• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Racist? Texas high school apologizes for fans' 'USA!' chant after basketball game

Clearly, the teenagers were being prejudicial based on "you're not from here" or "you're different" or "your parents are illegal" or even "we don't like the Hispanic culture", but until Latino/Hispanic is determined to be a race instead of an ethnicity, it's not racism.

You're getting caught up in the term. Racism, although is used to describe bigotry against race primarily, can also be used to describe bigotry, discrimination, and prejudiced used towards any group. There are numerous terms that have the exact same definition as Racism, but is used for specific groups; Homophobia, Xenophobia, Anti-Semetic, etc.

Racism is the blanket term for all of those variations. So when it is said that the chanting of USA at that school was racist, although it wasn't specifically about race, it was about bigotry and prejudice. That is why the blanket term, racism, is appropriate and accurate.
 
I'm prejudice against anyone who isn't me. After all, I choose to treat everyone either better or worse than myself based on their value compared to me as I define it.

They chanted at the other team to show they liked their own team better. They determined their worth, not based on who won or lost, but on a different set of preconceptions. Therefore, they were prejudicial in some way. Was the value determined because of the school they attended? Of the culture they embraced? Of preconceptions regarding heritage? You'd have to ask them. All I'm saying is that it would be nearly impossible to say it wasn't prejudicial and totally impossible to say it was racist.

But they weren't chanting the name of their team, or the name of their school. They were chanting USA, which if we follow your line of reasoning, was to show that their own country was better. Which again, leads to the insinuation that the hispanic team were not Americans, despite being from an American high school. The prejudice lies squarely on the ethnic group of the hispanic school/team.
 
Oh, I'm sure the kids wore them on that day on purpose. Iirc, a couple had bandanas too. My question is far more fundamental. Why should the American flag be considered disrespectful to Mexico? Why would that be any kind of instigation, especially in the US?


IMO you already answered your question, it doesn't have to be the american flag it could be anything that is worn on purpose to instigate and to insinuate they aren't real americans or anything else dumb kids do.

I don't understand how it gets anymore fundamental than common sense, the fundamentals is knowing WHY its worn.

Also this is only applied in schools with kids in a school environment, in the real world to bad.

On a public street you wearing an american flag means nothing towards mexico

In a school setting fundamentals are about intent, some schools ban hats, logos, even colors all based on the students intent
 
Or digging for racism where there is none. there is plenty of racism out there. I dont see why people feel the need to assume every display of white or american pride is racist.

Do you read your own posts?

It is definitely the case that every display of "white" pride is racist, because "white" is an explicitly racist identity.

Many (not all) displays of "american pride" (usually implied to mean U.S. American) are partially rooted in racism, because (as is clearly the case here with the USA chant) there is an obvious implication that one (predominantly white) team is representative of the U.S.A., while the other (however defined as "other") is not (or at the very least, than one of them is MORE representative of it...in either case the racist premise is obvious).

If apologists for racism in this country spent maybe half the time and effort acknowledging and considering possible solutions to racism as they currently spend denying the very existence and operation of racism, we might actually be able to have practical, productive, collaborative discussions which actually achieve something.

In the meantime, however, it's back to the usual MO: a combination of mass denial and pretense coupled with attempts (both implicit and explicit) to keep "white" folks comfortable and at the center of the discussion.

The problem is not oversensitive people of color who Just Need To Get Over It. The problem is ongoing acceptance (and trivialization) of real racist oppression. Will the losing basketball team die from enduring racism? Of course not. But the aggregate toll of putting up with BS like this over the course of a lifetime ultimately adds up to higher stress, fewer and lesser opportunities, and a host of artificial obstacles to success put in place and left in place by racism and -- especially -- the collective societal failure of a complacent and comfortable "white" population to examine and overturn their own unearned and unsolicited privilege.

