Discrimination -- the reality

[Politesse]

I am asking you about what you believe about institutional discrimination against white people in America.

There is no evidence of institutional discrimination against white people in America.

That's ridiculous.
Affirmative Action has been a big thing for over 50 years.

... even if what is on the table is outreach and empowerment of under-privileged groups rather than direct discrimination against those who are in power, I do not agree with that sentiment as you should well realize by my postings in this thread alone.

Why do you describe those forms of affirmative action that are not outreach and empowerment of under-privileged groups, but are direct discrimination against white people, as "direct discrimination against those who are in power"? Do you have any evidence that when an unemployed person applies for a job or a high-school student who applies for a slot in a college's freshman class, if he or she is white then that means he or she is in power?

Your post sets up a dichotomy in which either a white person is "in power" in critical economic situations, or they are victims of "direct discrimination". There is no such dichotomy, because people are not, in the first place, owed special privileges just because they identify as white.

Now, if you are asking whether a person is more or less likely to get a job, get a good job requiring a degree or get accepted to a school if they are perceived as White as opposed to Black, the data on that point are more than clear.

I am fascinated by your language here.

...people are not, in the first place, owed special privileges just because they identify as white.

And later:

if they are perceived as White as opposed to Black,

What does it mean to 'identify' as white? Is it necessary to 'identify' as white to be white? Is it necessary to 'identify' as white to be 'perceived' as white? Can I meaningfully opt out of being white, or being perceived as white, or 'identifying' as white?

I am also curious about the capital letter change, from 'white' to 'White'. I do not know if it is related.

We all know, or I hope we all know, that race is a folk categorization, not a biological reality. However, most people will get thrown into a racial category based on whatever features the people in their community consider definitive to a given racial category. This is what sociologists call apparent race, and it is what is most significant when it comes to things like job interviews. That said, many people take a more nuanced view with respect to their own racial identity, especially if they have family or cultural connections to more than one community. This won't help with a job interview, but may well be very important to them personally. Your apparent race would be very difficult to opt out of, but it doesn't have to mean you personally identify as "a white person" in all contexts. Many people do not feel comfortable with the racial labels assigned to them by others, for any number of reasons.

None of these concepts are well-defined, nor ever could be, as they are based on an ever changing sea of cultural and social assumptions with not much of an anchor in the world of the objective.

As for capital letters, they should probably always be used in a discussion of sociology, if nothing else to distinguish between white the color, and White the social categorization. But I am lazy and don't always do so consistently.

 

[TomC]

The means by which traits are transmitted from one generation to the next is thriugh genetics.

Lemme dumb this down a bit.

The most important traits we're talking about here have nothing to do with genetics. Genetic traits in such large groups are infinitesimally small. It's cultural traits that matter. Those can be huge.
Tom

 

[Metaphor]

I am asking you about what you believe about institutional discrimination against white people in America.

There is no evidence of institutional discrimination against white people in America.

That's ridiculous.
Affirmative Action has been a big thing for over 50 years.

... even if what is on the table is outreach and empowerment of under-privileged groups rather than direct discrimination against those who are in power, I do not agree with that sentiment as you should well realize by my postings in this thread alone.

Why do you describe those forms of affirmative action that are not outreach and empowerment of under-privileged groups, but are direct discrimination against white people, as "direct discrimination against those who are in power"? Do you have any evidence that when an unemployed person applies for a job or a high-school student who applies for a slot in a college's freshman class, if he or she is white then that means he or she is in power?

Your post sets up a dichotomy in which either a white person is "in power" in critical economic situations, or they are victims of "direct discrimination". There is no such dichotomy, because people are not, in the first place, owed special privileges just because they identify as white.

Now, if you are asking whether a person is more or less likely to get a job, get a good job requiring a degree or get accepted to a school if they are perceived as White as opposed to Black, the data on that point are more than clear.

I am fascinated by your language here.

...people are not, in the first place, owed special privileges just because they identify as white.

