First of all let me tell you where I am coming from so you all can go into this with preconceived notions which are way off the mark.

I grew up in Idaho about as white as you can be. I was raised in a very rural area (county population 800) with zero black people. I don't remember the first black I saw but it would have to have been in my teenage years. Where I grew up the terms n***er-knocking and n***er-toes were common terms for ringing the door bell and running and Brazil nuts respectively.

I remember distinctly one vacation when we went into a restaurant and the cashier was black. I was probably rude in staring at her but she was the first black person I had been that close to.

However none of this had anything to do with race. None of it was done out of dislike or racism. It was simply the way things were done in that small town. It was our culture. It had nothing to do with us being white but with us being small town Idahoans.

As I grew up and moved out into the world I have met many blacks who I became friends with. Why? Because they shared common interests with me. I learned where the terms I had used growing up came from, that many people would consider them offensive, and stopped using them. Not as a conscious decision but simply because it wasn't accepted by the culture I found myself a part of.

My point is that everyone seems to focus on race being the big bad divide in the country when it really has nothing to do with it anymore. It is held up as the smoking gun. It is what causes all the hard feelings. Black culture and white culture are incompatible. Blacks who act like whites are considered to be sucking up or giving up their heritage. Whites who act like blacks are posers.

This is all a bunch of bull pucky. There is no such thing as "Black Culture" just as there is no such thing as "White Culture." Now before you all start screaming that I am a conservative white guy who just doesn't get it let me explain.

Black culture as a specific culture does not exist because it is divided along a line created by man based on superficial visual differences. If you were to visit 5 black families around the country, born and raised in the area they are in you would find that all 5 had a different culture based on the area they grew up in.

Take for example the following 5 people -

1. Colin Powell
2. Michael Jordan
3. Rodney King
4. Phillip Grant
5. John Brown

I am going to assume that you know the first 3. The 4th is a black man accused of murder in a hate crime in New York. The 5th is middle manager at a corporate office in Salt Lake City.

Now if you were to take a poll of which of this people was the most "black" who would win? Why? The answers would be as different as the people answering them. The reason is that there is no overall definition of what makes a person "black" other than their skin color. That is, there is no 1 black culture.

Currently I am living and working in Salt Lake City. Yes I am a Mormon. So are around 60% of the population of Utah. I am white. So are 85% of the population. Do Mormons and non-Mormons have the same culture? Just read the editorial pages in the local news papers. The answer is definitely no. So which better reflects "white" culture. Answer - Neither. There is no such thing.

I have lived in other areas, such as Los Angeles where, while there are a large number of Mormons they are still a vast minority. Is their culture different from the Mormons living in Utah? Oh yah. So which is a better reflection of Mormon Culture. Well the answer to that is neither. Culture is a more a result of shared background, geographic location, and common beliefs than skin color.

Now please do not believe that I am naive, or that I say that skin color has nothing to do with it. This does affect relations, with some more strongly than others but the questions posed strike me as ludicrous. Please note that this is not to say that the questions posed are ludicrous but that I find them ludicrous. Why, because of MY culture. Which is small town Idaho, with a sprinkle of Japan (lived there 2 years), LA (6 years), big town Idaho (3 years), and finally a dash of Utah (4 years).

I don't deny that there is a perceived problem in America, but I see it as an ignorance problem. Note I did not say Stupidity problem. The difference is people don't understand each other because they don't know each other.

Let me answer the questions posed and see if you can catch a glimpse of my mindset.

Absolutely not. But then again my black counterpart is a 34 year old single man making a decent living in a customer service job. My black counterpart is not a Colin Powell or a Rodney King nor is my counterpart a Larry Bird or a Randy Weaver or a Bill Gates. I am definitely out of touch with any of those last three and they are white!

Which one are you talking about? The community in Detroit or the one in New Orleans. Or is it the one in Redmond Washington? I probably have a distorted view of the one in Detroit. But I have the New Orleans one dead to rights. A bunch of Jamaican sounding guys that like spicy food and play in a Jazz band. What a hoot. Of course they have to watch out for them darn Red-necks and Hill Billies who all are hopped up on moonshine and and are liable to shoot you first and ask questions later. Silly hicks.

I don't remember. Probably several years ago when I was in LA. However I had dinner the other day with a white Lutheran friend from Georgia. It was very educational as he talked about things I had never experienced, nor thought about really.

No, because that is a personal thing. Races don't relate to each other, people do. I do know that personal contact with persons of a different culture, be it a black from South Central or a non-Mormon from Utah is very important in breaking down the misconception that there is one "American Way".

The problem with most of the hate based crimes today, be it hate crimes or terrorism is narrowmindedness. We hate what we don't know. We look down on what we don't understand. It is possible to hate people you live among, but you have to at least find reasons to do so, you can't just rely on your prejudices.

Sorry to make this so long but let me just close by saying this. When I grew up I was ignorant and held beliefs that were not true. I used terms I did not understand. But I went out in the world and threw off my ignorance. I am not perfect but my faults are, for the most part, my own now. I don't believe in the fallacy of racial culture. Race can be a part of a culture. It is not THE culture.

Economics is not the only division left in this world.

By the preceding story you included isn't it clear that those who lived in that Rural Idaho town were, by definition, out of touch with their black counterparts?

It's not just a local occurence.


Race can often be a BIG part of the culture. Especially in this country where racially-based culture was mandated by law for decades.

I didn't say it was. If you look at my example there were several things that I mentioned, my economic status was only one of them. Marriage status, job status and age were others. This was not supposed to be an exhaustive list though. I could have mentioned that my counterpart would be of a similar educational background as in not mentally handicapped or of a genius level either. He wouldn't be an exercise freak either.

