• 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!

Racism in America

Which of the following statements do you agree with?

  • America is becoming more and more racist

    Votes: 5 12.8%
  • America isn't becoming any more racist but racists in America are becoming more and more vocal

    Votes: 22 56.4%
  • America is no more or less racist today that it has ever been

    Votes: 14 35.9%
  • America is not a racist country and never has been

    Votes: 3 7.7%

  • Total voters
    39
Depends on what you define as 'racist' really. Some of the same posters in this thread who say America is becoming 'less and less' racist are those who will swear that it is highly unlikely that Barack Obama got through university without Affirmative Action. Seems to me like the racism is now a lot more politically correct. Instead of saying 'a nigger would never get through school! come on! he's a nigger!' they now use the nigger's name. Overall I think that as far as 'Americans' go, most people between the ages of 35 and 50 today grew up and were raised with the same misconceptions about race that their parents had. Only now it is no longer seen as correct to express one's feelings about a particular race out in the open. They do it on forums instead.

getting rid of affirmative action would get rid of the last bit of institutionalized racism in the USA. My leftwing friends in college--the ones who protested south africa while ignoring Macias, Amin and later Mugabe, said the RSA was worse because APARTHEID was part of the LAW in the RSA while the genocide of Amin, the mass murders in Rwanda, the Biafran civil war etc was all de facto oppression

given that, affirmative action is thus far worse than say other forms of racism because it is INSTITUTIONALIZED.
 
Well, of course, "less."

No reasonable person can deny that there have been enormous strides. Overt, formally sanctioned legal racism is effectively gone now, though I would claim that there are many laws still on the books that perpetuate the consequences of former policy. And I am of the school of thought that believes that the primary problem continues to be white racism, despite attempts to equate “black/brown pride” with it, and all of the “Imagine if whites had [done/said this/that] instead of [a racial minority]” talk. I’ll elaborate more on that at the end of this post.

What concerns me, but is not surprising in that it exists, is the prevalence of white populism, which is an outgrowth of what’s known as “angry white male syndrome.” The foundations of this belief are generally present in the mindsets of social conservatives.

I want to make it emphatically clear that I am not saying or suggesting that the majority of social conservatives are Klan members or anything so vile. I’m instead saying that the shared angry white male syndrome of many social conservatives and overt racists is the foundation for racist and bigoted attitudes and beliefs, which is why it’s more difficult for a socially leftist person to be a racist in the vein of white nationalism and associated movements.

The reason that white racism naturally meshes with the conservative mindset is because the conservative has notions of equality of opportunity existing in the U.S., despite the fact that if pushed, they will generally admit that free-market capitalism does not exist, which should actually be a major clue that the statist interventionism that characterizes U.S. economic history has not produced moral outcomes. So the conservative sees racial minorities “unfairly getting a leg up,” thanks to social welfare and affirmative action programs, and is indignant. Why is it that others should receive extra benefits merely by virtue of their race, when whites who work just as hard as everyone else are relegated to an underclass position because of whatever the sins of their long-dead ancestors might have been? That is a form of reverse racism! That was exactly what was supposed to have been eradicated. It’s only natural that white social conservatives will be resentful, and non-white social conservatives sympathetic to that resentment.

Now, humans have a tendency to conceive of things in terms of generalities, since we can’t reasonably account for every minor exception to rules, and will look to what’s regularly the norm instead of occasional deviations. As a result, since most recipients of welfare are thought to be racial minorities (though that’s not necessarily true; more whites receive welfare than blacks simply because there are more of them), and since most recipients of affirmative action are racial minorities (alongside females, and while that’s a separate topic, the angry white male conceives of them similarly), their race and color becomes a convenient mechanism for quickly and effectively categorizing them, since they are generally composed of racial minorities, the conservative believes.

And since the users of “nanny state” programs are simply obtaining rewards without having worked for them (with the conservative belief in equality of opportunity always central, since this entire mindset is dependent upon it), they are engaging in immoral behavior. From an initial point of equality, they have actually descended into inferiority, since they are the ones that lack responsibility and self-discipline, and are instead reliant on free handouts from the nanny state that they did not work to receive. And the race categorization mechanism means that these immoral people are associated with racial minorities.

