This election year has been filled with racial tension. It has brought the issue of race out into the sphere of political discussion. The term "white guilt" is often used in describing the motivations behind white support for Barack Obama.

Debate Questions:

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama? (If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)



Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)




What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?

Debate Questions:

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama? (If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)

Do I as a white American feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America? Um let me think...................Hrm, nope I don't feel guilty for the actions of my ancestors whom Ive never even met. Id feel guilt for my own actions, if I had reason to feel guilty. Also any white person who votes for Obama simply because they feel guilt for African Americans is misguided in my opinion. Thats not a reason to vote for anyone, you vote for someone because you agree with their policies, and like their character, not because you feel you owe their race a vote, thats silly. I think most of the white democrats voting for Obama, are voting for him because they like him, not because he is black and they feel guilty.



Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

To some degree especially in the past, but today not as near as much as the blacks themselves are responsible. I believe a person (whatever race they are in) are most responsible for their own actions and our own lives, we reep what we sew, and today the law is set up the same for blacks as it is for whites.




What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?

Nothing will put an end to racial tensions between whites and blacks, ever. It hasn't ended in the past, and it wont end in the future either. There will always be tensions between races. Why? because blacks and whites are different, and variety in culture has and always will spark tension. Its the human condition, yet at the same time Id rather live in a world where racism exist, than live in a world where everyone is the same, or a world where we are so politically correct that our society becomes Dull and stagnate.

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama? (If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)


I don't think this question is valid. Guilt is a powerful, sometimes hidden psychological force that varies with personality, more than issue.


http://www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s...journalCode=jpa

Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

Obviously given a couple of centuries of discrimination in every possible way.

What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?


I have a few thoughts.

1. If you are correct net2007, then we're probably doing something wrong.

2. Use of words like "nothing," and "always" are gross generalizations that negate any meaning in your post.

3. Racial tensions and political correctness have little correlation.

4. I don't think the lack of racial tensions would make us "dull and stagnate." Too Bad you weren't around during the Watts riots. You could have cheered from the sidelines just as you have with Iraq.

5. It may be that neither of us will be around to see what eventually happens. I'm very bad at predicting the future a hundred years + or - out.

BTW: I nulled my vote.

BoF






No we are not doing anything wrong, we are being human beings. Since the dawn of societies people have had tensions with other races and societies. Im not saying I like it, I'm not saying its a pleasant truth, but it is the truth. Progress regarding racial matters in America in the future will be pretty small compared to the changes that have already occurred in prior generations. At this point perhaps we have some tweaking here and there but the primary problem as of now is not our laws or gouvernment, it's ((US)), (the American public) is where some steps can be made from here, but if you honestly believe there can ever be a day where racial tension does not exist, then look into the history of man, and there lies an obvious truth. Its here to stay because it has always been a part of culture.


Those aren't generalizations, the words NOTHING and ALWAYS are specific and defining words, not generalizing ones, especially considering the context in which I used them. when I said there will Always be racism I don't see how that leaves anyone uncertain of what I was implying.

3. Racial tensions have and political correctness have little correlation.

I disagre, to some people political correctness is a tool of intolerance, ironically. There are people who go out of there way to fire someone, for saying something rude, and often this is because such a person has a racial agenda of their own. AL Sharpton helping to get Imus fired for saying something that was rude rather than racist is a great example. Of course he played into it as if it were certainly a matter of racial discrimination. He used the situation as it presented itself and took advantage of it to imply that Imus was a racist. However Im almost certain if Imus was black, or those basketball players had been white that, Al Sharpton would have been nowhere to be seen. Ive read a lot on Sharpton and its always the same story with him. So thats how a racist uses political correctness to label those of another race, and why there is indeed a correlation between the two.

4. I don't think the lack of racial tensions would make us "dull and stagnate." Too Bad you weren't around during the Watts riots. You could have cheered from the sidelines just as you have with Iraq.

You misunderstood me, What I said was that I would rather live in a world where racism exsist, than live in a world where everyone is the same. Racism is the unfortunate price we pay for having a very diverse society, but I wouldn't have it any other way. Racism aggravates me, it obviously aggravates you, and I think it aggravets a lot of people. However there is ONLY one way I can think of to get rid of racism, and Adolf Hitler could have told you all about it. If you eliminate varity in society then in therory you elimiinate Racism, because everyone is of the same racial orientation. Do you know how boaring that would be? Think about it, if everyone was like me or you, id find the nearest cliff and take a dive personally. I like that there is varied opinions, races and religions, so I'll accept the price we pay for that Which is Racism, Bias, and even War ect ect, it doesn't mean I like it.

5. It may be that neither of us will be around to see what eventually happens. I'm very bad at predicting the future a hundred years + or - out.

You know what Ive always said when someone says what you just did? That there is perhaps only one way to predict the future, and that is to have an understanding and appreciation of the events of the past. I look into the past and for eons, in fact ever since time was timed, there has been Racism, and ugliness and I'm here to tell you its not going anywhere. Read this following quote, this one isn't mine, but its brilliantly written.........

Imagine a world where every crisis did not result in new atrocities, where every newspaper was not full of war and violence. This is a world where human beings cease to be human�

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama?
The number of whites who actually feel "white guilt" pales in comparison to those who complain about it, so I'll say no.

Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America?
I accidentally voted no in the poll.

The correct answer is two-fold.

If you're speaking historically the answer is yes.


Blacks experience greater poverty in the US as a direct result of historical racism, it's reasons #1, 2 and 3.

It's why their schools are struggling, why the poor are packed into projects and segregated on the "wrong side of the tracks," it's why crime is endemic in so many communities.

It is the only key difference in blacks and whites in America.

If speaking only on contemporary whites, the answer is partially.

Their reticence to clean up the mess of public policy and cultural bias left over from Jim Crow and the like stands in the way of progress.

Many are part of the problem because they refuse to be part of the solution.

What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?
Hard work.

