The Term Racist

[PerpetualImperfexion]

In my opinion the term racist is being thrown around way too much. I won't go into some of the things the media has said, but I'll give a real life example. Way back before President Obama was re-elected we had an election at my school. The election showed that Romney was the popular candidate at my school. Later that day I overheard a girl talking to her mom about it (she was black). The words "What a bunch of racists" came out of the mother's mouth. This is the sort of thing that bugs me. Why can't we keep race and politics separate. :/

[TigerBoy]

Republicans like Romney aren't popular with black and hispanic voters because their social attitudes and policies do not favour those groups and frequently harm them. The same can be seen with other groups such as LGBTs.

I suggest you need to put your question to the Republican party: why do their politics make an issue of race or sexuality.

It may not be needed though, since in the wake of the presidential election I have read many articles that indicate that Republicans are asking themselves the same question.

[Professional Russian]

Yes the race card is thrown around....alot.....too much. I have been called racist many times because i dont like obama. its not cause hes black god damn it. its cause i dont agree with his politics

[GummyUnicornDerp]

It's not racist if people don't share the same damn ideas as you.

What irks me the most is when people call me racist when i call someone white. It's not racist, it's what they are. Race recognition =/= racism.

[Taryn98]

A lot of people say that because they are ignorant and accusing someone of racism isn't something that can be easily disproved.
If someone calls me racist, even without proof, what can I possibly do to show them I'm not, essentially nothing. It's a tactic for people that don't want to deal with fact based arguments and only want to use emotion to push their ideology.
Basically it's a copout.

[Lost in the Echo]

Yeah, I agree. Just because someone favors Romney over Obama, doesn't make them racist.

A racist is someone who believes their race is superior to anothner race. Or someone who dislikes a person, because of their ethnicity.
People need to quit using that word so lightly, because being a "racist" is a horrible thing. That word shouldn't be just thrown around like it is.

[toobigforlife]

Well being part black I can tell you that, yes we sometimes use the race card a lot but that is our #1 defense, because we basically have nothing else, there is still racism in America today, and in the past the republicans were pro-slavery, anti-civil rights, etc... the only president from the slavery days that wanted to change it was Abraham Lincoln and he freed the slaves, but he never gave them civil rights. so... the reason why that mother said that is because when he first got into office there was racial threats towards him and was made public in some areas so that mother did throw it out there but it doesn't mean she was lying

[Lost in the Echo]

Well being part black I can tell you that, yes we sometimes use the race card a lot but that is our #1 defense, because we basically have nothing else, there is still racism in America today, and in the past the republicans were pro-slavery, anti-civil rights, etc... the only president from the slavery days that wanted to change it was Abraham Lincoln and he freed the slaves, but he never gave them civil rights. so... the reason why that mother said that is because when he first got into office there was racial threats towards him and was made public in some areas so that mother did throw it out there but it doesn't mean she was lying

I understand what you're saying, but someone shouldn't just call another person a racist. A racist is a terrible thing to be, and some people take offense to being called racist.

Yeah, there's still racism today, and that's horrible, but it's nothing like it was 200 years ago.
The term "racist" should be reserved for those who truly are racist.
I think it's wrong, that the term "racist" gets thrown around like it does.

[toobigforlife]

I mean you can say the same about the word nigga, everybody uses it loosely and the meaning has changed from what it originally was, but rappers and people use it in songs and i have heard other races say it and people dont care as much anymore. so you really cant reserve the word nigga for certain situations because technically all black people are niggas so its just that people now in days need to be less ignorant and be proactive in the communities

[FreeFall]

Nah. I don't play that. If someone calls me any variation of nigger, I will not hesitate to either verbally or psychically demand they never do that again.
Don't care if it means "Unicorns shit rainbows", that word is racist to me, always will be, and I will not tolerate being identified by it no matter who said it.


The mother may have said it because Romney had, with foot in mouth, come off as a racist during his campaign. Especially towards the Hispanics in my opinion.

In slight though, the race card has been abused. Black girl in my class used it when her teacher gave her a low grade, said she felt like a slave. It boils my blood. You have no idea what a slave is or was in your gucci crap, your weave all nasty riding in your daddy's Mercedes.

Though it still holds meaning, it depends on the person using it I suppose.
Just like above, some people don't care if they get called nigger.
If someone calls me nigger, I'm throwing down my race card like a fire was lit under my ass in fury.
To me they're racist for calling me that, to others, probably the majority, they aren't. Depends on preference of how they want to be treated.

