Over the past three years I’ve noticed something about “race” threads on this board. They start off about white racism and get turned on their head to reverse – black racism- threads. The tactic seems to be to shifting blame, rather than addressing the question. The other thing I’ve noticed is that that threads are sometimes started that have a “race baiting” motivation.


I want to turn racism on its head again an approach it from a totally different angel. To do this, I need to tell a couple of episodes from my past. I’ll try to do it as briefly as possible.

Episode 1

During the 1973-1974 school year, I taught in a unit for suspended students in a district on the Texas Gulf Coast. Toward the end of the year, I went to see B. B. King at a predominately black club in a neighboring city.

A couple of weeks later, I got called into the assistant superintendent for personnel’s office. He told me that he had heard that I was in this club, that I was down at the front of the stage drinking a beer, dancing and that some of my students were present. He went on about how teachers need to set an example for their students, neglecting to mention that I was of legal age and my students were not. Then, out of the clear blue, he turned, looked at me and asked, “How many white people were in there.” My answer was that "I was having a good time, not taking a census." He then informed me that my contract would not be renewed. Surprise, Surprise!

Episode 2

During my early years teaching special education, I worked in "special schools” rather than classrooms on regular campuses for the type students I taught. The faculty at the special school decided to raise money by putting together and selling a cookbook. Funds from sale of the cookbook were to go toward financing fieldtrips for our students.

Shortly before the winter break, the faculty vote to take the kids to see ET. I voted with the majority. The faculty was divided along racial lines, due mainly to having a succession of three principals who had neither the desire or ability to bring the faculty together as a cohesive whole. The white teachers voted for going to see ET. The Black teachers voted aginst it saying the kids wouldn’t understand it and that they needed to spend the money in their clasrroms. I voted with the white majority.

Then after the winter break, one of the Black teachers brought up the idea of taking the kids to the rodeo. Too get even, some of the white teachers mocked the Blacks saying the kids “wouldn’t understand it.” When the vote was taken, the vote was along racial lines – blacks for; whites against. There was one exception. I in a losing effort, I voted with the Blacks to attend the rodeo.

My thinking was that there wasn’t that much difference in the intellectual level of the rodeo and ETand that we had raised the money for the purpose – the express purpose – of getting the kids out of the building into the real world.

After this event, the principal continued to raise money, but refused to spend any over a period of two to three years. Although we had had a committee explore the possibility of getting a van, we determined that it wasn’t feasible when one considered steel reinforcements for the side panels, insurance, storage, maintenance, etc. After several years of frustration, I opined in the lounge that the principal was raising money under false pretenses. Shortly thereafter, the principal became ill and required an extended leave of absence. The substitute principal who took her place was retired. She had served in a number of posts including director of counseling. While the regular principal was out, the substitute spent all the money accumulated over several years on the kids. Please note, that durinfg thisa period several kids graduated with only minimal rewards from the money they helped raise.

Shortly after the vote on the rodeo, rumors were getting back to me that I was being called an “n-lover.” Then one day I cleared my box. Someone had presented me with a ceramic donkey. The donkey had a human rear end and the inscription, “there’s one in every crowd” – just payment for breaking ranks.

I am going to partially answer my own questions here by stating, that white racism hurt me, a white man, by limiting where I could go in the first episode and frowning on how I voted in the second.

To turn the question on its head in a different direction, I have the following questions for debate:

1. Does white racism hurt those who perpetrate it? If so how?

2. Does white racism hurt white non-perpetrators? If so how?*

*I may give a fuller answer later.

1. Does white racism hurt those who perpetrate it? If so how?

Certainly. Anything which poisons our minds is bad for us. When one sees the most extreme examples of such thinking, one cannot help but feel sorry for such people. (Of course, if their opinions lead them to harm others, they must be stopped, using appropriate methods. Yet even though one must show more concern for their victims, one cannot lose one's pity for the delusional.)

2. Does white racism hurt white non-perpetrators? If so how?

Certainly. It is an unfortunate fact that the negative actions of a tiny number of persons reflects upon whatever group those persons are identified with. The white bigot or the black gangsta should not be seen as representative; but it is inevitable that this will happen.

1. Does white racism hurt those who perpetrate it? If so how?

2. Does white racism hurt white non-perpetrators? If so how?*

Yah know, racism simply sucks. It has no basis in reality. One race superior to the other, who says? And what are the criteria of judgment, and who the hell are you to pass judgment in the first place? I smells a rat.

I will appeal to schoolyard justice. Here we are, kindergärtners, some white, some black, some red, some yellow, some brown (and purple and green for those who like to go that way). All right, show me who's superior, inferior, or actually thinks in these terms. Huh? Come on, show me! I'm from Missouri on this one.

Fact of the matter is that kids of this age don't give a crap. That comes later, when the real brainwashing kicks in. I'm Catholic and you're Jewish, so we can't be best friends anymore. Okay, well, that didn't work, but nice try and it does work some of the time. It did work well enough that suspicions built, thank you very much you [self-censored bull wraps].

Racism hurts period. It hurts all who embrace it and all who have to put up with those who embrace it. It can manifest over skin color or religion, or both. It just sucks, you know, really so like the word I can't use here.

I think it's very cool that a Catholic and a Jew could spawn a guy like Bill Maher, if nothing else (besides my entertainment) than to tick off those whom I will not mention. Cuz, I might be intolerant of intolerance, kinda like being against the black plague. What a screwed up wuss I am =o) __!__,

Of course, it does. Anytime anyone is discriminated against, for any reason other than merit, at the workplace it lowers the production of the company and society as a whole. There are always some winners who benefit from racism but they are vastly outnumbered by the losers Racism is the major cause for disproportionately high crime among minorities which taxes and endangers us all. On the latter issue the only debate is how much of the higher crime rate is due to past versus present racism.

The primary reason the South's economy historically was much less efficient than the North's was racism. A few whites benefitted, from racism most whites did not.

Imagine how many potential Booker T's had their talents wasted on the plantation.

Martin Luther King, Jr. must have thought so when he said, "If physical death is the price that I must pay to free my white brothers and sisters from a permanent death of the spirit, then nothing can be more redemptive." For an example of how racism can be every bit as lethal as the most virulent cancer, one needs only to observe the formalized system of racism taken to its insane extreme by Adolph Hitler and The Third Reich. The racism of Nazi Germany toward all non-Aryans was a form of super racism the world had never seen before or since. Even at its zenith, American racism never was as pervasive and accepted and normalized as it was by the Nazis.

