Page 5 of 8

Posted: 10 Mar 2009 21:30
by SandRider
Chaniluv brought up a very good point about the "race relations" issue in America
being fixated on the black/white slavery/segregation aspect. The reason is that it is
the overwhelming issue, and not that far in the past. I was a very bright and observant
nine year old boy when my granddaddy and his buddies loaded up the dogs in the
trucks and headed up to Little Rock to confront the National Guard troops that were
protecting the colored kids intergrating Central High School.

I think I've told the story here of burying my daddy in 1985 with colored pallbearers,
men he had worked with, and the turmoil that caused in an all-white county.

My brother over in East Texas refers to the President of the United States as "That Damned Nigger."
His sons worship Hitler.

And it's a two-way street these days. Young black men have no problem being publically
vocal about how much they hate the White Man, and want "Him" dead.

So while there's been so much progress, in my lifetime, there's a long damn way to go ....

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 01:12
by Eyes High
I agree with you. In some ways we do still have a long way to go.

I also see that in some ways we have begun slipping backwards.

I remember my Grandmother (although she would not have considered herself racist) believe that separate races were just fine. They just needed to stay with their own kind. Momma thought that it was okay to have people from other races as friends and co-workers but that was it. You 'should not date outside of your own kind'. Once again she would not have considered herself racist. I tried to teach my children that you judge a person by their actions and not the color of their skin or how they sound. And I hope I have done a good job in that regard. However, I see kids the age of my children and younger who seemed to have so much hatred for others from a different "group." Not just white kids against blacks, or blacks against whites, but also some Native Americans, and Latino, and....

Is it the modern culture, is it parents who are passing down their hate (either knowingly or unaware), is it violent songs and video games and media portrayal, is it easy access to hate group via the web, is it the perceived advantages that some groups seem to be getting over others, or a combination of the aforementioned?

What ever the answer, we are a long way from harmony. I know there is no easy answer and no one size fits all solution.

I also think that there is not one set cause for the prejudices we have in our whole world.

Maybe the easiest solution is the simplest. “Let it begin with me.” If each one of us can not only ask that of ourselves but live by it, then just maybe real change will begin. It won’t be easy or quick. But it is as good a place as any to begin.

Have a nice day my internet friends.

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 08:08
by orald
chanilover wrote:
orald wrote:
chanilover wrote:No, my dad's a cracka my mum's Filipina, so they're probably not contributing to racial tension. Maybe amongst racists they do, but who cares what they think?
Didn't you write this same line somehwre else before?

I'm getting way too many deja-vu's recently. :?

I'll be off to bed, get some shut-eye before going to work...got some more deja-vu's there lately as well. I hate them.
I don't think so, maybe I did, I can't remember, or maybe you're prescient. I do remember saying you could pass for a cracka in your latest pics.
Well, yes, that's the thing, I do have such "deja-vu's" that aren't just deja-vu's(and been having quite a few lately). I know I had a thread about it somewhere, and on Worm's.

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 12:47
by SwordMaster
SandRider wrote:Chaniluv brought up a very good point about the "race relations" issue in America
being fixated on the black/white slavery/segregation aspect. The reason is that it is
the overwhelming issue, and not that far in the past. I was a very bright and observant
nine year old boy when my granddaddy and his buddies loaded up the dogs in the
trucks and headed up to Little Rock to confront the National Guard troops that were
protecting the colored kids intergrating Central High School.

I think I've told the story here of burying my daddy in 1985 with colored pallbearers,
men he had worked with, and the turmoil that caused in an all-white county.

My brother over in East Texas refers to the President of the United States as "That Damned Nigger."
His sons worship Hitler.

And it's a two-way street these days. Young black men have no problem being publically
vocal about how much they hate the White Man, and want "Him" dead.

So while there's been so much progress, in my lifetime, there's a long damn way to go ....
thanks for sharing that insightful experience to your childhood. It really illustrates many of our worst traits, but always leaves room for someone like yourself, who is clearly enlightened well beyond your enviroment.

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 13:12
by GamePlayer
SwordMaster wrote:GamePlayer your cognitive ability is again on display, I was indeed raised catholic and you have probably found a source for much of my difficulty doing what you suggest. I do find it helpful to use it as motivation, not that I need motivation. But lets face it, racism is easy. Fighting it is difficult. So I use it as the extra push factor, in the deep shadows of my mind.