[Gigablue]

Nah. I don't play that. If someone calls me any variation of nigger, I will not hesitate to either verbally or psychically demand they never do that again.

I'm the exact same way. I find that word inherently racist, and don't think it should ever be used. Regardless of the intention, I get offended if someone uses it.

As for the original question, I think that the term racist might be overused, but racism is still very present. Though we don't live in the days of slavery, anyone who says there is complete equality is simply delusional. I think people can dislike Obama without being racist, and that saying that anyone who dislikes him is racist is wrong. We need to fight actual racism, not just differing political opinions.

[CharlieFinley]

It bothers me when people get offended when you provide a physical description of someone. Say, for instance, you're pointing out one black guy in a group of white guys (which isn't very uncommon, because blacks are a minority). Of course you say, "go talk to Bob." "Which one?" "The black one."

People sometimes get offended by that, which is stupid. It's like saying, "the tall one," or "the girl."

[PerpetualImperfexion]

Well being part black I can tell you that, yes we sometimes use the race card a lot but that is our #1 defense, because we basically have nothing else, there is still racism in America today, and in the past the republicans were pro-slavery, anti-civil rights, etc... the only president from the slavery days that wanted to change it was Abraham Lincoln and he freed the slaves, but he never gave them civil rights. so... the reason why that mother said that is because when he first got into office there was racial threats towards him and was made public in some areas so that mother did throw it out there but it doesn't mean she was lying

Using the race card is perfectly fine when someone is actually being racist. In my opinion disliking a (partially) black president for his political believes is not racist and therefore the mother's actions were not justified.

This sums up the democrats past pretty well: http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/the-racist-bloody-truth-about-democrats/

EDIT: I'm pleased that the liberal youth realizes this as a problem unlike their older members.

[Twilly F. Sniper]

Its thowh around so much, because...
1. People like to make shit up about others.
2. There really are still racists that step 149 steps backward in time.

[Horizon]

I feel way to many people run to the racist card to much.
When in reality, to be a racist, you have to think all other races, other then your own, are inferior.
Making a racist joke doesn't make you racist. Disliking Obama because of his politics isn't racist. The racist card is thrown around way to much is this day in age, and I see it as people running to it as an excuse.

[FreeFall]

When in reality, to be a racist, you have to think all other races, other then your own, are inferior.
Not so, one or two races is fine. A person can like every race except Korean. Still a racist. A person can hate every race except the Bengals. Still a racist. Just against the specific race. As long as they're showing a complete bias, prejudiced, and hatred based on someone's racial/ethnic background, they're a racist.

I've had people show extreme hatred towards me when they thought I was a Latina. Upon finding out I'm black and white, I'm cool and they're nice to me. It's disgusting. Make any sense? No, but then again, there's no rationality to racists.

[Horizon]

Not so, one or two races is fine. A person can like every race except Korean. Still a racist. A person can hate every race except the Bengals. Still a racist. Just against the specific race. As long as they're showing a complete bias, prejudiced, and hatred based on someone's racial/ethnic background, they're a racist.

I've had people show extreme hatred towards me when they thought I was a Latina. Upon finding out I'm black and white, I'm cool and they're nice to me. It's disgusting. Make any sense? No, but then again, there's no rationality to racists.

Yeah, pretty much what I meant, I just used a more literal definition of the word. But yeah, racists are... just... >:(

[Twilly F. Sniper]

Not so, one or two races is fine. A person can like every race except Korean. Still a racist. A person can hate every race except the Bengals. Still a racist. Just against the specific race. As long as they're showing a complete bias, prejudiced, and hatred based on someone's racial/ethnic background, they're a racist.

I've had people show extreme hatred towards me when they thought I was a Latina. Upon finding out I'm black and white, I'm cool and they're nice to me. It's disgusting. Make any sense? No, but then again, there's no rationality to racists.

Yeah that too.

[Haufen]

and in the past the republicans were pro-slavery, anti-civil rights, etc...


Sorry, but I'll have to correct you on this. In the past the Republicans were actually the ones pushing for the end of slavery, Lincoln for example was a Republican.

"The Republican Party (also called the GOP, for "Grand Old Party") is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States, along with the Democratic Party. Founded by anti-slavery activists in 1854, it dominated politics nationally for most of the period from 1860 to 1932. There have been 18 Republican presidents, the first being Abraham Lincoln and the most recent being George W. Bush."