Some psychologists have argued that racism in its more violent form is a form of mental illness. Dr. Alvin Poussaint wrote in the New York Times his belief that this was the case.

Americans are loath to label even extreme racist behavior as mental illness. Consider the debate since the arrest of Buford Furrow Jr., who admitted to going on a hate rampage in Los Angeles several months after the Washington State mental health system evaluated him.

Ron Sims, the Executive of King County, the highest elected official in the Seattle area, said after Mr. Furrow's arrest: ''People are trying to build a case that this killing was done because the man was insane. But mental illness was not the cause. Hatred was. This guy came out of a culture of hatred.''

It's true that the American Psychiatric Association has never officially recognized racism as a mental health problem, though the issue was raised more than 30 years ago. After multiple racist killings in the civil rights era, a group of black psychiatrists sought to have racial bigotry classified as a mental disorder. The association's officials rejected the recommendation, arguing that since so many Americans are racist, racism in this country is normative -- a cultural problem rather than an indication of personal pathology.

In addition, the association said, calling racism a mental illness might appear to absolve racists of their moral responsibility, thus decreasing their motivation for self-examination and change. The group also suggested that racists do not show symptoms that are distinctive enough to fit any of its diagnostic categories. link

On the way to work today I saw one White girl playing tag with three Black kids. They weren't relating to each other as a color. They were just kids doing what kids do. People have to learn how to be racist. That means they can "unlearn" as well.

But only if they want to.

1. Does white racism hurt those who perpetrate it? If so how?

So many ways to answer this question, but I guess I could answer it from a Marxist perspective and posit that racism in the south, like the ""opiate of religion," distracted workers from their common struggle and collective grievances and in so doing, upheld and perpetuated an unjust class system.

We should remember that, as an extension of the new deal, the great society --authored by one poor-born southern white -- was aimed largely at helping other poor-born southern whites, not only blacks. This is rarely discussed in today's talk of Welfare Queens, but in many ways I'd argue the south as a whole has suffered -- we still lag in education, health care and housing. Southern Democrats were all too willing to receive these kinds of gifts from New Deal politicians from electrification onwards, but once those gifts came with a stipend -- de-segregation and the abolishment of the social privilege -- suddenly, 'libertarianism' took root. (I don't say that to bash the philosophy of libertarianism, only to question the moral integrity of the in which soil it took hold.)

2. Does white racism hurt white non-perpetrators? If so how?*

Another big question which I will briefly answer in the small: In Louisiana politics, racialized voting is so rank that it has only fed corruption... no matter if you are talking about David Vitter or Ray Nagin or a racially divided parish council out in the bayou. The vengeance and vitriol which local radio DJs and local talk show hosts spew at Nagin -- and any black 'opportunistic' 'race-bating' 'agitator' -- only creates a feedback loop in which, like a swamp, the muck rises to the top.

Does white racism hurt those who perpetrate it? If so how?

Yes. Any form of negative energy or actions that you commit against anyone hurts YOU the most. Living in a big city I have struggled with racial, cultural and humanistic issues. I have discovered that the best way to get on with my life in a productive way is to let the anger go, however possible and focus on bettering myself, however possible.

It just seems like we, as a people, are always criticizing or judging the "other" person, instead of doing what we can to improve our own lives and not getting hung up on what we think is wrong with others. In the end, you won't change something by throwing hate on it. You will only add to your own unhappiness by virtue of the negative energy you create through such feelings and/or actions aimed at diminishing others.


Does white racism hurt white non-perpetrators? If so how?

I would say it does, to the degree that people associate behavior with skin color. He's white=he's racist. He is guilty of racism until proven innocent.

My dad was once jumped by four black guys as he walked out of a bar in Florida. They beat him up and took his wallet. To this day, he carries that incident around and uses it to judge every black person he encounters. He justifies his racist thoughts by that one event. I think that is a common occurrence. We tend to judge others by our own limited experiences.

Funny you should bring up child development of racism, and mental illness and racism- these are VERY much on the forefront of psych today.

There are a plethora of "personality disorders" in the DSMR IV, well, all personality disorders are really brought about by bad up-bringing for the most part- pick which one you want to talk about there, negligence , abuse etc.

I have done psych evals for about 10 "skinheads" in the last, oh, 15 years. Each and every one of them was completely and thoroughly mentallly ill, along with thier racist leanings.

This was of great interest to a PHD that is a certified expert witness for the state. - so we performed the same tests to see if someone is "religiously ideated" or a actual practitionar of thier faith- very difficult sometimes- kinda the difference between WORSHIPING jesus and believing you ARE jesus

Turns out, in each of the cases, these guys (and a couple gals) were indoctrinated as racist by thier parents- it wasn't neccesarily the mental illness that led to a fixed ideation/delusion of superior race thoughts.

What really intrigued us, is that we have no record of a black person having black is superior ideation/delusions or violently racist behaviors leading to hospitalizations- and this is going 20 years back!

Now- we have had Asians with racial/master race delusions and ideations- that were part of thier delusoinal complex- in fact, to give an example in one instance- the violent behavior based on race was because he thought black poeple were white poeple wearing black poeple skin as disguises.

I hope I am able to convey the subtle differences here?

Okay- that being said- how does a racist BECOME a racist- and then, after that, you have to determine to what level of behavior they ARE racist.

Denying racism exists would probably be the 'lowest, most benign and hardest to diagnose" while sporting a swatstika tatoo on your face while attending white power rallies would be the most virulent form?

I would say the first , most benign form comes from a total ignorance of life outside thier own circle of comfort and living- You don't think racism exists, because you have never had it happen to you in it's more virulent forms- such as "stopped for driving while black" and such things- while the latter type is engrained into your psyche from childhood.

Somewhere in between that is those that have had some negative exposure to another race- such as a crime commited against them by another race- or many negative encounters with poeple of another race. Then, thier life experiance causes them to think that all that race is a bunch of _______ (fill in the blank with whatever) - Doomed Planet gave us an example in her father.

So- in the end, most racism, IMHO is, at best, a mild neurosis, with some survival mechanisms built into it, or activated by survival mechanism, to, at worst, a personality deficit that was placed thier by thier parents.

for me, I sometimes have an initial negative attitude regarding race towards Alaskan natives- and specific to northern tribes- due to my years of working on the "bottom wrung" of thier society- and so very little exposure to the folks that ARE succesful. I combat this by going out of my way to cultivating and meeting/making friends with Alaska natives that destroy my own predjudices against them. Knowing you have a problem is the key to solving a problem- after all, right?

