RACISM - Let's get it all out in the open

Crankyfeet

We got sidetracked in the GT forum on a racism discussion that I thought might be better continued down here. I'll just copy in the relevant posts.........

[Please feel free to add any views or discussion points or criticisms of what's been said]





Originally Posted by tonyzackery (in response to a whiteboytrash post)
As a Black American I take strong offense to this ignorant statement. You truly are just as your screenname describes...at least you intelligent enough to know who you are...you should take your prejudicial comments to stormfront or somewhere else for that matter...However, I have run into a number of you racist numbskulls during my short time being involved in cycling, so I guess I shouldn't have presumed there wouldn't be any on this worldwide forum...I feel sorry you and your kind...



Then Crankyfeet enters the high voltage discussion with....













__________________
Then a reply to this by tonyzackery:

And you are very much entitled to have and express your opinions - right or wrong, ignorant or intelligent. Nevertheless, how I regard you as a human being based on your expressed opinions is my right...


Then a reply by Crankyfeet:

So your regard for me as a human being is affected by the opinions I have.

Talk about Opinion Discrimination!

So the 100m finals at the Olympics are always usually competed between people of West African descent, because....... white guys are discriminated against as teenage track athletes???

Fact => African American SAT scores are over 250 points less than white scores on average, totally because.......African American students get ignored by the teacher??? My speculation would be that different races learn best in different environments. And the western education environment is set up basically to favor boring accountant-type personalities that can sit and listen to a teacher talk about mostly crap all day and not get distracted. Again we are talking generalizations. This is an important concept - GENERALIZATIONS. That means individuals can be anywhere on the number line, whether they're white or black or Latino or Chinese.

I don't formulate my opinions based on how I'm going to be regarded by others....so your response doesn't affect me one iota.....But perhaps it shows how much your life is being guided by impressing others if you thought I was going to be upset by it..

Fact is I believe in equal rights for all humans, and equal love, for want of a better term. But you can't solve any problems when the problem is not allowed to be addressed, as is the case generally in the political climate in America IMHO. I would have been one of the people marching for civil rights for minorities in the 60's. I am all against any form of discrimination against an individual based on race, which includes reverse-apartheid (affirmative action).__________________
Then a reply by tonyzackery:

Silly, I'm not about to get into some socio-political debate with someone like you...you are superior...feel free to have the last work because I KNOW you will need it...

Then a comment by doctorspoc:

Crankyfeet are you completely an utterly daft? he said he formulated an opinion of YOU based on YOUR opinions that YOU, YOURSELF expressed... not on some generalizided opinion based on some socio-economic group that you belong to... that seems completely rational and reasonable to me.

Then a response from Crankyfeet:

Yeah....I guess you are right. What I meant to say was that I thought he was a tool for casting judgment on another's value as a human being based on limited information gathered in a post.

Not many people know this, but I have an African American fraternal twin brother and his attack on me was indirectly an attack on my love for my brother.

I suppose having Mel Gibson as my avatar doesn't help the appearance of not being a bigot.

Then a comment by Eldron:

As a South African I find this debate interesting - and weird because it's not been conducted by two South Africans.

Ah people - gotta love them - they will always find a way to discriminate - the car you drive, the skin you wear, the neighbourhood you live in, what god you pray to, the country you support etc etc.

Embrace it I say - the world would be so much poorer if we were all grey, Totoya driving, christians with 2.4 children, a white picket fence and 0.75 of a dog.

Then a reply by doctorspoc:

but Crankyfeet you are racist that is very obvious from your posts. most people are... truthfully i don't know how you can grow up in a culture like the US or even Canada and not be racist. i think if people would just come to terms with the fact that they are racist a lot of this mess would start to get cleaned up. i'm not saying you want to be, that you are by any kind of malice or that you are an evil person, but the fact remains that you are. and these type of views are not limited to "white" people, they are held by many "races" including "blacks" since they grow up being bombarded by the same crap day in and day out just like you are. look at what bombarding people with complete BS day in and day out can do.. americans were all gung ho for the war in irak and voted George Dubbayah in twice... ok, ok, i know it's really only about 25% (1/2 voted and of them only 1/2 voted for him.. but the others were complicit by their non-action in letting it happen)

do you you that any modern biologist will tell you that there is not bilogical basis for race? there is more genetic diversity within a race than between the races so race it really a myth. race is a socio-economic constuct... it's there because we will it to be there. we take a few superficial genetic traites and string them together and call them race. it's idiotic. lets have a brown haired, blue eyed race or tall and blond race or a short and fat race... this makes just about as much sense. science has realized the stupidty of this but most people, your self included haven't realized how stupid it is.

