poverty, right? Those single-parent families are going to get defensive, recognizing that no one factor is a guarantee of success or failure.

Two points.


1. Only if someone tells them that a general problem is a personal, likely "racist" insult.


2. So, we don't address a huge social problem because it might hurt some people's feelings? That is not valid to me.

It's not about hurt feelings; it's just ineffective because of the hurt feelings.

I'm telling you how it is, but it's not how you want it to be. That's not my problem.

If we have pro-job policies and put out the truth about how illegitimacy is harmful to children, young women are going to have the option of finding fathers who can also be providers.


That some single moms, and their political allies are unhappy does not stop that, unless we let them.

If you put out that truth, you are only putting out part of the story.

Is it always best to have a two-parent home when one is abusive? Is a two-parent home best when both are miserable with each other?

Education is about more than propagandizing the American dream. Honest conversations need to be had, more than prescribing how people behave. Meaning that, with all other things being equal, a two-parent home works better because it is easier to raise a child with a committed partner. Because there's someone else to pick up the slack. Because you have another pair of ears and eyes and another person's judgment for the tough problems.

So, how would you suggest addressing this issue?

 

[SeaGal]

On this issue I definitely lean in that direction - the Left has caused, and continues to cause, great damage because it's so committed to any political advantage it can squeeze out of this. I see it in my own family.

That doesn't mean the Right is blameless, though. First, there are still those who claim/pretend that racism no longer exists to any significant extent, and second, it has shown its own hypersensitivity on the issue. Trump's recent comments, while they may have largely been accurate regarding violence, were tone-deaf in the extreme, and his fans refused to give an inch there.

While I agree the "sides" are not "equal" in blame on this issue, that doesn't preclude both "sides" from cleaning their own house before pointing the finger.

I don't disagree.

I think part of the problem lies in that we have allowed political activists on the left to define the dialogue. (and as a recovering lefty I say that without enmity) Is it racist to dislike someone because of the color of their skin, be it brown, black, white or somewhere in between?...No, it is bigoted. Bigotry is self-defeating, not illegal.

Is it racist to expect those on the dole to pay back to society if of able body or mind?...No, it is prudent. We're out of money. All skin tones are represented on the dole rolls.

Is it racist if a couple is turned down for a mortgage for their dream house because they don't meet the credit standards? No, it's financial sense.

Is it racist to support advocacy groups based on skin color, or prefer the company of like minded or like shaded people? No...it's human nature, tho' not necessarily productive.

Yet there are those in politics who try to convince the electorate that all the above are racist. They are not.

Can we live in any community we choose regardless of our skin color?...or work where we choose regardless of skin color?...or sit anywhere we like on the bus? Why, yes. Yes we can...as long as we can afford the rent, meet the qualifications or pay the fare.

Is it racism when you aren't accepted into your college of choice even though qualified because you have the wrong skin color...or being passed over for a promotion for same? No, it is discrimination no matter the skin color...and discrimination is illegal.

We cannot legislate like and understanding - we can legislate rule of law and equal treatment under that law.

What it may take is for people living in what most of us would describe as beleaguered communities to stand up and demand better of their representatives - as one gentleman did in Chicago at an Al Sharpton meeting - 'we don't need to blame white people, we need to blame the right people' - the race hustlers, the 5th floor (mayors office).

I do offer an example of institutionalized (governmental) racism alive and well today - the myth that the government can do a better job of making choices for us than we can. That's a crime against the entire human race. On a smaller scale?...condemning inner city kids to failing schools and lowered expectations of behavior and success.

We are so locked in to judging by externals that I don't know where it goes - For example: A white store clerk is rude to me. I think - wow, how rude. The same clerk is rude to the black gal behind me - what does she think?...wow, how racist? Or reverse the clerks skin color and do I think - wow how bigoted? What does the black gal think?

This I do know - we've made great strides in my lifetime.

 

[Correll]

When the Right gives an inch, the left takes it and just keeps attacking.

If the Left ever gave an inch, well, I strongly suspect that once we recovered from the shock, that we would be very pleased and open to something constructive.

The same kind of talk that so derails race conversations, you did with politics.

You just criticized my whole side of the political spectrum.

Nice.

What derails any conversation on race, is the constant use of false accusations of racism, ie The Race Card.

I spoke of the Left as a general group. Unless specified, normally people understand that comments about a large group, does not mean universally.