Either way- all of it is eventually harmful to the subject, and the level of harm is probably proportional to the level of racsim.

Remember- any neurosis is bad if it causes negative things to happen to you in your life.

The most benign form, well, I might lose the opportunity to have a good friend in someone similar, but living in my area, of a person like our esteemed debate person Nighttimer.

The most virulent form, arrested for beating up someone based on race.

Somewhere in between, you are willing to lose a renter based on race- possibly causing a person some financial hardship (the racist that is) .

To turn the question on its head in a different direction, I have the following questions for debate:
I'm not going to allow you to "turn the question on its head in a different direction", because you are not taking it in a different direction. You are, once again doing exactly the same thing that has been done in all those other threads, attacked whites to the exclusion of all others. I believe this could easily be termed "race baiting."

1. Does white racism hurt those who perpetrate it? If so how?
Illegitimate, demeaning and attacking question, worthy of a self-hating, false consciousness bearing white guy.

To take it in a different direction, here is the question you should have asked:

Does racism hurt those who perpetrate it?
notice all the colors?

The answer is generally, yes, but not always. It depends simply on how egregious the racism is. Racism, a two edged sword, is one factor in self-identification. Black, White, Asian, Latino pride, no matter the race, identifiying with others who are successful from one's own race when the only commonality is race, this too is racism. Yet, the example of successful blacks to inspire other blacks is common, as it is for Latinos, Asians, Jews, women, etc, etc....

2. Does white racism hurt white non-perpetrators? If so how?*
Here is the question you should have asked:
Does racism hurt same race non-perpetrators? If so how?
It hurts non-perpetrators to the same extent as it hurts perpetrators, or helps them. Somebody who gets a promotion or a job or a sweet deal because of somebody else's racism has benefitted. The preference will hurt them if it turns out that they've boosted past their Optimal Peter Point. Generally, when the non-perpetrators are, by virtue of their race, slandered by association, then it hurts them.

Once again the all-wise Bikerdad tells someone how they should have constructed a thread.

As the line from the B. B. King song goes, "I got some outside help that I don't really need."

How about I just check in with you before starting another.

Bikerdad, I'll make you one hell of a deal. You don't rewrite my threads and I won't rewrite yours.



From 34 years of teaching school in various parts of the Texas, I can assure you that white on black racism, within official circles - administrators - pervades the cultures. Sure, there are exceptions. The thing that has always bothered me about the racism, I saw as a teacher, is that those in the majority would seek to tell others who they can associate with and when. This was the whole point of episode 1. Being highly individualistic, I don't like others trying to tell me who I can have as friends. To hell with them.

[Does racism hurt same race non-perpetrators? If so how?
It hurts non-perpetrators to the same extent as it hurts perpetrators, or helps them. Somebody who gets a promotion or a job or a sweet deal because of somebody else's racism has benefitted. [/quote]

What you left out is that overall society is harmed because the overall size of the pie is smaller due to racism. If the more efficient worker had been hired more goods would have been produced. Racism increases the scarcity of goods. In social affairs it is hard to measure the value of a friendship that never came to being due to illogical racism.

What is strange is I have seen very little racism as a resident of Texas in the corporate world. Could it be because the public education system needs not worry about fair competition?

I'm not sure how much things are different in the corporate world than public education. Much of anything that happens is the result of multiple causes. To answer this, as you've asked it, would probably involve a gross oversimplification.

I think that emphasizing the economics impact, while it may be strictly true, can be misleading if we take the rarefied platitudes of macroeconomics to heart without applying them to the sordid mishmash of reason and insanity that make up everyday life.

The South benefited from racism for a very long time and I'd say it is a huge stretch to say that racism is why it lags behind in development. The South like most other agricultural centers simply caught the bad end of the industrial revolution. Agricultural giants went from shot-callers to cogs in the textile machine and so-on.

This in and of itself did not make racism economically inviable. Large steps towards that still incomplete goal began during the advent of the consumer-service economy that characterizes today's America.

After all for industrialists, particularly in my own Birmingham, racism made it easy to use government to mandate a desperate, ignorant, disenfranchised pool of labor which suited them just fine.

These days racists can still become filthy rich and make it hard for many in their power spheres.

My own addition it not so much the psychosis racism represents as the neurosis.

Just as in post-fascist Japan and Germany many white Americans find it difficult to reconcile their ideal of the nation with its historical reality. There are many ways to confront cognitive dissonance and psychologists have found more than a couple that can certainly be called maladjustments. I've seen it work, on the board and off. The mental contortions we will sometimes resort to in order to avoid an uncomfortable truth are a large factor in why we find race debates so difficult.

This particular issue validates the focus on white Americans here. There's is the racism that has had the most clear and drastic affect on the national character and it has unique consequences.

Turnea certainly hit upon something that has always been friedmen's "achilles heel"- he put too much emphasis on economic self interest vs man's illogical obsession with hating others until it causes them ruin. Look at the KKK- they are not exactly richer for the experiance, are they?

That is the true weakness of the entire libertarian core- the thought that self -interest economics will equalize all, - but, it really relies on a sane, logical community- not just insane individuals- but entire insane segments of our society.

Racism seems, well, at best, a neurosis.

I have met a couple black racists in my life time, but they seem far fewer in number than white racists- but that is simply anecdotal, and my own logic dictates that there is probably as many forms of racism and it's behaviors in every race, in proportionate numbers.

And, as I talked a short amount about some negative feelings I occasionallly have to come to terms with in regards to northern native Alaskans, it is pretty well accepted up here that the most racist elements in Alaskan society are the natives themselves.

the more extreme types of racism can have a huge negative impact on the racist's lives. Ostrasization of entire families, loss of livelihood (hey, who wants to hire a skin head with a swastika on his forehead )

Black racism certainly exists- I recall posting a black college proffesors vid of this guy calling for the extermination of whites. - I am going out on a limb here, but I am thinking he is probably racist.

But I really think white racism is the one that really impacts our society and ourselves much harder.

Which, interestingly, is exactly what is wrong with this thread. To answer, as you've asked it, would probably involve a gross oversimplification.

1. Does white racism hurt those who perpetrate it? If so how?

2. Does white racism hurt white non-perpetrators? If so how?
I don't understand these questions based on the corrolative stories. What is 'white racism?' Is it a white person racist against blacks or racist against whites? And what is a 'white non-perpetrator?' Is this a person that isn't a racist? Clarification please. Thanks.

Allow me to add me 2 cents.