what percentage of the "black race" is constituted by the individuals in the finals at the 100m world championships? or lets make it even more broad than that.. what percentage of the "black race" is constitued by the blacks in the top 1000 atheletes at the 100m in the world? ...a puny, tiny percentage. so because a miniscule percentage of people who have similar genetic traits that allow them to run a 100m fast also have other completely unrelated traits (curly hair and darkskin) you are willing to say that in general black people are fast runners? that makes no sense because in the grander scheme of things the vast, vast majority of "blacks" (people with curly hair and dark skin) are much slower runners. it's only a miniscule small group of "blacks" that can run disproportionately faster than anyone else. if you look at the overlap of this ability on a distribution graph, almost all of the two population of "whites" and "blacks" run at the same speeds compared to their counter parts in the other population... so your generalization about black being able to run fast will neccesarily lead you to wrong conclusions in the general case... it's just plain stupid to think as you do.

it's the same with that SAT score stat you pulled out... lets say for the sake of arguement that this is true and that all of the difference in scores is completely due to genetics (which is absurd, but lets go with that). all black don't score the same it's a bell curve distribution... again overlap those two distributions and you'll see that again the vast, vast majority of the "populations" scores overlap... so again your generalization, in the general case doesn't make a lot of sense and will lead you to wrong conclusions most of the time.

what's even worse is taking the general case and applying it to an individual is even more stupid.

Cycler6n

i think racism is a horrible thing that only turns man away from fellow man, if we could all work together, life would be easier, probably not better, but easier.

__________________
“(Training) doesn't get easier; you just get faster”
-Greg Lemond

BioWheel

The majority of black babies grow up without fathers. That's the problem.

Eldron

Racism is just the flavour of the day - every day jokes are thrown around about people's nationality, home, car, religion, friends, choice of alcohol, sexual orientation and no one bats an eyelid. Call someone black, white, coloured, indian, whatever and everybody gaps in disbelief.

F*ck it all I say. Minorities, majorities, skin colour, sexual orientation, physical disability, eye colour and brand loyalty are all fair game for some jokes and discrimination.

This whole "we're all equal" bollocks marginalises everybody. Instead of celebrating every person's strength we're reducing the world to "average".

Carrera

I don't consider myself a racist. What I do oppose is the phenomenon of multiculturalism - the idea a society of vast ethic groups can live together in harmony just like that. Having lived in various multiethnic societies for given periods of time, what I noticed is such societies may actually generate the very thing they claim to eliminate - racism.
Strangely enough, I believe I do feel I have something in common with Muhammad Ali who actually opposed what he referred to as "forced integration". This started back in the late sixties with the Nation Of Islam and Elijah Muhammad.
Also, Ali evolved somewhat so I think he believes different ethnic groups, blacks, whites, Arabs, Jews can live together in harmony but not by force.
The thing is multiculturalism doesn't respect culture and language but seeks to muddle us all together so we wind up losing our roots and identity. Yet Africans, Arabs, Jews and Europeans all have a right to their own culture and identity. It's nothing to do with anybody being better than anyone else.

__________________
"Everybody has a philosophy. However, what philosophy you have is a matter of choice, and most people don't make a conscious choice with regard to what philosophy they accept."

limerickman

I agree with you to some extent.
Multiculturalism cannot be imposed by force.
However.
It is dangerous to suggest that multiculturalism is, in your country's case, imposed.

Because britain was an imperialist power and conquered people/territories outside of it's own location, those people it conquered became British citizens.
Those british citizens from those territories are entitled, by law, to relocate to your country.
So multiculturalism, in your country's case, is a product of history.

The fact that hundreds of thousands of people have relocated to your country forces the debate.
Do the people coming to your country have to adopt....or does your country have to adopt to the citizens who have relocated?
It's not an easy one to answer.

Nominally Britain is a white, Christian country, premised on the principles of common law and centuries of jurisprudence.
However, the demographics of Britain suggest that your ethnic and religious mix of your country is changing.

As I say, it's a very difficult one to answer.