This is a subconscious thought process, but its evolution into a conscious thought process (i.e. racial minorities clearly use these programs more than whites, and are generally more immoral than whites as a result) breeds further mental inquiry (perhaps these racial minorities have an inherent disposition to be dependent on whites, since they cannot be self-reliant), and possibly serves as a springboard to white nationalism, a doctrine of white racial supremacy. Here is an example of angry white male syndrome taken to the extreme of full-fledged white populism:

Are Tea Partyiers Racist? - Stormfront

The tea party crowd are comprised of ordinary White Americans, just as White Nationalists are. Culturally and traditionally, they're basically the same as White Nationalists - both rooted in the earlier paleo-conservative value system. The only difference might be that the neo-conservatives seem to think they can manipulate the tea partiers much more easily than they can manipulate White Nationalists. Of course, from the liberal side, the only thing they can throw out is the "race card," so therefore they will keep using the label of "racist" against the tea partiers. "Racist" is really the only rhetorical weapon the liberals have in their arsenal, and since they disingenuously overuse that label as much as they do, even that is starting to lose its power.

Instead of mindlessly throwing around labels like "racist," liberals might actually have to make real, genuine arguments in the future - something they've proven incapable of doing. They've come to rely so much on calling people "racist" to get their way, they use it mostly as a crutch these days.

As we can see, the foundations for white populism do exist in the social conservative mindset, though the transformation to explicitly racist beliefs is relatively uncommon. But the common resentment can be seen:

Are Tea Partyiers Racist? - Stormfront

I think that the slander "racist" is thrown around indiscriminately, against anyone who is white who organizes against the government.

In your own post, you made the statement that since 90% of the Tea Partiers were white, it must evidence that they are racists. Its a fraudulent association. If there was an organization that is 90% of Black, or 90% Mestizo, or 90% Jewish, or even a 90% Non-White, regardless of background, would you use that as evidence that said organization is racist. If your answer is no, then its hypocrisy.

As an aside, the CNN poll states that the Tea Partier movement is 80% white, 10% hispanic, 2% Black, 8% other. And of course these are self-identifications. There is no reason to assume these percentages are in line with true racial background.

Basically, the Tea Partiers just want to be left alone by the government, and I don't think they have much more ideology than that. Less Government, Less Taxes, Less Bureacracy, less government Social Engineering, thats the tea partier goal. Because, this is in direct contradiction of the Multicults program, more government to make more social Engineering, enforced by thugs with guns and billy clubs at any expense, the Tea Partiers are on the firing line. However the Multicult can't just come out and say, "you want too much freedom, you want too much liberty" they instead call them Racists. And Academia, supports this by defining Racist as anyone who doesn't want to be socially engineered.

The people on SF who call themselves WN, for the most part, just want to be left alone by the government, they don't want to be social engineered either. However, because social engineering is painful and oppressive, many people are radicallized and pushed into a rage, and basically provoked into being "mean". And then of course the Multicult points to the result while ignoring the cause.
 
You’ll also notice at this point that white nationalists’ comments bear an interesting similarity to those of mainline conservatives. This is not superficial or accidental; it is a result of those related foundational beliefs between the two groups. Look at this post:

Are Tea Partyiers Racist? - Stormfront

No one knows if the 90% number is accurate. As a Tea Party member I can say that Whites are a majority in the Tea Party movement, but then again whites are the majority in this country. Whites are the majority of taxpayers and true conservatives. There are a few black and hispanic members of the Tea Party but I think the reason for this is the fact that most blacks and hispanics are liberals, not true conservatives.

True conservatives believe in a small central government with little taxation and governmental intrusion, self reliance, and the freedom to succeed or fail according to each individuals' abilities. Liberals are just the opposite. They believe in a large government with the power to punish those who succeed through taxation, legislation and the redistribution of wealth in order to achieve "social justice".

The Tea Party is accused of racism simply because they disagree with the policies of President Obama because he is black. The real truth is that President Obama is a socialist and socialism is the direct opposite of conservatism.

That post could have been easily made by many of the social conservatives on this forum, though the comment about whites being “the majority of taxpayers and true conservatives” might have raised some eyebrows. The point is that political views, racist ones certainly included, are not formed when a previously apolitical person sits down one day and logically deduces each and every one of his or her stances. Rather, they’re formed by upbringing, experiences, and the intuitions that result. As with mainline conservatives, most white nationalists were at one point simply resentful of the greater “entitlements” that racial minorities received for no merits other than the color of their skin (ultimately becoming more immoral than whites as a result of their acceptance of them), and eventually took that to a higher level.