[toobigforlife]

Sorry, but I'll have to correct you on this. In the past the Republicans were actually the ones pushing for the end of slavery, Lincoln for example was a Republican.

"The Republican Party (also called the GOP, for "Grand Old Party") is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States, along with the Democratic Party. Founded by anti-slavery activists in 1854, it dominated politics nationally for most of the period from 1860 to 1932. There have been 18 Republican presidents, the first being Abraham Lincoln and the most recent being George W. Bush."

Yea thats why i said Lincoln was an republican and he stood for ending slavery, so you didnt correct me all you did was restate what I said

[Haufen]

Yea thats why i said Lincoln was an republican and he stood for ending slavery, so you didnt correct me all you did was restate what I said


I did correct you, since you said that the Republicans were pro-slavery, while they were actually created by anti-slavery activists. While the Democrats were actually for a long time extremely racist.

[toobigforlife]

I did correct you, since you said that the Republicans were pro-slavery, while they were actually created by anti-slavery activists. While the Democrats were actually for a long time extremely racist.

Yea sorry, i forgot all about that and after slavery ends and stuff some democrats became republicans and stuff yea, thanks

[Danny_boi 16]

rac·ist [rey-sist]
noun
1. a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that a certain human race is superior to any or all others.

adjective
2. of or like racists or racism: racist policies; racist attitudes.


rac·ism [rey-siz-uh m]
noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

race2 [reys]
noun
1. a group of persons related by common descent or heredity.
2. a population so related.
3. Anthropology .
a. any of the traditional divisions of humankind, the commonest being the caucasian, Mongoloid, and Negro, characterized by supposedly distinctive and universal physical characteristics: no longer in technical use.
b. an arbitrary classification of modern humans, sometimes, especially formerly, based on any or a combination of various physical characteristics, as skin color, facial form, or eye shape, and now frequently based on such genetic markers as blood groups.
c. a human population partially isolated reproductively from other populations, whose members share a greater degree of physical and genetic similarity with one another than with other humans.
4. a group of tribes or peoples forming an ethnic stock: the Slavic race.
5. any people united by common history, language, cultural traits, etc.: the Dutch race.

adjective
11. of or pertaining to the races of humankind.




Maybe you don't have a dictionary :)

[Majin Vegeta]

when you see a black person trying to use the race card saying that ask them what they specifically like about obama's policies or what he's done so far then wait.

I'm ok with people liking him but not with ones who just voted for him because it's the cool thing to do

I just think it's most annoying when if you say you don't like obama they assume you like romney which I don't. if they knew who jill stein or gary johnson were they would've very likely voted for one of them instead

[Danny_boi 16]

Why can't we keep race and politics separate. :/

Because we made a group of people slaves by law, just because they were darker than the governing body. And then that changed with Abraham Lincoln.But the nation was still segregated till John F. Kennedy and before Kennedy segregation was law or rather, no one card to make make a law saying it was wrong. The military was segregated till Harry S. Truman. Then We never had a black president till 2009, and still people think he's a Muslim, a Kenyan, a gangster, and a homosexual.

[Majin Vegeta]

Because we made a group of people slaves by law, just because they were darker than the governing body. And then that changed with Abraham Lincoln.But the nation was still segregated till John F. Kennedy and before Kennedy segregation was law or rather, no one card to make make a law saying it was wrong. The military was segregated till Harry S. Truman. Then We never had a black president till 2009, and still people think he's a Muslim, a Kenyan, a gangster, and a homosexual.

this race issue would go away a lot faster if we stopped celebrating black history month or having affirmative action or doing anything else that reminds people of racial equality issues

[Danny_boi 16]

this race issue would go away a lot faster if we stopped celebrating black history month or having affirmative action or doing anything else that reminds people of racial equality issues

Removing black history month isn't the problem it a baby-step for the solution. The problem is parents teaching and or sub-teaching their children that the other races are inferior. What is sub-teaching you ask? here's an example: A family is watching CNN and a black (or other race that's not white) man has robed a bank and killed a guy. The children are watching the news with the parents and the mom says "Uhh, these black (or other race that's not white) people are just the worst kind of people" The child hears this and form a perspective on these kind of people, so he/ she can be like their heroes mom and dad. This goes for all equal rights groups: races, sexual orientation, or small factions. Education is the key to end the slavery of racism.

