Yahoo posted a Reuters news story today with the headline: "After Katrina, black family warily adjusts to Utah"

The article starts out as follows:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060826/lf_nm/...s_evacuees_dc_3

It is interesting to note that they use the term "subtle racism".

Racism is a term that has become so politically and culturally overused that I think many times people are crying racism in the same way the boy cried wolf.

No where in the article does the write provide any support to this allegation, instead the following are mentioned:







It wouldn't surprise me to find that there have been problems with racism in Utah, but it would surprise me to find out that they were anything other than small, isolated incidents.

What each of these quotes support is cultural differences NOT racism. Yet the article specifically mentions racism in the opening paragraphs. If you were to use the information provided in this article as the basis of a court case the only charge that would originate would be that of filing a false report. None of the evidence supports any charges of racism except one, that is reverse racism.

I am a white male. I have had experience with this before. Once while waiting for a plane in Los Angeles airport as a tour guide many years ago an African American woman in a Hawaiian shirt told me to move to the other side of the entryway. I could see no identifying marks (badges, logo's, etc) to indicate this person was an official of any sort. I had worked there for several years and had never been told to move. I refused stating I saw no reason to move. The lady then said, and I quote exactly, "You wouldn't have said that if I wasn't black!" I was shocked. I wanted to reply that she wouldn't have said that if I hadn't been white.

I think that too often we see racism where there isn't any or where the cause is actually something else. In the case of the Katrina evacuees it appears to me that the issue is more cultural related than racism related. As I stated before I don't doubt that there has been some racial issues but the main issue is cultural in my eyes.

This brings me to my questions:

1. Do you think that racism is a convenient label to too many of us and if so why?

2. How big an issue do you think reverse racism is?

3. Do you think that the media is helping narrow the cultural divide or widen it and why?

This thread sounds like its poster had a bit more of a point to make, than a discussion to provoke.

Either way, I read the article and found it very tasteful in its approach. For one, the graph on the Andrews brothers is both attributed to them and presented as anectdotal evidence to serve a much larger story. Since this newspaper isn't writing a thesis, I feel it's ok that they didn't present something like this:

1. Utahans are subtly racist.
a.) the time the cop used the n word
b.) the time the restaurant wouldn't serve us
c.) the way they stare at you.


If anything, the papers crime is using anectodotal evidence, not charging Utahans with racism, which it didn't do.



1. Do you think that racism is a convenient label to too many of us and if so why?

Yes. But I think its an umbrella term that shelters everything from derranged and explicit racism, to when a dude just feels weird sharing an quiet elevator ride with a black man-- or whatever.

2. How big an issue do you think reverse racism is?


In that it exists, not as big an issue as racism.


3. Do you think that the media is helping narrow the cultural divide or widen it and why?


Survivor has this great idea for a TV show where 'tribes' from different races meet up on the cook island and brawl at it, check it out:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/livin...le/15369496.htm

I like to bust open the Katrina debate from a perspective that most people on AD don't have...

1. I AM from Louisiana, have lived/worked in this region, and understand the culture well.
2. I HAVE been back, will continue to attempt to support the New Orleans economy, and believe that racism in reference to this subject is based solely upon an inherent ignorance of the matter.

The people that lost the most were hard-working and responsible home owners, who by all stretches were doing the right thing. People paying renters/homeowners insurance, feeding their families, paying taxes, etc.

Insurance companies all over the state are making it nearly impossible for people to move back, recoup their losses, and gain a sense of normalcy. What does this have to do with racism?? Nothing really.

Folks like Jesse Jackson NEED to play the race card to further their rhetoric. Is it fact based? Of course not. What people don't understand about New Orleans is that it is a city that had a black majority, of which a large portion was economically depressed. With all of its culture, wonderfulness, and diversity, New Orleans had a less-than-poetic side, which was seen when one of the nation's worst national disasters hit. The newspapers, the television, and radio told everyone to evacuate. What usually happens in these cases? PEOPLE LEAVE. What CBS news doesn't tell you is that THOUSANDS of people who stayed had automobiles! What CBS won't tell you is that there are THOUSANDS of white people, in relatively normal neighborhoods whose homes are devastated.