Here’s a perfect example of the mentality I’m referring to:

Are Tea Partyiers Racist? - Stormfront

I have never seen one example or even argument that shows how redistributing the wealth of hard working successful people to less hard working unsuccessful people will benefit the Nation.

The wealth of the “hard-working successful people” (since conservatives’ belief in equality of opportunity means that the wealthy generally rose to that level through persistent hard work), is “redistributed” to the “less hard working unsuccessful people,” those immoral folk who sit and wait for government handouts instead of working for their rewards like the good and upright rich people. Since humans think in generalities and race is a convenient categorization mechanism, and since most of the moral rich hard workers are thought to be white, with most of the immoral and lazy welfare dependents thought to be racial minorities, these groups come to be associated with morality and immorality, respectively. This is further validated by others in that thread:

Are Tea Partyiers Racist? - Page 2 - Stormfront

As for race, most do seem to be White. But so what? Maybe its because its mostly the White middle class that pays all the taxes?

All the taxes to subsidize the minority lower classes, that is, punishing the morality of hard work and rewarding the immorality of sloth.

And last but not least, this mindset is certainly not limited to economic success and failure. The dominant social institutions of American culture are seen as pandering to racial minorities at the expense of whites, a reflection of the perverse and corrupt economic system that robs from the productive to subsidize the unproductive:

Are Tea Partyiers Racist? - Page 2 - Stormfront

What is truly repellent is the way the media leaped with joy at the first opportunity presented to smear the Tea Party as racist following the alleged incident involving black lawmakers walking towards the Capitol to vote on the health care bill. For those who do not know the story here is a summery: on their way to the House of Representatives, several black congressmen claimed that they were hurdled the N word at least 15 times and spat upon as well by Tea Partiers. Of course, this was like manna from heaven for the liberal mainstream media and they promptly seized upon this to illustrate that the primary motivating factor behind the Tea Party movement as well as any opposition to Obama's agenda is racism. Much was made of this incident and the fact that the majority of the Tea Partiers are whites which of course automatically "proves" that the Tea Party is a new version of the KKK, at least as far as liberals enamored of diversity are concerned.

But the false belief in equality of opportunity is the keystone to the majority if not all of these other beliefs, as far as I’m concerned. And if true conservatives and true supporters of the free market employed logical deduction to reach their conclusions instead of relying on emotional intuitions, they would be forced to conclude that current economic conditions have been spawned by a long history of statism and economic interventionism in various forms, which has created corporatism, not free-market capitalism. And why should that be supported, or its consequences espoused as moral?

Now, what of the “pride” movements of various racial minorities? Are they not just as objectionable? Aren’t they a form of equivalent racism, simply the “other side of the coin”? I would say not. For one thing, they generally developed as challenges to the supremacy of the dominant race/ethnicity through pride in deviant societies and cultures. This is why “English pride” is not a popular ethnic slogan in the U.S., whereas “Irish pride” and “Italian pride” are, despite the capabilities of modern Irish and Italians to assimilate into the generic “white” race. They did not develop as an interest in supremacy over other races, as white racism did, but as a reaction to such supremacy. And their supremacist elements, if and when they do or did exist, never had and do not have the ability to exert influence that rivals that of white supremacy in the U.S.

Conversely, many white nationalists hope that their aims can be manifested through the policies of standard conservatives. Consider their shared interests in eliminating welfare and affirmative action for racial minorities, which will force these immoral and handout-dependent parasites to sink or swim. Mainline social conservatives expect a mixed outcome, as far as I can tell; some will swim and some will sink. White supremacists, because of the racist beliefs about the inherent genetic/biological inferiority of minority races that they have developed, believe that all or the vast majority will sink, which is a welcome consequence.
 
I tend to believe that the U.S. is becoming more classist than racist.
 
They were accusing blacks of becoming 'embolded' or 'more racist' and I'm asking them to discuss why they think that is.

I do think that it is culturally accepted for African Americans to point out racism, whether or not it actually exists.

The niggardly comment in DC, for instance.
 
I do think that it is culturally accepted for African Americans to point out racism, whether or not it actually exists.

The niggardly comment in DC, for instance.