The people I mentioned as an example of who aren't my counterparts were chosen more for their tastes as reflected by their chosen careers than by their economic status. I couldn't hang with Colin Powell because I'm not that interested in things military. Larry Bird would be cool to hang with but he probably wouldn't want to hang with me because there really isn't anything in common other than skin color.

I've had computer geeks for roommates and had fun with them but Bill Gates is too old. I like video games, he probably likes corporate takeovers.




Not at all. Their black counterparts would be black farmers and ranchers in a small town. Their black counterparts are not highly educated black professors, or rich black hip-hop artists, or even white lawyers. Their counterparts would be able to meet them for lunch and discuss the price of steers easily. They would be able to discuss the effects of the grain exports to Korea. Those are their counterparts.

While the story I used did include the fact that some of the terms used by the people in my home town could have come across as racial slurs they weren't used as racial slurs. They were simply used in ignorance for the most part. That is not to say that there weren't any bigots in town, but then again their black counterparts would probably have their own bigots. They would probably be more in touch with each other anyway. They both understand hate.

Are there a lot of black farmers and ranchers out there in small towns? Probably not. But that wasn't the point. The point was you have to compare apples to apples. It doesn't matter if they are red apples or green apples or yellow apples. The point is they have to be apples.



I didn't say it couldn't be a part, or even a big part. What I said, or at least meant was, it wasn't the ONLY part. Too often we try to simplify things past the point where they become meaningful.

If it is "Black Culture" versus "White Culture" why does Hip-Hop have an LA crew that hates the New York Crew. That isn't black culture that's Hip-Hop Culture.

I remember reading an article where the black author is very upset that people call him African-American. I can't remember the actual article title or who the author was but I remember him stating that he had been to Africa as a journalist and had seen the atrocities that were being carried out by Africans and wanted nothing to do with it. It was completely foreign to him.

On the other hand the name African American is a badge of honor among others. It has nothing to do with Black Culture and everything to do with that persons culture. This may be Black Culture to them but the point I was trying to make was that culture can not be divided along racial lines. Race can play a big part IN a culture but it is not THE culture.

I'm not sure why this statement bothers me, but something about it does. Oh, I know that hayleyanne means no offense and is complimenting the Lester Holts or Colin Powells of the world for how well-spoken they are, but the sentence, "I have a difficult even believing they are "Black" is not a compliment. I'm sure Mr. Holt and Mr. Powell would be the first ones to point out that despite their lack of a "strong Black dialect" that they are still Black.

I have heard White people tell me, "I don't think of you as Black" and I know they mean it as a compliment, but it's a back-handed compliment. It usually means they feel relaxed and at ease and I haven't said, done or acted in a way that emphasizes my Blackness.

Have you ever heard a Black person say, "I have a difficult time believing that you are "White?" I know I never have. Maybe it's because when a White person tells a Black person that they can't believe they are Black, the unfinished thought left hanging out there is, "Well, what do you think I am then?



"'I really don't think of you as Black.' The erasure of my Blackness is meant to be a compliment, but I am not flattered. For when I am e-raced, I am denied an identity that is meaningful to me and am separated from people who are my flesh and blood." [Harlon L. Dalton, 1995]

If I thought of some one as a person, so much that I didn't think of them as being black, then thats not an insult.

Its a way of demonstrating that the colour of their skin makes no difference to how I perceive them. Of course I can see they are black, or brown, or darker than I am, but that is just a detail. Their personality is what counts... the 'content of their character'.

To suggest otherwise is to level an accusation without merit. Like Haleyanne, I don't look at Colin Powell and see a black man. I see an American politician, a former secretary of state. When I look at Condoleeza Rice, I don't see a black women, I see another American politician and the current secretary of state.

Yes, I know they are 'black'... but it doesn't matter.



editted for spelling

Nighttimer-- I just want to clarify. It is not even that I meant any of it as a compliment. It was more of a comment on how I process information. When I hear standard "broadcast" style american english, I see a generic newsperson (Lester Holt). The color of the person's skin doesn't get "processed" in my mind. Do you see what I am saying? When I say: I have difficulty believing they are black--it is more that I take a second look and see that they are black and then think-- how is it that I did not notice this first?

I guess my point was that there are many factors that play into how we perceive others, and the color of a person's skin (as obvious a trait as it is) may not be as significant as people think it is

Agreed. There isn't a uniform black culture any more than there is a uniform white culture. It's as much socio-economically based as racially based, probably more. Lower class blacks have as little in common with middle and upper class blacks as they do with middle and upper class whites. In fact, lower class blacks have a lot in common with lower class whites, hispanics and asians.

It isn't so much a matter of culture as it is socio-economic status. I think you find just as much anti-educational bias among the lower classes, regardless of the color of their skin, yet not nearly so much as you move up the economic ladder.

Where I think the problem really comes in isn't celebrating your culture, it's demanding that you're 100% different from everyone else yet you expect to be treated 100% the same as everyone else.

You either fit in or you're treated differently. Not sure how much more clearly you can put it.

Are a substantial proportion of white Americans out of touch with their black counterparts?

Which blacks do you want to discuss, the quiet stay-at-home type that, in other than color, are pretty much the same as comparable whites, or the type shown in the various media that get hyped for reasons of their own? I am certainly out of touch with rap, hip hop, gang bangers, etc. A family man is a family man, tho, and I can identify with that. And I really can't speak for a substantial proportion of white America, as I probably don't identify with most of them either.


Has this lead to a distorted view of the black community as a whole?

