Give me a break for the absurdity of making it all about race

while this is true, and these vandals don't represent most of our fellow citizens, it seems that white people get this benefit of the doubt more often than people of color.  Black people, immigrants, or Muslims who commit bad acts are often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.  When a white person commits a similar act, they are seen as outliers.

RealityForAll said:

I am truly sorry and appalled that LJ's house was vandalized.  And, no doubt some miscreant(s) thought this was the way to make their feelings known.  However, this/these miscreant(s) do not represent the rest of America.  They are just that miscreant cowards who have nothing substantive to say and who threatened LJ and his family with this act (showing up at someone's house for vandalism is a threat IMHO).  The miscreant(s) should be condemned in the strongest terms.  And, hopefully this/these miscreants will be caught and brought to justice.

GL2 said:

I'm guessing the LeBron vandalism and the noose at the museum weren't about race either.

Most poignant thing James said was something about it not mattering how rich, celebrated, etc. you are, you're still a target.

Reminds me of the line (usually attributed to Malcolm X), what does a white man call a black man with a PhD? A ni$$er.

What you are describing is the concept of "collective guilt."   You then state "Black people, immigrants, or Muslims who commit bad acts are often seen as stand-ins for their whole group."  Equally, white people who commit bad acts are also often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.   See for example:  http://www.theblaze.com/news/2...

http://iotwreport.com/professo...

I am opposed to collective guilt being applied to POC, Whites, Asians, Middle-Easterners and any and all other ethnicities, races, genders, religions or non-religionists.  IMHO, identity politics seems to focus on slights, hurts and oppression of various groups.  With such slights, hurts and oppression usually being the responsibility of other ethnicities, races, genders, religions or non-religionists.  US crime figures (set forth by the FBI) demonstrate that some ethnicities here in the US are disproportionately involved in certain crimes (such as murder).  See murder statistics by race:  https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-t...

IMHO, each individual of each ethnicity should be treated as an individual and not judged based statistics regarding their ethnicity, race, gender, or religious affiliation (or lack thereof).  

ml1 said:

while this is true, and these vandals don't represent most of our fellow citizens, it seems that white people get this benefit of the doubt more often than people of color.  Black people, immigrants, or Muslims who commit bad acts are often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.  When a white person commits a similar act, they are seen as outliers.

RealityForAll said:

I am truly sorry and appalled that LJ's house was vandalized.  And, no doubt some miscreant(s) thought this was the way to make their feelings known.  However, this/these miscreant(s) do not represent the rest of America.  They are just that miscreant cowards who have nothing substantive to say and who threatened LJ and his family with this act (showing up at someone's house for vandalism is a threat IMHO).  The miscreant(s) should be condemned in the strongest terms.  And, hopefully this/these miscreants will be caught and brought to justice.

GL2 said:

I'm guessing the LeBron vandalism and the noose at the museum weren't about race either.

Most poignant thing James said was something about it not mattering how rich, celebrated, etc. you are, you're still a target.

Reminds me of the line (usually attributed to Malcolm X), what does a white man call a black man with a PhD? A ni$$er.

Most people know only members of their own race, ethnicity or national group. They know there are all sorts of people with their group, good and bad, smart and stupid, rich and poor, etc. They then encounter or hear about a member of a group with which they are unfamiliar and make an assumption that said person is representative of that group.

If I knew nothing about Dominicans and didn't even know who or what they were and was then introduced to a Dominican professional baseball player I would think that Dominicans are good baseball players.

Fair enough.  However, I think people who live in this very diverse area probably have more exposure to different races, ethnicities or national groups than people in other parts of the US.

LOST said:

Most people know only members of their own race, ethnicity or national group. They know there are all sorts of people with their group, good and bad, smart and stupid, rich and poor, etc. They then encounter or hear about a member of a group with which they are unfamiliar and make an assumption that said person is representative of that group.

If I knew nothing about Dominicans and didn't even know who or what they were and was then introduced to a Dominican professional baseball player I would think that Dominicans are good baseball players.

there is no way that it's equal, your anecdotes notwithstanding.

RealityForAll said:

Equally, white people who commit bad acts are also often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.   

The principle is absolutely equal.

ml1 said:

there is no way that it's equal, your anecdotes notwithstanding.

RealityForAll said:

Equally, white people who commit bad acts are also often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.   

that's an absurd premise

RealityForAll said:

The principle is absolutely equal.

ml1 said:

there is no way that it's equal, your anecdotes notwithstanding.

RealityForAll said:

Equally, white people who commit bad acts are also often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.   

