Skip to main content

View Diary: Is reverse racism legit? Is it racism against racist? Or against White People? (142 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  indeed (0+ / 0-)

    which is why black folks will always have white folks to blame for their problems.

    one is not given power, one takes power.

    •  Really, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mariken

      so it's a fact that black folks blame white people for their problems?

      Or is this snark? I can't tell.

      "A nation that continues to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." *Martin Luther King, Jr.*

      by TrahmalG on Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 08:18:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  from the AP link below (0+ / 0-)

        Joe Hicks was a black nationalist and proudly demonized whites back then. Now a conservative Republican and vice president of Community Advocates Inc. in Los Angeles, which works to improve race relations, Hicks says today that black racism is not widespread: "The average black person doesn't dislike white people."

        But he does believe it has become more prevalent than white racism. "Bigotry among white Americans has been driven to the margins of society. White people fear being called a racist more than anything else. But as white people have slowly moved away from viewing themselves in a racialized way, black people have maintained their sense of racial consciousness," which sometimes leads to bias, he said.

        I have no idea who this guy is, but from my personal experience I would say prejudice is more acceptable in the black community. you wanted a conversation, right?

        •  ...heh... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          snackdoodle, Mariken, Oh Mary Oh

          Bigotry among white Americans has been driven to the margins of society.

          As a white person mingling among white folks - that has not been my anecdotal experience.

          "The revolution's just an ethical haircut away..." Billy Bragg

          by grannyhelen on Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 08:29:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  it can depend on the social class (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            snackdoodle

            as a white person, you may rarely be privileged to hear the conversations about whites that blacks have.
            we've got hundreds of years of ingrained antagonistical cultural differences. If one can't speak openly, as Shirley Sherrod did, about overcoming prejudices, there's not a lot of hope.

            I highly recommend the movie about Chess Records, "Cadillac Records", as an entertaining yet insightful look at some of the issues surrounding the interactions between races.

          •  That's part of the problem (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            grannyhelen, whoknu, TrahmalG

            It's hard to address racism when there is such a concerted effort to deny that racism even exists.

            The wolfpack eats venison. The lone wolf eats mice.

            by A Citizen on Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 10:58:00 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Ya (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kyril, Mariken

          I can agree with that.

          Although you don't hear what people talk about in private, I can say Black people openly talk about racist and as racist too.

          I believe some Black people think it's ok to be racist towards white people because of our history together.

          But I don't believe Blacks are more racist or prejudice against Whites in our times.

          Have you seen the tea party lately?

          "A nation that continues to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." *Martin Luther King, Jr.*

          by TrahmalG on Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 09:07:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  again, I think social class plays a large role (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TrahmalG

            for the "talented tenth" of both races, prejudoces aren't as large of a factor.

            As a result of past discrimination and the means of affirmative action to correct it,  economic competition in the workplace, housing and education has created a lot of racial tension by preferencing one over the other, for the middle eighty percent.

            Affirmative action policies, while appearing to right a wrong, had become a form of institutionalized racism in and of themselves. MInority set asides for government contracting, preferential hiring and promotion practices, college admissions, etc. have done little to improve the lot of the majority of the black community. The policies have improved the opportunities for that top tenth, but meanwhile the same policies have deleteriously affected the middle 80% of white Americans on occasion. Actually, to be more accurate, the policies have affected those whites in the 20-80th percentile.

            Now have the discrimination of the past and the affirmative action policies of today had equal effect on their respective aggrieved constituencies? I would say absolutely not, but due to the stagnation of wages experienced since the 1970's caused by offshoring, automation, women entering the work force, immigration, aging industries, etc; race is an easy scapegoat for tea party leaders to lead the ignorant masses against.

            What hasn't occurred is a credible organization from the left that organizes in the interests of working classes regardless of race, since the systematic destruction of the unions from within and without. The Democratic party shifted allegiance in in the interests of campaign contributions in the 80's. The "left" completely left the white working class to the manipulations of the tea party, in favor of identity politics. Where the hell is Rainbow Push when you need them? Why have they allowed the media to portray them as working solely in the interests of blacks (or solely in the interests of Rev. Jackson)? What is NOW doing for undocumented Hispanic cleaning women? Does GLAAD care about HIV infected drug users and their effects on the greater society?

            Shirley Sherrod was perfectly correct in pointing out that the biggest struggle is not between the races, but between those that have and those who do not.

        •  Showing one black person (0+ / 0-)

          making idiotic statements is not evidence that black people, plural, blame white people for their problems.

          The implication of such that this one person is representative of all black people is, in and of itself, racist.

          •  oh, fuck that (0+ / 0-)

            being called a racist isn't going to shut me up..
            black people are prejudiced as well. hell everybody is prejudiced based on the cultural upbringing.

            your implication of my racism is prejudiced for that matter. you don't fucking know me

            •  No one said (0+ / 0-)

              you had to shut up; this is America and you have every right to be as ignorant in public as you choose to be.

              BTW, I didn't say you were racist; I said the argument you put forth is implicitly racist because it presumes this one person is speaking for all black people everywhere.

              You don't assume all white people are cannibals just because Jeffrey Dahmer was one, do you? Of course you don't... And it would help if you actually tried to refute an argument I made.. rather than trying to put words in my mouth to build a strawman you have a chance to defeat.

              I never said black people weren't prejudiced; I never even implied such...since that is not what  we are discussing in the first place...

              At issue is Joe Hicks and your thinking that because he blames white people for his problems all black people must do the same.

              •  excuse me? (0+ / 0-)

                you're ruining my coffee  :)

                The implication of such that this one person is representative of all black people is, in and of itself, racist.

                what implication where and by whom?

                •  Re-read your posts in this thread... (0+ / 0-)
                  •   would it have been more accurate (0+ / 0-)

                    to say "some black peoples"?

                    •  It would have been more accurate (0+ / 0-)

                      if you acknowledged that Joe Hicks' opinion is representative of Joe Hicks and Joe Hicks only rather than the amorphous and undefined entity that is "black people".

                      As a black person, he does not speak for me... nor does anyone else.

                      What a single black person does or does not do is not indicative of what black people en masse do or do not.

                      "Some" is still inaccurate because it inclines towards a consensus thought process. Each black person who does or does not does so for his own reasons relative to his own set of circumstances rather than as a response to a collective stereotype or as part of a monolith.

    •  Ew, please don't presume to speak for me. I don't (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kyril

      blame anyone for shet.

      The Diaries of Blackwaterdog,Tia Rachel and Tim Wise are why I'm still here.

      by WeBetterWinThisTime on Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 08:21:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site