Maybe you interpreted Turnea's post too broadly, or maybe you used it as an excuse to post liberal rhetoric. Whichever comes first.

The fact of the matter is QH that you're prejudiced against anyone you deem intellectually or culturally inferior, but frankly I'd venture to state that you're not economically or physically able to make these statements anywhere outside of America's debate. People with views as uber-liberal as this rarely are anything but fruitcake professors like Noam Chomsky and more commonly the Blockbuster guy or someone making coffee at Starbucks. Not captains of industry, not government leaders, nada. It's just the truth world-wide, not just in the US.

In reference to a pedestal, QH, I disagree. I believe that if you have an idea I don't agree with, that it's just peachy so long as it doesn't hurt anyone. I rarely agree with BOF, but don't truly believe that my ideas are better. That's the point for many of us on this site. We're here specifically to entertain the ideas of others, QH, not to spew some message that we believe the minions should read.

Talk about cultural prejudice... some people don't care for educated and religious professionals in the south. We're the spawn of GW and his conspiracies to have the world listening to Toby Keith and watching NASCAR. We don't eat escargot or sushi, and don't believe that global warming came from Aqua Net and Ford Trucks. We MUST be ignorant.

I understand cultural racism to be more than just one man's prejudism based on his percpetion of culture. Thats not cultural racism. Thats a racist's attitude towards culture.

You even brought up the tension between the Russian minorities in the Baltic states in an earlier example. Unless you were implying all Estonians who have a problem with Russians are being 'culturally racist', then I don't know what your point was.

I'm failing to see I difference I suppose.

Biological racism is simply a racist attitude towards biology...


I simply meant it as an example of a tense situation, whether cultural racism applies there I really don't know.

Just giving an idea of what was meant by "tensions" is all.

Surely its obvious. A racist is an individual person. His perceptions are his own and he is solely responsible for them. A culture is comprised of many people not all of whom will agree on any given subject.

Arguing that racism is become triggered by cultural crticisms is fair enough, but to call this 'cultural racism' is to imply something far greater. These words imply a culture which is racist as opposed to racists who criticise culture. By using these words, one targets a lot of people who are not racists but who happen to be apart of a culture, national or otherwise.

No more than "biological racism" actually implies persons who are racist by their genetic make-up.

That's simply not the meaning of the term.

Thanks for that link to the Pew study. And I'm sure you're right that most every black child knows someone who has a father in the home. I should have made my point without that bit of, um, imaginative hyperbole.

According the Pew study, blacks and whites are about the same in thinking (about 60%) that unmarried couples having children is bad for society. Blacks and whites are also the same in the proportion of having had children (73%). But only 54% of blacks have ever been married, compared with 82% of whites.

So the norm of childbearing within marriage survives as an ideal, even as two-thirds of black children are born outside of marriage.


If only! But I think I get your point. Calling a problem "cultural" can be a way of saying "nothing I can do about it, that's just the way 'those people' are." Is that your main objection to the word?

Or are you saying there's no such thing as "black culture" as something distinct from the rest of American (or even Western) culture?

Has racism changed its primary justification over the past fifty years?

Probably.

Is "cultural racism" a phenomenon worthy of concern?

Honestly, I think "cultural racism" isn't racism at all. It is an offshoot answer to the question that is continually posed. Why aren't blacks (and hispanics, ect) successful to the extent the whites are today? If the only acceptable answer is 'racism', and any other answer is racist, then we aren't having an honest argument. Yes, racism is a often a factor but the answer is often also environment...the environment in which they grew up, social interaction, ect. The word used for that is usually "culture".

When an Asian child performs well by comparison to other children, they investigate and find that the Asian child's family makes him/her study 5 hours each day. Their culture values study like we value football. Ergo, this has an influence on performance and increases the likelihood of success. Do I want my child to study five hours per day? No, I'm willing to take the risk that they will not be as successful as Lee Ping so that they can enjoy being children. Not my culture...I'd like for them to be successful, but not at that cost.

Does the theory apply to the current tensions in the United States? In Europe?

I don't know. Maybe.