Fix what's broken in the system and address what's amiss in our national character.

Tensions are practical matters, change the situation on the ground before asking people to sing kumbaya.

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama? (If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)

I hope not.

Do I feel a sense of guilt? Absolutely not.

Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

Well, I'd have to say partially, only because the question covers so much time. I would argue that there was a time when white people were most definitely responsible for the socio-economic conditions of blacks in America. I believe, however, that now it is a much more complex situation. There are those in society - regardless of race - who engage in self-sabotage. There are those that see new opportunities and those who are blind to them because of past injustices or some who are just too ignorant to recognize them for what they are.

It started somewhere and white people were definitely responsible for that beginning. Now, I'd say there is a bit of self-sabotage thrown into the mix.


What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?

Education and time.

I think you are trying to say that things will remain the same, because they have always been that way. Isn't it strange that so many people on this board have practically said racism doesn't exist. I don't like what you are saying because it takes man's fate out of his hands and places it somewhere else.


Let's put it another way then. Those are absolutist words. Once you say "nothing" there is something and once you say "always" or "never" there's an exception.


I don't think the decision to remove Imus from the air was Al Sharpton's. The Imus fate had little to do with what some want to call "reverse racism." Get over Sharpton, how about?


Well, net you make it easy to misunderstand what you are writing, but I understand completely. I agree for about the need for diversity, I just think we need to find a way out of dealing with diversity through war, turbulence and conflict. It reduces stress, and who knows, most of us might live longer healthier lives.


What you always say doesn't matter. More absolutes.


It would be hard to accuse you of such elocution net. The quotation was from Russian ambassador Yorish (Roger Rees) about the science fiction flick [i]The Invasion.[/b] Why didn't provide proper citation? Still, I don't agree with the ambassador. The last part about being human presupposes something like belief in "original sin" rather than a an existential view of life.

Ending racial tensions will come when blacks and whites come together to acknowledge not only the sins of the past; but the sins that continue to this day. When we stop acting like everything is good and just and we take an honest look at the state of things in America; we can move forward. What it takes is for the open minds in the middle to change the society so that the closed minds on both ends of the spectrum have not a leg to stand on.

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama? (If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)

I don't believe so - at least not in any amount to make a difference. I like Obama's character from what I can gleen on the airwaves his recent "minister" problems notwithstanding. I just can't stomach his more liberal views regards to redistribution of wealth and national defense - they make me want to wretch.

I am white and I do feel guilt. I don't think that will go away for me. I am appalled knowing there are fellow Christian brethren walking the earth who countenanced and even provoked the atrocities of only a few decades ago.

Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

Not this white person. The people who are responsible for this are other white folk who lived primarily during an era the majority of us on this board were not present for.

What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?

net2007 is correct to say these tensions will never end. Where there is difference there is tension racially or otherwise. This tension is not a function of differences per se but rather of the depraved opinions of those who cannot tolerate them.

Any positive change however will require those of us (black and white) who believe in racial harmony to continue doing what we always have been doing - treating our fellowmen with the respect they deserve. Though I appreciate those who have achieved change on the national stage, I do prefer the potential power of individual connection with those who are different than I. Our common desire for connection TRUMPS the more superficial concerns over the color of one's skin or the difference in one's culture.

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama?

Depending on how you define "white guilt," I think this is a small, but not completely insignificant, portion of his support from European-Americans. Let me make it clear here that I am talking about "guilt" as in "I feel uncomfortable about the fact that, as a European-American, I have certain advantages over an African-American who is otherwise similar to me." This is very different from saying "I feel guilty for what I have done to African-Americans." In my opinion, the first sentiment is quite reasonable for just about any thoughtful European-American, while the second is clearly limited to a very small number of individuals who have evolved from frank racism to a more enlightened point of view.

(If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)

In the sense I have indicated above, sure. In a similar way, it is only reasonable for heterosexual Americans to feel "guilt" over the societal advantages they enjoy over gay Americans, and so on. It is emotionally healthy to be uncomfortable about one's unfair advantages. Because of this, it seems reasonable, all other factors being equal (which never happens), for one to support an African-American candidate, or a female candidate, or a gay candidate, over an otherwise equivalent European-American or male or heterosexual candidate.

Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

This is much too broad a question for any simple answer. The current situation is an extraordinarily complex one, with so many factors involved -- historical, economic, psychological -- that it's a foolish game to try to assign blame. Suffice to say that there is something wrong with a society in which de facto segregation is so prevalent; where separate and unequal is so accurate a description for the way that so many of us live. This doesn't mean that European-Americans are racists; very, very few are. This doesn't mean that there is something wrong with African-American "culture" (assuming there really is such a thing.)

What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?

Lots of time, lots of hard work, lots of good will. As tragic as much of the current situation may be, it is obvious that we have made progress over the last couple of centuries. Maybe it will take at least as much time to put all of this nonsense behind us. Encouraging as many "mixed marriages" as possible may help a little.

]
No, I don't feel a tremendous amount of personal guilt towards black America.

The issue, in my opinion, is too complex even to warrant a "partially." Therefore, I nulled.

To state the obvious, White Americans open racism in days past had largely retarded any significant economic gains for African Americans.

The real question is whether or not white people, present today, are contributing to barriers that prevent the "rise" of African Americans. This answer is complex, but you can say I lean mostly towards a "no" answer.

The most irritating aspect of the modern majority is it's passive acceptance of behavior it knows to be unfair and immoral. If a crowd watching a bully beat the snot out of some poor, defenseless child refuses to act, I consider them as guilty as the bully. Non-action is a green light: an indicator to oppressors that violence/discrimination will be tolerated. Its just as deadly whether the motivation to not intervene is from reluctance to make a stand, or a secret sympathy with the oppressor. In the instance of race, to the extent that white America does not insure the equal protection of African Americans by law, and to the extent they stand idly by while watching their Black brethren discriminated against, they are responsible for the modern day racism that subverts the economic climb of black America. This criticism can be extended to all races. However, in the instance of race, White America holds the bag because we have the fewest barriers to extend protection (in the cases we are present, which is often).

