Racism isn't in the list

[ewalling]

In my view, the best cure for racism is intermarriage/interbreeding. At the moment in the US, the divisions between peoples are too marked, which gives rise to this dreadful smoldering resentment and the feeling of walking on eggshells lest we offend someone by using a wrong word or saying the wrong thing. Once various peoples 'get it on' together, we'll no longer be able to see who's supposed to be what, and then perhaps all these poisonous double-barreled nationality labels can finally be put to rest.

[imwjl]

Originally Posted by Bucc5207

No, I think not. Not in today's PC, offense-seeking, hypersensitive culture, and not in the current no-topic-is-safe AGF environment. Would 'twere otherwise, but that's my opinion.

On "PC, offense-seeking, hypersensitive culture" I can only think of my youth when our home, cars, business and selves were vandalized and attacked by biggots and KKK. This year same happened to minority families about a mile from where I live. Now the community and police departments rallied and arrests were made. I"m thankful for the changes and living to see the differences.

In that era teachers and other institutions tolerated terrible stuff that is not allowed now.

It was terrible to be a kid and go through that. Worse to have institutions not sensitive to the wrong.

This doesn't mean I have tolerance for plain silly or stupid behavior I see around me whether it's liberal or conservative.

[Teleman52]

Originally Posted by ewalling

In my view, the best cure for racism is intermarriage/interbreeding. At the moment in the US, the divisions between peoples is too marked, which gives rise to this dreadful smoldering resentment and the feeling of walking on eggshells lest we offend someone by using a wrong word or saying the wrong thing. Once various peoples 'get it on' together, we'll no longer be able to see who's supposed to be what, and then perhaps all these poisonous double-barreled nationality labels can finally be put to rest.

I really hope something can be done before the enormous amount of time that would take.

I personally love diversity and it's good for all of us. We should learn to live with our differences, not strive to be the same

[Davis Webb]

We have to cast the mote from our own eyes before we criticize the speck on our brother's eye. Or whatever Jacobean dialogue that was said in

Its amazing how we carry racist attitudes, often when we don't even know they exist. Case example.

You are walking down a secluded street in a major city at 2 AM alone.

You see a group of black teens in hoodies on one side of the street.
You see a group of white teens in regular "frosh-ware" and khaki trousers on the other side.

Which side do you move to?

Now, this has reality to it. In Toronto, the police "card" black teens. That means, they pull over, ask them where they are going and then request ID. They then ENTER the ID into a data bank, for future problems that might occur. So just taking a walk to get a smoothie at night in Toronto, can result in "carding". The carding data goes on the police main system. If they apply for a sensitive job later, the "carded" data will appear on the police record. They would be denied the job until the data is erased, which takes a special trip to police HQ to request clearance. All this for grabbing a late night soda.

Although tongue in cheek, we all carry some prejudices that we tend to overlook. Its working on these, that makes us better people. And we can...to quote you from an earlier thread...change! Or as I like to put it...UNLEARN!

[CoolerKing]

This has been good so far!

[kmcmichael]

Originally Posted by Teleman52

I feel like there's not much of a conversation to be had about racism other than between people who deny that racism exists, and reasonable people. The people who actually ARE racists, are not going to swayed by a conversation. The only hope for them is some kind of life changing event that causes them to question themselves. Honestly those kinds of events are rare because often these people aren't even around other races that much to begin with.

But I think the word "racist" itself is WAY over used and is often used as a bludgeon to beat on the heads of people who disagree.

I think this is a good post with one exception. The statement that people who are racist aren't around other races to begin with. There are plenty of people that dislike other races that grew up around them.

[Chicago Sandy]

A “midrash” (apocryphal interpretive legend) aimed at those who used to quote theological justification for one race's purported superiority over another became the basis of the old Gene Chandler song “A Hundred Pounds of Clay:” the legend goes that the first human was created out of soil from the four corners of the earth precisely so that no one nation or race could assert ultimate superiority. Whether one is a scriptural literalist or accepts only scientific discoveries, it’s a neat allegory--one that would never have sprung up absent a hard-wired recognization over the millennia that all people are indeed created equal (and that there are many “nations” and ethnicities but only one “race:” to-wit, human).

Perhaps the reason why discussion of race here on the AGF has remained civil and not devolved into ad hominem mud-slinging is due to our collective innate sense of decency: that more and more people realize there is neither factual nor moral justification for racism and that it is closer than ever (perhaps inevitably) to being universally regarded as anathema. Those who still cling to it are, we hope, increasingly being marginalized and justly so.

[Silly Moustache]

Originally Posted by Ramesses

It was my understanding that Blighty was part of Europe and populated before the landbridge from Holland was lost to rising tides.

Yes. However, the British Isles have been a separate entity culturally and geographically for hundreds, maybe thousands of years - even when we had large parts of what is now France.

Politically we are once again a part of Europe, (at least since France stopped opposing our membership), but the mindset of European-ism isn't universally shared in the UK, hence the upcoming referendum about our continued membership of the EU.

[Silly Moustache]

As a Brit, I find recent reactions to a seemingly race crime which focused on a back image of the confederate flag confuses me.

I would like to ask a question, please, about your understanding of your civil war :

1. Was it not true that the industrialised north felt that the agricultural south had too much influence in your parliament?

2. Isn't it true that the North felt it necessary to try to reduce the power/influence of the south?

3. Isn't it true that the North's proposal to end slavery was not about the benefit and well being of those in slavery, but the enforced removal of the labour resources on which much of the South's economy depended?

4. It seems to me that during the late 19th century agricultural technology was progressing rapidly, to the point when slavery would have become redundant in a short time anyway, but the North felt it necessary to take action before this happened.