Different example to make a point, but there are some tensions between North and South here. The culture of the South is slow. They don't value the same things the north does. I grew up around some people who still call the northerners Yankees. They have a totally different view of what is important in life (speaking in generalities as I must because I'm speaking of a large group of individuals who are obviously not identical). I'm from the south, but I've spent so much time in the North it takes me a while to get used to the way things are done down south when I visit my family. And in parts like the Mississippi things are REALLY slow. Go to a drivethrough and expect to wait a while. Call the theatre and expect an actual person to answer the phone with 'hello' , rather than a recorded customer service message. The conversation will go something like this. Him/her: "Hello" (silence); You: "Um, yes, is this the cinema?"; Him/her: "Yep" (more silence); You: "I was wondering, um, what is playing today"; Him/her:"Well (long pause). Let me see (long pause) We've got Underdog (Underdog is drawn out at lenghth over several needless syllables, as though he's trying to find the next entry on one of 30 separate post-its and doesn't wish to pause between movie choices), and the Simpsons." You:"is that all?" (L-O-N-G) pause "Yep. Have a nice day."

The above isn't the way things are done in the north. If someone asked why southerners underperform northerners (and they GENERALLY do), well, what is there to say other than culture? Black northerners are more successful (well, score higher on IQ tests) than white southerners in general. That doesn't mean that every southerner is destined to be unsuccessful or ignorant, but it would be dishonest to pretend that the culture has absolutely nothing to do with any of it.

Edited to add: I'll continue (why not, since I've already muddied the water?). A personal anecdote: Take my father-in-law, born in Cuba. He is brilliant. He has an IQ measured at over 160. He is also unbelieveably lazy in many respects. If he has a job, he'll work 48 hours without rest, but he would also sleep 48 uninterupted hours. He has come up with about 15 inventions that he created simply to make work easier (he's an electrician, plumber, carpenter, cop, realtor, pilot, engineer, computer programer, ect...). But he has never bothered to patent any of them. Some of his inventions have actually been stolen by visitors, and they got rich off of them! He just shrugs and says, "Oh, well...too busy, no point in patenting anything because it's too much aggravation." I'll tell you, those inventions were never stolen by any Latino visitors that frequent his home, but by ambitious white guys who ask, "So...how does this work? uh, huh..." He wrote an entire computer program with 500 page manual, was only about three days away from finishing it and never bothered to finish it. and his family is EXACTLY the same way. ANd my husband? The same. Brilliant but not ambitious at all. He is successful, he works hard, but he'd never in a million years step over anyone to succeed....and he'd as soon not work at all if it wasn't necessary. And when everyone else is pinging off the walls with stress, he's cool as can be. I swear, that man could nap while under seige.

Bingo.

It suggests that blacks as a people have chosen some some of alternate lifestyle on basic societal issues. That from first-hand experience, is utterly false.

It suggests further that if only blacks thought more like mainstream (read white) Americans, their lot would be better.

I can't even begin to say how condescending and... rather annoying that can get in a debate. All of the closed thread in this section might give a hint though.


Is it?

There is a difference between environment and culture. Culture is about transmitted values and can be sustained in any number of environments. Many circumstance outside of a groups culture call alter social interaction. When Irish immigrants were funneled into slums and the resulting vice and violence was labeled Irish culture.. about how accurate was that?


I'm from the South too and I grew up hearing that all my life. I also grew up interacting with northerners all my life, family, friends, many who moved "back" South (a common trend these days)

These "cultural differences are largely over stated even there. If you put in earplugs and watched a Southerner and a Northerner behave you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference.

The South also has substantially higher poverty and has been as an economic disadvantage since the collapse of king cotton.

Is culture why the South lags behind the North?

No.

I think we are riding that justification into the ground.

Oh, boy, Turnea. I'd suggest that rather than make your own personal observations based on the way Northerners "act" in your end of the woods, you actually ask those friends and family members who have lived in the North if things are different in their estimation. Using "earplugs and watching" people's individual behavior in one environment or another is no way to form a comparison. You have to live here and there...or visit for a rather long period of time.