The biggest tragedy in this disaster is that the media has perpetuated a cycle of divisiveness. Over spring breaks, on vacations, etc... thousands of people from all walks of life have attempted to help those in New Orleans. Millions of dollars have been spent, and none of it has anything to do with skin color.

1. Do you think that racism is a convenient label to too many of us and if so why?

Racism is often a convenient scapegoat for many problems, certainly. Admittedly, racism is not the cause of most of black America's current woes--high murder rates, high illegitimate births, etc.--but we should not easily dismiss it as a non-factor in black Americans or other minorities' lives, for it is. After all, were it not for racism, many, particularly blacks, would have had the opportunities and access to resources that nearly all other Americans had, thus improving their lot in life. Furthermore, while exclusion is not so much a problem anymore, other racist principles are, for example, one that compensates black labor far less than white labor (though, admittedly, women of all races could make this claim as well).

2. How big an issue do you think reverse racism is?

It depends on what you mean by "reverse racism". If by "reverse racism" you are referring to programs such as affirmative action, then you may be in for a bit of a surprise. White women have benefitted more from affirmative action than anyone else. Dr. Evelyn Hu-DeHart, Professor of Ethnic Studies at University of Colorado-Boulder, writes:

"All studies conclude, and statistics easily confirm, that white women have benefitted the most from affirmative action. White women now comprise 45% of the workforce, compared to 7.5% for Latinas/os, 10% for African Americans, and 2.6% for Asian Americans. Although still far from attaining parity with white males, and still facing serious glass-ceiling barriers, white women have risen more rapidly and spread more evenly across the workforce than any racial minority group. For example, in administrative jobs, between 1960 and 1990, white women rose from 9% to 33% of the total; in professional jobs, from 22% to 34%; and in technical jobs, from 14% to 30%.7

White women have some clear advantages over minorities: there are more of them; as a group they are better educated and suffer no major educational disadvantages in K-12 levels; collectively they are less mired in poverty; and they are represented in all classes as well as being more "middle class." Culturally and racially, they are more accepted by white males, who hire, sire and marry them. As Professor Ruth Rosen of California acknowledged: 'White middle class women were best positioned to take advantage of affirmative action programs. Once the barriers were lifted, we leaped into male dominated professions and occupations.' In other words, given their social, class, economic and educational background that most closely approximated the criteria of meritocracy set up by white males, and which affirmative action had to accept as fair and universally valid, white women could best and most immediately meet these standards of qualification. White women's progress has outpaced all minority men and women in every sector: the workforce, management, higher education (as students, faculty and administrators). U.S. West in Denver is typical: of 43 high-level executive positions, white women hold 17, compared to 4 minority men, and no woman of color."

I think part of the problem with the term reverse racism is that there is some widescale belief that equality for minorities means a loss for whites. An unfortunate by-product of the empowerment of the minorities is that there is less for the majority, but the converse has been true for so long that perhaps we need to come to terms with it. However, by and large, whites, somewhat by default, still remain quite empowered in this country as is evident by the statistics above. I am not suggesting that reverse racism does not exist or that it does not effect some; I am just not so sure it as prevalent in the lives of whites as racism is in the lives of other minorities. Racism has a lot to do with power, and minorities ultimately lack the power to withhold whites from too much.

3. Do you think that the media is helping narrow the cultural divide or widen it and why?

I think this largely depends to which media you are referring. If by popular media--the nightly news, the daily newspaper, etc.--then I would have to say, no, the media is not doing too much to narrow the cultural divide. The news in whatever form is as polarized as our government; as such, what they display is as well. The news does not deal with the middle ground, which, unfortunately, is where the truth often lies.

1. Do you think that racism is a convenient label to too many of us and if so why?

I think when people judge people by their race, they often do so, because races have cultures, and most people in them are members of their cultures.

Blacks often push great emphasis on athleticism, speak in their own dialect (to I believe their general misfortune), tend to incorperate phyiscal punishment onto their youth, and be realitively un-uptight and un-pc. Not to be offensive, but unlike Asians and Hispanics, they don't have a culture intrinsically tied to hardwork and self betterment.