I should be more positive but the pitfalls of relating one bad example to the whole, are indeed difficult to overcome.
Well, remember there are many motivators to positive change besides guilt. Like RATM says; "Anger is a gift" :)

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 14:50
by moreh_yeladim
I don't understand racism. Why should a single people divide themselves based on something so stupid as skin color?

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 15:02
by SwordMaster
moreh_yeladim wrote:I don't understand racism. Why should a single people divide themselves based on something so stupid as skin color?
Similar to anti-Semitism no? You have experience with that you want to share?

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 18:24
by SandChigger
moreh_yeladim wrote:I don't understand racism. Why should a single people divide themselves based on something so stupid as skin color?
Because we're primates. ;)

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 19:17
by moreh_yeladim
SwordMaster wrote:
moreh_yeladim wrote:I don't understand racism. Why should a single people divide themselves based on something so stupid as skin color?
Similar to anti-Semitism no? You have experience with that you want to share?
Ah, so it's people dividing themselves into tribes on the basis of skin color? Seems kind of retarded to me, but that's humanity for you.

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 19:48
by SandChigger
Yeah, we're basically shit. Yahweh should drop another rock on us and see what develops next.

There's time to do it three, maybe four or five more times before things get too toasty 'round here. ;)

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 19:58
by Freakzilla
Monkey spheres.

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 20:32
by Seraphan
moreh_yeladim wrote:I don't understand racism. Why should a single people divide themselves based on something so stupid as skin color?
Well people are mostly insecure about their ignorance and it's easier to attach labels on people without even knowing them, as well as blaming them for bad things.
It's stupid, no doubt. But racism is pretty much, in my view, a way for some to lower others while believing themselves to be grand. And you find this in white people, black people, chinese, middleastern, european, etc.
Like i say, most people are beyond idiocy, so it's no surprise that such a thing as racism exists.

Posted: 12 Mar 2009 08:07
by SwordMaster
racism is the clumping of many to the actions of one or few
has nothing to do with skin color

Posted: 12 Mar 2009 08:33
by orald
Racism, in some way, begins whenever you get into a group, and people crave to be in a group(hence the success of such things as the Nazi party etc).
The problem in getting in a group is that some others are not inside your group.

This also includes simple things like a certain class* in a school(and schools seem to enhance competitions between classes), and I've seen rivalries between classes.

It applies to countries, cities, neighborhoods. Even families.

Whenever you cast yourself as something, there's something you're not, and there you have the start of hating the different(in all kinds of levels of severity).



*Here I mean, inside the age level, you're devided to different classrooms. You get my meaning? I'm still unsure what are the technical terms for it in the USA etc.

Posted: 12 Mar 2009 08:40
by Freakzilla
cliques?

Posted: 12 Mar 2009 11:05
by Eyes High
Orald's statement reminded me of a show I watched when I was younger.

Does anyone remember the After School Special: The Wave?

I think it was done in 1981. (I figure other countries had something similar)

It was a good example, I thought, or how prejudice and racism can grow and be unchalleged until it reaches such staggering portions that some asks "how could people let this happen?"

here is a clip af the opening to the movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i42W__ghBHc

and the ending:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqdpNa-kR0w

Posted: 12 Mar 2009 12:53
by orald
I meant multiple classes for the same grade level due to too many students for oen class to hold.

There's also seperation of classes based on intelligence, but that's less prevelant or matters a little less(cuz the dumb ones are usually the bigger ones, so you don't ridicule them :P ).

My point was, racism is a part of the "my group-their group" mentality that pops up in every human's psych sooner or later. It's natural. Ugly, yes, but natural.

When you say "my family" you already start to seperate. Humans can't live without categorising everything, for better or worse.

Posted: 12 Mar 2009 13:17
by Freakzilla
Freakzilla wrote:Monkey spheres.
"What the Hell is the Monkeysphere?"

First, picture a monkey. A monkey dressed like a little pirate, if that helps you. We'll call him Slappy.

Imagine you have Slappy as a pet. Imagine a personality for him. Maybe you and he have little pirate monkey adventures and maybe even join up to fight crime. Think how sad you'd be if Slappy died.

Now, imagine you get four more monkeys. We'll call them Tito, Bubbles, Marcel and ShitTosser. Imagine personalities for each of them now. Maybe one is aggressive, one is affectionate, one is quiet, the other just throws shit all the time. But they're all your personal monkey friends.

Now imagine a hundred monkeys.

Not so easy now, is it? So how many monkeys would you have to own before you couldn't remember their names? At what point, in your mind, do your beloved pets become just a faceless sea of monkey? Even though each one is every bit the monkey Slappy was, there's a certain point where you will no longer really care if one of them dies.