And later:

if they are perceived as White as opposed to Black,

What does it mean to 'identify' as white? Is it necessary to 'identify' as white to be white? Is it necessary to 'identify' as white to be 'perceived' as white? Can I meaningfully opt out of being white, or being perceived as white, or 'identifying' as white?

I am also curious about the capital letter change, from 'white' to 'White'. I do not know if it is related.

We all know, or I hope we all know, that race is a folk categorization, not a biological reality. However, most people will get thrown into a racial category based on whatever features the people in their community consider definitive to a given racial category. This is what sociologists call apparent race, and it is what is most significant when it comes to things like job interviews. That said, many people take a more nuanced view with respect to their own racial identity, especially if they have family or cultural connections to more than one community. This won't help with a job interview, but may well be very important to them personally.

None of these concepts are well-defined, nor ever could be, as they are based on an ever changing sea of cultural and social assumptions with not much of an anchor in the world of the objective.

So, am I correct in thinking 'racial (self) identity' is meaningless in terms of the 'job interview' situation, and that any discrimination by race operates off 'apparent race'?

How much importance and respect do you attach to somebody's racial (self) identity? Do you hesitate to call people whose apparent race is white, 'white'?

 

[ZiprHead]

How much importance and respect do you attach to somebody's racial (self) identity? Do you hesitate to call people whose apparent race is white, 'white'?

Why are you personalizing this to Politesse? I don't believe they are in any position to hire anyone.

 

[TomC]

Telling a white man who only hires other white men, that he has to look closer at applicants of other races and he is expected to find a few suitable non white non male employees is not a disease. It's actually an accommodation for an employee with an obvious impairment.

It would be simpler for everyone to fire the guy and replace him with someone better equipped for the job.

I see this sort of simplistic analysis a bigger problem in 21st century USA than institutional racism.

You've completely ignored any possible explanation for racially disparate results other than white racism. There are other explanations. Explanations that are well supported by more sophisticated statistics and statistical analysis. From the staff of the local BurgerDoodle to the staff of a sophisticated engineering company in South Carolina, there are probably dramatically different reasons for the racial makeup of the employees.

Pretending that every employment situation is the same, and therefore racial disparities are evidence of a racially biased management team is ridiculous.
It's wrong and counterproductive and results in a worse world for all of us.
Tom

 

[TomC]

How much importance and respect do you attach to somebody's racial (self) identity? Do you hesitate to call people whose apparent race is white, 'white'?

Why are you personalizing this to Politesse? I don't believe they are in any position to hire anyone.

Because he quoted Politesse, probably.

And Politesse does have rather pointed opinions on the subject. One could ask why Politesse talks so much about hiring practices when he doesn't actually hire anyone.
Tom

 

[Toni]

The means by which traits are transmitted from one generation to the next is thriugh genetics.

Lemme dumb this down a bit.

The most important traits we're talking about here have nothing to do with genetics. Genetic traits in such large groups are infinitesimally small. It's cultural traits that matter. Those can be huge.
Tom

So how do you believe stripping the entire culture of kidnapped people whom you enslave, de y the right to speak their own language, choose or maintain a spouse or have or rayse chijdren, to treat as less than livestock ( except when you want sex) and refuse the right to read might do to the perceived intellectual traits of the enslaved people?

The corrupt culture here is the one that enslaved people.

And just fir shits abd givgjes, why don’t you read up a bit on the history of slavery, how slavery was practiced in African nations, Asian nations, and the Americas abd Europe.

You really need a big boost in your base of knowledge here.

 

[TomC]

The corrupt culture here is the one that enslaved people.

So let's go back to the question a couple of other posters have asked.
"Who bought the African slaves?" isn't the same as "Who enslaved the African slaves?".

Again, you seem to be implying that the folks who bought the slaves were corrupt while dismissing the culture that actually enslaved them.

Is that because the people doing the enslaving were Africans, and couldn't know better? Sounds kinda racist to me.
Tom

 

[Metaphor]

How much importance and respect do you attach to somebody's racial (self) identity? Do you hesitate to call people whose apparent race is white, 'white'?