Likewise, we must insure fair opportunity, but only to the measure that it does not impose on the freedom of others. The most obvious example are schools. Children of all races need access to quality schools (Given the non-quality of our public schools, I think vouchers/charter schools are the way to go). To the extent that America (notice, no white) does not try vigorously to equip black America with the opportunities it can grant which are necessary for success, it is responsible for the the economic status of Black Americans.

Provided fair protection of law, and opportunity that does not infringe on freedom, white Americans are not responsible to black Americans, not even for its shameful past. If succeeding as a black person is an uphill battle despite fair opportunities and equal protection, it is not the responsibility of other races to grant special attention, privileges, or rights in order to smooth the hillside. Unfair burdens are placed unfairly, a sad fact of life. If this means the majority of African Americans remain in poverty, so be it.

While I'm rolling on the controversy ball, I would say that there needs to be a degree of insensitivity to race. By that I mean: the minimizing of the emotional impact race has on individuals. Political correctness works against this goal, and gives emotional meaning to race which creates boundaries between what one can say and what one cannot. Porn is, surprisingly, a good analogy. The more you see, the less it offends (or excites ). Likewise, the more we try to refrain from racial talk, the more it becomes a hidden, taboo subject, the more power and meaning it has. There needs to be a safe way to express opinions about race without fear of backlash or angering the other side.

Edit:

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "de facto," but I think you would be surprised how much racial segregation is self-segregating. I lived at Oakes college my freshman and junior year. Oakes draws a large percentage of minorities (Diversity is kind of a college theme). The dorms are named after various diverse leader (Hong-lim, Biko, Harvey Milk, Kahlo). In some instances, the names give away their race. You would be surprised how many people choose to live in a dorm thats themed after their race. I had an interesting discussion with my Asian friends in Hong-Lim about it.

Part of the problem is that people over emphasize the emotional side of things.

Political Correctness is a strawman of monumental proportions. People have always been free to say what they think, this backlash comes in when these things are racist or just stupid which is more common than you might think.

If you want to change the emotional impact, chance the practical impact. PC isn't the problem.

The actual problems is the problem.

PC does become the problem when those in power are the ones advocating for it. You are right to say that for the most part we are still free to say whatever we want. It will be interesting to see if when a Democrat wins the POTUS (which I believe will be the case) whether this person will use it as an opportunity to derail those who are considered unpolitically correct. In other words, when the person who has all the marbles complains about the rules of the game, those who have less will be compelled to listen.

The actual problem is thinking that changing the way we speak about the issues will meaningfully solve them. To state the obvious, if you want to change the practical impact then focus on changing the practical impact not merely the window dressing.

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama? (If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)
I don’t believe so.

Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

Partially since the state and federal governments of this country have failed to deal with the educational inequities faced by not just blacks but poor Americans of all races and much of the middle class - leaving too many with poor prospects and little chance to "make it" in America.


What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?


Never happen. There will always be some level of tension between the races. What will improve it is to continue the progress made to lift blacks and the poor out of poverty by improved education so that they can participate in the freest and most prosperous economy in the world – ours.

Amen to that last bit but the fact is our champiions of political incorrectness are more often than not juvenile loudmouths who are just looking for an excuse to speak without thinking.

PC is only a problem because people think it is.

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama? (If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)

I think that it is there, but it is not very prevalent. I certainly know a couple of students who share some sort of sentiment that it would be good to have a half-black (Obama is half-black remember?) man POTUS for its own sake. But I think a majority of support is due to his character and the remaining support because of his stance on the issues.

I personally do not feel any sense of guilt to anyone. I am responsible for my own actions only, not for the actions of people who were alive before I was born. My ancestors did not even arrive in this country until the first half of the 20th Century. Anyone who claims that whites (as a race) must feel some sort of guilt or responsibility for the past are using a hypothetical. Obviously you cannot be literally responsible, so people are hypothetically responsible. I reject both. I hold other people to the standard that they are responsible for their own actions and I expect the same.

Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

A race is not responsible for anything. Individuals are responsible and in the past there are many instances and laws past by government that oppressed different groups. One such thing is the War on Drugs which in my mind has created more crime and contributed to the culture of violence and poverty among urban populations. Furthermore, many government programs intended to help minority groups have hindered their progress. The rise of the welfare state will create a perpetual dependence of the poor on the government and keep them from advancing.

What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?

Freedom. Racism is a collectivist ideology akin to marxist thought that places people into groups. You are white so you are this or think this way. You are black so you are this or think this way. Its absolutist garbage. Individualism recognizes the value of every individual and see that all rights are protected. People who push for diversity and multiculturalism are jsut as guilty as the racists in this regard. They perpetuate the idea that race matters. Those who support multiculturalism claim that we should celebrate our differences. But when someone points out those very differences, they are a bigot. You cannot have it both ways. The free market is the single best tool to defeat racism in society. Material self-interest trumps superficial racist attitudes. Nowhere is it required for you to like everyone, but you can still do business together.

As long as the language of the debate is white v black, then there will be conflict. Once we start looking at people as individuals and not part of a race, ethnicity, creed, etc... there will not be racial tensions.

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama? (If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)

I would say there is no "white guilt" whatsoever driving Barak's support. When you have white men in Georgia, that have voted thier entire adult life Republican, and identify themselves as "conservative" saying "I am going to vote Barak"- there is something going on a bit deeper than just "guilt".

The driving force behind Barak is the failure of the post Reagan conservative ideology, on a very large scale.

Basically- he is everything GW is not- smart, well spoken, willing to disagree, but will listen, and possibly even change his views depending on the reality "on the ground"- he doesn't seem to be a very divisive guy at all, and looks, at this point, to try to include everyone- not just his "base".