The Buzzfeed article quoted by The Blaze seems pretty much on the money. You could, in fact, go even further as John Oliver once did on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert and claim that behind nearly every global problem there's an Edwardian British toff guzzling gin and tonic and drawing arbitrary lines on a map. 

RealityForAll said:

What you are describing is the concept of "collective guilt."   You then state "Black people, immigrants, or Muslims who commit bad acts are often seen as stand-ins for their whole group."  Equally, white people who commit bad acts are also often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.   See for example:  http://www.theblaze.com/news/2...

RealityForAll said:

The principle is absolutely equal.

ml1 said:

there is no way that it's equal, your anecdotes notwithstanding.

RealityForAll said:

Equally, white people who commit bad acts are also often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.   

Wow. What a load of delusional crap that is. 

This country has never blamed ALL white men or women for the actions of a few. If that was the case the 'War on Drugs' would have focused on white people and not poor Black people. Stop and Frisk would happen in white neighborhoods and incarcerate white urban youth.

One of the main advantages of creating and maintaining a racist society with white privilege as a by product is the right to be seen as an individual and not as a member of a maligned and/or marginalized group.

The act of group-identifying is a basic tenet of subjugation and oppression and sometimes genocide used all over the world by those in power.

Who is oppressing you?

I like your response 100X better than mine.

flimbro said:

RealityForAll said:

The principle is absolutely equal.

ml1 said:

there is no way that it's equal, your anecdotes notwithstanding.

RealityForAll said:

Equally, white people who commit bad acts are also often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.   

Wow. What a load of delusional crap that is. 

I think you misunderstand me.  The principle to which I refer (and to which I implicitly referred in my earlier posting) is that all should be judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin.  My apologies if I was not clear enough in explaining myself.

ml1 said:

that's an absurd premise

RealityForAll said:

The principle is absolutely equal.

ml1 said:

there is no way that it's equal, your anecdotes notwithstanding.

RealityForAll said:

Equally, white people who commit bad acts are also often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.   

LJ does make an important point about racism: it ain't about achievement, status, wealth. It's about the lingering hate in a significant portion of the populace. And it rears its ugly head most often when economic times are tough for that demographic. 

But racism is very good for people like DJT, who plays to that hatred.

You went from "are" and "is" to "should be."

RealityForAll said:

I think you misunderstand me.  The principle to which I refer (and to which I implicitly referred in my earlier posting) is that all should be judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin.  My apologies if I was not clear enough in explaining myself.

ml1 said:

that's an absurd premise

RealityForAll said:

The principle is absolutely equal.

ml1 said:

there is no way that it's equal, your anecdotes notwithstanding.

RealityForAll said:

Equally, white people who commit bad acts are also often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.

I don't find "guilt" to be a very helpful or useful concept. I do, however, find the idea of "responsibility" to be so.

As an American, I have a responsibility toward my fellow citizens, and toward the shared project of our nation. Given the ways white supremacy has, and continues, to harm all of us, individually and collectively, I do feel a responsibility to do what I can to combat it. I would hope all Americans feel likewise.

I'd also further argue that responsibility increases along with power. As an American who gets the benefit of qualifying as "white," I have more social power than, say, someone a few miles away in Newark who doesn't get slotted into the "white" category, and hence more responsibility to do something with that added power.

To the extent that guilt can be a motivator driving me or anyone else to step up and act upon that responsibility, I suppose its useful, but if it's just going to be a shield to duck the need to take action (or, more commonly, a burden paralyzing people from feeling they're able to act), then it's outright harmful.

Thanks for the feedback,  I will try to do better next time.

DaveSchmidt said:

You went from "are" and "is" to "should be."

RealityForAll said:

I think you misunderstand me.  The principle to which I refer (and to which I implicitly referred in my earlier posting) is that all should be judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin.  My apologies if I was not clear enough in explaining myself.

ml1 said:

that's an absurd premise

RealityForAll said:

The principle is absolutely equal.

ml1 said:

there is no way that it's equal, your anecdotes notwithstanding.

RealityForAll said:

Equally, white people who commit bad acts are also often seen as stand-ins for their whole group.

RealityForAll said:

Thanks for the feedback,  I will try to do better next time.

Sorry if I implied it was about doing better. I was merely noting a difference between expressing how things should be and how they are. 

The difference you pointed out also fundamentally changed the argument 

DaveSchmidt said:

RealityForAll said:

Thanks for the feedback,  I will try to do better next time.

Sorry if I implied it was about doing better. I was merely noting a difference between expressing how things should be and how they are.