Why are you personalizing this to Politesse? I don't believe they are in any position to hire anyone.

Because it was Politesse who used that language, and I am curious why they did.

Of course it's a public thread so you can also answer the question giving your own opinion. In fact, I would encourage you to do so.

 

[bilby]

Bringing up the notion that Africans as a whole were not innocent victims of slavery is not relevant...

The notion that "Africans as a whole" is a useful subset of humanity for any purpose, is nonsensical and shows at the very least an abject ignorance that Africa is a very large, very diverse, and very populous continent, with 54 completely distinct nations (according to the latest UN recognitions - there are several nations that are in the process of possibly breaking up, and there could easily be far more recognised countries in Africa in the future than there are today) and over 1,500 distinct tribal groups (if we define such groups by their use of distinct languages).

To take an entire continent of 1.2 billion people, and lump them all together on the basis that they're mostly of darker complexion than "us", is itself distinctly racist.

 

[TomC]

So how do you believe stripping the entire culture of kidnapped people whom you enslave, de y the right to speak their own language, choose or maintain a spouse or have or rayse chijdren, to treat as less than livestock ( except when you want sex) and refuse the right to read might do to the perceived intellectual traits of the enslaved people?

I went back and did some research.

Can you explain to me how being kidnapped/taken prisoner and forced into the hull of a ship and sailed across oceans to be sold/resold into slavery...changes genetics?

Is what started this long and winding road of tacit assumptions and goal post shifting.
Tom

 

[Toni]

So how do you believe stripping the entire culture of kidnapped people whom you enslave, de y the right to speak their own language, choose or maintain a spouse or have or rayse chijdren, to treat as less than livestock ( except when you want sex) and refuse the right to read might do to the perceived intellectual traits of the enslaved people?

I went back and did some research.

Can you explain to me how being kidnapped/taken prisoner and forced into the hull of a ship and sailed across oceans to be sold/resold into slavery...changes genetics?

Is what started this long and winding road of tacit assumptions and goal post shifting.
Tom

Of course it is all my fault. Mea culpa

 

[Metaphor]

So how do you believe stripping the entire culture of kidnapped people whom you enslave, de y the right to speak their own language, choose or maintain a spouse or have or rayse chijdren, to treat as less than livestock ( except when you want sex) and refuse the right to read might do to the perceived intellectual traits of the enslaved people?

I went back and did some research.

Can you explain to me how being kidnapped/taken prisoner and forced into the hull of a ship and sailed across oceans to be sold/resold into slavery...changes genetics?

Is what started this long and winding road of tacit assumptions and goal post shifting.
Tom

Of course it is all my fault. Mea culpa

You have your faults Toni, but I don't think the transatlantic slave trade was your personal doing.

 

[Toni]

The corrupt culture here is the one that enslaved people.

So let's go back to the question a couple of other posters have asked.
"Who bought the African slaves?" isn't the same as "Who enslaved the African slaves?".

Again, you seem to be implying that the folks who bought the slaves were corrupt while dismissing the culture that actually enslaved them.

Is that because the people doing the enslaving were Africans, and couldn't know better? Sounds kinda racist to me.
Tom

I’m sorry that I don’t have the time to do all the relevant research to provide links that you might/might not read but: You really should do some reading about how slavery was practiced in West Central Africa ( and other parts of the world) compared with how it was practiced here in the US. Those who sold Africans into slavery had no idea nor any way of knowing what horrors would greet the enslaved people in the new world.

Neither you nor I nor any of our parents or grandparents engaged in slavery. We don’t bear that blame. But we are responsible for recognizing and acknowledging the scars that slavery and the policy of genicude carried out against Indians created as well as the many ways our society has been structured specifically to prevent Blacks and Indians from obtaining equal rights, much less any form of restitution fir the horrendous wrongs done to them over the past four or five hundred years and which continue today. And doing our best to redress those wrongs. No, it will not be easy and yes, it will mean acknowledging all the many ways you and I benefited from the mere fact that we have white skin—and then stepping aside and making room and start treating everyone as our equal.