I think that the distorted views that some of us hold are, again, due to media, and a lot may be due to blacks themselves. I grew up in a mostly white area, no blacks at schools, but traveled through black communities around Houston when I ditched school to go downtown to wander thru the museums. What I saw in those communities was sad, and was a result of white on black racism of the day(60's). But worse, in my view, is black on black racism, and I have seen some of that while in the USN. Blacks that aspired to a technical career, or pursued an education, were ostracized by other blacks. What is so great about any part of black culture that makes anyone want to stay uneducated, ignorant, and poor?

When was the last time you sat down for a meal with a family/person not of your racial background?

A few years ago, when I was still working, with a very pleasant black lady co-worker, at lunch. But what does this have to do with it? I don't get many sit-down meals at home with my wife! My fault, she is still working, I am retired, so I should cook more often.

Is personal contact with persons of another race important to forming an accurate impression of the state of race relations in this country?

Definitely, for the reasons already stated, and especially to help counter the images as shown in various forms of media. The most twisted definition of today must be the one used for "reality".


Certainly I have no sympathy for people who spend their time being angry at the world, whether it is the white world, or the world in general, instead of making an individual effort to improve their lot in life. Blaming whitey isn't working anymore.
Even Bill Cosby is singing that tune.
I can blame my white parents for part of my less than stellar situation, and at the same time give them zero credit for my limited success. But why bother? That is ancient history, as is most white on black racism. I can only think of one person who I know who uses the N word occasionally, and everyone who knows him knows he is an idiot.

Most of us are too busy trying to make our own lives more pleasant to worry about anyone who is just sitting around expecting success/acceptance/whatever to be handed to them.

That's not necessarily the case at all. Heck, in my case, I have never once used a 'connection' to get a job or anything else. It's all been hard work on my own, from college to every job I've ever had, up to my own company now. I paid my own way through college too, no grants, no scholarships, no nothing and graduated at the top of my class.

Anyone can do it. Blacks claiming they're somehow 'disadvantaged' are full of it. They have the same opportunities in school to get ahead, they simply choose not to.

Strangely... I have to agree with moif. I believe that friendship has hit a new level once you forego the idea that skin color is a defining factor in the relationship.

Consider the idea that I spend time with predominantly caucasians, of whom some are fair skinned, some darker.. some have light hair, some fat, some well toned, etc. I never call friends by their physical characteristics; ie "George the Chunk".

nighttimer, you said earlier that "Have you ever heard a Black person say, "I have a difficult time believing that you are "White?" I know I never have. Maybe it's because when a White person tells a Black person that they can't believe they are Black, the unfinished thought left hanging out there is, "Well, what do you think I am then?"....

Well, I've never heard that, but I have heard; "that's pretty good for a white boy" on numerous occasions...of which are generally references to sporting accomplishments. Can you imagine the reaction if I said something like that at the office??? "Those sales numbers are pretty good for a black dude..."!!!
I'd get fired and beaten up in the same day!!!

First, you have to define what you mean by the stark black/white definitions.

What is your definition of "white", "black", "racial background"? How does the reality of "racially mixed" people fit into your worldview?

Do I have a distorted view? Well, that depends. Of what? Where? Whom?

I went to college for 6 years in Detroit which has been called the most segregated city in America. I have some very stark impressions of that place. And frankly, I don't think their problems are "race" related at all. Except for the racists who live there and refuse to deal with the reality of their fellow Michigan and USA citizens.

From my perspective, their issue is culture, and a dysfunctional one at that. But, it hides under the facade of "black pride" and the idiocy that allows crime, rampant out-of-wedlock birth, and educational underachievement to hide behind that false storefront. Their problem is also a failure of politics (which is the same problem that most of Africa suffers from). Poverty, crime, and hopelessness can be cured by politics or enabled by it. Unfortunately, Detroit, which is a democrat monopoly, has embraced the form of politics that thinks that victimhood is a virtue, not something to be overcome and conquered. What these people just don't understand is that one cannot simultaneously be a "victim" and "equal" in spite of the noise they create. Either they need to take charge of their own destiny or be tramped under the feet of history.

Is personal contact with other people who don't "look like you" important? I think so. I have gone out of my way to interact with others and have ensured that my children have been exposed to many people who look, talk, and act differently than they do.

Will this help them down the road? I'm sure they'll look beyond external, and meaningless genetic characteristics of people to see what's really important. The content of their character, not the platitudes they recite, the "racial allegiance" they cling to, or the discredited politics they promote. Their qualities of the only race that counts, the human race, are what I hope they focus on.

"Race" doesn't change the fact that people are human and thus subject to factors known as "human nature". Political and racial (a discredit concept in its own right) allegiance cannot change that force of nature.

But, that's only what I think and I didn't win any awards last night. I'm sure a few of the other esteemed members of AD will step in and correct me where necessary if my non-PC views ruffled any feathers in here.

..and yet we take Bill Clinton to task for exploiting ambiguity.

What is the meaning of the term "sexual relations"?

To reach a practical conclusion we must take a practical approach.

In practice the vast majority of whites and blacks can tall one from the other, hence little clarification is needed.


..and who exactly has championed these faults as defensible under "black pride".

I sure as heck haven't heard that line before.

The "failed subculture" myth stands in the way of true understanding.

It ignores that fact that similar complaints where lodged with every ethnic minority who fell victim to greater poverty in this country.

We should have moved beyond this lazy rationalization.

No, I take Bill Clinton to task because he's a liar. There is nothing ambiguous about that. He lied about his "personal issues" like he lied about his foreign and domestic policies, his agenda, and even his golf game.



Well, most people know what this means. Lets just say that Clinton's attempts to minimize his contact with Monica, cigar and all, missed the mark.



I'm all for moving beyond lazy rationalization. If you read my posts on a regular basis you would understand that.