So how many monkeys would it take before you stopped caring?

That's not a rhetorical question. We actually know the number.


"So this whole thing is your crusade against monkey overpopulation? I'll have my monkey castrated this very day!"

You see, monkey experts performed a monkey study a while back, and discovered that the size of the monkey's monkey brain determined the size of the monkey groups the monkeys formed. The bigger the brain, the bigger the little societies they built.

They cut up so many monkey brains, in fact, that they found they could actually take a brain they had never seen before and from it they could accurately predict what size tribes that species of creature formed.

Most monkeys operate in troupes of 50 or so. But somebody slipped them a slightly larger brain and they estimated the ideal group or society for this particular animal was about 150.

That brain, of course, was human. Probably from a homeless man they snatched off the streets.

"So that's the big news? That humans are God's big-budget sequel to the monkey? Who didn't know that?"

It goes much, much deeper than that. Let's try an example.

Famous news talking guy Tim Russert tells a charming story about his father, in his book Big Russ and Me (the title referring to his on-and-off romance with actor Russell Crowe). Russert's dad used to take half an hour to carefully box up any broken glass before taking it to the trash. Why? Because "The trash guy might cut his hands."

That this was such an unusual thing to do illustrates my monkey point. None of us spend much time worrying about the garbage man's welfare even though he performs a crucial role in not forcing us to live in a cave carved from a mountain of our own filth. We don't usually consider his safety or comfort at all and if we do, it's not in the same way we would worry over our best friend or wife or girlfriend or even our dog.

People toss half-full bottles of drain cleaner right into the barrel, without a second thought of what would happen if the trash man got it splattered into his eyes. Why? Because the trash guy exists outside the Monkeysphere.


"There's that word again..."

The Monkeysphere is the group of people who each of us, using our monkeyish brains, are able to conceptualize as people. If the monkey scientists are monkey right, it's physically impossible for this to be a number much larger than 150.

Most of us do not have room in our Monkeysphere for our friendly neighborhood sanitation worker. So, we don't think of him as a person. We think of him as The Thing That Makes The Trash Go Away.

And even if you happen to know and like your particular garbage man, at one point or another we all have limits to our sphere of monkey concern. It's the way our brains are built. We each have a certain circle of people who we think of as people, usually our own friends and family and neighbors, and then maybe some classmates or coworkers or church or suicide cult.

Those who exist outside that core group of a few dozen people are not people to us. They're sort of one-dimensional bit characters.

Remember the first time, as a kid, you met one of your school teachers outside the classroom? Maybe you saw old Miss Puckerson at Taco Bell eating refried beans through a straw, or saw your principal walking out of a dildo shop. Do you remember that surreal feeling you had when you saw these people actually had lives outside the classroom?

I mean, they're not people. They're teachers.


"So? What difference does all this make?"

Oh, not much. It's just the one single reason society doesn't work.

It's like this: which would upset you more, your best friend dying, or a dozen kids across town getting killed because their bus collided with a truck hauling killer bees? Which would hit you harder, your Mom dying, or seeing on the news that 15,000 people died in an earthquake in Iran?

They're all humans and they are all equally dead. But the closer to our Monkeysphere they are, the more it means to us. Just as your death won't mean anything to the Chinese or, for that matter, hardly anyone else more than 100 feet or so from where you're sitting right now.


"Why should I feel bad for them? I don't even know those people!"
Exactly. This is so ingrained that to even suggest you should feel their deaths as deeply as that of your best friend sounds a little ridiculous. We are hard-wired to have a drastic double standard for the people inside our Monkeysphere versus the 99.999% of the world's population who are on the outside.

Think about this the next time you get really pissed off in traffic, when you start throwing finger gestures and wedging your head out of the window to scream, "LEARN TO FUCKING DRIVE, FUCKER!!" Try to imagine acting like that in a smaller group. Like if you're standing in an elevator with two friends and a coworker, and the friend goes to hit a button and accidentally punches the wrong one. Would you lean over, your mouth two inches from her ear, and scream "LEARN TO OPERATE THE FUCKING ELEVATOR BUTTONS, SHITCAMEL!!"

They'd think you'd gone insane. We all go a little insane, though, when we get in a group larger than the Monkeysphere. That's why you get that weird feeling of anonymous invincibility when you're sitting in a large crowd, screaming curses at a football player you'd never dare say to his face.


"Well, I'm nice to strangers. Have you considered that maybe you're just an asshole?"


Sure, you probably don't go out of your way to be mean to strangers. You don't go out of your way to be mean to stray dogs, either.