If someone says that a city is very excited about their team making the Superbowl, you know that there are rare individuals in that city that, for whatever reason, don't give a damn.

Then you've just called out your own fallacy.

I'm just getting here but I can see by simply looking up two levels in the nest that you just used two broad-brush generalizations, "the right" and "the left". Unless you can prove that what follows applies literally to every member thereof, whatever follows will be a lie.

Nope. Generalizations are generalizations. YOur pretense that you don't understand that is silly.


noun
1.
the act or process of generalizing.
2.
a result of this process; a general statement, idea, or principle.
3.
Logic.

1. a proposition asserting something to be true either of all membersof a certain class or of an indefinite part of that class.

Wrong. It still remains a fatal fallacy, very possibly the most insidious one used on this board. When you declare "the right" or "the left" or any other blanket statement and follow it with an absolute, you accuse every member in it of whatever follows.

Again, unless you can show that that's true of the entire class, then your argument is a lie. And that makes the point useless.

It's also, and I don't know if this point has already been made, a fallacy that is an essential tool to develop racism (or any other kind of bigotry). "They all look alike to me". It belies a profound inability to see and hear. And when it's coupled with an absolute accusation against a race, which is what we call "racism" --- it's an exercise of the same fallacy.

That's exactly why I spend so much energy pushing against that fallacy on this board. It's the sociopathic equivalent of It says "you don't matter, I will now disrespect you by attributing traits to you that you never claimed and do not believe in". That's profoundly ignorant. And divisive.

The bolded portion of the definition shows that it is NOT an absolute.

THus your calling it a lie, is the lie.

 

[Correll]

I think it would be far smarter to completely ignore them.

And then have people who disagree, communicating, listening and slowly improving relations.

The idiots would be completely neutralized with no screaming, no attacking, no deaths.

Things are only getting worse with this approach.
.

Mac, I heard a guy on the news a few nights ago who has just written a book. His claim is that we can defeat racism by being MORE into our "identities," into being tribal, really building feeling of community around us and feeling of belonging in our own cultures, which defeats the reason for racist recruitment--needing a feeling of belonging, of a specific identity. If we have a strong sense of identity, of who we are, we will be more secure and less likely to be hostile or uncomfortable with other groups. Just being white isn't enough. It's way too global and ephemeral.
Wish I could remember where I heard him. It was an interesting and practical idea, actually. Some of the groups that try to "rehabilitate" racists claim the same underlying lack of a positive identity that sucks them in. The racist org gives broken folk a place to feel accepted and gives them a "tribe." Not so different from the lure of gang culture, actually.

That's not the ONLY factor or the only solution, but it was harmless and people have actually been talking about it for years--somehow recouping that feeling of belonging in something secure and positive.

Holy crap, that goes against all my impulses, but I'm open to anything at this point.

Let's not forget that it's Identity Politics, the division of people, that has so many (including myself) at odds with the Left.

Maybe the author might argue that it would depend on the way it's done. If it's done in a combative, divisive way, it simply can't work, because that's what got us here. If there's a way to do it in a civil, cooperate way, then maybe. Of course it takes two to tango...
.

The tribe is the community IMO. No white or black tribes necessary. Local tribes, neighborhood tribes, school group tribes, sports/extracurricular tribes, religious tribes and so on. All of these are well integrated where I live and it is working well.

There are some things predominantly one race or the other, churches for example. There are none that I know of that are exclusively one race. The other race is welcomed (even appreciated), but church music is an acquired taste and we don't seem to acquire other flavors of music so readily. There are whites that prefer black churches (mostly 20 to 30-somethings) and black people who prefer white churches (mostly 60+ and Catholics).

We identify with common interests and common ties more than skin color. We had a rocky time for a bit after Katrina, but the haters mostly moved back to NO, into BR or across the river. The rest seem to have acclimated well and are with the program.

Like politics, IMO, race relations is a local thing until you turn on the TV.

Here's the big picture problem from my perspective: (1) Race has (obviously) become politicized, and when that happens, all arguments get dumbed down to bumper-sticker level and no one wants to get in the weeds. We just want to keep stuff simple enough to fit on a sign. Well, that approach ain't gonna work here. (2) There are too many people who have a vested professional interest in keeping us angry and divided - I'm call them the Division Pimps - and their flocks are all too happy to dance to their tune.

