The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Martin Luther King Day
Shinto
__BANNED USERS regular
__BANNED USERS regular
Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech.
Watch it or listen to it. It's only seveneen minutes long.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbUtL_0vAJk
Where have we fallen short, what is left to be done and what can we do?
Watch it or listen to it. It's only seveneen minutes long.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbUtL_0vAJk
Where have we fallen short, what is left to be done and what can we do?
Shinto on
0
Posts
Increasing teacher wages and offering positive incentives for the school to do well instead of deterrents would strike me as a good place to start.
On the black screen
The problem is that the struggle for Black equality is taught as history, and the implication there is that the struggle is over.
This is most harmful in that white people, who are disconnected from these events, view them as being resolved and so are less able to understand the importance of AA laws.
Just because you did not directly enslave someone in the plantation sense does not mean that you've had a head start as a result of that person's ancestor lacking education, money, and being continuously discriminated against.
Another problem is that the media, even if they run a story about someone like MLK III, they are reluctant to broadcast any message that runs counter to their corporate ownership.
Black youths are far more likely to see black people represented as materialistic rappers or drug dealers on TV than doctors or lawyers. The unhealthy culture is in a large way generated by upper class whites. The only message on the radio is to drink more Patrone, and a track advising youths of their rights when dealing with police will never be aired over the latest braindead club jam.
JFK said, "If we make peaceful revolution impossible, we make violent revolution inevitable."
And honestly, I can't think of a TV show where blacks are portrayed as rappers/thugs/criminals, but not also portrayed as the leaders/docters/laywers/police/good guys, etc.
I've said it a gazillion times, but indie hip-hop isn't likely to become popular like club anthems are, just like indie rock will never be as popular as mainstream stuff. It has nothing to do with "the man", it has to do with the fact that the majority of people who listen to new music (re: teenagers) tend to have bad taste. I don't think it has anything to do with "the man".
Anyway, we have a long way to go, but we've come a VERY long way in the last couple of decades. The biggest movie star on the planet is a black man that -everyone- identifies with (Will Smith), and we have a black presidential candidate who has a large, multi-racial, support base, to name a couple.
XBL: QuazarX
I see it as the exact opposite: the struggle for equality is taught to be part of the black character, with their telos as indefinite struggle rather than possibility, which makes deadlock more likely than resolution.
I agree. Also you taught me a new word today (I thought "telos" was a typing error until I looked it up because I had no idea what you could have meant).
I don't give a crap if a persons asshole ancestors gave them a leg up. People should not be punished for their ancestors action. I have zero problem with giving a helping hand to those in need. I do have a problem with AA programs that allow less or equally qualified applicants entry based on race.
Scholarship programs for impoverished applicants? I'm all for that as long as it's not given out based on race. Equal funding for all schools regardless of location? Fuckin A that's what we should have.
I would also like to know the number of black record labels putting out shitty messages compared to white ownership before saying it's the white man's fault that the leading rap artists put out a bad message.
So the way you see it, black peope are not discriminated agianst any more, they just like to be angry and constantly look for racism that isn't there. Is that right?
Way to put words into somebody's mouth.:roll:
I just had this conversation with my grandpa about Jews (he is Jewish). Almost every time I see him he is bitching about how the Jews are being oppressed somewhere somehow. I certainly think that racism, anti-semitism and egregious religious intolerance should be highlighted and dealt with. But a group should not define itself in terms of victimhood.
MLK focused much more on the hope and reality of progress than the bitterness of victimhood.
I really doubt this is the case anymore. You'll have a hard time finding a show that is based outside a specific family that doesn't have prominent respectable black people in it. If there isn't a black person there will usually be other minorities.
Shit out of the shows I watch:
The Wire
Scrubs
Shield
Psych
Dexter
the Unit
Pushing Daises
House
All have black people in positions of power or respectability. They are treated the same as whites with regards to witch ones are assholes and corrupt and which are ones to look up to as role models. The two that deal directly with poverty in the inner city, The Shield and Wire, are both very sympathetic looks at the plight of inner city minorities.
Can we blame it on the man when BET decides to play video's with negative messages and ban others with positive images because the are "too intelligent".
I think what he was trying to say was that because the idea of perpetual struggle for equality is so ingrained in the culture of black America, the race issue is more likely to continue to be antagonistic rather than a cooperative effort for real substantive equality.
But I think I said it less clearly than he did.
While the last line you stated about MLK sums up his philosophy and outlook extremely well (read Why We Can't Wait and you'll see this philosophy in nearly every passage), it's hard for many marginalized groups not to feel victimized.
While marginalization is not directly traced to a race struggle, it is more of a socio-economic struggle. Essentially, you are born into a poor family, you are given a sub-standard education, and you don't have much opportunity for upward-mobility. Living under those kinds of conditions, you can't help but find yourself becoming bitter at just about anything.
Since a majority of many non-European racial groups are part of the "underclass", this constant struggle becomes a reality for many of them.