The problem is that eventually, the needs of you or those within your Monkeysphere will require screwing someone outside it (even if that need is just venting some tension and anger via exaggerated insults). This is why most of us wouldn't dream of stealing money from the pocket of the old lady next door, but don't mind stealing cable, adding a shady exemption on our tax return, or quietly celebrating when they forget to charge us for something at the restaurant.

You may have a list of rationalizations long enough to circle the Earth, but the truth is that in our monkey brains the old woman next door is a human being while the cable company is a big, cold, faceless machine. That the company is, in reality, nothing but a group of people every bit as human as the old lady, or that some kind old ladies actually work there and would lose their jobs if enough cable were stolen, rarely occurs to us.

That's one of the ingenious things about the big-time religions, by the way. The old religious writers knew it was easier to put the screws to a stranger, so they taught us to get a personal idea of a God in our heads who says, "No matter who you hurt, you're really hurting me. Also, I can crush you like a grape." You must admit that if they weren't writing words inspired by the Almighty, they at least understood the Monkeysphere.

It's everywhere. Once you grasp the concept, you can see examples all around you. You'll walk the streets in a daze, like Roddy Piper after putting on his X-ray sunglasses in They Live.

But wait, because this gets much bigger and much, much stranger...


More...

Posted: 12 Mar 2009 14:23
by orald
One death is a tragedy. A million deaths are a statistic.

Something like that? :)


And all I wanted to say about your monkey speheres, Freak, is "Those damn dirty apes! They ruined it all!" :x

Posted: 13 Mar 2009 01:19
by Robspierre
We use monkey spheres in my Commuincation & Culture class.

Rob

Posted: 13 Mar 2009 05:46
by Freakzilla
Robspierre wrote:We use monkey spheres in my Commuincation & Culture class.

Rob
It makes sense to me. It's an interesting way to think about the world around you.

Re: Racism

Posted: 24 Jun 2011 10:39
by Freakzilla
Census shows whites lose US majority among babies

By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Hope Yen, Associated Press – Thu Jun 23, 2:32 pm ET
WASHINGTON – For the first time, more than half of the children under age 2 in the U.S. are minorities, part of a sweeping race change and a growing age divide between mostly white, older Americans and fast-growing younger ethnic populations that could reshape government policies.

Preliminary census estimates also show the share of African-American households headed by women — mostly single mothers — now exceeds African-American households with married couples, reflecting the trend of declining U.S. marriages overall.

The findings, based on the latest government data, offer a preview of final 2010 census results being released this summer that provide detailed breakdowns by age, race and household relationships.

Demographers say the numbers provide the clearest confirmation yet of a changing social order, one in which racial and ethnic minorities will become the U.S. majority by midcentury.

"We're moving toward an acknowledgment that we're living in a different world than the 1950s, where married or two-parent heterosexual couples are now no longer the norm for a lot of kids, especially kids of color," said Laura Speer, coordinator of the Kids Count project for the Baltimore-based Annie E. Casey Foundation.

[ For complete coverage of politics and policy, go to Yahoo! Politics ]


"It's clear the younger generation is very demographically different from the elderly, something to keep in mind as politics plays out on how programs for the elderly get supported," she said. "It's critical that children are able to grow to compete internationally and keep state economies rolling."

Currently, non-Hispanic whites make up just under half of all children 3 years old, which is the youngest age group shown in the Census Bureau's October 2009 annual survey, its most recent. In 1990, more than 60 percent of children in that age group were white.

William H. Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution who analyzed the data, said figures in the 2009 survey can sometimes be inexact compared with the 2010 census, which queries the entire nation. But he said when factoring in the 2010 data released so far, minorities outnumber whites among babies under age 2.

The preliminary figures are based on an analysis of the Current Population Survey as well as the 2009 American Community Survey, which sampled 3 million U.S. households to determine that whites made up 51 percent of babies younger than 2. After taking into account a larger-than-expected jump in the minority child population in the 2010 census, the share of white babies falls below 50 percent.

Twelve states and the District of Columbia now have white populations below 50 percent among children under age 5 — Hawaii, California, New Mexico, Texas, Arizona, Nevada, Florida, Maryland, Georgia, New Jersey, New York and Mississippi. That's up from six states and the District of Columbia in 2000.

At current growth rates, seven more states could flip to "minority-majority" status among small children in the next decade: Illinois, North Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, South Carolina and Delaware.