Look at his thread. Accusations and insults, accusations and insults. This is what they want, and it's clearly working.
.

mac, I'm still not sure how heavily armed Nazi's screaming "blood and soil" and "jews won't replace us" and a president who thinks some Nazis are "fine people" isn't political.
....

The nazis were not and are not the only people who didn't want the statues down.

And a reasonable person would realize that Trump was NOT referring to the Nazis screaming "blood and soil" when he made his comment.

 

[Rocko]

I do not think many black people are looking for improved race relations. I think we are simply looking to be RESPECTED, which blacks have never been in this country. From respect comes improved relationships.

I can see that, that's close enough. The question will be how much it's going to take. Most likely a person thing, I suspect.

The problem is that there are so many working so hard to keep everyone angry, that's working against all of us.
.

I understand what you're saying. but being quiet in the face of bigotry isn't what's necessary.

and standing up to bigots isn't exacerbating the problem.

the right's inexplicable defense of the bigots is what is exacerbating the problem. if everyone stood up to the scum, they'd crawl back into their holes......which is where they lived until a political candidate/now president enabled them.

the difference is, in the old days, the orange one would have been marginalized like George Wallace was. apparently after eight years of a black president, the hate-filled pond scum feel enabled by this guy. and don't say no, there is a reason david duke a) reminded trump who made him president' and b) thanked him.

When I talk to a Trump supporter about his (pick an adjective, I'm out) behaviors, their argument is that it's time someone stood up to "the establishment".

The blazingly obvious flaw in that thinking is the assumption that the way he's doing it is the only way.

I don't agree with them, and I don't agree that what we're seeing is the only way to heal racial divisions. I think we're all better than that.
.

I'm not quite sure how anyone who made half his appointments from Goldman Sachs and the other half for their contacts with Russia is fighting 'the establishment".

and one doesn't need to be a racist piece of garbage to oppose the so-called "establishment".

see if you find a single trumptard who stands up to the kkk and neonazi scum. good luck with that.

what is important now for people like you and people like me who don't agree on an awful lot but who agree that neo-Nazis are vile and should certainly shouldn't be enabled, to stand up and be as loud as possible.

I don't worry about making the bullies mad. I worry that we won't.

and I keep remembering "all it takes for evil to prevail is for decent [people] to do nothing".

I think it would be far smarter to completely ignore them.

And then have people who disagree, communicating, listening and slowly improving relations.

The idiots would be completely neutralized with no screaming, no attacking, no deaths.

Things are only getting worse with this approach.
.

In other words jillian is an idiot. Yes, I know Mac,very true. Nazis and white supremacists are a tiny micro-slim-minority with no power whatsoever. Jillian acts like they're a yuuuge problem. She's stupid. Just ignore them and try to live a good life. That goes for black lives matters and antifa, or any other hate group.

 

[jillian]

Mac, I heard a guy on the news a few nights ago who has just written a book. His claim is that we can defeat racism by being MORE into our "identities," into being tribal, really building feeling of community around us and feeling of belonging in our own cultures, which defeats the reason for racist recruitment--needing a feeling of belonging, of a specific identity. If we have a strong sense of identity, of who we are, we will be more secure and less likely to be hostile or uncomfortable with other groups. Just being white isn't enough. It's way too global and ephemeral.
Wish I could remember where I heard him. It was an interesting and practical idea, actually. Some of the groups that try to "rehabilitate" racists claim the same underlying lack of a positive identity that sucks them in. The racist org gives broken folk a place to feel accepted and gives them a "tribe." Not so different from the lure of gang culture, actually.

That's not the ONLY factor or the only solution, but it was harmless and people have actually been talking about it for years--somehow recouping that feeling of belonging in something secure and positive.

Holy crap, that goes against all my impulses, but I'm open to anything at this point.

Let's not forget that it's Identity Politics, the division of people, that has so many (including myself) at odds with the Left.

Maybe the author might argue that it would depend on the way it's done. If it's done in a combative, divisive way, it simply can't work, because that's what got us here. If there's a way to do it in a civil, cooperate way, then maybe. Of course it takes two to tango...
.

The tribe is the community IMO. No white or black tribes necessary. Local tribes, neighborhood tribes, school group tribes, sports/extracurricular tribes, religious tribes and so on. All of these are well integrated where I live and it is working well.