From my interaction with all major ethnic groups, they are all very racist. And this sort of racist behavior that you experienced, BoF, would have been the same if the colors of the majority were changed. The dilemma you were faced with in those situations was not racism, but "pack mentality." If you are not with us, you're against us. Pack mentality permeates every aspect of our society, from our bicameral legislature to our high school cliques. When you voted along racial lines for the movies, you were probably described by some skeptical black faculty members as "no different than the rest of them." And when you voted for the rodeo you were called a n----- lover.

If you continue to use your own brain to form your opinions then you will find yourself in constant confrontation with the Pack mentality.

Well, I don't think so. When I need to maximize profits I hire the best workers. If there is no need to ensure quality or expenses I can act on my prejudices. Basic human nature.

Business models rarely fit public schools. Public schools are for everyone. They are often the largest employer in a local area. There is not as much latitude in selecting personnel and practically none concerning students. Being for everyone is both the genius and downfall of public schools. (if you would like I can explain this statement) The mix of cultures reflects whoever happens to come. Maximizing profits is not been a goal of any public school I've ever known about.

One of the problems with Texas public schools is that the reform movement of 1984 was chaired by H. Ross Perot and tried to incorporate elements of business into the mix. We still haven't fully recovered.

Your analogy is totally irrelevant.

It is quite relevent,public schools have an unfair competitive advantage over a private schooll. Making the private school the only option for many and a more expensive option for all, This means that public schools can discriminate against good employers with few consequences. In this case racism harms all the strudents of the school regardless of race. Time to eliminate the public school system.

All racial and ethnic groups, to a great degree, prefer their own--in school, in business, in recreational choices, in social choices. Call it racism, call it whatever, but that's the way it is. There are exceptions, of course, but as a general rule, this is true. True racism, defined as believing one race of people is congenitally superior to another, is more rare, but certainly still exists. Blacks certainly think they are congenitally superior to whites in certain athletic traits, for example. If you listen to enough sports commentary, you can't miss it.

Does it help or hurt? Life is about power and control; power and control are by nature scarce, in that power and control can only be vested in a relative few, even in a republic like our own. If sticking together helps your kind get and maintain power and control, to a greater degree than competeing racial or ethnic groups, than it helps you. If overdone, it can hurt, as those that inherit power are often indifferent about its wise use.

The corollary of this concept is the classic one in economics--food, shelter, clothing and all other material wealth is scarce, i.e. it is not possible for everyone to have as much of these items as they want or need. Power and control helps one group leapfrog others for greater access to these items.

You could alternatively group yourself under national banners rather than ethnic or racial ones, and we do so to some degree. There are often overlapping loyalties. Heck, we may find our greatest loyalties in the future are to unions or to multinational corporations that run our lives, provide us sustinance and succor, and do our bidding, and vice-versa, on the several continents. Who knows?

But, the concept of a truly free market where everyone operates as some kind of free agent without prejudice is an academic concept, at best, and a total fraud, at worst. It is as silly as Rodney King's, "Why can't we all just get along?"

ARGH! I just spent about an hour and a half writing a post only for it to be eaten when my window closed itself If this wasn't a subject I feel so strongly about, I wouldn't waste my time attempting to re-write my post.

Guess I'll have to try to make it short and sweet now.

First, I think it's important to talk about race and racism openly and honestly. Race and racism effect different people in very different ways. As a white woman who attended a mostly non-white high school, minored in Africana Studies, and has a black husband and "biracial" daughter, my experiences and beliefs will come from a completely different place than someone who has never noticed or been exposed to racism and other issues surrounding race.

I'll try to cut to the chase here...ANY racism hurts EVERYONE. Whether it's racism perpetrated against whites, against blacks, from whites or from blacks (and anything "in between"), all forms of racism can only hurt us as a society. When others commit acts of racism or hold racist beliefs, it hurts us all on a variety of levels. It hurts the non-racist white person because of race-related stereotypes of white racism. It hurts the non-racist minority for obvious reasons. It hurts the perpetrator and any other person practicing racism in ways he/she is not aware because he/she thinks his/her way is the "right" way and refuses to open up to other ideas. Racism is inherently and intentionally hurtful. This country has a pervasive and distinct history of racism and for that very reason, it has been and will continue to be difficult to disassociate from it. Our racist history has certainly lead to much of the racism that exists today, on all sides of the equation. Our own beliefs are, after all, largely a result of what we have experienced in the past.

We often develop prejudices and stereotypes based upon limited personal experiences. Nighttimer has an excellent thread in the Casual Conversation archives entitled "Rapping About Race Reasonably" which is a fantastic example of how our own experiences have shaped our beliefs about race. The thread was started because race debate threads here almost always end up being locked because people can't seem to talk about race without getting heated. It is definitely one of my favorite topics of all time here at because it's the one time I think people felt they could be candid without fear of being labeled or judged. That's the biggest issue with race and racism today. Fear. People are afraid of being misjudged, mislabeled, and misunderstood and as such, limit talk about race to the superficial. People are also, naturally and instinctively, afraid of what they don't know. That fear is what drives racism and ideas we hold about race makes it that much harder for us to really discuss it honestly.

On a side note, I'd like to suggest to anyone who is equating racism with Affirmative Action (I think all race debates somehow seem to end up back on the AA topic ) to take a look at some of my posts here at in AA threads in the archives. I won't post them here (copying a link to these threads is how I lost my gigantic reply in the first place), but they're easy to find in the Race Debate archives (one started by I believe ConservPat some time in 2005 and the other was started some time in 2003, as it's the thread that caused me to join ).

Ahh I missed a twist. Another way people try to deal with racism without confronting it is to fall back on the old line that it's simply natural to "prefer" one's own race.

Nature and God are the two forces most often called into action whenever an irrational decision needs justifying and I'm afraid both of them have had words shoved into their mouths from the beginning of time.

Racism is not "natural" in the sense that it is inherent. It's a learned behavior as other posters have noted clearly.

Thanks for the shout-out there, kmsouthern. The "Rapping About Race Reasonably" thread is one of my most favorite threads I've created and for the most part, I was very pleased in how the debate went.

The link is here: http://www.americasdebate.com/forums/index...ping+about+race . Not to get off the subject here, but I think it makes for a fine ancillary discussion to this one.

Exactly how do you know this? How do you independently address cause-and-effect in this instance? I am not saying your statement is not true, but--I'd like to see some proof for such a definitive statement.

1. Does white racism hurt those who perpetrate it? If so how?

Yes, it does. Which is one of the reasons why private racism should not be a governmental concern. It is economically a dumb decision to be a racist. People should be judged by their actions and their achievements, not by some arbitrary characteristic.