What's intellectually lazy is the old "black vs. white" argument. What's even more insidious is the concept of "race" which has been medically and scientifically discredited beyond doubt.

Race is bogus

Who are the people most concerned with "race" these days in our society? It sure as heck isn't the republicans or even the conservatives. It's the left who use the obsolete concept of "race" to divide people and to attempt to form voting blocks (and increase their own political power) by playing to those outdated concepts. These same people then enable subcultures that are based on the failed concept of "race" and that allow clearly dysfunctional behavior by hiding behind "racial pride".

It's idiocy. And our country is paying a heavy price for that idiocy.

Ahhh... more leading questions. I feel like I'm at a Johnny Cochran trial.

Firstly and most importantly your questions elude to the idea that eating dinner with an Asian/Black/Hispanic family would cause an intrinsic understanding. Frankly, I can say that unless you're truly immersed in a diverse environment, that understanding is elusive.

Are whites out of touch with their black counterparts?
I guess this is probably an easily answered question, in that no would be the answer if you were really talking about counterparts.

The military is the best petri-dish for this experiment. What you'll quickly find is that men in a unit spend social time in their unit, but often segragate themselves based nearly completely upon job functionality (where they work every day!!) and rank (socio-economics). It's funny to think that black people and white people all over the nation have these "notions" about race relations. The military doesn't force social segregation, but go to a gym or Officers/NCO club at your local installation and you'll see a salt and pepper-esque mix.
To answer the question at hand, I sincerely doubt it.

In my civilian career, I find that I spend the most free time w/ my black counter-parts in that we're about the same age and from similar backgrounds/educations. We play sports and hit happy hours, where as many others in our organization do not. Are we out of touch with each other??? ... I mean, do we listen to the same music, like the same clothes, and spend weekends at the same "spots"??? Not at all... but during working hrs and the couple of times/week that we hang out I don't think the fact that I burn in the sun matters...

What the question really should ask is; "Do black and white people from different walks of life really know much about each other?? For that matter, what do Americans from different walks of life know about each other??"

The thing that drives "being out of touch" is socio-economic status. Let's talk about my college experience for instance. I found that coming from a middle-class southern family, I rarely felt comfortable spending time with people from the Northeast (why the heck they were at LSU I'll never understand) or very wealthy families. We couldn't relate to each other on many levels; such as spending free time, money, food, and values based judgements. What does that have to do with race??? Basically nothing...

So to bring this full circle... are white people out of "touch"??? I would say it all depends on the white person and where exactly he/she is supposed to be touching.

Of course, it's not necessarily the case at all. Like I stated in my previous post, it's easy to find anecdotal counter examples. And, BTW, good for you (I suppose) that you never used a connection to get a better job. Of course, I'm not sure that this is a virtuous claim to make. Personally, if I can use my connections to my advantage, I will.


Yes, anyone can "do it" provided there's an opportunity for them to "do it". You may be one of the most exceptional people in the world where you would treat friends and strangers equally. That is, given a person you know and a person you don't know, you would never prefer the person you know over the stranger. Kudos to you. Now, if you could only teach this technique to others, we would be living in a better world.

There's a difference between using your connections to get ahead and using people. The fact remains that no one can claim they failed because no one was there to give them a hand up. Hard work remains a major factor in success.



People have to be willing to learn. Unfortunately, you get far too many kids in school, particularly poor kids, who are more willing to drink, do drugs, be pregnant by 14, etc. than actually go to school and learn something. You have parents who are too busy sleeping with boyfriend #64 this month (without protection, of course) to bother raising the children they already have. It's a self-perpetuating problem, but anyone who wants out can get out, they just have to actually DO something about it. There's nothing exceptional in that. It's disgusting that people are all too willing to throw up their hands and say kids are going to be kids, rather than demand the best from their children and instill them with a drive for success.

Otherwise, the problem will never stop, but that doesn't seem to bother most poor people. Why do you think they're poor in the first place?

Now, what you've done here is ignored the call for substantiation of your bogus claim and fallen back on repetition.

Singularly unconvincing.


...and I'll repeat that race remains as much a barrier to contact (if not more) than socio-economic status.

I said "counterparts" for a reason. Even white on an even socio-economic level tend to have far less contact with blacks that the other way around.

Neighborhoods, schools and churches continue to be divided along racial lines.

We can all chant "there is no problem" til kingdom come, but denial never solved anything.


I'm guessing you don't know too many poor people.

To claim that the poor don't value education and success is pure nonsense. If anything they value it moor because they receive it less.

Blame the victim is a fun game.

Perhaps, but they're doing it to themselves. No one is gathering up all the blacks or hispanics or whites and forcing them to live in single race neighborhoods, attend single race churches, hang out with single race friends, etc.

No one has anyone to blame for this but themselves.

True in a sense, but this segregation is not entirely up o free will. Blacks would love to integrate neighborhoods as historically whites have owned the better land.

..but in many places they haven't exactly been welcomed in to the the fold.

My point is that race continues to be a division and that a large part of the impetus behind that is the distance that many in the white community continue to place between themselves and other races.

Frankly, I grow tired of having to "substantiate" the self-evident.

You answer it for me then.

Which group of people in the United States sees "race" as a very important issue? You tell me.

Is it the republican party?

Is it conservatives?

Is it "white people"?

If you call my claims 'bogus' then back up YOUR claims with some "documentation".

You'll find that persons of all political persuasions with a clear view of the American landscape recognize race to be an important issue.

Of course black people are going to complain about it far more than whites. They are the ones who have been most affected by it.

Of course the political party closest to black will be the one to air these concerns.

Denial is a luxury that most blacks cannot afford.