That is what is energizing the nation for this guy, and getting folks that don't agree with him to consider voting for him- I think they know he is no stuck on ideology idiot.

He exudes something GW has NEVER had- competence.

He is completely different than any candidate in my lifetime, period. He represents everything that is right with America, while GW represents everything that his wrong- it is just that easy.

REally does have nothing to do with race- other than he LOOKS the opposite of GW- he looks humble, not cocky, approachable on tough subjects- and he exudes "smart"- while GWs entire administration exudes "moron, idiot, dumb"- even when people in that admin or not- I mean, my gawd, Obama freakin' quotes Faulkner in his speeches- GW can't even read a dang script well.



Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

Historically, yes, and, I have to agree with Ted, (ouch) currently- we are not paying attention to the education of the poor in this country- no doubt- and blacks fall under that banner more than whites right now- but the poor overall should be the focus in educational needs.

I am also like leder- I have no guilt for anything I have no control over either, and agree with 99.999% of leder's post




What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?

Obama's win may be the single most healing watershed moment in US history, quite frankly- won't end it, but man, one BIG step in the right direction.

Not because folks will vote because he is black, but will vote for him EVEN IF he is black, simply because the prior guy was so stinkin' bad, and even that wasn't enough 20 years ago.

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama? (If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)

No but then I would be considered a foreigner. I make every effort to debate the ideas of the candidate. I'm interested on how they will follow through on such ideas.

Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

During the 50s with racial segregation? Maybe. Today? No. The one caveat is is that there must be an understanding of allowing the previously oppressed the opportunity for expression. Be it law, politics, or better integration into society. We need to let them have the bullhorn and take control of their lives.

What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?

The letting go of history.

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama? (If you are white, do you feel a sense of guilt regarding blacks in America?)

I generally feel guilty over something that I have done, not others. But if there is anything from history to feel guilty over, I'd say the treatment of Native Americans trumps slavery. Both of those things sucked, just one involved genocide and other dehumanizing. And both of those things have been around since human societies begun. They still suck.

Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

A case can be made for this. It may not be so much White people as corporate people, such as redlining by banks and the denial of credit. Of course that goes to everyone in the lower economic classes, so a case can be made that it has nothing to do with race. We just treat the poor in this country badly, and we must like to do that because we keep on making more of them. Some of us anyway. Not pointing fingers except at massive glass skyscrapers full of office stinks. Call it The System.

What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?

Global thermonuclear war? Global disasters from overwarming? A really big meteor impact? I do tend to think that enough human beings are still dealing with diversity in a species that it's hopeless for the species. Maybe the next dominant species will get it right. Then I think this might be a condition of living, something to get over in this lifetime or maybe even future lifetimes, but then I think about multiple dimensions and the meanings of time in physics, and my noodle overflows. Then the muttering starts.

In two words, no clue.

Its hard to make a practical impact when when there are barriers to discussing it.

People say loudmouth things all the time, theres no reason we must make them feel extra guilty for doing so. If political correctness stifles dialogue by making people sensitive to race , then its a problem.

1) In part, yes; I have heard a number of white colleagues say that is we elect Obama, maybe our racial problems will go away. That surely stems in part from guilt. Aside from its obvious naivete, I think such a viewpoint is so silly--If Obama is elected but then truly bombs: gets impeached and convicted for embezzling govt funds, has four affairs with "Kristen", et al., and sells nukes to al Qaeda, I feel certain a significant portion of the black community would STILL contend that Obama was set up by the white man. There still isn't enough trust.

2) White-dominated society over the last 300 years is, but over the last 50 we have spent trillions and done as much as any culture in history to right the ship.

This is the truth of the current situation, be it for a poor black, poor white, or poor immigrant today, and this would be literally a lock-step process (This assumes you are not in terrible health or have serious mental problems--these folks must be helped for the duration): Stay in school, whatever school you can attend; stay away from thugs and gangs; avail yourself of the endless streams of scholarships, grants and offers to go somewhere to college; get a job--any job; save and invest in CDs 25% of your take-home; and by the time you are 50 or so, you will be set, or at least your family members who come after you will be, to live a perfectly acceptable middle-class life.

Now--here's the rub: You may have to go to work at 13 to stay in school; you may be able to eat only one decent meal a day, or even less, and that may be govt-provided lunch at school; you may find you are in school or working 16 hours per day--no sports, no TV, no recreation; you will have to do your best to walk, talk, look and dress like those from whom you need assistance, like a job; you may have to give up much of the material goods people love so much in the US to get ahead; you will have to sacrifice in a way that may seem downright draconian and unfair. But, if you do this, you cannot fail unless someone shoots you or you die of a disease. I personally know a number of people, many immigrants who didn't even speak English when they arrived, who have followed this admittedly very hard path, but it works--almost without exception.

175 years ago, even this may not have been possible for most blacks; it would have been very difficult even 75 years ago; but today, there is no structural impediment to your success, although admittedly you will have it much tougher than someone born into a more secure environment.

That said, even in the Deep South--that would be hell for Rev Jeremiah Wright--blacks could do quite well, even in 1900: http://atlanta.citysearch.com/profile/3008...rndon_home.html

3) I am not sure it will end--certainly not completely. If blacks become the majority here in the US, they will treat whites at least as badly as we have treated them. Heck, blacks sold their own "brothers" to the European and Arab slave traders over tribal differences. I think the white US culture's ethics over the years were as high, as profound and as morally good as mankind will ever have, yet whites routinely fell far short of their own aspriational ethical code. Same would hold for any other tribe or creed. Why? Well, mankind is fallen--sinful and selfish. Men mistreat each other. Race has been a determining factor in mistreatment for as long as we have had recorded history. As Benjamin Disraeli said,

"No one must lightly dismiss the question of race; it is the key to world history and it is precisely for this reason that written history so often lacks clarity - it is written by people who do not understand the race question, and what belongs to it."