As a famous example, the Major League baseball teams that did not hire Jackie Robinson (or his American League counterpart Larry Doby) missed out on future Hall of Fame players. Robinsons was MVP of the league and Doby runner up. These were impact players who were not hired (prior to 1947) because of race. Those that did not employ them lost out.

2. Does white racism hurt white non-perpetrators? If so how?*

Yes, because of the stereotyping that is all too common in species homo sapien. Just as racism arises out of stereotyping members of one race, stereotypes work the other way as well. Some consider whites to be racist until proven innocent.

On the flip side, people judge others by whom they associate with. This is, in my view, very appropriate. However, when one prejudges a group, they will prejudge people that associate with that group as well. Often this leads to incorrect perceptions, which leads people to make bad decisions. Of course, they themselves (the pre-judger) suffer for it the most.

For the record, I do feel that humans have a tendency to be around people that they perceive as being "like them". This can start with race, but also extends to all facets of life (interest in certain activities such as sports and hobbies, similar music taste, religion etc.) as they get to know the other person better. Race is simply the easiest "first glance" characteristic to go by when deciding if the other person is "like me". Opposites do not attract in the long run, in my experience. Racism, then, breeds out of ignorance of the other person's true nature and prejudgement based upon superficial qualities.

The majority of research surrounding the causes of racism suggests that it is largely a learned behavior, with the possibility of certain biological and psychological influences playing a minor role. Someone with anxiety or depression, for example, may be more inclined toward racist tendencies given the right environmental influences, but that those environmental influences must be present. Of course, given the nature of social science, it is nearly impossible to establish causality because of the inability to control for all other influences. But most research does support the "learned behavior" hypothesis unless things have drastically changed in the last few years.

I'll try to locate some studies later (gotta take my daughter to the pool before the monsoon hits).

BOF, I think this thread proves a point that I've been trying to make for years on AD.

Racism in general is often perceived simply as something white people do. All other actions by minorities, specifically but not exclusively blacks, will never be racist in may people's eyes.

Why? Why would you have a thread with two anecdotes that prove a couple of people during your career were jerks. Funny enough though, it seems that the black teachers were being difficult too.

I think that racism hurts both parties generally regardless of the color of the people perpetuating it. It can often be hurtful to those who have to feel like outsiders or inferior, and of course hate is a cancer that eats at the souls of anyone who truly believes that mess.

But white perpetuated racism? Seriously. Why is there a difference?

I'm going to answer quick's question when I get around to pulling up the studies but I've already addressed the issue of the focus on white racism.

That and I'm pretty sure BoF is white and is investigating his own experiences.

When I first dropped by on this thread, I worried about the vague, open-ended nature of the questions, but in second review, its been a strong suit of this thread.

Reading NightTimer's thread -- never read that one, we should revive that thread -- I was reminded of a crucial point reinforced by a psychological study on race, one in which I've participated no less.

I might argue that it is quite rarely an economic or rational decision to perpetuate racist or even racialist viewpoints. In fact, hang in here with me, I would argue that those historical examples of conscious, forthright racism like segregation, apartheid and slavery were more economically rational than the more subtle, persistent, and ubiquitous racial stereotypes perpetuated in American life.

(i'm getting to that study, but first...) I had a history professor in college who made a great point: White segregationalists were in many ways far more aware of the reality that might follow in the aftermath of segregation that northern integrationalists: white flight, deterioration of urban centers, 'miscegenation,' etc. In many instances, if you look at what the crux of Dixiecrat arguments against integration were, and compare them to Norther Liberal views on integration, the former seems more anticipatory, if apocalyptic in tone. Even blacks who opposed integration as a singular goal were proven sagacious. The black bourgeoisie that lived along Atlanta's Auburn Avenue -- near MLK's church and birth home -- largely dwindled when White businessmen were suddenly able to cross the color line and invest in black neighborhoods. Few blacks were wealthy enough to return the favor.

Continuing on, no racist regime has ever seemed more justified in the long run than the former apartheid government of Zimbabwe. The UDI's doubts about the capacity of African for self-rule seem more than confirmed by the Mugabe regime. And as cruel of a power system as they upheld -- denying education to the masses they would soon forfeit self-rule to -- George Wallace and Ian Smith were nothing if not totally rational defenders of racial privilege and an entire way of life. Unlike Major League Baseball teams circa Jackie Robinson, their 'team' benefited through the exclusion of Blacks, and they were far more acutely aware of what they had to lose than say, Andy Young backing Mugabe, or the Kennedy's backing King.

Obviously, that's not to defend apartheid or segregation, just to say that in many ways legalized, conscious racism stems directly from economically rational decisions. In those instances, white perpetuated racism helps those who perpetuate it, and a non-racialized free market society such as the above quote proposes would hurt the centurions of power, privilege and governance..

The more dangerous and less easily discredited forms of racism are, I'd argue, those guiding concepts that continue to segregate people
even when the legal curtains are lifted. Nighttimer hit on this when he started his thread like this...



Back to the study:

A few years ago, after living in Africa I signed up for a psychological experiment that was looking for non-Black people who had lived as a stark minority. They had me watching The Simpsons (a mildly non-racial cartoon (yellow skin) i'm guessing) interspersed with images of faces of various races-- while taking a catscan. It was weird, I know, but it paid well and continues to make for terrific bar conversation.

Part B, the part I didn't take was a computer in front of which subject sat and pressed one button for 'black' and another button for 'white.' If this is starting to sound like something out of Clockwork Orange meets racial essentialism, I can only agree. Anyway, for two or three minutes the subject viewed white faces on the left (they pressed 'white' when they saw them) and black faces on the right (they pressed black when they saw them) and then they were exposed to a second round: in which adjectives like rhythm were flashed on one side of the screen (left or right) and they had to press 'white' if it was on the left, and 'black' if it was on the right. Eventually with the images going so fast, hypothetically, their racial associations would be exposed: for instance, rhythm associated with black, and other concepts I can't remember. I do recall thought-concepts being associated with whiteness, versus action-concepts being associated with blackness.

Another experiment I read about explored similar racial assumptions, only with concepts of good vs. evil. The test leaders found one white male whose answers consistently ran against the grain-- this was during the 1996 Olympics and prior to the test he had been watching the track and field events (in which Africans regularly outperform the international competition). Eventually they concluding that the track and field event served as priming for the psych experiment and, for whatever reason, led the subject to associate grandeur and Olympic greatness with blackness.