You claim a "dysfunctional sub-culture".

I counter the problem has nothing to do with culture and ask you to explain why you think it does.

Answer: None

This is an ancient argument rehashed. The Irish were poor because they had a drinking culture, the Italians were poor because the refused to release their culture.

Culture is not the catch-all root of every social problem.

I called it a lazy rationalization and that is exactly what it is.

Turnea
I'm guessing you don't know too many poor people.

To claim that the poor don't value education and success is pure nonsense. If anything they value it moor because they receive it less.

Blame the victim is a fun game.

Bogus, bogus, and bogus.
I was a poor person, and half of my siblings are still poor. Difference is, I value education and they do not. We all had the same opportunities, went to the same schools, so they did not "receive it less". And receiving is the wrong word, as we should be taking it when it is offered. Lots of people, of all colors, refuse to see the value in it, even when close relatives prove the value by being successful.
If my siblings are victims, they victimized themselves. I have 2 more siblings who have done well, so half of us are living well, and half are not.
My education involved some sacrifice on my part, many years active duty in the USN in exchange for some excellent technical training. One of my poor siblings actually tried the same thing, got some good welding training. What did he do with it? He chose to live far away from where the welding jobs are, in the sticks of East Texas, close to hunting and fishing. He was offered a good job and a place to live, with my oldest sister, but would not leave his dogs.
It isn't only blacks who are poor or disadvantaged, so there must be some commonalities other than color. Perhaps attitude toward education is one of them.

You still haven't really answered my question.

Which group of people in the United States sees "race" as a primary issue?

I maintain that "race" is a bogus concept. It has no medical or biological basis.

Yes, I would maintain that "culture" is what keeps people down. Race has little to do with it. Individual behavior and individual choices determine a person's outcome infinitely more than their physical "appearance", hair, eye, or skin color.

And yes, there are dysfunctional subcultures in our country. That is also self-evident. Obviously, you aren't a member of one of them. I wouldn't put you in the same "class" as an inner city crackhead anymore than I would expect someone to put me in the same subculture of a meth-head biker who happened to "look" like me physically.

Race means nothing to me. It also doesn't mean much to most of the people I know and interact with daily.

Yet, there are some in our country who see the obsolete concept of "race" as primary to their lives.

If you call my statement bogus, then I suggest YOU back it up with substantiation, documentation, and references.

Lord Helmet

There was a study done by MIT that showed people with "Black" sounding names had substantially amount less chance of getting a call back for an interview for a job than people with "white" sounding names.

Now names may derive from culture, but a name says nothing about culture. My question is:

How would you explain this disparity on culture rather than race??

There was a study done by MIT that showed people with "Black" sounding names had substantially amount less chance of getting a call back for an interview for a job than people with "white" sounding names.

Now names may derive from culture, but a name says nothing about culture. My question is:

How would you explain this disparity on culture rather than race??

There are also studies that show how disadvantaged the fat, or unattractive, are when seeking work. Life is not fair, and no amount of whining about it will change that. If you can't find what you want behind one door, open another.
Life in a group is not necessarily a group effort. Everyone is trying to work with the group, but still the end result of your life is mostly dependent on your own personal efforts.
I have personally observed that blacks have the advantage in some areas, such as when I was working in Idaho. The company paid moving costs to engineers and managers, but not technicians, unless it was a black technician they were recruiting from the southeast. One in particular I attended night classes with, as we were both prior Navy and using our GI Education Bill. She ended up quitting her job and moving "home" because she felt out of place in a mostly white community. Also, there were not enough eligible black men to date for her and her teenage daughters. She also stated that she missed her people back home. So she packed up her girls and went home to be unemployed. Her job was easy and paid better than mine, and I tried to get it after she left. They killed the position, saying that it didn't need to be filled.
Read into that whatever you want. I can tell similar stories for hours.
Looking for someone else to blame is futile. Nearly all our problems are caused by the person we see in the mirror when we brush our teeth.

Gotta jump in on this one... it's gone from rational to completely absurd.

The thing about any study, especially one coming from MIT (which I'm not calling you dishonest... but I'm a little apprehensive that you didn't even provide a link) is that you can sway it in whatever direction you'd like. Again, I don't even know why MIT (which is a technologically driven university) would even be doing such a study... Harvard or Yale, maybe.

I could send out 20 people of all races to interviews for jobs that they are not qualified for, and call it racism. It would be very easy to not compare apples to apples. I could send people with less experience, deficient education, poorly worded resumes, etc. Is it the name or the resume??? Hmm...

We may not be addressing the problem, in that we consistently pull the race card.

Finally, if there are such things as "black sounding names", where did people fall if they had names that were typically "anglo"... I don't know, such as William or Fred?? Were they hired?

If you want to not be thrown rhetorical remarks, you might want us to be able to read the information you're quoting...

Sure, jump right on in... not quite sure what I said that is so absurd?

I have seen the study brought up before, so I didn't think to link the material, but I have no trouble doing it.

Here:
link

Try not to let your emotions get the best of you on this issue, and I hope you don't take this debate too far off track, if you attempt to "discredit" the research.

Also in a debate about race... the race card will be pulled. Ever have a debate about war with out talking about war??

Back to the debate...

I don’t know if this is the same study droop referenced. This one is on Princeton’s page.

It seems almost anything, on this or other subject, counter to aevans176’s preconceived notions, is either absurd, irrational, illogical, not objective, or something like that, depending on which post you are reading.

http://www.irs.princeton.edu/seminars/Bertrand.pdf

This is a PDF file.

Pray tell... What's the difference?


While hard work is certainly an important factor for success, it is by no means the exclusive factor; it remains to be demonstrated if it is the most important factor. There are many other factors associated with success. Why can't one of those factors be race?