There are some things predominantly one race or the other, churches for example. There are none that I know of that are exclusively one race. The other race is welcomed (even appreciated), but church music is an acquired taste and we don't seem to acquire other flavors of music so readily. There are whites that prefer black churches (mostly 20 to 30-somethings) and black people who prefer white churches (mostly 60+ and Catholics).

We identify with common interests and common ties more than skin color. We had a rocky time for a bit after Katrina, but the haters mostly moved back to NO, into BR or across the river. The rest seem to have acclimated well and are with the program.

Like politics, IMO, race relations is a local thing until you turn on the TV.

Here's the big picture problem from my perspective: (1) Race has (obviously) become politicized, and when that happens, all arguments get dumbed down to bumper-sticker level and no one wants to get in the weeds. We just want to keep stuff simple enough to fit on a sign. Well, that approach ain't gonna work here. (2) There are too many people who have a vested professional interest in keeping us angry and divided - I'm call them the Division Pimps - and their flocks are all too happy to dance to their tune.

Look at his thread. Accusations and insults, accusations and insults. This is what they want, and it's clearly working.
.

mac, I'm still not sure how heavily armed Nazi's screaming "blood and soil" and "jews won't replace us" and a president who thinks some Nazis are "fine people" isn't political.
....

The nazis were not and are not the only people who didn't want the statues down.

And a reasonable person would realize that Trump was NOT referring to the Nazis screaming "blood and soil" when he made his comment.

it's so cute how you defend Nazis.

if you're in a protest.... and the people around you are armed to the teeth and wearing swastikas and shrieking "blood and soil" and "jews won't replace us".... you get the hell out of there or you're a Nazi.

but it's adorable seeing how trumptards try to justify hate.

which, btw, doesn't even go into the fact that there shouldn't be monuments to treasonous losers who fought a war to own people....

 

[jillian]

I can see that, that's close enough. The question will be how much it's going to take. Most likely a person thing, I suspect.

The problem is that there are so many working so hard to keep everyone angry, that's working against all of us.
.

I understand what you're saying. but being quiet in the face of bigotry isn't what's necessary.

and standing up to bigots isn't exacerbating the problem.

the right's inexplicable defense of the bigots is what is exacerbating the problem. if everyone stood up to the scum, they'd crawl back into their holes......which is where they lived until a political candidate/now president enabled them.

the difference is, in the old days, the orange one would have been marginalized like George Wallace was. apparently after eight years of a black president, the hate-filled pond scum feel enabled by this guy. and don't say no, there is a reason david duke a) reminded trump who made him president' and b) thanked him.

When I talk to a Trump supporter about his (pick an adjective, I'm out) behaviors, their argument is that it's time someone stood up to "the establishment".

The blazingly obvious flaw in that thinking is the assumption that the way he's doing it is the only way.

I don't agree with them, and I don't agree that what we're seeing is the only way to heal racial divisions. I think we're all better than that.
.

I'm not quite sure how anyone who made half his appointments from Goldman Sachs and the other half for their contacts with Russia is fighting 'the establishment".

and one doesn't need to be a racist piece of garbage to oppose the so-called "establishment".

see if you find a single trumptard who stands up to the kkk and neonazi scum. good luck with that.

what is important now for people like you and people like me who don't agree on an awful lot but who agree that neo-Nazis are vile and should certainly shouldn't be enabled, to stand up and be as loud as possible.

I don't worry about making the bullies mad. I worry that we won't.

and I keep remembering "all it takes for evil to prevail is for decent [people] to do nothing".

I think it would be far smarter to completely ignore them.

And then have people who disagree, communicating, listening and slowly improving relations.

The idiots would be completely neutralized with no screaming, no attacking, no deaths.

Things are only getting worse with this approach.
.

In other words jillian is an idiot. Yes, I know Mac,very true. Nazis and white supremacists are a tiny micro-slim-minority with no power whatsoever. Jillian acts like they're a yuuuge problem. She's stupid. Just ignore them and try to live a good life. That goes for black lives matters and antifa, or any other hate group.

poor useless as boobs on a bull trumptard.

 

[Correll]

Holy crap, that goes against all my impulses, but I'm open to anything at this point.

Let's not forget that it's Identity Politics, the division of people, that has so many (including myself) at odds with the Left.