Circumstantially they are very bad off; 70% of them are born to single mothers. Unfortunately, they don't have a tradition of having proper families, and the fact that they are most often poor and shot down by actual and perceptual racism makes their lives tense, and by extension their relationships instable.

Offense definitely taken, A left-Handed person. Congratulations on a fine piece of stereotyping.

In one paragraph you say that Blacks put too much emphasis upon athletics, speak in their own dialect, beat their kids, are "uptight" (whatever the hell that means), are politically uncorrect and have not created a culture where the ethic of working hard and self-improvement are valued or encouraged. In the second you decry out-of-wedlock births, wag your finger at our broken dysfunctional families and have lousy relatinships because we're all so poor and plagued by racism--actual and perceived.

That about right?

Let's hear it for liberal racism.

Part of me says I should just ignore the putrid prejudice of your remarks. Even to comment on them gives them a validity and value they don't have or deserve. However, to leave your racially insipid remarks unchallenged offends me as well. There are times when ignorance should be ignored and others when you have to confront it head on.

Do Black people have their problems. Oh my, yes. No doubt about it. What I will admit is that if you focus upon the pathology of the few, you are blinded by the progress of the many. What I will admit is that Hurricane Katrina showed the whole world how comfortable Americans can be with thousands of their own citizens living in misery, filth and conditions they wouldn't allow their pets to endure.

Success runs in the Black race. We are scientists, surgeons, CEO's, professors, professionals and prophets. What we are not are as adept as White people are in concealing our drug abuse, our failures, our criminals and our problems. We own few magazines, television networks, magazines, film companies or other means of controlling the image that the world sees. White people control their image and their image of themselves is one of intestinal fortitude, putting one's nose to the grindstone and back to the wheel and all that good stuff.

As if White people don't do drugs. Don't kill each other. Cheat each other. Rape each other. Or pretty much do all the horrible things human beings do to themselves or others. As if.

What America so often sees is Black people committing crimes. Black people killing each other. Black people carrying a football or dunking a basketball. Black people clowning. Black people screwing up in public and in living color.

There's far more to what Black people are that your extremely limited view of them, Lefty. But someone who thinks you're worth taking the time to explain it to you will have to do it because I have no interest in bursting your fragile little bubble.

Keep your stereotypes. The fight for civil rights wasn't just to free Black people from White racism. It freed White people from their own racism that was killing their souls as sure as a cancer killing the body.

And look how well it worked. Now White people can go online and be offensive (and un-p.c.) in Cyberspace.

What progress we've made. How far we've come.

How far we still have to go.

You, sir, are generalizing.

Very few parents worth their stead--black or otherwise--pump their children with hoop dreams. In fact, if you listen to most athletes, they are often encouraged by their parents to finish their degrees. That black children have hoop dreams is not some by-product of a lack of interest in education by blacks or some overemphasis on sports by their parents. It is more an indication of black children wanting to make loads of money and gain fame in the one of the few arenas in which we are readily accepted.

As far as dialect is concerned, every American has some manner of accent or dialect that differs from so-called proper English. From a Southern drawl to a Northern tendency to replace a with er (go to Philadelphia and ask someone to say "Nova Scotia" and you'll most likely hear "Nover Scotier"), we all mangle the King's English in some manner. In fact, in his book Black Rednecks and White Liberals, Thomas Sowell actually indicates how so-called ebonics emerges from blacks learning English from Scots and Irish slavemasters who spoke similarly (for example, saying "ax" for "ask", etc.). That ebonics or black English is stigmatized is the greatest hindrance to blacks, not so much our refusal to speak properly (which you will find very few Americans actually do). Trust me; as an English professor, I can certainly attest to how Americans who think they have a firm grasp on English make mistakes, particularly in terms of subject-verb agreement and illogical shifts in person.

I do not know if I should dignify your other remarks in terms of blacks engaging in corporal punishment and avoiding political correctness or uptight behavior. Why in the world would you want someone to be uptight? Why would you want someone not to be forthright?