Look, you won't get any argument from me that there are slackers in the world. That there are folks who abuse the system. I agree with this. What I don't agree with is your suggestion that this is exclusively or even the majority of cases. I'd sooner go with half and half. But, I have no numbers to back this up (nor do you, I see).


Again, there are almost certainly poor people who choose to be poor. But, um, it's quite a statement to suggest that this condition is desired by all or even most poor people. But, if you'd like to continue with this line of logic, I'll need some empirical data and not ideology for further debate.

Then they get a job and go buy homes in that neighborhood. Real estate agents aren't refusing to show property to blacks, are they? Oh wait, they can't afford it? Then why didn't they get a better education and get a better job? It's their own fault, nobody was sitting behind them in class with a gun to their head demanding they don't study. It's 100% their own fault.



But you're completely ignoring the distance that many in the black community or the hispanic community continue to place between themselves and other races. You're only pointing fingers at one side when it's EVERYONE'S fault.



Because if race was a factor, why are there successful people of every race and unsuccessful people of every race? Why are there people of every race who have shown the ability to rise up out of the ghetto and succeed? Every single one of them that I have talked to has credited their own hard work for their success.



Everyone has the same general opportunities in life. We all go to school. They might not be the same schools, they might not be the same quality schools or schools with the same funding, but not very many people don't have the opportunity to get an education. It's what they do with that opportunity that matters. It's very telling that we see so many inner city and ghetto schools putting in day care centers because there are so many students with kids. This should not happen. Period. And people wonder why there are so many drop outs and failures in the inner city school systems?

Far too many people are refusing to take responsibility for their own lives. Nobody can make you learn. Nobody can make you join a gang. Nobody can make you remain abstinent. Anything that anyone does, positive or negative, rests solely on their own shoulders. Ask the people who do get out of the ghetto.

A name says nothing about culture? That's absurd. A name is associated with a culture. Besides, I'm not that trusting of those types of "studies". I recall that the last time someone tried to promote that sort of idea, there were a ton of holes in their methodology.

Again, I reject your simplistic "black/white" notion. You'd have us believe that there is no difference between the poor black kid in Detroit with a mom who's 19 years old and the kids of Ken Chenault. They're both "black" but the cultural gap between the two is huge.

What does this prove? We're speaking in generalities. If the population of gainfully employed folks is at a certain percentage but a subset of that population is not employed at that same percentage (within a margin of error), then there are factors to be considered which are relevant to that population subset.


There are drop outs and failures in non-inner city school systems. And the bulk of the black population does not live in the inner cities. The link is from 1999 census data but you can see it's just about equal between inner cities and outside cities + non-metro. I believe the trend has been for blacks to move out of inner cities (but I'm too lazy to look this up). Anyway, I believe you really need to find some data to back up your ideology because it looks like mythology to me.


Again, you're not going to get an argument from me that more folks need to take responsibility; I consider this to be only part of the problem. But, if you consider the exclusive (or almost exclusive) issue is personal responsibility, then prove it.

You quoted me... but are you writing to me??? Everything you wrote seems irrational, calm down, and think for a moment, please.

First, this is the first time I have written in this debate... so "again," you can do nothing.

Second, I have put no "black/white" notion forth for you to reject. If so please quote the line.

Third, I would not have you believe there is no difference in the culture, "between the poor black kid in Detroit with a mom who's 19 years old and the kids of Ken Chenault." Nor did I ever posit, or even imply, anything remotely to what you are saying I did.

Lord Helmet I believe, I have seen you label yourself as a logical rather than emotional debater. Please, get a hold, before another race debate gets closed.

As for what is debateable, if you throw out research like this before looking it over, your mind is already made up. Your outright refusal to acknowledge studies are disheartening, but not a surprise to any one who has ever debated with you. So let's go another route.

You admit yourself that it is the culture that sets blacks back correct??

Now can your everyday white or even black person, tell what a black person's culture is before they get to know the person?? Can they tell that the Black person with cornrolls is actually a rock n roll musician?? Can they tell the Black person with nice clothes and a suit is actually mixed in the drug business? So before one gets to know a person they will naturally make some prejudgements on things they have seen or things they believe Prejudicial judgements... we all do it, and it's not all about race.

Now names do derive from culture, however, they do not denote a person's cultural background. A white woman can name her daughter Tamika or Ebony, a Black women can name her child Kristen or Julia. Also, a name can not denote where a person grew, their values, or mores. An adopted black boy named Jamal could be raised by a wealthy white family. Is there anything you disagree with so far??

However, all the above are exceptions In this research this is how they came up with names.



As we can see the experiment was set up so that people would more than likely associate race to a name, by picking the more unique names of both races.
will this help you accept the study more??

Are a substantial proportion of white Americans out of touch with their black counterparts?

Has this lead to a distorted view of the black community as a whole?

When was the last time you sat down for a meal with a family/person not of your racial background?

Is personal contact with persons of another race important to forming an accurate impression of the state of race relations in this country?

I've been reading this thread since it's inception and trying to figure out exactly how to place a context to this debate. I honestly don't know what the "black culture" is, or the "black community" in general terms. I tend to look at people as people and in doing that discover that we share more in common than not. As an example, I lived in Simi Valley during the Rodney King riots and my neighbors across the street were a black family. The rumors were that because the Rodney King trial was held in Simi Valley, our community was being targeted by black gangs for some sort of "retribution". So, my neighborhood "mobilized" and set up a neighborhood watch for trouble 24/7. Who organized it? The black guy across the street. He told me he'd worked two jobs to get his family out of the hellhole that was (and is) South Central LA and he sure as hell wasn't going to let his new hometown of Simi Valley turn into South Central - Northwest. He wanted the same thing for his family as all of those "racist rednecks" living in Simi Valley wanted for theirs and they were more than happy to share the watch with him. There was no sense of black and white, only a sense of community. So, I ask, is that a "black community" or a "white community" or just "a community"? It seems to me it's the latter.