Maybe the author might argue that it would depend on the way it's done. If it's done in a combative, divisive way, it simply can't work, because that's what got us here. If there's a way to do it in a civil, cooperate way, then maybe. Of course it takes two to tango...
.

The tribe is the community IMO. No white or black tribes necessary. Local tribes, neighborhood tribes, school group tribes, sports/extracurricular tribes, religious tribes and so on. All of these are well integrated where I live and it is working well.

There are some things predominantly one race or the other, churches for example. There are none that I know of that are exclusively one race. The other race is welcomed (even appreciated), but church music is an acquired taste and we don't seem to acquire other flavors of music so readily. There are whites that prefer black churches (mostly 20 to 30-somethings) and black people who prefer white churches (mostly 60+ and Catholics).

We identify with common interests and common ties more than skin color. We had a rocky time for a bit after Katrina, but the haters mostly moved back to NO, into BR or across the river. The rest seem to have acclimated well and are with the program.

Like politics, IMO, race relations is a local thing until you turn on the TV.

Here's the big picture problem from my perspective: (1) Race has (obviously) become politicized, and when that happens, all arguments get dumbed down to bumper-sticker level and no one wants to get in the weeds. We just want to keep stuff simple enough to fit on a sign. Well, that approach ain't gonna work here. (2) There are too many people who have a vested professional interest in keeping us angry and divided - I'm call them the Division Pimps - and their flocks are all too happy to dance to their tune.

Look at his thread. Accusations and insults, accusations and insults. This is what they want, and it's clearly working.
.

mac, I'm still not sure how heavily armed Nazi's screaming "blood and soil" and "jews won't replace us" and a president who thinks some Nazis are "fine people" isn't political.
....

The nazis were not and are not the only people who didn't want the statues down.

And a reasonable person would realize that Trump was NOT referring to the Nazis screaming "blood and soil" when he made his comment.

it's so cute how you defend Nazis.

if you're in a protest.... and the people around you are armed to the teeth and wearing swastikas and shrieking "blood and soil" and "jews won't replace us".... you get the hell out of there or you're a Nazi.

but it's adorable seeing how trumptards try to justify hate.

which, btw, doesn't even go into the fact that there shouldn't be monuments to treasonous losers who fought a war to own people....

Nothing I said, defended nazis,. That was you being a vile liar.


Your hard line against people who lose and were forgiven and accepted back into American society many generations before you were born, is just you being a drama queen.

 

[Mac1958]

On this issue I definitely lean in that direction - the Left has caused, and continues to cause, great damage because it's so committed to any political advantage it can squeeze out of this. I see it in my own family.

That doesn't mean the Right is blameless, though. First, there are still those who claim/pretend that racism no longer exists to any significant extent, and second, it has shown its own hypersensitivity on the issue. Trump's recent comments, while they may have largely been accurate regarding violence, were tone-deaf in the extreme, and his fans refused to give an inch there.

While I agree the "sides" are not "equal" in blame on this issue, that doesn't preclude both "sides" from cleaning their own house before pointing the finger.

I don't disagree.

I think part of the problem lies in that we have allowed political activists on the left to define the dialogue. (and as a recovering lefty I say that without enmity) Is it racist to dislike someone because of the color of their skin, be it brown, black, white or somewhere in between?...No, it is bigoted. Bigotry is self-defeating, not illegal.

Is it racist to expect those on the dole to pay back to society if of able body or mind?...No, it is prudent. We're out of money. All skin tones are represented on the dole rolls.

Is it racist if a couple is turned down for a mortgage for their dream house because they don't meet the credit standards? No, it's financial sense.

Is it racist to support advocacy groups based on skin color, or prefer the company of like minded or like shaded people? No...it's human nature, tho' not necessarily productive.

Yet there are those in politics who try to convince the electorate that all the above are racist. They are not.

Can we live in any community we choose regardless of our skin color?...or work where we choose regardless of skin color?...or sit anywhere we like on the bus? Why, yes. Yes we can...as long as we can afford the rent, meet the qualifications or pay the fare.

Is it racism when you aren't accepted into your college of choice even though qualified because you have the wrong skin color...or being passed over for a promotion for same? No, it is discrimination no matter the skin color...and discrimination is illegal.

We cannot legislate like and understanding - we can legislate rule of law and equal treatment under that law.

