Quote:
Originally posted by ktsnake
True neicy engages in a very antagonistic, aggressive style of debate... but short of 'hun' he/she hasn't used any namecalling. Let's please refrain from that in this thread and try to keep this intelligent discussion going.
Thanks
|
OK - instead of taking potshots at
Tom Earp, let's do what has been proposed,
neicy. If you choose, and since you're enamored with defining, what exactly defines racism for you?
It seems that you see it as an offense of power - that without the 'upper hand' portion of the deal, no one can be racist (forgive the simplification). This would, then, preclude (in general) the African-American community from being a racist institution, as Whites control the balance of power in the US; however, this would NOT preclude
specific instances that could be deemed "racist" should situations arise where an African-American holds the 'power' in the situation.
This, to me, is indicative of a "capital-R"
Racism, where you would be defining institutionalized Racism in America spefically. This would be things like denying education and job opportunities to blacks, purely because of race, or the criminal justice system being slanted in favor of whites.
Now, I won't argue against this sort of "institutionalized" racism occuring - in its purest form, it has been in existence since the time of the founding fathers (ie Thomas Locke's "Life, Liberty, and Property" being changed to "... and the Pursuit of Happiness" b/c only white men could own things), and even for centuries before that, unfortunately.
However, I think that perhaps it is narrow-sighted to infer that any race that has been abased to this point in tme cannot have racist tendencies of its own, in specific circumstances. To me, it is difficult to draw the line between supporting the institutional racism as a white person, or a sort of 'vigilante retribution' by specific acts of abasement or racism should a person of minority status be in a situation where s/he could perform such acts. To my mind, that sort of situation only pushes further the hate which we all (supposedly) are supposed to fight against.
Ultimately, this is not a purely white problem, or purely black problem. History cannot be rewritten, unfortunately - however, it
does appear that within a few decades, white non-hispanics will not be the majority of the US population (ie less than 50%) . . . then it becomes interesting - does a higher integration of American society result in a higher integration in, say, Congress? How about the National Football League, where more than 50% of the players are black, but less than 25% of the coaches are . . . does that represent institutional promotion of whites over blacks, even though the African-American community is less than 20% of total population?
Or some other questions - to what extent does stereotyping connote racism? Is there such a thing as a positive stereotype? Is it possible to draw the line between the two?
Just some food for thought - we ARE trying to fuel meaningful discussion, no?
Hybrid Mode