The average participant in racist oppression in this country is a well-intentioned and reasonably intelligent person who doesn't appreciate the full implications of their participation in racism. Thus the appropriate identification of solutions will not be found by looking mostly for overt and intentional acts of racism, but negligent and entitled ones. In other words, instead of a battle of presumed accusations of racist super villainy (i.e. accusations of racism as identity of persons), we need to look at racist premises and the actions which follow from them. In other words, it is about racist thought and action, not about racist PEOPLE per se.

Maybe then the reflexive habit of defensiveness can be dropped and some sanity can be safely injected, because as long as most of the would-be discussion ends up being about "white" people defending themselves against real or imagined charges of BEING racists, there will remain little opportunity to address the real issue of "white" people -- or anyone else for that matter -- engaging in racist ACTION.
 
I didn't mean to sound as if I was arguing with you. I was attempting to continue your thought. Sorry.






Respectfully, you might want to spend some time looking into the definitions of "race" versus "ethnicity" or "nationality" or "heritage", etc. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I'm pretty sure that while you fairly well demonstrated an example of someone being racist (cheering for a team of whites over blacks because of race), you also seem to be off a beat when you try to equate South America with being or not being Caucasian. Did you know that there are Caucasians in Africa, too?

Clearly, the teenagers were being prejudicial based on "you're not from here" or "you're different" or "your parents are illegal" or even "we don't like the Hispanic culture", but until Latino/Hispanic is determined to be a race instead of an ethnicity, it's not racism.

You do realize your post is meaningless to the story right? there are blacks in Germany too your point?
I never specified what race and ethnicity is did I?
Did you see the words "isnt exactly" in my post? So there was nothing off beat LOL. Common sense will tell you people who scream white power would never be proud over Kenya winning something because theres SOME whites in kenya.

Also just to further educated you, since as you claimed you are clearly NOT an expert, a race of people BY DEFINITION can also be any people united by common history, language, cultural traits, etc OR ethnic stock. Race is not ALWAYS the anthropology version of only 3 or 4.

Respectfully you might want to read what is actually posted and instead of assuming off a baseless guess you might want to ask next time and it in fact could be deemed racist and "probably" was by some. Too funny.
 
Oh, I'm sure the kids wore them on that day on purpose. Iirc, a couple had bandanas too. My question is far more fundamental. Why should the American flag be considered disrespectful to Mexico? Why would that be any kind of instigation, especially in the US?
This isn't difficult to understand. There is nothing disrespectful about ANYTHING in and of itself. There's nothing disrespectful about the word "nigger" in and of itself since it's just a collection of sounds. There's nothing disrespectful about the American flag or chanting "USA" either in and of themselves. Disrespect comes from intent and when you chant "USA" with the intent to imply that Americans aren't American because they are Hispanic, then that is disrespectful. What the Hispanic students choose to do with that disrespect is another story.
 
I've already shown that last year against this very same school, another team's fans chanted "USA" and "Arizona" (the state with the infamous law). My guess is that a lot of those kids were from Arizona, because we're all playing dumb, right?
 
How ashamed of being American does one have to be to think that a chant of "USA" is a bad thing? Sad dude, real sad.


j-mac

You STILL don't get the context, do you?
 
You're getting caught up in the term. Racism, although is used to describe bigotry against race primarily, can also be used to describe bigotry, discrimination, and prejudiced used towards any group. There are numerous terms that have the exact same definition as Racism, but is used for specific groups; Homophobia, Xenophobia, Anti-Semetic, etc.

Racism is the blanket term for all of those variations. So when it is said that the chanting of USA at that school was racist, although it wasn't specifically about race, it was about bigotry and prejudice. That is why the blanket term, racism, is appropriate and accurate.

I agree that it could have been about bigotry, and it certainly demonstrated prejudice. However, you'll have to provide something in the way of a link to say that "racism" is the blanket term for many variations of bigotry, etc. Using it as such diminishes the value of the word. I'm not saying a lot of people may not use it that way - but, they're using the word incorrectly. And, there are reasons to point out that other types of bigotry exist without trying to lump everything into racism.

Again, I could be wrong - show me a credible source definition that doesn't say something like "some people use the term", etc.