What it may take is for people living in what most of us would describe as beleaguered communities to stand up and demand better of their representatives - as one gentleman did in Chicago at an Al Sharpton meeting - 'we don't need to blame white people, we need to blame the right people' - the race hustlers, the 5th floor (mayors office).

I do offer an example of institutionalized (governmental) racism alive and well today - the myth that the government can do a better job of making choices for us than we can. That's a crime against the entire human race. On a smaller scale?...condemning inner city kids to failing schools and lowered expectations of behavior and success.

We are so locked in to judging by externals that I don't know where it goes - For example: A white store clerk is rude to me. I think - wow, how rude. The same clerk is rude to the black gal behind me - what does she think?...wow, how racist? Or reverse the clerks skin color and do I think - wow how bigoted? What does the black gal think?

This I do know - we've made great strides in my lifetime.

Good stuff.

I know I've long since lapsed into "broken record" status with this, but I feel strongly that the entire conversation is being controlled and manipulated by those I call the Division Pimps - those on both ends of the spectrum who have a vested professional interest in keeping us divided and angry. They exist in the "media", politics, even popular culture, and together with the internet, they're dragging the ends of this in opposite directions.

But they can't do it alone - they're being enabled by their flocks, the fans and followers who eat it up and apply the same binary thought patterns to their everyday lives. And now, partisan politics is essentially inescapable. It's everywhere.

We need some kind of driver, something to create a momentum that will marginalize both the Division Pimps and their flocks, at least to some degree. Clearly we can't do this ourselves, because the ends of the spectrum aren't after healing, they just care about beating the other side.
.

 

[Mac1958]

I can see that, that's close enough. The question will be how much it's going to take. Most likely a person thing, I suspect.

The problem is that there are so many working so hard to keep everyone angry, that's working against all of us.
.

I understand what you're saying. but being quiet in the face of bigotry isn't what's necessary.

and standing up to bigots isn't exacerbating the problem.

the right's inexplicable defense of the bigots is what is exacerbating the problem. if everyone stood up to the scum, they'd crawl back into their holes......which is where they lived until a political candidate/now president enabled them.

the difference is, in the old days, the orange one would have been marginalized like George Wallace was. apparently after eight years of a black president, the hate-filled pond scum feel enabled by this guy. and don't say no, there is a reason david duke a) reminded trump who made him president' and b) thanked him.

When I talk to a Trump supporter about his (pick an adjective, I'm out) behaviors, their argument is that it's time someone stood up to "the establishment".

The blazingly obvious flaw in that thinking is the assumption that the way he's doing it is the only way.

I don't agree with them, and I don't agree that what we're seeing is the only way to heal racial divisions. I think we're all better than that.
.

I'm not quite sure how anyone who made half his appointments from Goldman Sachs and the other half for their contacts with Russia is fighting 'the establishment".

and one doesn't need to be a racist piece of garbage to oppose the so-called "establishment".

see if you find a single trumptard who stands up to the kkk and neonazi scum. good luck with that.

what is important now for people like you and people like me who don't agree on an awful lot but who agree that neo-Nazis are vile and should certainly shouldn't be enabled, to stand up and be as loud as possible.

I don't worry about making the bullies mad. I worry that we won't.

and I keep remembering "all it takes for evil to prevail is for decent [people] to do nothing".

I think it would be far smarter to completely ignore them.

And then have people who disagree, communicating, listening and slowly improving relations.

The idiots would be completely neutralized with no screaming, no attacking, no deaths.

Things are only getting worse with this approach.
.

In other words jillian is an idiot. Yes, I know Mac,very true. Nazis and white supremacists are a tiny micro-slim-minority with no power whatsoever. Jillian acts like they're a yuuuge problem. She's stupid. Just ignore them and try to live a good life. That goes for black lives matters and antifa, or any other hate group.

Jillian is not an idiot, far from it. She disagrees with you (and me, on this topic).

The "you disagree with me, so you're dumb" canard is a big part of the problem.
.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Must be another pledge drive going on.

The troll is trying to hijack the thread. It happens. So, back to the conversation.

There was a conversation earlier here about how hyper-sensitive both "sides" of this issue are to outside criticism, and how it's likely that the only way forward may be to demand that each "side" clean its own house.

I'm believing that more and more. You?
.

oh, yes.