What I will say, is that I've always found your average english person to be the most tolerant of people.
He/she has every kind of nationality/creed living on their doorstep......and invariably (based on the people I have met and I've been to your country many times and I have numerous extended family/friends/acquaintances in both the north and south of England) I've found every person to be very very tolerant.
Long may that continue.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

Carrera

I agree multiculturalism is rooted with imperialism. Of course, I oppose imperialism as well - the subjugation of other countries.
I agree people from, say, Zimbabwe and India have certain rights, given the fact we exploited countries such as India e.t.c. in the past. The snag is often the people who have a right to be here historically are upstaged by those who don't.
However the case may be, I don't oppose democratic multiculturalism in the case people are free to mix and choose who they wish to marry e.t.c. It's forced integration I oppose. Forced integration is non democratic and goes over peoples' heads or threatens to obscure minority languages such as, say, Dutch, Estonian, Gallic, Basque - all in favour of English, perhaps.
At any rate, actual racism - a feeling that other races are below you is not an ideology I would ever endorse. I think we could get rid of racism if we allowed all people to preserve their own identities. I don't see how people from other cultures should be made to feel British any more than I should be Spanish if I'm living in Spain. You are who you are, Chinese, Asian, German, Indian whatever.

__________________
"Everybody has a philosophy. However, what philosophy you have is a matter of choice, and most people don't make a conscious choice with regard to what philosophy they accept."

Carrera

Funnily enough, there's a story about Muhammad Ali and Don King. Once King made the mistake of insulting Angelo Dundee who was both white and a non-muslim. I think this was prior to the Ali/Foreman rumble in the jungle. Evidently, Angelo was being ignored and when he asked King what he'd just whispered to Ali, King snapped, "I wasn't talking to you!"
Ali leaned over, pointed his finger at King and said, "Don't ever talk like that to Angelo again!" King shrunk a few inches as well when he realised Ali meant it. Many of Ali's closest friends were both white and Christian or Jewish.

__________________
"Everybody has a philosophy. However, what philosophy you have is a matter of choice, and most people don't make a conscious choice with regard to what philosophy they accept."

limerickman

Zimbabwe/Rhodesia was a British colony up to the 1960's and is still a Commonwealth country.
India was a British colony up to 1948 and is still a Commonwealth country.

Those people are entitled to be in your country.........as are many other people who your country conquered.
Whether they're upstaging those who have a right to be there historically .....
is garbage.
Your country conquered those nations and in doing so conferred the benefit of British citizenship on those peoples up to 1948 and 1964 respectively.

They're as entitled to be in your country, as you are.






Forced integration?
Forced integration isn't applicable to Britain.
And to try to suggest that forced integration is the case in Britain is another lie, Carrera.





Your country through it's imperial past, conquered peoples/territories.
In doing so, those territories/peoples were forced to become British citizens.
Those people are entitled, by law, to be in your country.
They're as British as you are, Carerra.
They share the same British identity as you...they share the same entitlements as a citizen as you do.
They're as entitled to be there, as you.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

Carrera

I think you misread my post. I never said India and Zimbabwe weren't entitled to be here. I meant those being upstaged are the Indians and Zimbabweans themselves. It's often very difficult for those folks to get into the country, according to a T.V. documentary I saw some months ago.

"Your country conquered those nations and in doing so conferred the benefit of British citizenship on those peoples up to 1948 and 1964 respectively."

I agree. I didn't argue otherwise.

__________________
"Everybody has a philosophy. However, what philosophy you have is a matter of choice, and most people don't make a conscious choice with regard to what philosophy they accept."

Carrera

"Forced integration? Forced integration isn't applicable to Britain."

The country is split on Europe. There's a large part of the population that fears too many arrivals arriving mainly from Eastern Europe before those countries develop their economies. In many areas hospitals and schools are failing to cope with the influx and, in other cases, taxes have gone up.
If nothing else you'd think there would be some consideration of the environment. Seems like polticians are just getting out of touch. Do they really believe driving a smaller car is going to make the same impact as huge bombs going off at war and oil plants going up in smoke?

__________________
"Everybody has a philosophy. However, what philosophy you have is a matter of choice, and most people don't make a conscious choice with regard to what philosophy they accept."

ndbiker

In America forced integration takes on another meaning. In 1964 we passed the Civil Rights Act. It was an amendment to our constitution which was far too long in coming. The courts took it upon themselves to interpret that act to mean schools must be integrated regardless of the makeup of the neighborhoods. It sounds fair, however, it meant kids were being bussed all over the place in large cities, friends within the same neighborhoods would go to different schools etc. Neighborhood schools were eliminated all in the name of integration. No one black or white supported this. One of the results was white flight to the suburbs (I'll admit there were other reasons ranging from increased used of the automobile to race riots). Instead of integrating the races it had the effect of further segregating them and took the jobs and tax revenues of the middle class whites out of many inner cities. What we have now in many cities is a largely black inner city with largely white suburbs, hardly integrated. The potential which was brought about by the passage of the Civil Rights Amendment has been in some ways squandered by this type of forced integration.