So, as I have said many times on this board, I would prefer to be in the majority and constantly force myself to overcome my sinful nature and try to be merciful rather than be in a position where I must constantly beg for mercy. This is not because I want to be in a position to abuse the minority, which I strive mightily to avoid, even if I offend in frank discussion, but rather because I understand human nature, and human nature does not change....

People are sensitive about a lot of things.

There is not a single important issue that doesn't include a commensurate level of sensitivity.

Race has been fundamental to the America experience, it has viscerally affected the lives of millions of Americans and shaped the foundation of our history.

So yeah, it can be sensitive.

Political correctness is just a nasty name somebody thought up to give themselves license for speaking ignorantly.

There are always misunderstandings and controversies that's just life. It happens anywhere there's a lot at stake, race is no different.


Does it also deny the very existence of groups?


A bit maudlin, even for a strawman.

I hope you don't mean that last bit, it's class false victimization. The trouble is that race matters in the United States, because of the way blacks were singled out they do face unique difficulties as a group.

It's nice to just act like it didn't happen, but it doesn't help anyone.

Turnea, race matters to everyone on earth, all the time. Just take a look around. We generally do much better here, even with our history of slavery, than any other major nation. Just look at what is happening with Muslim immigrants in France and Germany right now.

Race matters and trying to be even remotely evenhanded is a constant struggle for everyone....

Have to say I disagree again. I haven't seen people holding back about tax policy, or the Federal Reserves recent involvement in the BSC buyout. These are important (very important, particularly the federal reserves recent expansion of power), but not touchy subjects. Discussion occurs at will.

Political Correctness is as real as Barney the dinosaurs multi-racial cast. Just because people cry wolf doesn't mean ones not lurking around the corner.

No. Groups exist when individuals voluntarily assign themselves to a group through no coercion of others. But to use terms such as "whites" and "blacks" leads to numerous generalizations and assumptions that are foolish and incorrect. Not all blacks are the same just as not all whites are the same. To assert that an entire group of people is responsible for some sort of action - any action is intellectually dishonest because there is always dissent.



You are right, blacks as a group were victimized in the past. But that is because of the collectivist racist ideology which places people into groups in the first place. As long as they remain a group and not recognized for what they are - individuals - there will continue to be conflict. We have a society that is based on group structures. This is done by both extremes to promote their own interests and it is due to many factors including laziness and ignorance. To reiterate my earlier example, diversity advocates base their ideology on the same flawed assumptions as racists - that our identity is defined by social factors like race, ethnicity, religion, gender, etc... Individualists like myself throw this entire assumption out the window and place relevance on the individual above all other factors.


That may be how you interpret my position but it cannot be further from the truth. It is recognition of why there is group conflict in the first place.

If people's identities are associated with different groups, it highlights the differences between people. This is the root of group conflict. It is a social acknowledgment of differences. If people weren't different, then there would be no need to place them in different groups! This is why we should be recognizing the importance of each individual above that of the collective. I don't much like the woman, but Ayn Rand once said: The smallest minority on earth is that of the individual. If you do not respect individual rights then you cannot claim to be a protector of minorities. She is spot on in this regard.

BoF




I don't know why anyone would say racism doesn't exist, when its obvious it does, and always has existed. Where I stand to be specific, is that I acknowledge racism is a problem amongst every race in this nation, not just whites. Whites, Blacks, and Mexicans, all have racism issues and Ive personally met racist of nearly every race and gender myself, it is a problem. However I also notice how far America as a whole has come, all of us have progressed leaps and bounds and particuarly how our laws have been changed to reflect the constitution which is a good thing.

Yet despite this schools and churches still remain largely segregated to this day, ugliness and individual cases of discrimination still go on. However has it ever occurred to you that this is because racism and ugliness are a part of the human psyche itself? I'm not saying not to fight against it, I'm saying its like bad weather you can't expect there will ever be a day where we can eliminate bad weather, or even that we should try to eliminate it, we just have to be prepared to deal with it as it presents itself. Now why wouldn't you want to eliminate bad weather? because in nature creation is based largely on destruction, im sure if you know about climatology and geology you'd agree.

Now why wouldn't we want to try and eliminate Racism? Thats a little different but I'll try and explain it. For starters much like trying to eliminate bad weather, I don't think it can be done. Secondly if we were to introduce laws that made it Illegal to say certain words, or made it far to easy to lose a job based on something that could or could not have been a case of discrimination. Then we set this nation up to have everyone going around kissing other peoples rear ends even when they may have right to be ticked off about something. Also that would make it easier for certain people to take advantage of such political correctness laws, not that they don't do it already. If someone is ticked off at me and they want to call me a name, Id rather them do that than pretend I haven't upset them because they are afraid of getting in trouble, or getting labeled a racist by some outsider they don't even know.

Bottom line is that people need to express tension, and anger, through words for many other reasons than racism. If you try to eliminate racism by making it illegal or making everyone who is potentially racist lose there jobs, you would have a bunch of jobless or imprisoned people, who weren't even racist, I guarantee it. In fact that already happens.



I don't believe there are exceptions, I don't believe there has ever been a time where different races or religions have existed side by side without some degree of tension and racism. Every case is different of course, and many races get along better than others, but as a good rule of thumb the more differences two races have the more likely they are to have friction. I said there has always been racism because I believe it, I've read about it. You can go all the way back to the time of the Egyptians and read about it.



Of course it wasn't Sharptons decision to make, but he used mass media to pressure CBS to fire Imus by painting Imus as a racist. For the sake of ratings CBS let Imus go, its their fault as much as Sharpton's for that. I read into this one and Imus is an all around rude individual, he became as popular as he did because of shock value, and his crass, blunt nature. In a similar way Rush Limbaugh does. So this is what I believe, if he was a racist, that should have been up to his fans to decide. Personally I don't find that type of commentary interesting, but apparently many do and CBS didn't care until Sharpton made a political correctness case out of this. There are some things you shouldn't be able to say, however Imus got fired not because what he said was any different than what he has said 100's of times before, he got fired because Al Sharpton was able to convince many in the AP that Imus said what he did out of racism. Sharpton manipulated the system, and wasted weeks of his personal time on an endeavor that accomplished what exactly, Apart from his personal vendetta to label the white man? I don't know how much history you know of Al Sharpton, and I don't want to get into it. However if your interested I recommend doing some thorough research on him. An obvious pattern will emerge in his past.