By contrast, whites make up the vast majority of older Americans — 80 percent of seniors 65 and older and roughly 73 percent of people ages 45-64. Many states with high percentages of white seniors also have particularly large shares of minority children, including Arizona, Nevada, California, Texas and Florida.

In California, for instance, the median age for whites jumped from 40.3 in 2000 to 44.6 years old, even as the state's overall median age remained one of the nation's lowest at 35.2 due to minority births — a sign of the rapid race change under way, according to 2010 census data released Thursday. California's minorities now make up 58 percent of the state's population, up from 51 percent in 2000.

"The recent emergence of this cultural generation gap in states with fast growth of young Hispanics has spurred heated discussions of immigration and the use of government services," Frey said. "But the new census, which will show a minority majority of our youngest Americans, makes plain that our future labor force is absolutely dependent on our ability to integrate and educate a new diverse child population."

Kenneth Johnson, a sociology professor and senior demographer at the University of New Hampshire, noted that much of the race change is being driven by increases in younger Hispanic women having more children than do white women, who have lower birth rates and as a group are moving beyond their prime childbearing years.

Because minority births are driving the rapid changes in the population, "any institution that touches or is impacted by children will be the first to feel the impact," Johnson said, citing as an example child and maternal health care that will have to be attentive to minorities' needs.

The numbers come amid public debate over hotly contested federal and state issues, from immigration and gay marriage to the rising cost of government benefits such as Medicare and Medicaid, that are resonating in different ways by region and demographics.

Alabama became the latest state this month to pass a wide-ranging anti-immigration law, which in part requires schools to report students' immigration status to state authorities. That follows tough immigration measures passed in similarly Republican-leaning states such as Georgia, Arizona and South Carolina.

But governors in Massachusetts, New York and Illinois, which long have been home to numerous immigrants, have opted out of the federal Secure Communities program that aims to deport dangerous criminals, saying it has made illegal immigrants afraid of reporting crimes to police. California may soon opt out as well.

States also are divided by region in their attitudes about old-age benefits and gay marriage, which is legal in five states and the District of Columbia.

Among African-Americans, U.S. households headed by women — mostly single mothers but also adult women living with siblings or elderly parents — represented roughly 30 percent of all African-American households, compared with the 28 percent share of married-couple African-American households. It was the first time the number of female-headed households surpassed those of married couples among any race group, according to census records reviewed by Frey dating back to 1950.

While the number of black single mothers has been gradually declining, overall marriages among blacks are decreasing faster. That reflects a broader U.S. trend of declining marriage rates as well as increases in non-family households made up of people living alone, or with unmarried partners or other non-relatives.

Female-headed households make up a 19 percent share among Hispanics and 9 percent each for whites and Asians.

Other findings:

_Multigenerational households composed of families with grandparents, parents and children were most common among Hispanics, particularly in California, Maryland, Illinois, Nevada and Texas, all states where they represented roughly 1 in 10 Latino households.

_Roughly 581,000, or a half percent, of U.S. households are composed of same-sex unmarried couples, representing nearly 1 in 10 households with unmarried partners. Unmarried gay couples made up the biggest shares in states in the Northeast and West, led by the District of Columbia, Oregon, Delaware, Massachusetts, Maine and Vermont. The largest numbers were in California and New York, which is now considering a gay marriage law.

_Minorities comprise a majority of renters in 10 states, plus the District of Columbia — Hawaii, Texas, California, Georgia, Maryland, New Mexico, Mississippi, New Jersey, Louisiana and New York.

Tony Perkins, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Family Research Council, a conservative interest group, emphasized the economic impact of the decline of traditional families, noting that single-parent families are often the most dependent on government assistance.

"The decline of the traditional family will have to correct itself if we are to continue as a society," Perkins said, citing a responsibility of individuals and churches. "We don't need another dose of big government, but a new Hippocratic oath of `do no harm' that doesn't interfere with family formation or seek to redefine family."

___

Online:

http://www.census.gov" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Racism

Posted: 24 Jun 2011 11:01
by Serkanner
Freakzilla wrote: For the first time, more than half of the children under age 2 in the U.S. are minorities,
more than half ... minority ... hmmm.

Re: Racism

Posted: 24 Jun 2011 11:04
by Freakzilla
Serkanner wrote:
Freakzilla wrote: For the first time, more than half of the children under age 2 in the U.S. are minorities,
more than half ... minority ... hmmm.
Yeah, several minorities make up a collective majority.

Re: Racism

Posted: 24 Jun 2011 15:57
by A Thing of Eternity
Redheads are the smallest minority of all, take THAT! :wink: