Some thoughts on Racism

[l33t.heathen]

it can take otherwise complicated issues and reduce them down to black and white

I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE!

 

[Stu35]

2) Now I don't know about the rest of the world but there is a lot of anger here about the preferential treatment that asylum seekers get upon entering Australia. Most of the time upon getting entry they are put straight into housing trust, which is something very hard to Australian citizens to get, and can be put on benefits for around $50,000 a year which is scandalous when you consider the average wage for a full time worker is something like $35,00 a year and pensioners who have worked all their life can only get $28,000 a year (btw don't quote me on these numbers I may be recalling them incorrectly). Anyway, people who are protesting this treatment may be misunderstood as being racist because it seems they are against immigrants when really they are against the government for not helping out their own people this much as well.

I'm just going to address this one - I'm not convinced by this paragraph.

It reads like something the Daily Mail (a right wing, anti-immigration tabloid in the UK), would post about asylum Seekers here to rile their small minded readership up.

However, what the Daily Mail DOES do in this country, is insist that we should be more like Australia - Your nations stringent migration laws and treatment of asylum seekers is actually held up as an example by the British right wing on how we SHOULD be doing migration, and we're probably the most xenophobic, anti-migration country in Europe.


I'm not convinced by the rest of what you're saying either, this is just the easiest one for me to address, and by itself starts to discredit whatever argument you may have wanted to construct.

 

[Malty Milk Whistle]

2) Now I don't know about the rest of the world but there is a lot of anger here about the preferential treatment that asylum seekers get upon entering Australia. Most of the time upon getting entry they are put straight into housing trust, which is something very hard to Australian citizens to get, and can be put on benefits for around $50,000 a year which is scandalous when you consider the average wage for a full time worker is something like $35,00 a year and pensioners who have worked all their life can only get $28,000 a year (btw don't quote me on these numbers I may be recalling them incorrectly). Anyway, people who are protesting this treatment may be misunderstood as being racist because it seems they are against immigrants when really they are against the government for not helping out their own people this much as well.

I'm just going to address this one - I'm not convinced by this paragraph.

It reads like something the Daily Mail (a right wing, anti-immigration tabloid in the UK), would post about asylum Seekers here to rile their small minded readership up.

However, what the Daily Mail DOES do in this country, is insist that we should be more like Australia - Your nations stringent migration laws and treatment of asylum seekers is actually held up as an example by the British right wing on how we SHOULD be doing migration, and we're probably the most xenophobic, anti-migration country in Europe.


I'm not convinced by the rest of what you're saying either, this is just the easiest one for me to address, and by itself starts to discredit whatever argument you may have wanted to construct.

Reading OP's post, I just wanna say 'This'. UK is fairly bad at things, with being polite often being confused with being 'PC' and 'PC' associated with hand-wringing namby pamby guardian readers.
My cousin (who's fairly to the right in her views) went to Oz on a work placement, and was pretty appalled with treatment most non-whites get (She's half Libyan, but gets away with it due to merely looking tan). Anecdotal evidence I know, but it goes hand in hand with the view of Australia that we're confronted with (and the Mail glorifies)
seriously, if the Daily Mail is your supporter, it may be time to reassess your priorities.

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

Well you have to remember that the racism you tend to see/hear about in today's First World nations doesn't seem like such a big deal to those who have never been a target of it. To those that have been, it's a very real and big deal that needs to be addressed; even if the situation is better then it was one hundred years ago. While "Whites only" signs aren't seen now-a-days in the U.S., I'm sure plenty of African-Americans have felt the sting of discrimination. Latin-Americans from Central/South American nations tend to get some shit for moving into the nation even up in the "liberal" Northeast or in California. Are they banned from working in areas or legally discriminated against? No, in fact some would argue the opposite, but there is still some racism present.

One thing to remember about the racial inequality in various areas isn't always due to an active attempt to oppress. Some of it is just after-effects of years, decades, or centuries of inequality. Socioeconomic mobility can be quite hard in some places for anybody, so it's just made all the harder when you've got the lingering remnants of racial discrimination piled on top. Which goes a long way to explaining why the average African-American has a lower standard of living then the average European-American. I'm sure there are still some in power who "wish to keep the Black Man down", but I don't believe that's the cause of the vast majority of cases dealing with socioeconomic inequality.

 

[gargantual]

Consider that only 50 or so years ago blacks and white were still segregated in the US and blacks were treated horribly. That was an attitude that goes back to Ancient Greece or even further which is thousands of years and I think the jumps society has made in such a short time are pretty good really.

History major here correcting your statement. Race doesn't go back to ancient Greece at all. You're probably thinking that because there were slaves in ancient Greece, it was a racial thing, but it wasn't. Slaves were enemies captured in battle. To say that race had anything to do with it is anachronistic.

In fact, race is a pretty new concept. It goes back to about the 17th century. Chattel slavery, which is what the American south practiced, was a unique kind of slavery based on white supremacy. Race wasn't a thing in ancient times. There are no words in ancient greek that translate to "race."

I posted something on my friends Facebook trying to explain the significance of race in American society, and I think it applies here:

"What made the white race so successful, as a whole?"

Let me try to answer that. I recently took a 3 hour exit exam for my Master's in History, and covering American history from the 1600's to present, all I talked about was race. I would argue it's one of the most important themes when analyzing our country's culture, and it took me seven years of college to figure that out.

The white race was so successful, as whole, because they invented the game. It's easy to win when you make the rules.

Race is a social construct. White people made it up. There was no such thing as race in ancient rome. It came about in the 17th century as white people moved into new territory and needed an excuse to justify it. White people were classifying everything at the time, and since you're writing the rule book, you might as well put yourself on top.

Now to understand race you need to understand the concept of "othering." We ultimately define everything, not by what it is, but by what it is not.

What does it mean to be black? It means you're not white. Language is nothing but a collection of metaphors, and thus imperfect. We only understand things by comparing them against others.

Now what does it mean to be white? There's a pretty sweet book by David Roediger called "Wages of Whiteness," and it explains how whiteness came about in America.

Basically it came from trying to get jobs. Dirty, smelly European immigrants came into the country, and found the job selection less than satisfactory. But they had one thing going for them, and that was their fair skin. Now it came time to one-up the competition.

"I'm better to hire because I"m not a negro, I"m WHITE." Nobody wanted to hire negros, because, black people, and nobody really wanted to hire immigrants, but that was definitely better than hiring a negro.

Immigrants joined the winning team, and many were able to successfully claim whiteness and as a result find better jobs. What did it mean that you were white? It means you weren't a negro.

White people are the winning team because it's a rigged game. Whiteness became a concept because of othering. "We're not like those savage negroes. We're different, and other races should be subordinate to us because they're not us."

Race is a tool of imperialism. It justified European conquests around the world and has been used to artificially categorize and separate us.

Saving this one. Very in-depth studies man.

 

[Mr.Cynic88]

snip

This is just utterly ridiculous and completely blows my mind that someone claiming to have a history major could be so completely ignorant.

You?re saying that with a rude and overly aggressive attitude, so now I?m going to have to school you.

What you?re saying isn?t wrong per say, in terms of general understanding about the past, but you?re using anachronistic language. RACISM, according to OED, ?is the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.? It was first used in 1903. That?s the 20th century pal. Like I said, the concept of RACE was somewhere around the 17th century, as the white men were expanding and justifying their conquests.

Now what you?re confusing for racism is that othering concept that I was talking about. Everybody judges themselves against others. The others are always savage idiots, worthy of contempt. E.G. my opinion of you right now.
You?re right that every group tends to hate the other, but that isn?t racism. Racism is the specific thing I noted above.

The word ?barbarians? comes from ancient greek. The Greeks called all of the outlying tribes barbarians. It?s translation: ?doesn?t speak Greek.?

I wasn?t blaming everything on white people, I was blaming a specific historical phenomena. If I were typing a paper I?d direct you to the books on the subject, but this is an Internet forum, and I have to make dinner.

Trust me, I?m properly contextualizing my statements within the historical period I?m talking about. You on the other hand are trying to apply racism, a specific phenomenon, a thousand years before it was invented.

Now what you said isn?t wrong in sentiment. The world is a big crazy place and there?s no one answer to everything. People have hated each other across time. You?re right about that. Technology is always a huge factor. As were natural resources. People fill libraries writing about these subjects. It?s kind of hard to say it all in a Facebook post about one specific topic.

All I?m saying is this, before you start calling me ignorant, first get a handle on what I?m actually saying. If it?s too complex for you to wrap your mind around, just be quiet and say nothing. It?ll make you look a lot better that calling me ignorant on a topic that?s probably just a little bit out of your reach.

 

[Mr.Cynic88]

Saving this one. Very in-depth studies man.

Thank you.

snip

I sincerely hope you get to move on to a PHD and write a book, because I would buy that book. I would buy the hell out of that book.

Thank you kindly.

I have no intention of pursuing a phd, but I don't see why I couldn't write a book. I like the idea of writing history for the layman, that gives real analysis but is aimed at regular people to be entertaining.

 

[Nathaniel Grey]

I understand your points but I'm confused. Who thinks Australians are racist? If they are, who are they racist against? Are you referring to immigrants, if so do they complain about said racism?

 

[rasputin0009]

A few days ago, I was sitting next to a cheery Pakistani girl and her boyfriend, who were chatting and minding their own business. Suddenly, a woman in front of her tried to hit her, told her to shut her fucking mouth, said that we ought to deport all the filthy immigrant sand niggers, and complimented her on her mustache before marching off the bus.

(For the record, the Pakistani girl had significantly less facial hair than the woman attacking her.)

The girl then leaned back, looking upset and said "Not again."

And I live in CANADA, land of immigration and accepting all other cultures.

So no, I don't think racism is overplayed. Not when this happens on a regular basis.

Oh Canada. It's so funny how quickly we forget that most of our families immigrated only in the last 120 years. My best friend recently tried convincing me that "reverse racism" is a thing (insinuating that there's an accepted kind of racism) because we give "preferential" treatment to immigrants. I pointed out that his family has only been in Canada for four generations.

I also don't think racism is overplayed anywhere. The only way to fix a problem is admitting that there is a problem. I know I can be racist at times. For example, my room-mate's truck was stolen last week, and I non-chalantly said "It's probably on a native reserve, already". That's obviously racist, and I'm gonna have to work on that.

 

[hermes]

Consider that only 50 or so years ago blacks and white were still segregated in the US and blacks were treated horribly. That was an attitude that goes back to Ancient Greece or even further which is thousands of years and I think the jumps society has made in such a short time are pretty good really.

History major here correcting your statement. Race doesn't go back to ancient Greece at all. You're probably thinking that because there were slaves in ancient Greece, it was a racial thing, but it wasn't. Slaves were enemies captured in battle. To say that race had anything to do with it is anachronistic.

In fact, race is a pretty new concept. It goes back to about the 17th century. Chattel slavery, which is what the American south practiced, was a unique kind of slavery based on white supremacy. Race wasn't a thing in ancient times. There are no words in ancient greek that translate to "race."

I posted something on my friends Facebook trying to explain the significance of race in American society, and I think it applies here:

"What made the white race so successful, as a whole?"

Let me try to answer that. I recently took a 3 hour exit exam for my Master's in History, and covering American history from the 1600's to present, all I talked about was race. I would argue it's one of the most important themes when analyzing our country's culture, and it took me seven years of college to figure that out.

The white race was so successful, as whole, because they invented the game. It's easy to win when you make the rules.

Race is a social construct. White people made it up. There was no such thing as race in ancient rome. It came about in the 17th century as white people moved into new territory and needed an excuse to justify it. White people were classifying everything at the time, and since you're writing the rule book, you might as well put yourself on top.

Now to understand race you need to understand the concept of "othering." We ultimately define everything, not by what it is, but by what it is not.

What does it mean to be black? It means you're not white. Language is nothing but a collection of metaphors, and thus imperfect. We only understand things by comparing them against others.

Now what does it mean to be white? There's a pretty sweet book by David Roediger called "Wages of Whiteness," and it explains how whiteness came about in America.

Basically it came from trying to get jobs. Dirty, smelly European immigrants came into the country, and found the job selection less than satisfactory. But they had one thing going for them, and that was their fair skin. Now it came time to one-up the competition.

"I'm better to hire because I"m not a negro, I"m WHITE." Nobody wanted to hire negros, because, black people, and nobody really wanted to hire immigrants, but that was definitely better than hiring a negro.

Immigrants joined the winning team, and many were able to successfully claim whiteness and as a result find better jobs. What did it mean that you were white? It means you weren't a negro.

White people are the winning team because it's a rigged game. Whiteness became a concept because of othering. "We're not like those savage negroes. We're different, and other races should be subordinate to us because they're not us."

Race is a tool of imperialism. It justified European conquests around the world and has been used to artificially categorize and separate us.

You made some good points, but how about the American conquistadores?

As I understand it, the concept of superiority based on "whiteness" came from the time of Cortez and the exploitation of indigenous people, and even before that if we consider the crusades. It is a common human trait of mankind to dehumanize the opposing force in every conflict (or in the example of slavery in general). In the case of the conquistadores, it was common for them to see indigenous people as little more than animals...

Truth, racism towards black people, and slavery justified by racism is a relatively recent concept, but racism on itself (understanding it as diminishing treatment of a group of people based on physical or cultural differences) seems old as time. At least, you might be a few centuries off.

 

[hermes]

The issue with racism is that is a cultural subject. As such, you have to understand the culture used as reference, and making claims about it based on your cultural background about a different culture is dangerously unfair, anachronistic and simplistic. As such, I can't make an opinion about racism in Australia based on American culture, at most I could say "if such and such happened on my country, it would be considered racism".

Context is everything.

 

[Zhukov]

2) Now I don't know about the rest of the world but there is a lot of anger here about the preferential treatment that asylum seekers get upon entering Australia. Most of the time upon getting entry they are put straight into housing trust, which is something very hard to Australian citizens to get, and can be put on benefits for around $50,000 a year which is scandalous when you consider the average wage for a full time worker is something like $35,00 a year and pensioners who have worked all their life can only get $28,000 a year (btw don't quote me on these numbers I may be recalling them incorrectly). Anyway, people who are protesting this treatment may be misunderstood as being racist because it seems they are against immigrants when really they are against the government for not helping out their own people this much as well

Ha!

Yeah, because being detained indefinitely in a camp is preferential as fuck. I'm a natural born Australian citizen, where's my unsinkable lifeboat? Where's my tent in Papua New Guinea damn it! I demand equal treatment!

Anyway, you ever want to find out if an Australian is racist or not, then yeah, just start a conversation with them about refugees and asylum seekers.

Way too often their mouths will start vomiting up all kinds of filth.

Takes some of them longer than others of course. You might get some preamble blather about preferential treatment. Maybe the queue-jumper speech. But sooner or later out comes the "I don't want any of those foreign types living in my neighbourhood! They might try and send their kids to my school!" Or, "I bet some of them are terrorists. I mean, they are muslims, right?"

Ask yourself this. Imagine there was a civil war going on in New Zealand, a really nasty one. And all of a sudden we were getting boatloads of desperate, white, English-speakers washing into Sydney Harbour? You think they'd be getting herded into detention camps or shipped to PNG?

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

There's rampant racism in white Canada against the 'drunk Indian' who get 'too many handouts'. Our government would like to pretend that the problem doesn't exist and that Canada is a land where everyone feels equal but there are genuine concerns about the First Nations question. Does eminent domain extend to land that technically the state doesn't own? That's a question being asked over the whole pipeline issue in BC right now.

[sub]I have an English class that's all about this stuff right now so I'm being made to look into this stuff.[/sub]

A few days ago, I was sitting next to a cheery Pakistani girl and her boyfriend, who were chatting and minding their own business. Suddenly, a woman in front of her tried to hit her, told her to shut her fucking mouth, said that we ought to deport all the filthy immigrant sand niggers, and complimented her on her mustache before marching off the bus.

(For the record, the Pakistani girl had significantly less facial hair than the woman attacking her.)

The girl then leaned back, looking upset and said "Not again."

And I live in CANADA, land of immigration and accepting all other cultures.

So no, I don't think racism is overplayed. Not when this happens on a regular basis.

Immigration made Canada what it is, I hate it when people forget that.

Oh, right, I'm sorry. They didn't forget.

White European immigration made Canada what it is.

I hate bigots. >.<

 

[Thaluikhain]

Real racists don't care what you think.

Why not? Is everyone who is racist entrenched in it to the degree they won't change?

If racists don't care about being called racist, why is "I'm not racist, but..." a thing?

 

[Robert Marrs]

Real racists don't care what you think.

Why not? Is everyone who is racist entrenched in it to the degree they won't change?

If racists don't care about being called racist, why is "I'm not racist, but..." a thing?

By real racists I mean people who openly hate other races. Generally people who say "I'm not racist but..." just have misconceptions or are about to quote a stereotype. Since really all people stereotype other people to some extent I wouldn't really call adding ignorance on top of that racism. Its just ignorance. It does not mean they necessarily hate or think they are better than the race they about the stereotype when they say that phrase. The people who use that phrase are a part of the other group I mentioned in my post. The people who are extremely afraid of being labeled a racist. When they say "I'm not racist but..." they mean " I don't hate or think I am better than (insert race) but (insert stereotype)". That's just ignorance. Big difference if you ask me.

 

[Thaluikhain]

By real racists I mean people who openly hate other races. Generally people who say "I'm not racist but..." just have misconceptions or are about to quote a stereotype. Since really all people stereotype other people to some extent I wouldn't really call adding ignorance on top of that racism. Its just ignorance. It does not mean they necessarily hate or think they are better than the race they about the stereotype when they say that phrase. The people who use that phrase are a part of the other group I mentioned in my post. The people who are extremely afraid of being labeled a racist. When they say "I'm not racist but..." they mean " I don't hate or think I am better than (insert race) but (insert stereotype)". That's just ignorance. Big difference if you ask me.

There can be a big difference, but the two can overlap quite a lot as well.

What about people who aren't open about their hatred? What about those that don't hate, but still actively dislike? Those that don't care, so long as their own group remains dominant and unchallenged and catered to?

 

[manic_depressive13]

-

So if I say "Iran is corrupt" am I saying that the people of Iran are corrupt? If I say "Russia is anti-semitic" does anyone think I am passing a moral judgement on every individual Russian? If I said "North Korea is fascist", would you dispute it on the basis that the average citizen isn't a fascist? So why shouldn't I say "Australia is racist" when it fucking is?

 

[Parasondox]

-

So if I say "Iran is corrupt" am I saying that the people of Iran are corrupt? If I say "Russia is anti-semitic" does anyone think I am passing a moral judgement on every individual Russian? If I said "North Korea is fascist", would you dispute it on the basis that the average citizen isn't a fascist? So why shouldn't I say "Australia is racist" when it fucking is?

I sense anger. Anyway, you can say what you feel and if you say and believe those comments then they are your opinion. I am just saying that sometimes, people may take what you say differently to what you actually intended. So yeah, some people might actually think you could be passing a moral judgement on the people too if you say something like. Especially those who may be from the countries you mentioned. Also the original point I was trying to make was EVERY country has that similar problem where racism, fascism and other forms of discrimination is involved. Yes it's a problem and the narrow minded few shouldn't be getting louder and the news media shouldn't be adding fuel to the small flame.

 

[ShadowStar42]

By real racists I mean people who openly hate other races. Generally people who say "I'm not racist but..." just have misconceptions or are about to quote a stereotype. Since really all people stereotype other people to some extent I wouldn't really call adding ignorance on top of that racism. Its just ignorance. It does not mean they necessarily hate or think they are better than the race they about the stereotype when they say that phrase. The people who use that phrase are a part of the other group I mentioned in my post. The people who are extremely afraid of being labeled a racist. When they say "I'm not racist but..." they mean " I don't hate or think I am better than (insert race) but (insert stereotype)". That's just ignorance. Big difference if you ask me.

While I agree that there is a big difference between ignorance and racism, you're example here is really flawed. People don't say "I'm not racist but..." because they're ignorant, they say it because they know they're about to say something that may be taken as racist. That's the opposite of ignorance. Racism isn't as simple as thinking that you're better than someone, is it thinking all of a certain type of people can be judged as the same. Saying "ooh, get the black guy for our basket ball team" may piss less people off then saying "let's not pick the black guy for the swim team" but it's no less racist.