I'm no expert on race relations, but it seems to me that personal interactions with people of different ethnic backgrounds is probably the best way to truly understand that we are far more alike than we are different. We really all want the same things. To be sure, there are tensions and racism on all sides that distort the true picture. It's more of a political power thing at this point though I think. The overt racist attacks on people like Colin Powell, Condi Rice and Janice Rogers Brown by some in the "black community" are Ibelieve less an issue of race and more an issue of political racism. Apparently some "leaders" in the "black community" believe they can get away with this sort of thing. So, I'm going to put up a bunch of links that reference statements made by people who claim to represent the "black community". I reject that assertation, but my evidence is only anecdotal. Are these statements truly reflective of the "black community"?

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/10/15/belafonte.powell/

http://www.blackcommentator.com/14_belafonte.html

http://www.blacknewsweekly.com/195.html

http://www.crosswalk.com/news/1344556.html

http://www.blackcommentator.com/61/61_cover_rogers.html

If this represents the "black community", then yeah, we have a major problem going on here. And I'm not alone in believing that, my black friends would agree with me.

That is a commonly expressed contention in race debates and I agree that on some level it is a commendable sentiment. It is one that, if followed, would necessarily lead to equality of opportunity along racial lines and we can all agree that this is a good thing.

The problem is, the view of "we're all just people" is simply divorced from reality.

Like it or not groups of humans tend to identify with those whom they feel share something in common. Whether you think this something is meaningful or acceptable notwithstanding.

Americans don't think of themselves as " just people" they think of themselves as Americans. This does not mean we necessarily feel superior of fundamentally different from the rest of the world, just that we in America have things is common which we feel require the protection of a national identity.

Some people is the US are proud of their states of origin. An Alabamian can think of his/herself as an Alabamian and an American with no conflict.

Just the same blacks in America by and large see themselves as black and members of a larger "black community." They share a history in common in just the same way as all Americans share some history in common.

Denying that the "black community" exist merely because it has not sat down and elected its own government is silly.

There is a black community, that's not necessarily a bad thing, it's just reality.


I realize the query is rhetorical, but I sincerely doubt you would even ask the question of the white community if I were to come up with a similar list from white partisans about black politicians.

Some of us don't remember the lines about "Poverty Pimps" and "Welfare Queens", but I assure you I do.

The concept of a black community is not more a political ploy than the Jewish community or Italian community or any other ethnic community in the US.

It is a natural reality, not an artificial construction to gain political power or some such.

Well since you brought up your friend let me tell you that I do believe he serves a "white community" as you put it. Here is why.

While I too would want to protect my family and believe that EVERY man should. I would never initiate a neighborhood watch against black people (although I am sure you wouldn't characterize it as such) just because there was a rumor that Black people might be wanting to seek revenge

So here come your Black neighbor "Johnny, Richard, Jim... Fellas i called you over because there is a rumor that the Black people are coming to get us!! Now, I'm from south central so let me tell you, gee golly bob, that these Negroes are dangerous. So what we need is a 24 hour 7 day a week neighborhood watch looking out for Negroes in hoopties"

I admit, I have a problem with those type of Black people and yes quite possibly they would get thrown in my "Uncle Tom " or "Sell out" book. To think he organized it...

I'm from a Black community. All my elementary schools were mostly Black, my middle school was mostly Black, my High Schools were mostly Black, my friends... were mostly Black, until I joined the service at 18 my world was Black. If your friend is from south central, I would think his world is similar. So what possesses a Black man to go to his (mostly white??)neighbors to form some neighborhood watch against other Black people over a rumor?? I suggest he goes back to South Central and get his roots watered, as I like to call it.

As for your references... I wouldn't call them leaders, but they are not far off from the Black Community's feelings. But neither am I a spokesperson for the "Black Community."

But usually Colin, Condi are seen as Tokens. Condi, much more so, than Colin. Clarence and Condi are big time "Uncle Toms" to many Blacks.

I think Harry and Judge Mathis hit a bunch of things dead on in regards to how Black people view certain things.

For instance, why is Colin such a house slave as Harry put forth?

Many Blacks could see that Colin was not in line with the white house, but when did he speak out?? He'd make a slick remark here or there, but he had a unique opportunity, and was in a position. There was NO respect for Colin's advice, though it is made to seem there was. He was thrown in front of the U.N. with faulty info to look like a buffoon in front of the world. Yet, still, what did Colin say negative about Bush. Colin labels himself a "Strong Proponent of Affirmative Action" yet when Bush went to work on doing his best to eliminate Colin merely states "I disagree". That's it?? This man is about to shut doors for Black people that you yourself admit were opened and helped you.... and that is all you can say?? Can you imagine the political pressure it would have put on Bush if Colin made a rousing speech?

But, most white people are against Affirmative Action, thus most white people find the silence of Colin to be quite pleasing and hold Colin Powell to the level of "proper Negro", thus most Black people may find Colin to be "The Proper Negro in White Peoples Eye's" a.k.a "the house slave" The negro all blacks should aspire to be... successful, abiding, and silent.

Contrast that to Judge Mathis... someone you posted a link to. Judge Mathis has the ability to speak out and does. Let's take a quick look at Judge Mathis

Is he articulate..... Check!!
Is he intelligent.... Check!!
Is he successful..... Check!!
Is he wealthy....... check, check!!
You have heard that he is considered an "uncle Tom" in the Black Community.................................................