What I'm getting at, is the level at which racism takes place not as an economically or even rationally motivated behavior. All this is theory, I'm not trying to flaunt definitive answers on racism, just trying to explore the nature of the problem before us.

However, what I am positing, is that yes, the major league baseball teams lost out for a racism that excluded qualified players (though the white less qualified players totally benefited from it): but that example is a rarity. Baseball is a field upon which one's worth is objectively measurable, and a home run is a home run no matter who hit it: John Rocker or Jackie Robinson.

Less objective might be the other great televised American past time, the sport of sensationalized journalism in which a murder is not a murder is not a murder, all depending on who the victim was. The editor of Newsweek was on 102.9 New Orleans the other day, discussing the Laci Peterson case and how white, female victims regularly receive the big summer scoops, while black female victims virtually never enjoy the same posthumous sympathy. I might suggest that maybe the televised news networks -- who cater to the taste of the viewership -- have perpetuated a system in which black tragedy is not as newsworth as white tragedy. I might even argue that the nature of race in our news media partially contributed to the slow out-pouring of American support for the victims of Rwanda or Darfur. Or even Katrina, as compared to 9/11.

Who knows. Those are all topics for a serious dissertation that instead I'm flinging around somewhat haphazardly -- but topics worth exploring nonetheless, especially as we debate how racism 'hurts' those who perpetuate it. In fact, I'm not even sure I can 100 percent say what it means to perpetuate racism. Sometimes, in our world, merely being alive feels like a way of perpetuating racism. That might be a cynical way to end a post. Insert happy ending.

The problem with this, aevans176, is that this is just the tip of the iceberg. I saw many more, even more overtly racist things, over a period of 34 years. Additionally, when one loses a job, as in episode 1, this takes it a little beyond dealing with jerks. It wouldn't at all surprise me if the assistant superintendent in the Texas Gulf Coast town didn't have a special sheet in his life. Oh and BTW, there were no black teachers involved in episode 1. You sort of conveniently overlooked that one.

While I don't doubt the existence of black racists - I always thought Norman Lear setup All in the Family and The Jeffersons as mirror images. Archie Bunker and George Jefferson were both bigots. In both cases the wives - Edith and Louise - took the rough edges off Archie and George.



That may be true, but white racism trumps black racism merely because whites are in the majority.

I'll have to respectfully disagree. Black racism generally is socially accepted, while white racism is never anything but deplorable in the eyes of American culture.

Black Racism is touted as liberating, vengeful for the years of oppression,etc. Look at guys like Farrakhan. He has mainstream followers.

David Duke? Not so mainstream.

Racism is racism.

That's rich...

I'm assuming you can back the claim that black racism is socially acceptable.

Now black comedians speak more freely about race but that's not the same as racism.

What you are misunderstanding is the information I posted which states clearly why it is that people are more sensitive to white racism.

Why are the Germans so sensitive about anti-semitism?

History forms the context in which all social speech is received.

At the risk of being accused of being "the protector of all things Black on America's Debate..."

I have to not-so-respectfully disagree with your un-freaking-believable line of utter garbage, Aevans176.

Louis Farrakhan? That's the best example you can come up with of "Black Racism?" A 74-year-old man in poor health and a small religious cult in suits and bow ties selling newspapers and bean pies? That's your example? Please tell me you've got something more than that?

Are you sure you're not confusing "bias" or "prejudice" or "discrimination" with racism because I'm trying real hard to think of a time and a place in America where Black people had the means, the method and the motive to enforce a racist agenda to the detriment of White people. I'm trying and coming up empty.

Please tell me you have a Black equivalent to the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Brotherhood, skinheads and other White supremacist groups only a Google away from this site? Please cite for me the incidents of Blacks going buck wild and lynching White men, women and children? Please show me the Black version of Birth of A Nation? Please list all the Fortune 500 companies owned and operated by Blacks with decades worth of history in discriminating against White people seeking jobs? Please find for me the Supreme Court decision that stated Caucasians were only 3/4ths of a human being? Please demonstrate how Blacks have kept a tight leash on coaching positions in the NFL? Please tell me what's the Black pejorative for Whites that endures like "nigger." Please demonstrate how Blacks have used systematic, legal and sanctioned racial segregation to oppress Whites? Please tell me when Whites were tolling in the cotton fields singin' spirituals while the brotherman sat on the porch of the plantation sipping a Mint Julep.

Please tell me what "Black Racism" is because until you do I have to believe it exists primarily in your mind.

Racism is racism? Not when you apparently don't know what racism is.

To pull this back on topic...

When one answers a question like this one, we cannot answer in the historical. We can only answer in the present.

Yes, fifty years ago there is little doubt that racism benefitted some who perpetrated it. It kept blacks out of certain jobs and depressed wages, benefitting less qualified whites. It kept neighborhoods mono-racial (one way or the other). It separated the white culture (of Ward and June Cleaver, perhaps) from the black culture (of P Diddy et al, perhaps).

When one answers today, would it benefit me to (for example) hire a less qualified white over a more qualified black? Does it benefit me to refuse to sell a house to a black family and instead hold onto my inventory (of houses) waiting for a white couple to show interest? Do racial epithets garner me a nod of approval or a scowl of disapproval?

When one speaks of racist acts, there are really only a few categories of suspect actions: hiring, housing, unfair application of the law. Other activities are already crimes whether or not the motivation is racist: harassment, assault, theft. Some actions can be racist, but cannot be quantified: racist comments or jokes.

Which of these categories are we discussing? I'd say category one: hiring, housing, and unfair application of the law. What do these actions benefit the perpetrator?

Here there is study evidence to prove that discrimination continues and actually has a monetary incentive.

Measuring Racial Discrimination with Fair Housing Audits: Caught in the Act
It's only an abstract but it captures the results of the study... there are many many more.

Depends on the company.

...and of course that one can benefit the perpetrator so long as they don't get caught.

Blah blah blah... same ol' talking points NT. Angry black "man keeping me down" points. Seriously, please go buy another "angry and oppressed black man" book so that you can tell me something new.

Racism, as defined by wikipedia:


Let's use a couple simple ones that even the angry black population can understand.
"White men can't jump"
"White people can't dance"

We could go into the truth about racism for 400 hours straight without diatribes about "mint juleps" and other asinine ideas.

The facts are that this is about white perpetrated racism, and my statement is that racism is the same regardless of how it happens.

How do groups outside of "white society" perpetrate racism? Every time someone gets hired, admitted to college, or picked for a basketball team because of their skin color... it's racist simply by definition.

Racism by black people is often seen as mainstream as opposed to subversive. The Klan and Neo Nazi groups are never supported by mainstream white society.