Sorry, the reason Tom Petty's song 'Southern Accent' is so popular in the south is because it is true. The south is different, and often those differences are embraced as a point of pride for many southerners.

Longest stint I've done in Chicago was a month.

I'm a sucker for the scientific method.

If the concern is a difference in observable behavior, observe and do so objectively.

The minds plays tricks of association and shared tales like the South and "those darn Yankees" die hard.

You are likely right on what they would say, but would they be able to describe it in detail?

I've had this discussion with a number of people before. Slow, fast. That's all they got and no observable behavior to show for it.

There was a time when the cultures were different, because the ways we lived and made a living were different.

Now that's more cherished myth than reality.


Never heard that track.

I like "Refugee"

Pride is a funny thing, we'll cling to the most irrelevant things and even make a few up to hold on to it.

Reviewed dispassionately the cultural differences are nigh unto microscopic.

I'd argue that you're correct in certain parts of the south, particularly in metropolitan areas.

The thing is that in some towns I'd completely disagree. Maybe somewhere like Shreveport maybe? Baton Rouge? Little Rock? Arguably even somewhere like Lubbock or Abilene?

The point to be made is that Dallas is not particularly "southern", but moreover a large melting pot where culture is mixed in like ice cream at Marble Slab. Houston, Austin, and somewhat even San Antonio (which has a largely Tex-ican feel) would fit into these categories.

What about cities like Jackson? In a town like Shreveport, now nearing the 300K mark in population (including Bossier City), life is slower. More polite. Easier going. People DO let you in when you turn on your blinkers, talk to you in the grocery line, etc.

Those are southern things. Seattle, Manhattan, or Philadelphia. One thing's true. People aren't that friendly and things work at a different pace. One could argue that Honolulu is outside this mold... but Hawaii is a different animal all together.

Observable behavior? I'd say that in the "real south" you'll see a handful of things. People talking to each other, eye contact, someone holding doors, people letting you in a line of traffic, smiles for strangers, etc. Don't ever try to tell me this happens in Boston or Fairfax.

Cherished myth? I'd argue that you may not live in a "truly still southern" atmosphere.

You see the swiss cheese starting to form? Now there are all these "exceptions."

Is there a rural culture? Maybe, more like a lifestyle.

Is is quintessentially Southern?

Nope.

I school in Huntsville, they cut you off

People will holds doors in Chicago or NYC, depends on where you are in the city and how close to rush it is.

I mean this is Alabama, "The Heart of Dixie" if we aren't Southern ain't no such thing.

Indeed you are correct about Hawaii. I had the wonderful experience of living there for several months when I was nineteen. I lived on the big island and let me tell you, they had a pace and culture all their own. The sense of time and necessity was probably the most pronounced difference. If it gets done good, if not, it can wait until later.

After being called Howly incessantly I grew to understand the distinctions between locals and transplants. It was still a load of fun despite the cultural racism I endured.



In L.A., too, you would be hard-pressed to find such hospitality. Here there are so many different cultures immersed in one place and it harbors animosity, impatience, and resentment.




Well, what is culture? Is it not behavioral patterns? Much of people's behavior is altered when they come into closer proximity with others. The more people there are the less chance you'll have a smooth and amiable cultural intercourse. Sure, in South Dakota it's easy to be friendly and speak to the guy standing next to you in line. A- He goes to the same church as you B- You've got the time to shoot the breeze C- you are not vying with countless others for limited resources

I hardly think that's the reason. I've been going to school with Asians, Arabs, Indians, black Americans, white Americans, West Africans, East Africans, the occasional South African, Europeans... though not too many Hispanics... weird... since I was a kid.

People are more antsy when population density is higher, probably a lack of space and all that pollution.


Culture includes some aspects of behavioral patters, particular those that are passed on through generations. Not everything we do can be called culture.

You must have family up north man... sounds like you'd defend them to the death.

The fact is that Chicago (our office is on 22nd street in Oakbrook, but I have regular visits to see a little company called US Cellular downtown) definitely doesn't have that 'small town appeal'. People really don't hold doors, etc. You're seriously kidding yourself. It doesn't happen man. I almost died in a cross walk there in March. The guy that works for me there even brags about how nice people are here in Dallas. Dallas! Of all places.

