|
United States4222 Posts
I feel as though, in today's world, we have done a fairly good job eliminating overt racism. No longer are we allowed to look at someone and hate them because of their skin colr, and in all actuality, hating someone simply because of their race has been diminished. Sure, there are still racist jerks out there who hate people for their ethnicity, but as far as I can tell, the majority of young Americans have lost that kind of thought.
However, I also feel as though we are still allowed to discriminate against cultures. I can't even count how many times I've heard "I don't hate black people. I hate ghetto black people." Basically, they are saying they don't hate a race the hate a socioeconomic class, and most people don't have a problem with this. The line of thought seems to be that a person cannot help their skin tone but certainly they can help their behavior. Obviously, as sociological studies have shown, circumstances affect your behavior greatly, and the idea that one can simply act privileged when one is not is untrue.
So my first question to teamliquid is: do you believe the form of classism I described is more common than ordinary racism? And is it a problem?
Consider:
The thought that people cannot help most of their behaviors and that it is unfair to discriminate based upon these generalized behaviors is somewhat odd. Choosing who you like, after all, is an inherently discriminatory process. You are choosing some people over another. Is it wrong to have the deciding factor be actions and behaviors derived from class? and if it is what do we decide upon? If it's not where do we stop in the other direction? at skin tone? at nothing?
|
Considering that there isn't any biological reality for race and scientists have known this for many years your argument just comes down to racism, which will always exist.
|
United States4222 Posts
|
On October 28 2009 10:22 DamageControL wrote:
we have done a fairly good job eliminating overt racism.....but as far as I can tell, the majority of young Americans have lost that kind of thought.
I agree, but the effects of racism of the past can still be seen today in poor communities. It's not as simple as teaching people that not every asian kid is great at math...I also think you are treading an unnecessarily thin line by saying that you hate "ghetto black people" as a socioeconomic class.
|
My point was that you were talking about overcoming "racism" as if it were a biological phenomena which it isn't.
|
"I don't hate black people. I hate ghetto black people."
This is not a problem, because ghetto refers to the way people act. Not merely by their skin colour.
Example, I could say I hate people who use illegal drugs, because it is the way they act, not because of the skin colour.
Please note that the word hate seems a bit extreme in both cases, but I think what people really intend is "People who use drugs really really bother me and I don't want to be around them."
Being in a certain social class does not mean that you must talk/dress a certain way. It's merely a choice, just like drugs for example.
|
On October 28 2009 11:55 andeh wrote:This is not a problem, because ghetto refers to the way people act. Not merely by their skin colour. Example, I could say I hate people who use illegal drugs, because it is the way they act, not because of the skin colour. Please note that the word hate seems a bit extreme in both cases, but I think what people really intend is "People who use drugs really really bother me and I don't want to be around them." Being in a certain social class does not mean that you must talk/dress a certain way. It's merely a choice, just like drugs for example.
the issue here ( i believe) is that in those subclasses ( i.g drug users) there is an enormous diversity so stating i hate drug users is a generalization based on very little information, and thus it leads to erroneous conclusions, much like being racist.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
Culture and ethnicity are tied together closely enough that we can say (for the purpose of this) that they are the same thing.
Sure, there are still racist jerks out there who hate people for their ethnicity, but as far as I can tell, the majority of young Americans have lost that kind of thought.
However, I also feel as though we are still allowed to discriminate against cultures.
That makes this a contradictory statement. Race is a concept that exists solely to describe physical features (as slaughter mentioned - it has no basis in anything). Typically what is labeled 'racism' (in America) would be more accurately described as 'discrimination along ethnic/social/economic boundaries'.
|
On October 28 2009 10:22 DamageControL wrote:
The thought that people cannot help most of their behaviors and that it is unfair to discriminate based upon these generalized behaviors is somewhat odd. Choosing who you like, after all, is an inherently discriminatory process. You are choosing some people over another. Is it wrong to have the deciding factor be actions and behaviors derived from class? and if it is what do we decide upon? If it's not where do we stop in the other direction? at skin tone? at nothing?
A comment, I found this very difficult to read even if I could tell where you were going.
+ Show Spoiler +
I'm just trying to guess why this is hard to read, but help noun instead of help verb, throws me off a little. or help with, or control
thought that... and that... is ->thoughts ... are
discriminate against X, be discriminatory
Finally is the first thought really odd, or is it given the first thought the second thought is odd? unfair then odd, kind of a confusing double negative.
based on? Sorry, it's just that I read expecting the language to throw differently, but then I get sidetracked from comprehension by these irregularities.
Deciding factor, decide upon makes it sound like you're weighing pros and cons. Isn't it more like I dislike poor people?
in the other direction of what?
It sounds like we're expected to pick a group to like. I don't see why this is necessary, but that would be a discriminatory process. Class would be like I hate black people that do drugs, whereas the alternative would be for physical reasons (I hate black people because they got 'fros) or non economic cultural ones (they like the rap music).