I'm not as pessimistic as McGruder. After speaking to my father, I've come to the conclusion that King would never give up, he would just pass into obscurity if necessary while humbly working behind the scenes for good causes.
Regardless, the episode makes some scathing indictments of black culture and the politics of hatred that's gotten us embroiled in wars under false pretenses.
I believe that King's movement was successful. We're almost to the point where we don't have to feel obligated to point out race when talking about people ("A guy I know," vs. "A black guy I know"), for example. But we're not there yet.
A black guy joined the staff of the building management crew in the building where I work, and the execs immediately and hamhandedly had everyone watch a racial tolerance video. Like... they didn't think it was important to teach employees to tolerate black folks before one joined their crew. There had been no problems, they just took the executive mentality of conquering racial prejudice as it became a potential lawsuit on the horizon... as opposed to, say, just showing all employees the video as they're hired from the get-go, because, as a business, they might come into contact with various ethnicities quite often (interesting side note, they never had any concern over the significant asian staff being discriminated against).
I think we're getting there. Few people will cop to overt racism these days, and we're starting to realize that there's racism inherent in a lot of our attitudes (do I avoid eye contact with the black guys at the bus stop because I'm afraid they'll jack me, or am I just that generally and equal-opportunity antisocial?). As Obama said, though, as long as there are people that don't look like me or talk like me or come from where I come from, it's going to be hard to destroy prejudice.
However, all in all, I say the dream lives.
And I think that's why MLK's message resonated with people of good conscience, regardless of race. He acknowledged that there was a struggle, but that you didn't have to resent your oppressors to overcome it.
I don't think that's what he was saying. I think he was saying that African Americans are taught that true equality will never be achieved, and that they must constantly struggle for an unobtainable goal, which leads to a lack of motivation in fighting for equality (why fight for what you can never achieve?).
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Edit:
For the love of shit...NO ONE IS SAYING THAT!* Jesus, read the fucking posts actually say, rather than reading what you want them to say.
*Except Cabezone
Steam: pazython
While there are some people who say that, I don't think that everyone is saying that. I'm certainly not meaning to.
Personally, I've had a bit of an epiphany about my racial attitude (I'm a white guy). But it took someone else to challenge me, before I realized that there was something wrong. There are a lot of people in society today that are insular enough to where they don't come in contact with hardly anyone of a different race. Furthermore, they wouldn't even dare to talk about race said person.
I'm rambling a bit, but yeah man, I'm in agreement with you. I think it's bullshit that people would even try to deny that there aren't any marginalized groups of people in the US today. Let alone tell them to just "get over it".
Is that what he was saying? I guess we'll have to wait for him to find out.
I could see this being the case though, esspecially if every time you did stand up and struggle, people would say your just playing the victim role.
And that's exactly what people said in 1963. There was this whole bullshit counter-movement that coined the phrase "Order before justice". Even if the white elephant is staring you in the face, there will still be people who deny its existence.
I think as a society that we need to learn the more subtle racism that goes on today. There is and institutionalized racism going on. There should to be some kind of way to level the playing field for historically disadvantaged minorities. Whether or not that's AA is debatable. I honestly don't see it as "punishing you for your ancestors deeds," but helping someone for their ancestor's disadvantages. But I can see how rewarding one can be seen as an indirect punishment of another.
If that terrible movie Crash showed us anything, it's that everyone has the capacity for racism, and we need to all stop saying, "I'm not racist! So I am spot free and don't need to work on any of my character flaws." I don't care if you voted for John Kerry and Barack Obama, and if you have a lot of Mexican friends. Everyone has the capacity for racism, even of you meant nothing maliciously. So instead of denying it when someone accuses us of it, I would rather we all take a minute to consider it and see how, as an individual, we might improve.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22758159/
Or are you talking about institutional, wide-ranging social struggles, with a distinct class of victims and a distinct class of oppressors? Because that is a worldview that I have a big problem with.
I'm re-reading James Baldwin's "Notes of a Native Son" essays again (read it years ago in college) and I think it's interesting that he uses "we" to refer not to blacks but to Americans in general. This was written in the 1940s and 50s, when blacks and whites were much more segregated than they are today, and yet a black author has no problem identifying himself as a member of the greater American culture—rather than the victim of that culture, and thus distinct from it.
I have absolutely no problem with struggling against inequality and racism. But I do have a problem with the way such struggles are often framed—as one hegemonic culture oppressing or marginalizing a less powerful, minority culture. It's 2008. The contributions African Americans have made to American and Western culture in the past 400 years—hell, rock and roll alone—are so great that there is no reason they cannot own this culture alongside every white suburbanite. Again, this is why I think King was so successful and inspiring: he cast himself and his movement not as an oppressed sub-culture (a la Malcolm X) but rather as part and parcel of Western Enlightened culture which America is ostensibly built on.