5. It seems to me that had the civil war not happened, then those in slavery in ,predominantly, the south, would have been given freedom and citizenship, albeit in a slower and more organised fashion, causing a lesser culture conflict.

6. It seems to me that the victory of the north over the south, and the rather sudden release of slaves ill-equipped to assimilate into the dominant culture of a resentful southern community contributes a great deal (not all) of the conflict between black and white in the Southern community which spread across most of the country as the ex slave peoples moved across the country.

Please understand that I understand that whatever had happened the act of slavery was bound to cause a degree of long lasting bitterness, and racial conflict is to an extent inevitable as (I believe) humans have an innate tendency to see,fear, hate, those who look differently.

Please , also understand that I have no particular affinity toward either the south or north during civil war, but I don't really understand why the stars and bars is seen as a problem.

Do people REALLY think that the civil war was about freeing the slaves for their benefit ?

[seannx]

Originally Posted by Silly Moustache

As a Brit, I find recent reactions to a seemingly race crime which focused on a back image of the confederate flag confuses me.

I would like to ask a question, please, about your understanding of your civil war :

1. Was it not true that the industrialised north felt that the agricultural south had too much influence in your parliament?

2. Isn't it true that the North felt it necessary to try to reduce the power/influence of the south?

3. Isn't it true that the North's proposal to end slavery was not about the benefit and well being of those in slavery, but the enforced removal of the labour resources on which much of the South's economy depended?

4. It seems to me that during the late 19th century agricultural technology was progressing rapidly, to the point when slavery would have become redundant in a short time anyway, but the North felt it necessary to take action before this happened.

5. It seems to me that had the civil war not happened, then those in slavery in ,predominantly, the south, would have been given freedom and citizenship, albeit in a slower and more organised fashion, causing a lesser culture conflict.

6. It seems to me that the victory of the north over the south, and the rather sudden release of slaves ill-equipped to assimilate into the dominant culture of a resentful southern community contributes a great deal (not all) of the conflict between black and white in the Southern community which spread across most of the country as the ex slave peoples moved across the country.

Please understand that I understand that whatever had happened the act of slavery was bound to cause a degree of long lasting bitterness, and racial conflict is to an extent inevitable as (I believe) humans have an innate tendency to see,fear, hate, those who look differently.

Please , also understand that I have no particular affinity toward either the south or north during civil war, but I don't really understand why the stars and bars is seen as a problem.

Do people REALLY think that the civil war was about freeing the slaves for their benefit ?

I think you will find some answers to your questions in this article, which I referenced in my previous post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/postev...nts-are-wrong/

[Gobo]

Originally Posted by Acousticado

Tell that to the Chinese if they ever decided to call in the debt.

It's not the Chinese (at least not yet). If oil rich middle eastern Countries stop selling oil in the petrodollar the American economy would be annihilated. That's what those wars were for. Iraq, Libya (now Syria, Iran) they want to start selling oil for Gold which would be disastrous for the American economy.

America Has a great lifestyle at the moment but it is funded largely by the demand for dollars from countries that need the currency to buy oil from the middle east and why the federal reserve prints so much. No demand for $ means after years of printing to meet the high demand it would leave the currency near worthless.

THEN enters China

[Otterhound]

Purely relating to the function and usage of the English language .
I used to road race motorcycles . By the pure usage of the word racist , I was a racist then and still am to some extent because that part of me , even while dormant , will never die .
Food for thought .
Words do have real meanings and they can leave real scars . Please be careful how you use them because the words know no color , nationality , creed ......

[ewalling]

Originally Posted by Davis Webb

We have to cast the mote from our own eyes before we criticize the speck on our brother's eye. Or whatever Jacobean dialogue that was said in

Its amazing how we carry racist attitudes, often when we don't even know they exist. Case example.

You are walking down a secluded street in a major city at 2 AM alone.

You see a group of black teens in hoodies on one side of the street.
You see a group of white teens in regular "frosh-ware" and khaki trousers on the other side.

Which side do you move to?

I'd say that should depend on which group is responisble for the most violent crime/theft in that area, pure and simple. That's not racism; it's survival and common sense. When I was living in Rome and my parents came out to visit me, I warned them about the gypsies in the streets that would form a circle around the intended victim or throw a plastic baby at them while the partner siezed the bag. Was that racist? Should I have warned them about anyone throwing a plastic baby at them, even though the incidence of other groups doing it was virtually nil? In the UK, if sufficient crimes are committed by youths with hoodies (to protect their identities or as 'gang' uniform), then you can bet your sweet Mary Jane that I'll cross the street if I see a group of youths coming towards me wearing them.

[ewalling]

Originally Posted by Otterhound

Words do have real meanings and they can leave real scars . Please be careful how you use them because the words know no color , nationality , creed ......

It does depend on the spirit in which words are used, though, doesn't it? When I was in South America, my new boss beamingly called me a 'gringo' to my face, after which she explained that the term was affectionate and carried no slur. On a least one occasion while traveling around the Andes, I remember children pointing at me and saying, 'Un gringo, un gringo!' In the knowledge that its use bore me no ill will, I was not bothered at all. Now if someone had placed the adjective 'filthy' before it, I might then have said, 'Hang on un minuto, amor!'

[GHS]

Originally Posted by ewalling

In my view, the best cure for racism is intermarriage/interbreeding. At the moment in the US, the divisions between peoples is too marked, which gives rise to this dreadful smoldering resentment and the feeling of walking on eggshells lest we offend someone by using a wrong word or saying the wrong thing. Once various peoples 'get it on' together, we'll no longer be able to see who's supposed to be what, and then perhaps all these poisonous double-barreled nationality labels can finally be put to rest.

Didn't Robert Heinlein predict this? I remember reading something about this in one of his books many years ago. In twenty years he may be proven right. I wont be here to see it.