However, the most offensive comment you made is in terms of work ethic and self-improvement. Try telling that story to my father-in-law, a 65 year old man who wakes up every morning at 4:00 a.m. to go to work in his barbershop, where he works all day until 9:00 p.m. and repeats it over again the next day. Try telling that story my uncles in Ohio who worked seemingly endless hours in the steel mills. Try telling that to the myriad of black women who work two jobs to make ends meet. Black unemployment often is the highest in the country, normally averaging around 16-20 percent; however, what that indicates is that on average 80-84 percent of work-eligible blacks do, in fact, work.

You do manage to go out on a somewhat sympathetic note by at least granting the possibility that racism is tied into the outcomes of black people. With that being said, you preface that by stating that blacks do not have a "tradition of proper families". In saying that, however, you fail to mention what has led to such an outcome (though we certainly cannot discount self-afflicted problems), including the disproportionate sentencing of black males, a history of broken and disjointed families via slavery, a welfare system that penalizes parents who have a father in the home, etc. It is fine to be dissatisfied or in awe of final outcomes; however, it is very misleading when end results are discussed without discussing the factors that led to them.

Isn't that how you provoke a discussion? Make your point and invite discussion about it?



They may not be writing a thesis but they are still making claims that I would think need more substantiation.



The point of the article seems to be how some Katrina refugees are adjusting to life in Utah however they do make a point to "[charge] Utahans with racism"

emphasis mine

Regardless of your personal feelings on the term, it is a very strong term to be slinging around and we tend to overuse it. I think that this was one of those times when it shouldn't be used because the situations discussed in the article seem more like cultural issues rather than racism issues.

I know that there have been many comments about how different it was to move to Utah and how hard it was to fit in by people regardless of what race they are. There is a big cultural difference in Utah. It may not as noticeable as it used to be and it is bigger in some areas of Utah than others but it is still there. When I see an article that discusses what appears to be those same comments but attributes them to "subtle racism" I have to wonder about other times when people cry "Racism!" Do they really mean "Culture Shock" or maybe "Clash of the Cultures"?

2. How big an issue do you think reverse racism is?

I guess I really didn't do a good job in explaining what I meant by reverse racism. When I use this term I mean that form of racism where some one feels that what you are doing is because of their race and bases this assumption on your race. To simplify: Racism = I do something because of your race. Reverse Racism = You accuse me of being racist simply because of my race. Basically they are different forms of racism but one is active racism and one is not. There, have I confused you enough yet?

An example would be when a caucasian and an african american are applying for the same job and the caucasian gets the job. Racism is when the caucasian got the job based on skin color, reverse racism is when the african american accuses the caucasian of getting the job because of their skin color when there is no evidence that that is the case.

I know there is a history of racism in situations such as this but when the first thing that you hear is "I didn't get the job, it must be racism" then that person is just as guilty of perpetuating the problem as are those who actually committed the original offences.

People are more likely to overlook actual cases of racism when they have heard too many false alarms. For example, did racism play a part in the problems following Katrina? We may never know because too many times Jesse Jackson and his ilk cried racism. Too many times have we heard the call to arms against the racist response. I am in no way racist but I can't seem to care about the supposed racist issue in New Orleans because I have heard the fire alarm too many times before.


I guess I wasn't as clear as I would have liked to be in my original posting. I wanted to see how others feel about this issue rather than simply rehashing the same "Racism is alive and well today" arguments. How much is Racism and how much is culture clash? I know that race and culture go hand in hand quite often but I think that crying racism is too simple many times.

Thanks for the clarification.

I think you are correct in some regards: Often, racism is a convenient scapegoat for negative interactions between minorities and whites. This is unfortunate, particularly in light of the fact that true racism does exist. However, if minorities constantly fill the role of the little boy who cried "wolf", it will eventually create even more disdain towards them.

First, I think it is important for us to understand what racism is. Racism is a policy of exclusion based on race.