On reflection, let me present a few examples of racism. Korean grocer shoots black guy in LA riots. I'm guessing Koreans hated blacks because they were greedy thieves, blacks hated koreans because koreans were defending the grocer. Racial profiling, police pull over black guys in cars because they think they probably stole it. Latinos, they took our jerbs!
|
On October 28 2009 11:55 andeh wrote:This is not a problem, because ghetto refers to the way people act. Not merely by their skin colour. Example, I could say I hate people who use illegal drugs, because it is the way they act, not because of the skin colour. Please note that the word hate seems a bit extreme in both cases, but I think what people really intend is "People who use drugs really really bother me and I don't want to be around them." Being in a certain social class does not mean that you must talk/dress a certain way. It's merely a choice, just like drugs for example.
Now you're discriminating against people who have a genetic predisposition to addiction, you racist bastard! Get im!
|
All this worrying about political correctness makes me go bleeeeeeeh.
|
i think we should let another racism blog expire before making a new one
|
By the way, racism isn't really that dead. Try going to the boonies of the South and you'll still see a fair amount of racism.
As for urban areas, yes you are right in the shift of discrimination from race to culture. This is because race is something you are born with, not something you are raised with. Modern liberalism (which is the ethos most Western democratic countries follow) tries to give validation for each person's life based on what choices they make in life, not on what they are born with. That is why discrimination has shifted to culture, not race. Most cultures are seen as something that people are raised with; that is, it is something they can choose to accept or reject. The amount of of discrimination people have against cultures varies on the individual belief about how much upbringings influence who people are.
|
On October 28 2009 11:34 Slaughter wrote:
My point was that you were talking about overcoming "racism" as if it were a biological phenomena which it isn't.
Who says it isn't? It's certainly a sociological phenomena, but that might be the natural result of some deeper psychological phenomena. If that's true, then it's there because it's buried in our genes somehow, somewhere. In which case it's biological.
|
There's nothing wrong with hating another culture. Hate is just an instance of preference. You're asking for dishonesty or repression; humans group and marginalize by nature.
I don't understand the ethical imperative of moderating preferences. In the end, we are judged by our acts.
|
Eh, racism is still strong, you're just not looking hard enough. That said, I think your statement that we've done a good job at eliminating overt racism is much overstated. Certainly it's improved, but in the right places it's still strong, and saying we've done a "good job" is an inappropriate statement given the situation, and furthermore discounts the long journey still ahead. Moreover, "covert" racism is still prevalent, and next to that, the fact that overt racism has improved becomes far less impressive. I felt the need to post that because I find a lot of people share a similar misconception.
As far as cultural discrimination. I recommend you pick up a well known book called "Orientalism" by Edward Said. It wholly deals with this issue pretty brilliantly. In a simplistic summary, it goes into the Western need to discriminate against other cultures just by virtue of basic human nature. We need to see the two sides of the coin; the good and the bad; the rational and the mystical; as a way to define ourselves, and feel that we are progressing.
|
Hm. When I read your "I don't hate black people, I hate ghetto black people" thing, I felt like I could relate.
I live in Georgia (right outside Atlanta), and there's a relatively large African American population in my city. Although I don't have a lot of African American friends, the ones I do have definitely seem to project that mindset-- they really don't like the African Americans that wear their pants stupidly low, yell obnoxiously loud, and talk in really uneducated manners.
I tend to agree with them on that as well, but it's not because I hate their social economic class, but rather because I dislike their behavior. Despite nurture being a large influence on the way they grew up, I can personally say that living in a poor area isn't a good excuse for being "ghetto."
|
On October 28 2009 14:10 lejason wrote:
Eh, racism is still strong, you're just not looking hard enough. That said, I think your statement that we've done a good job at eliminating overt racism is much overstated. Certainly it's improved, but in the right places it's still strong, and saying we've done a "good job" is an inappropriate statement given the situation, and furthermore discounts the long journey still ahead. Moreover, "covert" racism is still prevalent, and next to that, the fact that overt racism has improved becomes far less impressive. I felt the need to post that because I find a lot of people share a similar misconception.
As far as cultural discrimination. I recommend you pick up a well known book called "Orientalism" by Edward Said. It wholly deals with this issue pretty brilliantly. In a simplistic summary, it goes into the Western need to discriminate against other cultures just by virtue of basic human nature. We need to see the two sides of the coin; the good and the bad; the rational and the mystical; as a way to define ourselves, and feel that we are progressing.
load of shit
aegraen?
|
feel that we are progressing. The modern concept of progress is not ingrained in human nature; it is a construction which has existed for around 200 years.
|
On October 28 2009 15:37 L wrote: The modern concept of progress is not ingrained in human nature; it is a construction which has existed for around 200 years.
no, i think you're misinterpreting the meaning of the word progress, and limiting its definition to a conceptual idea. progress has been around a lot longer than that. and it's part of human nature insofar as society gravitates towards it. i'm not using progress in the Hegelian sense, which you seem to be alluding too, but in the sense that society naturally expands itself.
external cultures become "the other" to the western world and we see them in that way because we just need to have this contrast so we can better understand them, and through that, ourselves. Humans in general understand things through contrast; black and white; hot and cold; male and female. So for instance, we see ourselves as advanced, and in contrast, we see other cultures as primitive. Therein we achieve a sense of progress through a system of comparison--Said's basically points this out. His book goes into the implications that arise from this system of comparison. One possible example that this could be applied to is early Christendom and their viewing other cultures as primitive and therefore inferior, which they used to justify the various brutal conquests that they enacted without remorse. And obviously we can apply this concept in viewing the present day as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