In other words, for King, he didn't cast himself as a black struggling against hegemonic white culture; he cast himself as an American member of Western culture struggling to eliminate unenlightened vestiges of a barbaric age.
Liberals are actually the people who have hurt race relations, mostly through the doctrine of political correctness. Liberal guilt is pretty real, and it is almost Freudian how they have come to deal with it - by forgetting about it. It's why racial humor is almost always not acceptable, because jokes almost always cut to the core of neurotic truths.
I agree that the playing field should be level but it's starts from the bottom. I have a problem with hiring or college acceptance with race as any kind of deciding factor. I also have a major problem with the way schools are funded. All public schools should get equal funding per pupil. The fact that the areas with more wealth have better public schools is shameful. If wealthy people want their kids to go to better schools, they can form private ones but all public schools should be equal. The ones that have been traditionally underfunded, should get some extra cash to try and get them caught up with the well funded public schools. That's where the problem starts.
Maybe we need to define our terms.
I would agree that blacks, as a demographic, have ended up in the povery cycle much more often than whites—directly because of slavery and institutionalized racism post-slavery—and that their demographic is therefore denied many of the same opportunities to improve themselves that other demographics have.
I would agree that many people (including some blacks) tend to have a negative reaction against so-called hip-hop culture, which is widely associated with dark skin color, perhaps more widely than is fair.
I agree that some people continue to view blacks as inferior based on nothing more than skin color. But I disagree that such people wield much, if any, political power today. If anything such people are demonized much more than blacks in popular culture.
Now, to me, the term "institutionalized racism" means that you are explicitly and directly denied equal rights because of your skin color. (You cannot use this restroom, you cannot attend this university, etc.) One can make the argument that the racism-born poverty cycle denies blacks equal rights, which is true. But racism is the indirect cause of this, not the direct cause.
That said, I actually have no idea what my position is on AA.
Eh. The racism you are talking about here is a subset of stereotyping. And, as I said in some other thread, I think it's very important to separate stereotyping based on race from stereotyping based on culture—because one is much more acceptable than the toher.
For example, the Chavs in England.
As I understand (I'm not from England), Chavs form a subculture which identifies itself by clothing and anti-social "gangsta attitude." As a group, Chavs are often subject to stereotyping and mockery. Even someone who dresses like a Chav but who doesn't espouse the anti-social views associated with the subculture may be mocked and stereotyped.
We can debate on the extent to which such stereotyping and mockery is justified, but I think we can all agree that it is fundamentally different from stereotyping someone based on nothing more than ancestry. In other words, calling someone a "stupid fucking chav!" is fundamentally different—and, I would argue, much more acceptable—than calling someone a "stupid fucking n-word."
Cultural association is a choice that individuals make, and is therefore more open to judgment and derision. And I think that a lot of the so-called "racism" brimming underneath the surface in modern society is actually this kind of cultural stereotyping. The problem is that race and culture often go hand in hand, so the two kinds of stereotyping often get muddled together.
Edit: To put it another way, we need to distinguish between something that results in effects that resemble institutionalized racism, and actual institutionalized racism.
I could be wrong, though. Do you have a link to what you're talking about with more info?
My roommate took a class on urban discrimination, so only all the info I have is from books. However, it was set up to appear to help blacks (ie, people can't be refused housing because of race.) It even set up programs which gave aid to people who are qualify (mostly working blacks who have held a job for a year or so.) However, there were certain loop holes which allowed for the wealthy to extort land partitioning and evict certain tenants or buy up large amounts of land. Columbia and Fordham did this, I believe, and also abused title iv housing to turn them into dorms.
edit* Also, in many cases, it is impossible to work and be on welfare. Thus, the working people do not get the welfare they need to move up in the world, and the people on welfare cannot start working, as they might not be able to pay rent while to start up their jobs.
And you know, the CIA inventing crack and injecting AIDs into KFC chicken strips.
Institutionalized racism, as I have understand and heard it bandied about, is usually something to describe the cycle of effects whose confluence keep people down -- which you have acknowledged. So really, I'm just saying that your definition is narrow and seems without much application, and this is how I've heard it used instead.
I think calling the situation today "institutionalized racism" draws attention away from just how far socialized programs and better education would solve the problem. IOW, to help blacks as a demographic today, we need weapons to fight the poverty cycle more than we need weapons to fight racism.
But if you think about the actual problems of race relations in this country, it's almost hysterically ridiculous to blame them on either.
You're right on the money. I've met bigots of all creeds, races and cultures. Hate knows no single form.
Discrimination is still institutionalized in this country, which I see as the main problem. You can work against hateful words and hateful people, but it is much more productive to fight against institutionalized injustice. I don't just mean racism. I mean any official system that judges people on anything but their personal character, actions and objective potential.
"George Bush doesn't care about black people." Of course that's not true. But it is true the poor in this country usually don't get the help they need.
"Beyond Vietnam"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b80Bsw0UG-U