But they weren't chanting the name of their team, or the name of their school. They were chanting USA, which if we follow your line of reasoning, was to show that their own country was better. Which again, leads to the insinuation that the hispanic team were not Americans, despite being from an American high school. The prejudice lies squarely on the ethnic group of the hispanic school/team.

I've already said they were potentially being ethnocentric, and that there was prejudice. That doesn't make them racist. If I think I'm better than you (not saying I do) - even if I'm wrong - even if I'm bigoted about it - it doesn't make me a racist. I don't even know what race you are.

You do realize your post is meaningless to the story right? there are blacks in Germany too your point?
I never specified what race and ethnicity is did I?
Did you see the words "isnt exactly" in my post? So there was nothing off beat LOL. Common sense will tell you people who scream white power would never be proud over Kenya winning something because theres SOME whites in kenya.

Also just to further educated you, since as you claimed you are clearly NOT an expert, a race of people BY DEFINITION can also be any people united by common history, language, cultural traits, etc OR ethnic stock. Race is not ALWAYS the anthropology version of only 3 or 4.

Respectfully you might want to read what is actually posted and instead of assuming off a baseless guess you might want to ask next time and it in fact could be deemed racist and "probably" was by some. Too funny.

Post the source for your "DEFINITION". I dispute it.
 
I agree that it could have been about bigotry, and it certainly demonstrated prejudice. However, you'll have to provide something in the way of a link to say that "racism" is the blanket term for many variations of bigotry, etc. Using it as such diminishes the value of the word. I'm not saying a lot of people may not use it that way - but, they're using the word incorrectly. And, there are reasons to point out that other types of bigotry exist without trying to lump everything into racism.

Again, I could be wrong - show me a credible source definition that doesn't say something like "some people use the term", etc.



I've already said they were potentially being ethnocentric, and that there was prejudice. That doesn't make them racist. If I think I'm better than you (not saying I do) - even if I'm wrong - even if I'm bigoted about it - it doesn't make me a racist. I don't even know what race you are.

Well, I can't argue with you, if your position on this is as a purist. I can't offer you links to specific definitions to the term racism to show that "officially" it's a blanket term, but I'll hope you'll humor me with some of my anecdotal references:

During a history course, whether it was in college or high school, my instructors taught about Racism in the US throughout the Revolutionary War, up until the Civil Rights Movement. The use of the term Racism, was used generally to describe how the establishment treated the myriad of ethnicities that were found in the US. They range from Irish to Polish to African to Chinese to South Americans to Russians and to Native Americans, and so forth.

Some times racism refers to specific races, but sometimes it refers to a certain ethnic group. Such as Native Americans; there used to be hundreds, if not thousands, of different tribes. Each with their own specific language and culture. But my instructors would use the term racism to illustrate the bigotry that Americans had against Native Americans. Further illustrating the point, my instructors would point out that Americans believed that they were superior because the color of their skin was lighter than everyone elses.

So you see, in practice the term Racism is not used only to refer to races, but also different ethnic groups, and also discrimination by skin color (quite different from race specifically). But, of course, that's if your willing to accept my anecdotal references.
 
What is really a shame is that there are people like you who cannot see how this is even remotely prejudiced against the hispanic kids, when the example provided is quite clear.


No, it isn't clear, and it is an unproven accusation that wouldn't hold up in ANY court room in the land. But I do love how Progressives/far leftists can now determine intent of thought through the mere reading of a slanted news story.


j-mac
 
You do realize your post is meaningless to the story right? there are blacks in Germany too your point?
I never specified what race and ethnicity is did I?
Did you see the words "isnt exactly" in my post? So there was nothing off beat LOL. Common sense will tell you people who scream white power would never be proud over Kenya winning something because theres SOME whites in kenya.

Also just to further educated you, since as you claimed you are clearly NOT an expert, a race of people BY DEFINITION can also be any people united by common history, language, cultural traits, etc OR ethnic stock. Race is not ALWAYS the anthropology version of only 3 or 4.