Let us look at a similar situation as to the one you posted: During my undergraduate years, my alma mater, a fairly large Midwestern university in a rural environment, professed to be a very diverse college despite the fact that it only had a 4 percent minority (not just black) enrollment at the time. As such, the black enrollment started to increase. When a number of us arrived, we found that the small town in which the college was built was very unsuitable to us. This may seem some superficial and maybe even a bit petty, but one of the major differences between whites and blacks is hair. Most white hair care products are wholly ineffectual on blacks. However, in this college town, which minus students is essentially all-white, none of the stores carried black hair products (and there was not a barber or stylist in town familiar with how to cut or style black hair).

Is this racist to not have stocked black hair care supplies? Certainly not--at least not initially. For years, the college did not have enough black people throughout the year to justify having these products available. This is perhaps what you refer to as a "culture clash"--a situation in which a town that is predominantly white is not prepared for an influx of minorities simply because they have not been the norm in that area. Admittedly, some of the black students could not see this.

However, here is where racism steps in: The local drug store chain just a mere block from campus refused to stock these products even after the black enrollment had reached 1,000-plus. Even though these students were there nine months out of the year (and some even more so), the store still felt it should not have to order these products. This is racism, as the store felt no need to stock ethnic hair care products despite having a sizeable population of black students (and it was also just bad business!).

I guess the short answer is yes, there is culture clash, and yes, there is racism. Culture clashes often quickly lead to racism, unfortunately, both typical and reverse. To this date, though, I would argue that reverse racism as you define it--the perception by blacks that whites are racist--has yet to hinder whites in any fashion--though it does unfortunately shine a bad light on those who are mistakenly labeled racist. Reverse racism as others would define it--when minorities are empowered and exclude whites--can indeed be rather harsh, but then again, that is not really the norm as of yet.

fixed quotes

This may be slightly off-beat in some ways, as I'm not American, I'm a white European man married to a black African woman.
When my wife first came to Europe she definitely did experience racism - but she didn't let it get her down, and I always supported her through it, mostly by pointing out the low social and intellectual status of the racists. As a result she was highly successful in her job and very popular. A black American lady we knew tended to attribute people mocking her to racism. In fact we think it was more likely due to her being overweight.
Are there cultural differences? In my opinion yes, but my wife doesn't like me saying that. She says there are differences between all individuals, and their cause isn't relevant.
Is there reverse racism? Definitely yes. Some blacks have a tendency to label me as somehow tainted by colonialism, yet in fact my country was colonised and very savagely too. Neither I nor my ancestors had anything to do with colonialism. And actually, even if I came from an ex-colonising country what would that have to do with me? Slavery is a similar issue. No modern Americans own slaves, and no modern Americans were slaves. Slavery was just one of many injustices committed in the world. We cannot make up for injustices committed in the past. The best revenge is the laughter of your children.

Amen NT, and people call republicans racist? WOW. EDITED TO REMOVE NAME CALLING post was a mouthful.

However, you brought up a good point that this thread is missing. Black people ARE as able to be successful, have become doctors/lawyers/politicians/scientists, etc. It makes me cringe when people post to the contrary. I can just hear the dueling banjos as I type...

The issue w/ New Orleans is that it's demographics coupled with it's socio-economics caused HUGE issues... of which race have little or nothing to do with the outcome, but moreover were circumstance and part of the thread that makes up New Orleans.

The reality for people in Louisiana, of all colors, is that most responsible and reasonable people left the city with whatever belongings they could drive off with, and often are in financial disarray even now. Their homeowner's insurance doesn't want to pay, their life's savings went into finding a job/place to live in the mean time, and everything is upside down. Black, white, etc. It's toughest for those that lost the most and are least likely to be able to get it back I'd suppose. (i.e. most folks that had State Farm and thought they'd be covered, who lost their jobs as their companies are still under water, etc)

The problem is that the people who stayed, were the lowest common demoninator of New Orleans' citizenship. I have spent time in New Orleans since, and also have spent a large portion of my life in this part of the state prior to Katrina. The demographics and culture of New Orleans are/were what made it one of the most unique places on the planet. I also believe it was part of its downfall.

Lassiez Les Bon Temps Rouler (sp?) is the motto of the city for sure. When maybe they should've been considering flood planning, the city's inhabitants generally have had (all my life anyway) a "it'll work out" mentality.

