No Lives Matter
Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then
Thanks. Your writing is a concise example of racism. Let’s examine "enough blacks" as a quantified measurement. And lets select lazy. I haven't seen any data that that blacks are the only ones that are lazy. Also I haven't noticed that blacks are the color black; and, at an anthropological level people that have essentially the same color are usually racially quite different. So, what you are saying w/o knowing it is that people that share a color are a race. But your description is based on an assumed culture. An if you really look at culture only I have found lazy in white culture and I haven’t found any difference that I can resolve when it comes to skin color between those that consider then selves black, white, or any other color. This is all for now.
Last edited by OhIsee.Then; 03-31-12 at 10:25 AM.
What many are trying to express, however, is a different point. "Blacks" are of course capable of participating in racism, but (within the United States) they lack the institutional and aggregate political power to turn such participation into racist oppression. They do not dominate the corporate workplace, mass media narratives, the state or federal government, academia, etc. in the way "whites" do vis-a-vis the axis of "race." With the common sloppiness/neglect so prevalent in attempts at public discourse on racism, however, many speakers/writers get lazy and fail to make an explicit distinction between racist dogma/personal belief on one hand vs. racist oppression (which is different from and doesn't even require racist belief in order to be perpetuated) on the other.
A big part of such sloppiness/neglect in communication on this front is a response to the knee-jerk false equivalency often sincerely promoted by apologists for white racism. The false assertion that since people of color *can* participate in racism, that they implicitly do so with the same frequency, depth, and power behind participation in racism by "white" people, often follows just a step behind. It is in anticipation of this horrendous bull**** and trivialization that the sloppy failure to distinguish between racism vs. racist oppression is often couched. It's still a mistake, but I've seen where it comes from.
Arguably the single most productive point one can use as a foundation for setting up a meaningful discussion of racism and racist oppression is that it's not primarily a matter of good vs. bad intentions. "White" people have been and still are trained into blindness about their own privilege on the axis of "race", and so they (we) get defensive about issues of racism *even when no one in the discussion is assigning personal blame*. Taking some explicit efforts to defuse such anxiety can go a long way towards dragging things kicking and screaming back to something resembling rationality. Is it fair to have to put up with such arbitrary and uneven efforts just to get a privileged population comfortable enough to approach a topic honestly? No...but then again, racism isn't about what's fair and so a great deal of that unfairness and disparity must be recognized as a tactical necessity.
Last edited by cmakaioz; 03-31-12 at 12:20 PM. Reason: expanded paragraph on meaning of "prevalent"
I've moved on to a better forum (scienceforums.net). Facts matter, and I don't have the time or energy for putting up with the pretense that they don't. PM me if you'd like me to get in touch with you when I'm done developing my own forum system, likely towards the end of 2013.