By some (white) people's standard he should meet the criteria for being looked down upon, yet he doesn't.

droop, I'm not a spokesman for the white community either, but can you take step back from the quoted rhetoric for a moment and see how those statements by the Belafonte, Mathis and Gregory at the Voting Rights March will be taken by the non-black community?
I've got to tell you, the average white person who wishes for better race relations is going to hear this vitriol from the above three and their myrmidons, and are going to want to tell them to get bent. If black liberals are treated with such anathema and given a pass, then I should be able to speak of white liberals in like manner. If there is nothing wrong with the words of these bright lights of civil rights, then there should be nothing wrong found in the pedantic ramblings of David Duke. Right?

If this is the public face of the black community, I really can't blame whites for not putting forth tremndous effort to be 'in touch' with them.

Let's see, Colin Powell spoke out a bit, but not enough to satisfy a bunch of his "own people". Sounds like bigotry on their part. Why don't they collectively get off their butts and speak out themselves? Does their black man with power have to do all the work for them? Whose making him a token now?
I know I don't travel in any black circles, or any "power" circles, just some lower middle class white people, but I don't know anyone who thinks of Colin or Condoleza as tokens. Both are very well educated, intelligent, articulate, successful, (don't know about wealthy, and why should that matter?).
Just because they don't go all militant against the boss when they disagree doesn't make them "house negroes".

This is a most disheartening response. If Droop's version of the "black community" is accurate, then I would admit that I am most definitely out of touch with it and have absolutely no desire to know it. Droop states in so many words that race is more important than right and wrong, good and bad. I soundly reject that philosophy and if that makes me "out of touch", so be it. My neighbor wasn't starting some kind of jihad against black people, but the rumors were significant. There were threats made and the Simi Valley Police Department and Ventura County Sheriffl's department were on tactical alert because of those threats. Now maybe we're just a bunch of paranoid white boys looking out for each other and one of us happens to be black, I don't know. But a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do. And just as there are white folks that are really bad people, and Hispanics and Asians and American Indians, there's some pretty bad black folks running around out there too. Droop, if you lived next door to me and some white scumbag neo-nazi or klan member tried to burn a cross in your yard, I'd be right there next to you chasing them off. That kind of crap isn't a "white thing", it's just plain wrong and I don't want it in my world or in yours. My neighbor in Simi Valley wasn't turning against his race, he was fighting against evil and evil isn't a racial thing.

So now I'm really confused. Just what the hell is "the black community"? Is it a culture where people put race ahead of human decency? Is it a place where people put their families in danger of being killed by a drive-by just so they can "water their roots"? Or, is it a place where people feel trapped and fight like hell to get out of dodge so they don't have to sleep in their vans at night to keep them from being stripped? Or, is it a community where people seek to live in nice homes with their kids going to good schools and playing in safe neighborhoods? If it's the last one, then I've got some news for y'all. It ain't no different than any other kind of community.

Quite a number of response...

DTOM



Yes, I can take step back(even though it is unnecessary) and see how more vocal Blacks turn off the white community. I am not sure it turns off the non-black community to a large percent, unless they really identify with the white community.

At any rate, I think the comments made by Mathis will turn off many White people.

First,(and I have had this debate with you) think some, or many, whites get so infuriated at things they read that they interpret things not being said.

Second, who really wants to hear anything negative about themselves. No body does, White, Black, Hispanic, Chinese..... If Mathis is calling Bush a criminal who stole the election in 2000, and you disagree the remark may anger you, especially since the remarks are so strong. He called the President a thief!! So, yes, I understand how it turns a good percentage of White america off... especially conservative Whites. No doubt it turns off a percentage of all americans, regardless of race.

So here are the options for those who see racial injustices. Be quiet, speak up, speak up and speak loud. In general, I believe, Whites love silence because it promotes their self image of being "good" They tolerate those that will speak, "civilly" against mainstream White America policy so they can say to themselves "we are fair". And they are angered by any one who becomes too boisterous in their dissent against the actions of white America.

Here are some quick rhetorical question that may illustrate my point.

If you were fighting for civil rights who would you have on your team??
Martin Luther King or Malcolm X??

If you had to fight a war who would you want as your President?
Ronald Reagan or Jimmy Carter??

Did you pick the more peaceful in the first question and the more aggressive in the second question??

Bill


Basically, yes. Now I admit that conservative and liberals have a fundamental difference of fair so this may not make sense if you are conservative.

Say a four men have to lift 100 pounds. One man is capable of 50 Lbs another 25 another, 15 and another 10. A conservative will say it is fair to make each carry 25 Lbs worth of weight. A liberal would make the strongest carry 50, the next 25... and so on all in proportion to their ability.

Through what median will the masses of Blacks speak and with what resources?? ??? Let's be reasonable here. Colin didn't have to get "militant", but he didn't have to be so meek either.

As to him being a token... let's say Colin did go... "militant" after all he is a military man. What if he became outrageously outspoken on affirmative action. A man Bush appointed speaks out "loudly" against his bosses policy. Would white people hold him in the same esteem?? Would there be a show on Rush Limbaugh the next day saying "maybe we should listen to this great man" Or would there be a show the next day trying it's best to bring Colin down a notch.

I think Belafonte tried to get this message across, but I will try another way.

Colin, Condi, Clarence may be tokens to many black people, but they are not tokens for Black people. And though you and your "lower middle-class" White circle don't see Colin and crew as tokens, it doesn't mean they aren't . they are tokens because Republicans string them out to say "we really aren't a racist party, sure we believe that every social problem on you minorities is due to your own laziness and disgusting cul