Well you may believe in utopia on earth but I don't, nice thing to believe in, but its highly unrealistic given history. Another quote I want you to look at is a question Dr Robert Zubrin was answering a few years back on ScienceDaily.com . Robert Zubrin is a space scientist who has some of the latest and most respected ideas of how to get NASA to Mars, and how to settle, colonize, and even teraform the Red Planet.

Now the question he was answering was....

This idea of getting to Mars is very exiting, but shouldn't we solve all our problems here on Earth first before venturing out into the great unknown?

Now this answer is coming solely from memory, you may still be able to find this conversatin on ScienceDaily.com in audio form, but its 5 years old.
He was helping to promote his book "The Case For Mars" which was a really good book.

Anyway he answered it something like this........


((( In the late 1400's when Columbus was trying to find funds to sail out into the great unknown many people were skeptical, and he was turned down several times until in 1492 Ferdinand the 2nd, was willing to fund his mission, which was originally to find a shortcut to transport goods to Asia by sailing clear across the earth. As we all know the earth was much larger than Columbus had anticipated, and an entire undiscovered continent happened to be in their way. In taking a chance on discovery, the rewards in this case went far beyond what anyone could have anticipated at the time.

Now imagine if King Ferdinand the 2nd, and Queen Isabella had told Columbus that your ideas and quest sound noble and adventurous, and you science is sound, however shouldn't we solve all our problems here before we venture out into the great unknown? If this is how people would have thought in those days, nobody would have taken this trip, because as we all know Spain to this day has never solved all their problems. There is still hunger, there is still disease, as well as fighting. So it is in America, because wherever there are people there will always be problems, becuase thats one of the things we do very well is create problems. If we go to mars, people will do science, they will write poetry, tell jokes, ect... But they will also curse, argue, fight, and all the other crazy things people naturally do. ))))

Now presumably one of the other crazy things people do is have racial tensions. Is it a problem like the others Zubrin pointed out? Sure is, but thats what makes us human are these imperfections. That will never change, and there is no other way I can explain that than to be absolute.






Hey pretty good BOF, you know your movies. That Ambassador seemed rather ridged, and blunt in that movie didn't he? However he makes a point that rings very true. The day we don't have racism, or violence, or hatred, is the day Human Beings cease to be Human, because this has always been a part of the human experience. Perhaps the day we eliminate Racism is the day another organization like the Third Reich actually succeeds in eliminating variety in religion or culture. Or who knows maybe thats the day we even become as cold and calculating as the Aliens in the movie invasion. If you remember they had no war, no fighting, and no racism, but it was because they were all the same which makes sense. Also there was a strange kind of evil nature to that at the same time, because they had no emotions, so great movie. BTW I didn't give citation for that quote, because I memorized that and didn't feel like hunting it down.

The same is true of all groups. Groups are by their nature generalizations, they just happen to be very useful ones.

To be clear, this entire argument reminds of that John Lennon song Imagine

Wouldn't be nice if there where no whites, blacks, Americans, Iraqis, Catholics, Protestants, rich, poor, etc...

...after all these are just groups laden with generalization, assumptions, and error right?

Long live Nutopia!

The fact is we will no more destroy the idea of race than nationality. To deride those who identify as blacks while claiming to be a patrotic American is just inconsistent.

Groups matter.

You are making a common mistake. You are confusing social groups and political groups thinking that they are the same thing. A social group is what you describe: race, ethnicity, religion, etc... This has no political context and merely describes a social aspect of the individual. When you start to combine the two, applying political views to social groups, you are making assumptions and generalizations. For example: A given individual can be a white male. That would be his social group. But when you say that white males are all conservative, then you are combing the political with the social. The social groups that are a part of is not a determinate of the political groups we are a part of. Collectivists believe the opposite. A society that places emphasis on individualism and individual rights does not suffer from group conflict because groups are not as significant as the individual.

Well, I'm more "white" than I am black. (I guess white is European, whereas... black is.. black?? I'm definitely not European.

"White Guilt" is a term made up by people who aren't white, and later adopted by white people who figure that history already points at them for the misdeeds of their "ancestors". Michael Moore epitomized this in his book "Stupid White Men", and other countless examples followed. Instead of "White Guilt", why not use a more appropriate term, like "Black Regret"?

I sure as hell didn't have a family member beat on or rape a black. Except the kid in southside Chicago where I grew up, who threw a baseball at me. And after mopping the street with him, walked away with my black, greek and italian friends.

Seems to me, the question more fitting would be "Do you feel guilty enough about slavery to vote for a black guy, despite not ever having owned a slave, or forcing a black person to use a different restroom". Do you feel bad enough about knowing years ago that black people were beaten in tobacco fields, and black women were raped by the white slave owners to vote for one of them and prove that YOU are not racist? Are you open-minded to "give them their due"?

I don't have guilt. I have nothing to be guilty about. And neither should most people.

Yeah. And they're responsible for the Italians.
And the Greeks.
And the Mexicans.

Wow. It's easy to blame white people. They NEVER had it bad.

I recognize that not all things are fair. But I also recognize that how some people feel is taught to their kids.

Both colors, I mean. I guess when we stop making our kids fight wars of yesterday, we'll be able to deal with the issues of the day together. There will always be a couple of racists. Of any color or nationality who need the superiority complex. The best idea is to shove them back in the kitchen to get those dishes cleaned. We certainly don't want them wandering the restaurant of society being in any leadership positions, if you catch my drift.