Who are mainstream black biggots? Hmm...
Al Sharpton? Remember the anti-semetic and other biggoted comments he made? Still "normal" and respectable people follow Sharpton and people listen to him. Do "mainstream" white people follow Neo Nazi leaders... a resounding no.

Jesse Jackson? He won't even let the media use the word "refugee" in reference to Katrina because it's "racist". People still follow him.

White racism nowadays is primarily marginalized to hillbillies and weirdos who make comments over Busch Light in the trailerpark.

Hell- a man like Don Imus says something no more inflammatory than Sharpton and he gets the boot immediately. His supporters jumped off his cliff like Lemmings.



Do you people have a calendar? It's 2007. The study you linked a study from 1981!!!!!!

Find some contemporary information. This study linked information from as far back as 1979. I doubt you were even born Turnea in 1979!!!!!!!

Seriously. There are some sincerly bitter people on this planet for not reason.

Racism is racism and its wrong regardless. NT and Turnea, it's not just white people. Here are a few articles that might bring perspective.
http://www.suppressednews.com/mynews/news/...kYbFvAxrJ.shtml
http://www.tabunka.org/newsletter/black_racism.html
http://www.forbes.com/2006/08/18/walmart-a...facescan02.html

I could do this all day.... come on y'all. This debate might work if someone would sincerely say "YES- there are black racists too, and their actions are no better than any other racists". (but I sincerely doubt that some people on this board think that black people are even capable of racism)

[White perpetuated racism?[/b]... sure.. it's a mess, but in 2007 it's no better or worse than any other racism.

No one has ever denied that... in this thread or in others.

This whole faux-outrage is one long strawman argument. If you want to start a thread on black racism I'm sure BoF would appreciate your ceasing to derail his. Remember, that's how this started? You questioned his focus on white racism.

Well he and I and others have all answered why that focus is justified, white racism is more critical to the history and natural character of the United States.

..and the study was published in 1986... the basic societal factors haven't entirely reversed themselves since then... but you want a more recent study?
Fair Housing Enforcement and Changes in Discrimination between 1989 and 2000: An Exploratory Study

This is a debate board, not a sandbox where kids stick out their tongues and and holler, "blah. blah, blah" ... or "nana-nana, poo-poo."



I doubt Jesse Jackson controls the media. According to Merriam-Webster online,



http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/refugee

Unless the good folks from Louisiana are foreigners, then "refugee" is incorrect.

I used to have an AP Style Book. It would be interesting to see what it has to say about use of the word "refugee." Perhaps NT can enlighten us on how AP treats "refugee."

Farrakhan has lieutenants and thousands of followers. He is a Muslim, and there is no question but that black Muslims and middle-eastern Muslims have been building bridges. I have heard some of FK's speeches and they rival anything Herr Goebbels might have written. To marginalize his influence is a specious, silly argument. He is as revolting as any Grand Wizard of the KKK.



You are confusing two concepts rather badly. Rascism is still racism regardless of whether the rascist has the means to act dramatically on his beliefs. Influence and numbers in society change over time, and the existence of certain ideas may well find a root as influence and numbers change.




Here you go: http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/index.jsp?T=32&m=5




Blacks kill and rape whites for what appear to be racial motives every day.

"Buried in the stats, though, the report found that black offenders commit four times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. That inadvertently adds fuel to the charge that whites are under assault from blacks. The president of the Knoxville NAACP swiftly denounced the killings and expressed deep sorrow for the victim’s families. Yet, there’s some truth to charge that civil rights leaders generally don’t express outrage at heinous crimes committed by blacks against whites."

http://blacknews.com/pr/whites_blacks101.html



Ancient history all.




Blacks seem to think they have a congenital right to all positions in pro sports. Shouldn't everything in sports be apportioned by relative numbers of blacks and whites in society, just like blacks want for every other job in America? NFL owners want to win; they hire those they think most likely to do that; End of story.




Since whites founded and controlled American society so long, of course there are not any as universal as "nigger", but there are many--cracker, peckerwood, and there are a huge new raft of them from the hip-hop generation. Of course, this begs the question--the word isn't the thing, the thought behind it is, and all one need do is listen to the filth perpetrated by some black comics when they are on a roll hammering white people to know the thought behind the comments.




Blacks are doing it big-time now in former segregationist Africa; you haven't had the opportunity--yet--in the US, and hopefully will not. I hope you are better than that....but I seriously doubt it, as all people are corrupted by power.



Let's see--Relevant? Timely? Current? Well, no. Of course, whites, with superior tranportation, navigation, commercial and military skills in the 1600s and 1700s brought blacks from Africa to work in the tropical and semi-tropical South. This is historical fact. Read "Guns, Germs and Steel." We all admit it. So what? This is long gone....




If you define racism correctly, i.e. the belief one race is congenitally superior to another, I do not think there are that many black rascists, except when it comes to athletic and entertainment skills. I think most blacks, if you could scratch deeply enough, still have an inferiority complex and it leads to the extreme touchyness you see in black culture today. Hoepfully, this will continue to change over time.

If by racism you mean prejudice, blacks favor their own every day. Even in mainstream black magazines like "Black Enterprise," I have seen articles encouraging blacks to support black-owned businesses. If a white-run magazine did the converse, the entire staff would be fired immediately.

Can this all change? Sure. But it may take another few hundred years. In the meantime, I personally would like to focus on building a cultural concensus in the US rather than muttering on about this kind of stuff.

Oh, but it is exactly in understanding "this type of stuff" that all hope for productive dialoge lies.

I suspect that's the whole point of this thread.

In the United States trying to equate black racism and white racism while sound at the basic level, is humorously impossible on the the macro scale.

That's ok if you still believe that racism causes social inequality in 2007.
I suppose that's hard to prove when you're posting studies from 1981 that have 1979 data!!! HA!


I'd love to entertain thought and debate on how contemporary US society perpetuates white racism that actually holds minorities back. I'm not talking about redneck/hillbilly biggots in their pick ups flying confederate flags as they go to their jobs at the saw mill or jiffy lube... but true racism that causes socio-economic damage.

1. Does white racism hurt those who perpetrate it? If so how?

To me, racism is based on fear; the fear of something different than ourselves. And racism is neither black nor white - it's just racism; judging another based on race.