NYC? You jest. Have you ever been there? For more than 10 minutes? Now and again you'll find some nice people. It's the exception as opposed to the rule.

Huntsville probably just fits the mold of "melting pot". It probably doesn't have the "feel of southern culture". Go to Jackson, Galveston, or maybe spend some time in Baton Rouge (even though post - Katrina traffic is terrible) people will still talk to you in a bar or really anywhere. It's a college town, but what you'll find is that most LSU attendees are from Louisiana (or Southern TX).

I'd venture to state that you probably live outside the "bubble of Southern Hospitality" and don't know what it truly means. Take a trip to Shreveport. You'll undoubtedly love it.

I've got family everywhere, that's how I know these places.

Downtown in any big city can be rough. Ever tried Atlanta traffic? You keep confusing "not Southern" with urban. The south has cities, has for a while, just like the North.

I just got back from the family reunion in Eutaw, AL. I know the small town South very well. I spent my formative years in Bessemer

Rural and Southern are not synonymous and the Souther doesn't have much of a unique culture anymore, that time has passed.

Has racism changed its primary justification over the past fifty years?



This is the central theme behind the concept of racism and it hasn't changed in time. The justifications for this believe have changed, that's true. With the evolution of knowledge, the changes in social and cultural conditions, the justifications have altered. It is like spreading the same message in a different package.

One aspect that is striking for the last 50 years is the fact that racism itself has become a social taboo. The majority of people living in the West have, because of the horrors of WWII, more or less distanced themselves from racist thought. It still exist but resides in the dark corners of society.

I agree with dr. James Blaut that during the last 50 years it seems that a new ideology has evolved that stresses cultural superiority. I do have problems with the label he put on it to describe it. I think a better and more accurate term would have been "cultural bigotry", instead of "cultural racism". The definition of "cultural bigot" should be a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities that reside within a certain cultural context, because it is differing from his or her own cultural context.

Is "cultural racism" a phenomenon worthy of concern?

"Cultural bigotry" is a phenomenon worthy of our concern. It can have a polarizing and other negative effects on society as a whole. Exposing the ignorance and prejudices behind such a view / idea, through open dialogue and discussion, is the only way to deal with it.

Does the theory apply to the current tensions in the United States? In Europe?
It is harder for me to say anything about the U.S. regarding this point, I know that "cultural bigotry" is one of the causes why there is so much tension between, for example, Europeans and the Muslim communities within Europe.

The cultural racism designation is accurate, as I see it because it only tends to work powerfully at the intersection of culture and ethnicity or race.

No matter what the tensions between France and Germany there is not the culture sneering that occurs between them that is directed towards ethnic minorities.

It is not their cultural bigotry alone that is the issue, it is typically difficult to tell a person's culture by looking at him or her.

Rather it is prejudice, practiced according to race, but justified in the person's mind by culture.

That depends entirely on who you talk to turnea. I've met plenty of people who hate the French with passion and if you look back through history I think you'll find that no two tribes have shed as much of each others blood as the French and Germans! Things might seem oh so peaceful right now, but that was true in the past also. If there is sucha thing as animosity base don culture alone, then I think Germany and France qualify for that.

I don't know if Germany and France's past history qualifies as cultural racism though...

I wasn't discounting the tensions, I suspect though that it is of a different nature. Those who hate the French would do so on nationalistic grounds rather than assuming the French are culturally inferior.

As for race vs. ethnicity. I think the only workable definition of the old race concept is as ethnic super-groups, so I agree I wouldn't call this situation cultural racism either. I was just comparing and contrasting.

I think I need some extra details of what exactly you are talking about when you speak of cultural racism. If you meant to use it in a context like for example the tensions between Muslim communities and a large part of the population in European countries, then I think your concept of cultural racism is not correct. This social "conflict" you see in Europe (and to some degree in the U.S. and perhaps Canada) is not based on race, but clearly on culture with its distinct set of morals, values, religious beliefs and lifestyle.