 

[Toni]

So how do you believe stripping the entire culture of kidnapped people whom you enslave, de y the right to speak their own language, choose or maintain a spouse or have or rayse chijdren, to treat as less than livestock ( except when you want sex) and refuse the right to read might do to the perceived intellectual traits of the enslaved people?

I went back and did some research.

Can you explain to me how being kidnapped/taken prisoner and forced into the hull of a ship and sailed across oceans to be sold/resold into slavery...changes genetics?

Is what started this long and winding road of tacit assumptions and goal post shifting.
Tom

Of course it is all my fault. Mea culpa

You have your faults Toni, but I don't think the transatlantic slave trade was your personal doing.

That was not what I was accepting responsibility for.

 

[Metaphor]

So how do you believe stripping the entire culture of kidnapped people whom you enslave, de y the right to speak their own language, choose or maintain a spouse or have or rayse chijdren, to treat as less than livestock ( except when you want sex) and refuse the right to read might do to the perceived intellectual traits of the enslaved people?

I went back and did some research.

Can you explain to me how being kidnapped/taken prisoner and forced into the hull of a ship and sailed across oceans to be sold/resold into slavery...changes genetics?

Is what started this long and winding road of tacit assumptions and goal post shifting.
Tom

Of course it is all my fault. Mea culpa

You have your faults Toni, but I don't think the transatlantic slave trade was your personal doing.

That was not what I was accepting responsibility for.

Toni...I know.

 

[Toni]

So how do you believe stripping the entire culture of kidnapped people whom you enslave, de y the right to speak their own language, choose or maintain a spouse or have or rayse chijdren, to treat as less than livestock ( except when you want sex) and refuse the right to read might do to the perceived intellectual traits of the enslaved people?

I went back and did some research.

Can you explain to me how being kidnapped/taken prisoner and forced into the hull of a ship and sailed across oceans to be sold/resold into slavery...changes genetics?

Is what started this long and winding road of tacit assumptions and goal post shifting.
Tom

Of course it is all my fault. Mea culpa

You have your faults Toni, but I don't think the transatlantic slave trade was your personal doing.

That was not what I was accepting responsibility for.

Toni...I know.

Do you, tho?

 

[Metaphor]

So how do you believe stripping the entire culture of kidnapped people whom you enslave, de y the right to speak their own language, choose or maintain a spouse or have or rayse chijdren, to treat as less than livestock ( except when you want sex) and refuse the right to read might do to the perceived intellectual traits of the enslaved people?

I went back and did some research.

Can you explain to me how being kidnapped/taken prisoner and forced into the hull of a ship and sailed across oceans to be sold/resold into slavery...changes genetics?

Is what started this long and winding road of tacit assumptions and goal post shifting.
Tom

Of course it is all my fault. Mea culpa

You have your faults Toni, but I don't think the transatlantic slave trade was your personal doing.

That was not what I was accepting responsibility for.

Toni...I know.

Do you, tho?

Yes.

 

[TomC]

I’m sorry that I don’t have the time to do all the relevant research to provide links that you might/might not read but: You really should do some reading about how slavery was practiced in West Central Africa ( and other parts of the world) compared with how it was practiced here in the US. Those who sold Africans into slavery had no idea nor any way of knowing what horrors would greet the enslaved people in the new world.

What makes you so confident that you know more about the subject than I do?

That I don't agree with you and point out things you post that are nonsensical? Like asking how slavery changed genetics?
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

I’m sorry that I don’t have the time to do all the relevant research to provide links that you might/might not read but: You really should do some reading about how slavery was practiced in West Central Africa ( and other parts of the world) compared with how it was practiced here in the US. Those who sold Africans into slavery had no idea nor any way of knowing what horrors would greet the enslaved people in the new world.

What makes you so confident that you know more about the subject than I do?

What makes you so confident that you know more about the subject than Toni does?

That I don't agree with you and point out things you post that are nonsensical? Like asking how slavery changed genetics?
Tom

No, but your "analysis" about why the average black american less able than immigrants is so bigoted that it does make one wonder.