[Sugaree]

this race issue would go away a lot faster if we stopped celebrating black history month or having affirmative action or doing anything else that reminds people of racial equality issues

This is actually what I think. Black History Month and affirmative action does nothing but lead to racial guilt. It's just as bad as the racists trying to deny rights to whoever they don't like based on their history.

Affirmative action also goes towards things like LGBT and women's issues. And this results in trying to make people who are straight or men or anyone feel guilty for being part of a group that "oppresses" a minority. While affirmative action brings these issues to the attention of the public at large, too often does it try to shame the group they are against. Unfortunately, it's these groups that also take part in using a wide brush stroke to paint their picture.

[Danny_boi 16]

This is actually what I think. Black History Month and affirmative action does nothing but lead to racial guilt. It's just as bad as the racists trying to deny rights to whoever they don't like based on their history.

Affirmative action also goes towards things like LGBT and women's issues. And this results in trying to make people who are straight or men or anyone feel guilty for being part of a group that "oppresses" a minority. While affirmative action brings these issues to the attention of the public at large, too often does it try to shame the group they are against. Unfortunately, it's these groups that also take part in using a wide brush stroke to paint their picture.

Not true Black history month and or any other type time of recognition or remembrance. Is not to make people fell guilty, but rather have their wrong ideas fixed in away that strives for a more perfect union.

[Sugaree]

Not true Black history month and or any other type time of recognition or remembrance. Is not to make people fell guilty, but rather have their wrong ideas fixed in away that strives for a more perfect union.

Where's Asian History Month? What about WHITE History Month? Hey, let's throw the Latinos in there too! But wait, we can't HAVE a white history month because that's racist.

You see what happens?

[Danny_boi 16]

Where's Asian History Month? What about WHITE History Month? Hey, let's throw the Latinos in there too! But wait, we can't HAVE a white history month because that's racist.

You see what happens?

The Asian American and Pacific history month is in May and Hispanic history month is in September- October.

The reason we don't have a white history month, because all of history is written and about the light skin people. There is no need of a white history month, if this nations history is the history of the white demographic. I am 100% sure John Locke, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt are not from Mexico. Like I said there is no need for a white history month, not because it would be racist, but because it is unnecessary if the majority of US and world history is about the white demographic. And we learn history... I hope.

[Sugaree]

The Asian American and Pacific history month is in May and Hispanic history month is in September- October.

The reason we don't have a white history month, because all of history is written and about the light skin people. There is no need of a white history month, if this nations history is the history of the white demographic. I am 100% sure John Locke, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt are not from Mexico. Like I said there is no need for a white history month, not because it would be racist, but because it is unnecessary if the majority of US and world history is about the white demographic. And we learn history... I hope.

So what you're saying is that it's fine to recognize the accomplishments of other races, but when it comes to WHITE people, you shouldn't recognize the achievements they've made. We only invented flying, the telephone, the telegram, travel by sea, travel by train, and a lot of the modernized world can be owed to white people. Yet if we celebrate any of that, if we recognize the race that did all that, it's not right?

[Danny_boi 16]

So what you're saying is that it's fine to recognize the accomplishments of other races, but when it comes to WHITE people, you shouldn't recognize the achievements they've made. We only invented flying, the telephone, the telegram, travel by sea, travel by train, and a lot of the modernized world can be owed to white people. Yet if we celebrate any of that, if we recognize the race that did all that, it's not right?

My dear boy, I'm not sure you read the my post on which you quoted. The white demographic does not need a month of recognition of achievements when we study history. If you open and go through a US history or world or ancient history textbook. It is filled with accomplishments of the human race; irrefutably those accomplishments were made by a light skinned demographic. But here's the undeniable truth, one does not need to be reassured that they are light skin. It doesn't matter to say " John Adams is a white guy!" That statement is unnecessary, the population knows he's a white male, there is no need to profess it. Why we have these heritage months is because, our western minds are too around the popular demographic. If one is to tell the great journey of mankind, but only taught about the 'white guys' that teacher would have failed the pupil and closed a bright blooming flower of knowledge. Therefore, the public school system needs to be re-written to make sure such mistakes don't happen. I'm glad I do not attend such institutions.

My friend, I recommend reading my post before you ask a question I have foreseen in my last post. Now the next time you post some think read. Because I don't like idiots, that refuse to learn or even read.