Respectfully you might want to read what is actually posted and instead of assuming off a baseless guess you might want to ask next time and it in fact could be deemed racist and "probably" was by some. Too funny.


Post the source for your "DEFINITION". I dispute it.

Dispute it all you want you are wrong.

Race | Define Race at Dictionary.com

race
noun
1.a group of persons related by common descent or heredity.
2.a population so related.
3.Anthropology a.any of the traditional divisions of humankind, the commonest being the caucasian, Mongoloid, and Negro, characterized by supposedly distinctive and universal physical characteristics: no longer in technical use.
3 b.an arbitrary classification of modern humans, sometimes, especially formerly, based on any or a combination of various physical characteristics, as skin color, facial form, or eye shape, and now frequently based on such genetic markers as blood groups.
3c.a human population partially isolated reproductively from other populations, whose members share a greater degree of physical and genetic similarity with one another than with other humans.
4.a group of tribes or peoples forming an ethnic stock: the Slavic race.
5.any people united by common history, language, cultural traits, etc.: the Dutch race.

6.the human race or family; humankind: Nuclear weapons pose a threat to the race.
7.Zoology . a variety; subspecies.
8.a natural kind of living creature: the race of fishes.
9.any group, class, or kind, especially of persons: Journalists are an interesting race.

Race - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
race
noun
Definition of RACE
1: a breeding stock of animals
2 a : a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock b : a class or kind of people unified by shared interests, habits, or characteristics
3 a : an actually or potentially interbreeding group within a species; also : a taxonomic category (as a subspecies) representing such a group b : breed c : a category of humankind that shares certain distinctive physical traits

So as I was saying the anthropology versions are not the only ones used nor are they even the common one used in today's world.


So your dispute is a futile one.
 
It is overly sensitive and political correctness gone crazy to think chanting "USA, USA, USA" is racist. Even if the opponent high school were all illegal immigrants (although that is a possibility) there is no way that chant is racist. Although, it may be patriotic (is that bad according to the self-appointed, and somewhat fascist, PC police?).
 
CARLOS FUENTES, ALAMO HEIGHTS HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT: Whatever the chant is, I mean, you can always find something negative about it. And I do believe that at the very core of the chant, the beginning students, I believe they meant it in an offensive way, but that the rest of the audience that caught on for the few short minutes that it happened didn't mean it in that sense, didn't mean it in any way except, We're so excited that we won, you know, just ecstatic students... I've heard it at other games. We even chanted it the majority of our games. The Lake Travis game, which is a school that is predominantly Caucasian, much in the same way that Alamo Heights is. We chanted it there. We chanted it at the Edison game. And it's just -- it's almost like a basketball tradition.

According to one student's account, the chant was not entirely racist because it's been heard at many other games and it was not a one-time thing that was directed at Edison on Saturday night.
 
I didn't mean to sound as if I was arguing with you. I was attempting to continue your thought. Sorry.

Ah, ok. Sorry if I came off too strong, but I was looking at it like ???.
 
CARLOS FUENTES, ALAMO HEIGHTS HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT: Whatever the chant is, I mean, you can always find something negative about it. And I do believe that at the very core of the chant, the beginning students, I believe they meant it in an offensive way, but that the rest of the audience that caught on for the few short minutes that it happened didn't mean it in that sense, didn't mean it in any way except, We're so excited that we won, you know, just ecstatic students... I've heard it at other games. We even chanted it the majority of our games. The Lake Travis game, which is a school that is predominantly Caucasian, much in the same way that Alamo Heights is. We chanted it there. We chanted it at the Edison game. And it's just -- it's almost like a basketball tradition.

According to one student's account, the chant was not entirely racist because it's been heard at many other games and it was not a one-time thing that was directed at Edison on Saturday night.

What I gathered from those interviews was that the students at Alamo Heights are basically saying two things:

1) Some students who started chanting USA could have meant to insult, but the rest who joined in did not meant as an insult
2) Chanting USA is a regular thing they do at basketball games


1 is possible and probable, while 2 is possible but highly unlikely. I used to teach high school, and I've been to many different school games and never was that a chant that was done, and I have never heard that used in the same way in any school function.