I have seen a greater inclination from conservatives to distance themselves from the actual nazis and kkk types than I have the left, however. I don't think I have ever seen a lefty challenge any of extreme black racists who post here, but I HAVE seen it from the conservatives.

On this issue I definitely lean in that direction - the Left has caused, and continues to cause, great damage because it's so committed to any political advantage it can squeeze out of this. I see it in my own family.

That doesn't mean the Right is blameless, though. First, there are still those who claim/pretend that racism no longer exists to any significant extent, and second, it has shown its own hypersensitivity on the issue. Trump's recent comments, while they may have largely been accurate regarding violence, were tone-deaf in the extreme, and his fans refused to give an inch there.

While I agree the "sides" are not "equal" in blame on this issue, that doesn't preclude both "sides" from cleaning their own house before pointing the finger.
.

As far as sides are concerned, I tend to see human nature in terms of our ego, and what it extends to cover -- I think of them as concentric circles of ego. Our first concerns are ourselves, and so our defenses are heightened towards any threats, thereof. Our second is towards our immediate family, and then our real or perceived clan. Each set involves the establishment of double standards based upon that protectiveness.

This idea that we do not all have a generalized American identity, but only very rigid racial, ethnic, gender or sexual ones is utterly counterproductive to the notion of eliminating racism since it divides the world into us and them. One might as well offer up that we should engage in profligate and indiscriminate unprotected sex in order to combat aids -- it is THAT obvious.

How anybody could think that the establishment of a rigid system of identities replete with those that are acceptable and those that are not is unrelated to the resulting racism it produces should have their head examined. Those who do are so caught up in their desperate need to sound just like everybody else on the subject that they never stop to THINK. Not in any meaningful way, anyway.

 

[Rocko]

Is there anyone here, or does anyone here know of anyone, who wants to see race relations improve?

No, I don't mean "beat" the other "side". No, I don't mean punishing the other side for their opinions. No, I'm not talking about the political angles, particularly pointing the finger and blaming the other guy.

I mean, is anyone aware of anyone whose top priority is better, more open, more positive, more civil, more constructive, more fruitful human relationships between the races?

Dead serious question. Examples would be great. Links would be great.
.

I know some individuals, but as long as we have a media that magnifies differences instead of encouraging commonalities, race relations will only deteriorate.

When an authoritarian brand of identity politics replaced liberalism as the guiding principle of the left, the die was cast. Liberalism encourages a color-blind society while this new leftist authoritarianism is all about color.

Ignoring race and racism isn't going to magically make race relations better.

You guys really don't get it, do you?

How come you guys look at one side of racism? When you do that that pisses a lot of people off. Heck by you "fighting racism" you're probably manufacturing more racism.

 

[Rocko]

I understand what you're saying. but being quiet in the face of bigotry isn't what's necessary.

and standing up to bigots isn't exacerbating the problem.

the right's inexplicable defense of the bigots is what is exacerbating the problem. if everyone stood up to the scum, they'd crawl back into their holes......which is where they lived until a political candidate/now president enabled them.

the difference is, in the old days, the orange one would have been marginalized like George Wallace was. apparently after eight years of a black president, the hate-filled pond scum feel enabled by this guy. and don't say no, there is a reason david duke a) reminded trump who made him president' and b) thanked him.

When I talk to a Trump supporter about his (pick an adjective, I'm out) behaviors, their argument is that it's time someone stood up to "the establishment".

The blazingly obvious flaw in that thinking is the assumption that the way he's doing it is the only way.

I don't agree with them, and I don't agree that what we're seeing is the only way to heal racial divisions. I think we're all better than that.
.

I'm not quite sure how anyone who made half his appointments from Goldman Sachs and the other half for their contacts with Russia is fighting 'the establishment".

and one doesn't need to be a racist piece of garbage to oppose the so-called "establishment".

see if you find a single trumptard who stands up to the kkk and neonazi scum. good luck with that.

what is important now for people like you and people like me who don't agree on an awful lot but who agree that neo-Nazis are vile and should certainly shouldn't be enabled, to stand up and be as loud as possible.

I don't worry about making the bullies mad. I worry that we won't.

and I keep remembering "all it takes for evil to prevail is for decent [people] to do nothing".

I think it would be far smarter to completely ignore them.

And then have people who disagree, communicating, listening and slowly improving relations.

The idiots would be completely neutralized with no screaming, no attacking, no deaths.