(emphasis mine)
Hopefully I am translating the egghead ( ) speech correctly, in that the study found that judging an individual by race was a learned behavior, and as such, could be unlearned. But first, humans need to eliminate the “us vs. them” mentality in order to eliminate racism. While I can see more evolved individuals doing so, there are far, far too many others who nurture the “us vs. them”, because without a “them” to hate and fear, they have no wars, no one to feel superior to, no one to victimize, etc. (see: US government)

And it happens here with annoying regularity. Race debates on always devolve when those posters start angrily sputtering: well, what about them? They do it to us. (see: above)

2. Does white racism hurt white non-perpetrators? If so how?*

Racism hurts everyone. It’s a fear-based emotion - the fear of the "different" - and we’ve seen what kind of damage widespread fear can cause. (see: Bush Administration)

I think you're on to something. Maybe it's my turn to oversimplify, but I think liberals tend to approach economic problems from a systemic standpoint; conservatives tend to focus on the individual, micro level in general. There are only so many pages of Coase's "The Problem of Social Cost"—focusing on steers and crops, rabbits and chimneys by way of example, back and forth, back and forth—I can read until I reach a point where I want to claw my eyeballs out. And yet Farrell's broad criticism of the Coase theorem makes perfect sense to me because we are greater than the sum of individual transactions.

This doesn't explain why some conservatives get cagey about racism, though. They would rather "get beyond it" than dwell on it. It's so obvious to me that racism is still a problem, even among Hispanics, that compared to "the means, the method and the motive to enforce a racist agenda", footnoting every observation of white racism with a yellow/brown/black counterexample is an exercise in white political correctness.

I say keep on agitatin'.

The problem here is that BOF, just like anyone else at , is free to start any topic he likes (assuming it fits the confines of the forum). If he wants to ask a question about white racism, and specifies that he is doing so because the majority of race debate topics end up reverting to discussions about black racism and how it's socially acceptable for blacks to be racist (which is exactly what happens in race debate topics and is often why they end up being locked) then he is free to do so.

People continually use anecdotal evidence as "proof" of racism (or a lack thereof) in race debate threads. That's the nature of the beast because our information comes from our experiences. BOF did not say that his two experiences were proof of anything other than specific examples of racism that he has encountered.

I seriously doubt that the majority of people think that only white people perpetrate racism. That white people are often in positions of power in this country and have had the means (historically speaking) to make this racism institutional is what makes "white racism" more apparent and effects the population on a whole more than certain examples of black racism.

I don't think anyone is arguing that it's okay for blacks to be racist, aevans176. Racism sucks no matter where it's coming from and I am pretty sure that everyone *I* know who has posted in this topic would be in complete agreement with that.

As for Jesse Jackson getting up in arms about the term refugee? Well, I guess I must be racist then since I completely agree with him. Katrina victims are NOT refugees as they have not FLED their country to escape some sort of threat. THAT is a refugee last time I checked. I would say it's on the same level as referring to blacks as "looters" while whites are simply "getting necessary supplies for survival". It may be just semantics to some, but to many (including me) it sends a very clear message about how our populations are viewed and judged.

The problem with discussions about race is that a great many people simply cannot (by virtue of their experiences/situations) understand the impact that racism can have on minorities. It is NOT the same for whites because, last time I checked, this country is mostly white and the history of racist institutions is still prevalent today (moreso in certain parts of the country). Yes, there are plenty of black racists. Yes, that's a bad thing for everyone. No, they don't usually hold positions of power in which they have any means to enact or elicit widespread belief in their racist ideologies. Louis Farrakhan isn't exactly someone that the majority of Blacks look up to (I sure as heck don't know a single black person who listens to or has ever listened to a thing the man says). The Nation of Islam isn't exactly a mainstream force in America (let alone in Black America) and the only time it was ever remotely "mainstream" was when Malcolm X was connected to the NOI. Malcolm X is one historical figure who has suffered a great deal from misrepresentation as people often associate him with racist ideas. But that's another subject altogether.

The point is that this particular debate is about white perpetrated racism. If you or anyone else wants to start a topic about black perpetrated racism (just look at the race debate archives and you'll find many of them) you are free to do so. BOF was simply attempting to bypass the black racism angle because it's nearly impossible to have a debate here without black racism and "reverse discrimination" and "race baiting" being brought into the debate (two terms I cannot stand, by the way).

1. Does white racism hurt those who perpetrate it? If so how?

That surely depends on whether or not they are bothered by their actions. Many people later repent actions they've committed in early life.

Perhaps the question refers to more a tangible and immediete hurt though? By all means. Actions can cause reactions.


2. Does white racism hurt white non-perpetrators? If so how?

Without a doubt. There is a massive spill over of accusation and guilt-by-association. The mere fact that racism is coupled together with being white in this topic title acknowledges this, intentionally or otherwise. As a white man who has never committed any crimes (apart from down loading the odd film from the net) nor made intentional racist gestures or comments, I still feel obliged to respond to this thread as I feel obliged to respond to others like it. I feel I am being accused because I'm white.

I appreciate that threads about racism often devolve towards accustaions of racism by non whites, but I feel this is because the balance of accusation has long since been lost due to the legacy of American slavery and the Holocaust. There is an assumption made all too often that racism is a crime committed by white people against black people and crimes which do not fit this perception are not given the same narrow attention.

Personally, I agree with Daffygrl. Racism just is. No one group has a monopoly on being racist or being subjected to racism.

Moif, I don’t think this is the case at all. Turnea and others have mentioned fitting the cultural milieu of racism into historical context. I don’t think circumstances, history, culture are the same in Denmark.

That is not to say that your take isn’t valued and you can't give perspective, but that you need not go on the defensive.

Only--and I do mean only--because whites outnumber blacks. Have you been watching what has been going on in Africa lately in the former apartheid states?

I heard Farrakhan make a speech some years ago where he advocated US blacks reproducing in great quantity just so blacks could outnumber whites for this very reason (although it looks like Latinos will pass you on the way to the finish line.). There is no reason for whites--or blacks--to assume blacks will not misbehave when they have power just as whites did. Look at the incredible series of corrupt, big city black mayors--the words, "you got yours, now we're getting ours" sure come to mind.

No, Turnea, power corrupts, and blacks are no more immune than anyone else. Unless we begin thinking as one American culture do we have a chance to minimize this problem.

So then, would you agree Mark Steyn's "America Alone" is racist for suggesting white European culture will be wiped unless they outbreed Muslims? Maybe we can agree on something.

Well, there are a number of factors why one culture prevails over another, as Jared Diamond argues in "Guns, Germs and Steel." But, in a nation where majority rule is the norm (and while our Republic was not founded on that princple, we have been galloping towards it across the board), numbers certainly bode well for control and power. I would not want to be so outnumbered.