The ONLY times I have ever heard USA as a chant at similar events were on WWF/WWE or during Olympic sporting events.
 
No, it isn't clear, and it is an unproven accusation that wouldn't hold up in ANY court room in the land. But I do love how Progressives/far leftists can now determine intent of thought through the mere reading of a slanted news story.


j-mac

I always enjoy how extreme conservatives have no understanding of context. They just paint things in black or white, without examining the situation.
 
According to one student's account, the chant was not entirely racist because it's been heard at many other games and it was not a one-time thing that was directed at Edison on Saturday night.

The number of times it's been done...and the possible direction of it at other groups on other occasions...has absolutely no relevance to whether or not the USA chant can be reasonably construed as racist in the context mentioned for this thread.

Regardless of speculation about what the chanters backing the Alamo team intended, the fact that both teams are from the USA, and the Alamo supporters started chanting in response to the Alamo team winning the game, carries a crystal clear implication that the other team was either NotAmerican or LessAmerican. This, coupled with the fact that by current standards of "race" mythology in the U.S., the Alamo team was/is predominantly "white" and the other team was/is predominantly Non-"white", this distinction has something to do with identifying one team with the USA and the other as NOT.

This clear implication was obvious enough to at least the coach and some other school officials, who tried to discourage/cut off the chant...and who later issued an apology.

But once again, the bulk of the conversation ends up being about trying to make "white" people comfortable instead of about confronting the source and operation of the racism involved.

Bad intent MAY be involved in acts of racism, but usually is not...and under no circumstance is bad intent REQUIRED for an act to constitute racism. Racism is NOT just a matter of asserting inferiority or superiority of a "race" relative to another; ANY action which treats "race" as real is a case of racism. In this case, the implied notion is that the sloppy equation of "white" identity with nationalism (in which USA = "white") does actually carry an overtone of assertion of superiority (the implicit premise of U.S. nationalism is that there's something good/special about being U.S. American), but even without such an assertion the implication would still be racist.
 
I always enjoy how extreme conservatives have no understanding of context. They just paint things in black or white, without examining the situation.

I don't think they lack an understanding of context. They just don't want to see it because they refuse to see past the fact that people are being criticized for chanting "USA" First and foremost, they see that as people being punished for being patriotic. The reason behind them chanting "USA" doesn't even enter into it for them. However, in situations that suit them better, they are all about context. Sadly, the same goes for the other side. They aren't called "partisan blinders" for nothing.
 
Do you read your own posts?

It is definitely the case that every display of "white" pride is racist, because "white" is an explicitly racist identity.

Many (not all) displays of "american pride" (usually implied to mean U.S. American) are partially rooted in racism, because (as is clearly the case here with the USA chant) there is an obvious implication that one (predominantly white) team is representative of the U.S.A., while the other (however defined as "other") is not (or at the very least, than one of them is MORE representative of it...in either case the racist premise is obvious).

ACTION.

So you think a person having pride in their race or nationality makes them a racist?
 
His post makes sense. I was in NYC a few years ago and went to a club that a friend knew they were having a dance contest in there. They had the dance crews going it at. Really fun to watch. The final 2 groups that went at it was a group of black kids and a group of puerto ricans. The PR group won, and the crowd, or part of the crowd was getting pretty excited for them and the phrase Boriqua over and over. In case you don't know it means Puerto Rico or puerto rican or something like that. The other group of kids, or any of the other losers or anyone else in that crowd didnt start getting huffy and crying because of them chanting Boriqua. Certainly didn't make the news, and there damn sure weren't a ton of liberals there telling how wrong it was to have pride in the country many of them were from.

So I want to ask now, do you think those people in the crowd were being racist?

probably not, but the team who shouted USA was.
 
Please tell me what the difference is? Why is it ok to have pride it PR but not in the USA?

no. we both know what their intent was, and you being disengenuous doesn't change that.
 
Back
Top Bottom