When we stop accusing each other.

Blacks blamed whites for not hiring them. Okay, justified. Some didn't.
White blamed blacks for using Affirmative Action to take "the good jobs". Not really AS justified, but okay.
The point is that the cycle continues, each side counting the "wrongs" and "rights" of the other.

Take Katrina. A black mayor (Ray Nagin) completely EFF's-up. So he turns to the white guy (GW Bush) and blames Bush for the mess of his (Nagin's) city. I forgot that the President controlled the weather. If that wasn't bad enough, you've got Kayne West jumping in with "Bush doesn't care about black people". And because that message resonates with enough black people who blame white people "in general", the message was effective. Blame the color of skin. Blame the white guy in charge. I've seen absolutely NOTHING that suggests that Bush is racist - in fact, I've got more proof that he is NOT based on his diverse cabinet of ALL colors.

And then there are the conspiracy theories. "The only reason a black is in charge of anything is because a white put that person in place to blame when something goes wrong." And there we go again, people taking sides, defending the color of their skin.

As more accusations fly, more people jump in, and it becomes a big mess.

Bush wasn't racist. He didn't not respond because "it was black people". That's so ridiculous to even logically conclude, but sure enough, it happened. You know, white people were needing water and supplies in Katrina too. Why would a racist leave a white guy "trapped among black people without help". The whole suggestion is utter bullcrap.

Perhaps white people wouldn't be so on the defensive if they weren't constantly being reminded that their ancestors were less tolerant than they are. "The Man" isn't keeping people down. People are keeping themselves down with attitudes of "Hey, life isn't fair, so EFF those guys! I'm a victim".

Imagine if America had a "Whites" College Fund.
Or the United White Foundation.
Or the National Assn. for the Advancement of White People

You know what THAT would be: That's Racist! (Click)

1) 'm a pretty cynical person, and did think that the majority of his support among white voters was due to them wanting to believe that we were beyond race. I'm not sure if "white guilt" is the name for that. I've since amended that view and now believe that the majority of his support among white voters is because they actually think he's the best candidate for the job. Imagine that. I hate to invoke a Chris Rockism here, but he does actually speak really well.

2) I take the perspective that history is a continuous thing: what is happening now is strongly correlated to what happened in the past. That previous statement may sound terribly obvious, but I feel it's worth expressing because so many people are ahistorical and make it a point of applying no historical context to understand present issues. In that regard, white folks bear quite a bit of the responsibility for the present socioeconomic state of blacks in America because of the system that they created. I think that anyone who takes an honest look at the historical struggle of black folks in this country will have to agree with that to some extent. The difference between now and years past, is that black folks have a lot more agency; they're generally more equipped to improve their socioeconomic condition via more self-reliant means. Incidentally, I'm confounded by how much Trinity's self-reliance values are being vilified by conservatives whom criticize blacks for claiming victimization, the same ones that celebrated Bill Cosby's message to blacks.

3) The way I see it, two necessary conditions need to be met:
a. People on both sides have to realize that we all have biases. It's human nature to generalize and to have preconceptions about other groups. We won't get anywhere by denying that they (groups and biases) exist. The only way to dispel prejudices is by confronting them.
b. We need to practice more empathy.



I see your point, but I have to disagree here. Group identity and social organization are human nature. They are hardwired. We can no sooner abandon our deep seeded urge to identify into groups than we can train ourselves not to blink. Different areas of the world have different environments which yielded a stratification of cultures based on groups of people with similarly shared experiences within these differing environments. Differences between groups of people do exist. It is not realistic to expect people shut themselves off to this reality and avoid prescribing a social organizational structure to make some sense of it all.



This is what I mean by folks being too ahistorical....
Smart-arse answer #1: The nat'l assn. for the advancement of colored people started in 1909, back then they had several national associations for the advancement of white people, namely the supreme court, congress, and the executive branch.
Smart-arse answer #2: They do: naawp

The real answer to your (implied) question is that the NAACP is an organization purposed with advocacy against institutionalized racial oppression, and the history of this country dictates that white people have not needed an advocacy group to counter institutionalized racial oppression. Why do I have the feeling that you already knew that...

As for the rest of your implied questions
The united negro college fund started back in the 40's- when blacks were systematically excluded from higher ed.- as a way to encourage and provide a way for black students to go to college. I don't know what the United Black/African-American/Negro/Colored Foundation is.

I'll preemptively answer the BET question, too. It started back around 1980 when black entertainers were systematically excluded from MTV. Do you see a pattern here?

I had a feeling you'd say that.

I'm afraid the error in logic is yours.

Political groups are social groups, check out the very definition of politics as Aristotle famously wrote about it.

Link

Patriotism is a social concept. How is the social group of Americans acceptable where the social group of African-Americans isn't?

Patriotism isn't the same as political parties. Political parties are patriotic, but the inverse isn't always the same. Social groups are not the same as political parties. Political parties are usually made up of similar social groups, but not exclusively. Anyone here a Democrat and a Christian?

I think the question seriously underestimates the people who support Obama. How many people do you know who are willing to throw away their vote on something like "white guilt"? If anything, it's the other way around - why aren't you voting for Obama? It's pretty clear that lots of voters won't vote for him just because he's black. Just listen to the gomers that call into TV and radio shows - it's dissapointing.

Among Democratic candidates, what did you have? Obama, Clinton, a few competent but uninspiring familiar faces, and a few zeros. Obama has clearly been the most inspiring of the bunch. Clinton was the safer bet, but not nearly as likeable. Obama is competent, gracious (something we sorely need in politics these days), and a great speaker. In a polarized environment like 2008 America, the issues take a back seat to party affiliation, and within the party, the differences on issues aren't that big. So you go with who you like.



Not anymore. History and inertia are responsible. Starting out poor is not exactly life's pole position, but it's not insurmountable anymore.