Things are only getting worse with this approach.
.

In other words jillian is an idiot. Yes, I know Mac,very true. Nazis and white supremacists are a tiny micro-slim-minority with no power whatsoever. Jillian acts like they're a yuuuge problem. She's stupid. Just ignore them and try to live a good life. That goes for black lives matters and antifa, or any other hate group.

Jillian is not an idiot, far from it. She disagrees with you (and me, on this topic).

The "you disagree with me, so you're dumb" canard is a big part of the problem.
.

I beg to differ, Jillian is complete moron. I say that not because she disagrees with me, I say that because she proves it over and over again with her thoughtless posts. It is her who believes she owns the moral and intellectual high ground over anyone that disagrees with her.

 

[ricechickie]

It's not about hurt feelings; it's just ineffective because of the hurt feelings.

I'm telling you how it is, but it's not how you want it to be. That's not my problem.

If we have pro-job policies and put out the truth about how illegitimacy is harmful to children, young women are going to have the option of finding fathers who can also be providers.


That some single moms, and their political allies are unhappy does not stop that, unless we let them.

If you put out that truth, you are only putting out part of the story.

Is it always best to have a two-parent home when one is abusive? Is a two-parent home best when both are miserable with each other?

Education is about more than propagandizing the American dream. Honest conversations need to be had, more than prescribing how people behave. Meaning that, with all other things being equal, a two-parent home works better because it is easier to raise a child with a committed partner. Because there's someone else to pick up the slack. Because you have another pair of ears and eyes and another person's judgment for the tough problems.

i think we can get the message out that illegitimacy is bad, without encouraging staying with abusive men.

Not if you point a blaming finger at single black moms for all of society's ills.

Just like I will be hesitant to discuss things with you because your insistence that "the left" won't give an inch, when I have bent over backward to be reasonable in my dialogue.

And yes, I am now defensive.

Accusing me of "blaming single black moms for all of society's ills" is an interesting way to show defensiveness.

I took the time to include the word "if", which acts as a qualifier. That is be an "accusation" you can opt out of.

 

[Mac1958]

How anybody could think that the establishment of a rigid system of identities replete with those that are acceptable and those that are not is unrelated to the resulting racism it produces should have their head examined.

Well, I've thought quite a bit about that, and my (at least current) opinion is that it's not about sanity, it's about strategy.

I was dead serious in the OP. I've come to the conclusion that there are many to whom real racial healing would be an anathema, because it would rob them of what they perceive to be political advantage. I'm not being hyperbolic.
.

 

[Rocko]

To a liberal only a white Christian male can be racist. What they mean by talking about racism
Is bashing white Christian men.

 

[ricechickie]

I do not think many black people are looking for improved race relations. I think we are simply looking to be RESPECTED, which blacks have never been in this country. From respect comes improved relationships.

I don't mean to make a trite response. But, respect has to be earned.

And it is earned by proving we deserve it. Showing we've worked hard to educate ourselves, maintaining and doing a good job, showing that we are honest and trustworthy, treating others with respect, and so on. There is no magic to it.

Except, that simply "demanding" respect, or acting tough, is stupid; it doesn't work. And it shouldn't. Again: respect has to be earned. Then, respect will be given, and it will be genuine.

The "respect" random people or casual acquaintances want is usually "common courtesy" or "manners." I don't think we are talking about the kind of respect that is earned. We are talking about how you speak to someone, your tone and your words and your body language. I'm sure there are exceptions, but The Golden Rule has served me well.

If I need to rant or vent, that's what political message boards are for lol.

I agree with everyting you've written. Of course people should treat other people with simple respect. In casual meetings, etc. That's just part of having decent manners and knowing how to conduct ourselves around others.

In my earlier post I was talking about the kind of serious respect that people often yearn for. That kind of respect has to be earned.

But you can't go around rioting and looting and expect anyone to respect you. It's not gonna happen. All that will accomplish is to convince decent people that they should move as far as possible from you.

Who are you talking to? Who is doing the rioting and looting?

Maybe you didn't mean to, but you seem to be accusing people of rioting and looting, and witholding respect until they can prove their innocence in such activity.

When you wrote "you," who was your intended audience?

Read the thread. All of the answers are there. Why did you post before trying to understand what you are posting about.

This is how NOT to have an honest conversation.

Please don't worry yourself about responding to me again.