You want some figures, huh? Well lets start with racism against the black populace in this country:Mezmer said:I have a few issues with this: 1) That article was written in 1993, almost 20 years ago. 2) He didn't even say anything, or provide any proof. He provided 1 personal experience in that whole article, and draws an opinionated conclusion based on it. That's called insufficient evidence. 3) I have to believe racism is dying. I'm part of a generation that, for the most part, doesn't even think about it. People are people. That's it. Call me naive. Call me misguided. But are you really going to try and disprove an optimism that world could really use more of? I'm giving you my point of view. I think it's a pretty good one, don't you?
http://tinyurl.com/62f2evo
^^Notice the gap?
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104552.html
^^This only shows the gap up until '06, but let's face it: there was a 16 grand gap in median in income in '75, and by '06 the gap had "shrunk" to roughly 19 grand. I used "shrunk" because inflation actually outpaced the gap, effectively diminishing it. Take a look at the distribution of incomes as well - white percentiles consistently remain more skewed towards higher income throughout the sampling period. Being written almost two decades ago doesn't change the circumstances the average black man faces in America.
In addition, do you really think your generation doesn't care about race? Google search "racist" and check the news. This stuff shows up daily. Need I remind you that one of the biggest issues of the last campaign to decide the leader of the free world was whether or not the candidate in question was an "Arab"?
I'm not saying optimism is the bad way to go in this case, but optimism in the face of clear and undeniable evidence to the contrary is simply wrong and not "an optimism that world could really use more of"
tl;dr: The authors statements are supported by figures, and your opinion isn't more valid just because it's optimistic if it denies the existence of facts to be optimistic.
Wow... well, maybe I should have double checked my facts before I said that, thanks for the correction. My criticism does seem rather irrelevant now. Good point, I must say I am more or less convinced by your argument.BobDobolina said:Jews have like a whole heritage year chock full of religious holidays and significant dates. Native American Heritage Month is November. It's actually not a very relevant criticism.
Someone's opinionated screed on WikiPedia is not that interesting as evidence, either. Let's face it: Black History Month is significant enough that most North Americans here, even those who irrationally hate or fear or resent or disparage it, know (sort of) what it is and when it is. The same can't be said of "National Cherry Month."