I think a successful black president would go a long, long way toward making things better. Once the rednecks see that the country won't fall apart because a black man is at the wheel, and the blacks who feel like victims of their race see that a black man can indeed take the wheel, how can that not help? It's not the primary reason that I voted for Obama, but I hope it will be one of the benefits if he gets elected.

Beside the point. The term social is inclusive of politics. That is to say all politics is social and no political group can be disassociated from society.


Oh, it never was.

A.G. Gaston, Madam C.J. Walker and other black millionaires came to prominence at times when civil rights for blacks were unheard of. There have always been well-off black people in the US.

It's not about what possible, but what's probable when you're examining public policy.

When do white Americans become responsible for their own inertia?

That I think is a key question.

Is there something about public policy that is holding blacks back? And what do you mean by the inertia of white Americans? Racism? I'm just not sure where you were headed with your post.

No problem.

Most people probably have the same confusion which is why many voiced frustrations among blacks must seem unreasonable.

Recall that when law are based and policies implemented that often have far reaching effects long after their passage and often long after the policy is ostensibly abandoned.

Many of our public housing policies for instance where pointedly designed to segregate the urban poor from the rest of society, creating concentrated poverty which cripples a community. No property tax base for education and other programs, elevated crime, social stigma, the list goes on...

Our school remain segregated due to white flight and resistance to busing and other desegregation policies saddling urban districts with large numbers of poor students and insufficient resources.

These are some of the most damaging public policy holdovers that have been allowed to fester simply because the laws do not openly discriminate on the basis of race.

Our infrastructure of de jure bias has been dismantled, but de facto the poor among the black community still face a raw deal.

The inertia of white Americans is in the refusal to recall that these are racial issues and the further refusal to support changes in the policy.

It's the "finger-in-the-ears" stance towards to concerns of the black community that assumes that sometime in the seventies, the system suddenly became color-blind.

I hope that helps.

Let me get this straight: The govt spends billions of dollars building brand new housing projects at subsidized rates to keep the black man down? I suppose you would have suggested that the govt go to really nice neighborhoods, buy up the houses, and then lease them to the poor at subsidized rates?

This is what is so frustrating for whites. Our taxes go in bucketloads to programs we don't necessarily agree with, but then we get blamed for creating the programs in the first place, most of which were designed by black activists and the white liberal activitists in the first place to benefit the poor, which in urban areas seems to be disproportionately black.

At some point, the culture of the "victim" has to change.





I can speak personally about this.

I attended a school that was in one of the 1960's vintage busing/desegregation programs. I stayed one year after busing started. I was in fourth grade. I came home several times and told my parents I was bored, I wasn't learning much, and our teacher spent most of her time calling down the black kids, who were constantly cutting up in class and raising hell on the playground (I am sure they felt as out of water as we did having them there, but their behavior was what it was). My parents took me out of this school and put me in private school, where I was a full year behind academically. I had to bust it to catch up, but the envrt was totally different and conducive to learning. I mean, the private school didn't even permit locks on their lockers and had a honor system. Can you imagine that in a public school? The public school had better facilities, but the environment was much better at the private school.

While this is my ad hoc experience, I was not alone, and white parents (and increasingly many black parents, too, I might add) have followed suit for decades now. What would you suggest, Turnea? That my parents should have told me to tough it out? My future wasn't that big a deal? What would you have us do as parents now, just tell our kids to ignore the gangs, the theft, the violence, the lack of academic achievement? I know several people on our local school board, and 50 years later, they tell me the same problems exist, but there are better excuses for it now. And I am faced with paying full tax dollars for the public school kids and full tuition for my own at another school.

This is why I always come back to culture. It's not about skin color, it's about behavior. There just isn't any program that can possibly make this happen. If white kids buy into the victimhood mentality, they'll be at least as pitiful as any black kids. This probem must be solved at the one-on-one, family level, and....oh, well, I've been down this road before....

How is this a racial issue and not a socio-economic one? Wouldn't a Hispanic or even a White person in these same areas face the same dilemmas you mention, ie. no money for schools, etc.? I believe that pigeon-holing issues such as these into a race issue is one of the things preventing policy from changing, when they are really problems for all of us, not just blacks. It is also one of the things that creates the 'finger-in-the-ears' mentality, hearing complaints from only one group, and having that group claim that they are the only ones facing this problem, when that is simply not the case.

Is white guilt a driving force behind support of Barack Obama?

No idea, but I would imagine it is a factor for some.


Are white people responsible for the present socio-economic conditions of blacks in America? (Why or why not?)

No. No one is responsible for the decisions I make but me. If I decide to live in an ethnic ghetto, to raise my children in a ghetto, to continue to subscribe to a group mentality based on some vague, meaningless ancestral home land or ideology then I should not be surprised if the rest of society ignores my plight and moves ahead without me.


What will it take to put an end to racial tensions between blacks and whites?

Extermination by the look of things. It seems we are doomed to live with aggressive ethnic minorities until the day they reach majority and simply exterminate us. If you want to put this into purely racial terms, take a good long look at what has happened to Rhodesia and what is currently happening to South Africa.

Fair points all, and I understand I'm going to be making some subtle distinctions so try and stick with me.


A similar argument was made in defense of Jim Crow.

After all the government did build black schools and provide black public facilities. Why bother if they wanted to "keep the black man down?"

It's not all or nothing. There are gradations of support and black tend to get the short end of the stick.

The government gave support with one hand but traps millions on the wrong side of the tracks with the other to keep them out of sight and out of mind.

Many governments are catching on to voucher programs, which certainly have some hiccups but I hope the glitches can be corrected.

The goal is mixed-income housing, dispersing poverty rather than concentrating in and multiplying its effects.


Public housing, like public schooling. was not originally designed for blacks of course. It was originally support for the white middle class during the depression era.


Hardly,

The behavior is typically the same. When adjusted for socio-economic differences the differences in behavior are shown to have no cultural basis.

The problem is our broken policies the cultural gap between black and white America is minuscule.