Biological classification is often used to foist "racial" hatred.
 
getting rid of affirmative action would get rid of the last bit of institutionalized racism in the USA.
How utterly naive. How about the fact that a Black man who commits the same crime as a white man gets on average a six month longer sentence? Not to mention the racial makeup of the prison population. And don't even get me started on the racist death penalty. You want examples of institutionalized racism? It's called the criminal justice system.
 
How utterly naive. How about the fact that a Black man who commits the same crime as a white man gets on average a six month longer sentence? Not to mention the racial makeup of the prison population. And don't even get me started on the racist death penalty. You want examples of institutionalized racism? It's called the criminal justice system.




FIGHT THE POWER!!!!!!! :roll:
 
How utterly naive. How about the fact that a Black man who commits the same crime as a white man gets on average a six month longer sentence? Not to mention the racial makeup of the prison population. And don't even get me started on the racist death penalty. You want examples of institutionalized racism? It's called the criminal justice system.

BlackFist.jpg


Stupid cops, always keepin tha bruthas down!
 
How utterly naive. How about the fact that a Black man who commits the same crime as a white man gets on average a six month longer sentence? Not to mention the racial makeup of the prison population. And don't even get me started on the racist death penalty. You want examples of institutionalized racism? It's called the criminal justice system.


Oh lord, not this "black man sentence longer" **** again.

Does your little data that you used to make this comment take into consideration the past criminal conviction record of both individuals as well?

In most places in the world, there are levels of sentencing depending on how many prior convictions a person has had. Your white and black man may have committed the same crime, but there are a lot of factors which may determine the length of the sentence.

Those are:

1. Sentencing Level (prior conviction record).
2. Mitigating circumstances.
3. Aggravating factors.

Unless you can show me that said black and white man had the EXACT same of all of these, then blow off with your crybaby longer sentencing crap, im tired of hearing these generalizations from people who skew numbers to get the desired result.
 
:doh
Laugh it up. This country locks up Black men at a rate 5.8 times higher than South Africa under apartheid. But you're all correct, it's BLACK racism that is out of control in our society. :)




Are they all innocent? :roll:
 
:doh

Are they all innocent? :roll:

Of course not. That is also irrelevant. Black offenders do get harsher sentiences and are more likely to be locked up compared to white perpetrators who get house arrest and probation.

PS Cain actually made some good points. I don't think it is overwhelmingly racist now days. Allot more plays into it than just race.
 
Last edited:
Laugh it up. This country locks up Black men at a rate 5.8 times higher than South Africa under apartheid. But you're all correct, it's BLACK racism that is out of control in our society. :)

Black men offend at a rate far higher than any other population group in the U.S. (followed closely by Latino men). It's funny how posts like yours always seem to ignore that part of the equation.

You know how fewer black men could get locked up? They could stop committing crimes.

*Having said this, I still believe that black men face incredibly disparate treatment in America than whites do, generally, in society, and are more likely to experience poverty and social dysfunction as children, which plays a role in offending.
 
Last edited:
Oh lord, not this "black man sentence longer" **** again.

Does your little data that you used to make this comment take into consideration the past criminal conviction record of both individuals as well?

In most places in the world, there are levels of sentencing depending on how many prior convictions a person has had. Your white and black man may have committed the same crime, but there are a lot of factors which may determine the length of the sentence.

Those are:

1. Sentencing Level (prior conviction record).
2. Mitigating circumstances.
3. Aggravating factors.

Unless you can show me that said black and white man had the EXACT same of all of these, then blow off with your crybaby longer sentencing crap, im tired of hearing these generalizations from people who skew numbers to get the desired result.

I have often seen educated white men get longer sentences under the assumption that "they knew better"

Federal sentencing guidelines are pretty even handed for the same offense level
 
There is still some equalization that needs to occur in federal sentencing for drug crimes. For instance, treating crack offenses differently than powder cocaine offenses.
 
Laugh it up. This country locks up Black men at a rate 5.8 times higher than South Africa under apartheid. But you're all correct, it's BLACK racism that is out of control in our society. :)

Blacks are more likely to rob, rape or murder a white than the other way around. I don't have current statistics but in recent memory, one year featured over 1000 white women raped by blacks and less than 40 black women raped by whites.

interestingly that stuff is never mentioned when the left screams about hate crimes. We all know about those three rednecked racists who dragged that black man to death or the schmucks who beat a gay Matthew Shepherd to death but horrendous black on white crimes (one in tennessee made even hardened criminal investigators sick) rarely get any press.

Is it due to the liberal racism of figuring when whites do it it is worse because they are expected to be "more civilized"

(sort of like american liberals damning South African fascist racists while excusing the far worse genocidal black dicatators like Amin and Macias)
 
The racists in America are becoming more vocal.

But the Democrats still have the right to do that as much as they want. Some of us, who aren't Democrats, still support the First Amendment.
 
Black men offend at a rate far higher than any other population group in the U.S. (followed closely by Latino men). It's funny how posts like yours always seem to ignore that part of the equation.
I don't ignore that at all. When people are in desperate situations they're more likely to commit petty and violent crimes. Why are more Black people in desperate situations? Because of racism. Of course from a class perspective, it's notable that our prisons are filled all but exclusively with poor people of all races. I would argue that the greatest crimes--ie genocide, mass murder, policies resulting in famine etc. are the actions of the ruling class, that is, the rich.
*Having said this, I still believe that black men face incredibly disparate treatment in America than whites do, generally, in society, and are more likely to experience poverty and social dysfunction as children, which plays a role in offending.
It's good that you acknowledge that situational factors play a role in determining what group is more likely to commit crimes. Of course once we start looking at the big picture, considering situational forces the next step is to recognize that the situational factors harming Black people are the result of racism which in turn is a result of capitalism. Capitalism, and American Capitalism in particular can't survive without racism, and both are still very much alive.
 
I don't ignore that at all. When people are in desperate situations they're more likely to commit petty and violent crimes. Why are more Black people in desperate situations? Because of racism. Of course from a class perspective, it's notable that our prisons are filled all but exclusively with poor people of all races. I would argue that the greatest crimes--ie genocide, mass murder, policies resulting in famine etc. are the actions of the ruling class, that is, the rich.

It's good that you acknowledge that situational factors play a role in determining what group is more likely to commit crimes. Of course once we start looking at the big picture, considering situational forces the next step is to recognize that the situational factors harming Black people are the result of racism which in turn is a result of capitalism. Capitalism, and American Capitalism in particular can't survive without racism, and both are still very much alive.

I call BS on this. Black crime rates were not nearly as high compared to whites back in the days of Jim Crow. Then again black illegitimacy was no where near as high as it is now. Racism is a convenient excuse for racists who enable this nonsense and excuse the hurtful pathologies of black american culture.

Racism does not explain the fact that more t han 70% of black births are to unwed mothers or that black teenage girls are impregnated at alarming rates by black men often 10-15 years their senior. Racism does not explain why black kids who bust their humps in school are ridiculed by other blacks or blacks who learn proper English are called sell outs.
 
How utterly naive. How about the fact that a Black man who commits the same crime as a white man gets on average a six month longer sentence? Not to mention the racial makeup of the prison population. And don't even get me started on the racist death penalty. You want examples of institutionalized racism? It's called the criminal justice system.

You want Affirmative Action for prisons?

Does that mean the cops rush out and arrest enough white boys to fill the white boy quota, or do they tell the convicted rapist that they're full up with black rapists this week so they'll just have to let this one go?

Should the courts start taking the race of the accused into account, allong with the current census of the prison population to make sure the quotas are met and not exceeded?

Affirmative Action is institutionalized racism and no free government has any business enacting it. Applying it to prisons and convicted criminals is ludicrous.
 
I don't ignore that at all. When people are in desperate situations they're more likely to commit petty and violent crimes. Why are more Black people in desperate situations? Because of racism. Of course from a class perspective, it's notable that our prisons are filled all but exclusively with poor people of all races. I would argue that the greatest crimes--ie genocide, mass murder, policies resulting in famine etc. are the actions of the ruling class, that is, the rich.

It's good that you acknowledge that situational factors play a role in determining what group is more likely to commit crimes. Of course once we start looking at the big picture, considering situational forces the next step is to recognize that the situational factors harming Black people are the result of racism which in turn is a result of capitalism. Capitalism, and American Capitalism in particular can't survive without racism, and both are still very much alive.

Communism fail.

communist_poster.jpg
 
For instance, treating crack offenses differently than powder cocaine offenses.

In terms of racism, this statement is meaningless.

That some groups prefer crack to powdered coke is irrelevant, and the prosecution of persons holding one controlled substance over another is not evidence of racism.
 
Back
Top Bottom