The state's response had little or nothing to do with race, but moreover that the vast majority of the people stuck in New Orleans were the poverty stricken, elderly, and those whom chose not to leave. People like Kanye West turned it into "George Bush don't like black people", but it wasn't really his place to step in until the state asked for it. Should it have been "Ray Nagin don't like black people?"???.... maybe, but then again he's black! It really just happened that one of the nation's most black cities was at the center of this disaster. It also happened that NOLA is very poor. Had this happened somewhere like Sioux City or Des Moines, the race card wouldn't have been played. It wouldn't have mattered.

I personally find it sickening that folks are still discussing race. Go down during spring break, summer vacations, and other times when schools are out. Church groups and volunteer org's from all walks of live are/were attempting to provide help to a city in need. If anyone's to blame, it's Ray Nagin and Gov Blanco for their ignorant and half-hearted response.... not racism or the White House.

[/quote]

Lassiez Les Bon Temps Rouler (sp?) is the motto of the city for sure. When maybe they should've been considering flood planning, the city's inhabitants generally have had (all my life anyway) a "it'll work out" mentality.

The state's response had little or nothing to do with race, but moreover that the vast majority of the people stuck in New Orleans were the poverty stricken, elderly, and those whom chose not to leave. People like Kanye West turned it into "George Bush don't like black people", but it wasn't really his place to step in until the state asked for it. Should it have been "Ray Nagin don't like black people?"???.... maybe, but then again he's black! It really just happened that one of the nation's most black cities was at the center of this disaster. It also happened that NOLA is very poor. Had this happened somewhere like Sioux City or Des Moines, the race card wouldn't have been played. It wouldn't have mattered.

I personally find it sickening that folks are still discussing race. Go down during spring break, summer vacations, and other times when schools are out. Church groups and volunteer org's from all walks of live are/were attempting to provide help to a city in need. If anyone's to blame, it's Ray Nagin and Gov Blanco for their ignorant and half-hearted response.... not racism or the White House.
[/quote]

A few points to consider:

1. As someone who currently lives in an area susceptible to hurricanes, leaving is not always an option. First, because the paths of hurricanes are often erratic, determining where it will land is very difficult. Furthermore, as there is often a large cone of influence, a hurricane does not need to strike somewhere dead center in order to affect it. I say this because, oftentimes, businesses and other institutions often do not shut down until the day before the storm approaches. People are also not apt to leave behind their possessions, particularly if they have no insurance or if those possessions are all they have in the world. Furthermore, in many Southern states such as Louisiana and Florida, there is essentially only one major roadway leading north, which makes it extremely difficult to vacate considering that everyone is on the road at the same time. Furthermore, one of the first goods to be consumed by hurricane planners is gasoline for vehicles and, more importantly, electric generators.

2. It is hard to determine why the recovery efforts were so slow--particularly in light of how fast they occurred here in Florida. When Florida was hit by Hurricanes Frances and Katrina (Florida was hit first), recovery efforts literally began the next day. There were goods provided to those in need within hours. Within three days, food stamp applications were being taken and processed to assist those in need. Many suggest that this happened quickly because of Jeb Bush is governor of Florida; perhaps so or perhaps not. Whatever the case may be, Florida had no problem with federal relief efforts (most of the problem here was in terms of getting electricity back online fast enough for consumers). Therefore, most of us are led to speculate--were efforts better here because of Jeb Bush? Does the large Republican base here make FEMA move a bit faster? Was the response in New Orleans slowed because of the large poor black underclass there? Was the devastation in New Orleans more devastating than what Frances did in Florida? Is it even fair to compare? Definitely a tough call.

3. You raise an interesting tidbit about Ray Nagin--after all, New Orleans black residents were virtually split down the middle in terms of supporting him in his first election. Actually, Nagin only received 40 percent of the black vote in his initial election! Since his re-election, where he received a larger amount of the black vote (though it may have been via default), his actions have not really helped those who lived in the Ninth Ward.

Kanye West--as much as I love his music--was way out of line. Not only did he pick an awful, awful time to speak his mind, he said something that did not aid the situation. Of course, West is an egotistical sort who likes drawing attention to himself.