[FreeFall]

Black history month is NOT race shame month. Neither is Asian, Native American, or Hispanic heritage month. And Women's History month isn't a gender shaming month.
It's a month where we recognize, "hey (minority/females) people did this, see little children who are afraid of the mean people saying you're of an inferior race/sex/gender? They're full of shit, no race/gender/sex is inferior. Look at the many slew of months! So hold your head up, be proud and learn from every month and day of celebration." It was taught to us at a young age that being a different race/sex/gender is nothing and we're all capable of doing good (and evil but you don't teach kids that). None of the little white kids got upset, because they could turn around look at the wall of presidents or founding fathers.

There is no need for a man's month, or a white history month. Not yet, and let's hope it never comes to that. Pretty much from the oldest book written, the white man (males in general) was supreme. You can open a book, in nearly every "dominant" (well known like Egyptian or England) history study the males were the power holding ones. Elizabeth I and her sister Mary make their mark in detail, in my part of America anyways, if you're in the woman's history class. Any other text book, you'll see their names and who their dad was but that's it. Nothing in detail about their reign or themselves. Simply put, even during the women's and all of those ethnicity months, you can very easily learn about white/Europeans and everything they've done in history just by opening your textbook.
It's also interesting to note we have different television stations for nearly every religion, race and sexuality. Hopefully no one tunes into the 'Logo' station and get annoyed there's no 'straight people' television station. Because there's no need for it, it's everywhere. Or why we have B.E.T. and no W.E.T. In my opinion, that would be ABC or CBS. And then B.B.C and then wonder why there's no American Television station, well, there's no need for it and it's nice to have a separate station for the English shows. Better comedy.

[Sugaree]

My dear boy, I'm not sure you read the my post on which you quoted. The white demographic does not need a month of recognition of achievements when we study history. If you open and go through a US history or world or ancient history textbook. It is filled with accomplishments of the human race; irrefutably those accomplishments were made by a light skinned demographic. But here's the undeniable truth, one does not need to be reassured that they are light skin. It doesn't matter to say " John Adams is a white guy!" That statement is unnecessary, the population knows he's a white male, there is no need to profess it. Why we have these heritage months is because, our western minds are too around the popular demographic. If one is to tell the great journey of mankind, but only taught about the 'white guys' that teacher would have failed the pupil and closed a bright blooming flower of knowledge. Therefore, the public school system needs to be re-written to make sure such mistakes don't happen. I'm glad I do not attend such institutions.

My friend, I recommend reading my post before you ask a question I have foreseen in my last post. Now the next time you post some think read. Because I don't like idiots, that refuse to learn or even read.

But, to you, is there something wrong, if you're white, to take pride in everything people of your race have accomplished? I have nothing but respect for the pioneers of other races, but their accomplishments now are being so over embellished that to mention an accomplishment of a white man or woman is now deemed "racist".

There's nothing wrong with being proud about what your race has done and what it CAN do in the future. But my God, I can't wrap my head around this line of thought that "Well, the majority of history is white people, let's just ignore THEM and focus on blacks, latinos, and every OTHER group." Seriously, if you want to play up minorities so much, go ahead; but that doesn't help the notion that people need to be aware that it's ok to be prideful of your race. That is the point I am making, which many people think is thoroughly racist.

Black history month is NOT race shame month. Neither is Asian, Native American, or Hispanic heritage month. And Women's History month isn't a gender shaming month.
It's a month where we recognize, "hey (minority/females) people did this, see little children who are afraid of the mean people saying you're of an inferior race/sex/gender? They're full of shit, no race/gender/sex is inferior. Look at the many slew of months! So hold your head up, be proud and learn from every month and day of celebration." It was taught to us at a young age that being a different race/sex/gender is nothing and we're all capable of doing good (and evil but you don't teach kids that). None of the little white kids got upset, because they could turn around look at the wall of presidents or founding fathers.

There is no need for a man's month, or a white history month. Not yet, and let's hope it never comes to that. Pretty much from the oldest book written, the white man (males in general) was supreme. You can open a book, in nearly every "dominant" (well known like Egyptian or England) history study the males were the power holding ones. Elizabeth I and her sister Mary make their mark in detail, in my part of America anyways, if you're in the woman's history class. Any other text book, you'll see their names and who their dad was but that's it. Nothing in detail about their reign or themselves. Simply put, even during the women's and all of those ethnicity months, you can very easily learn about white/Europeans and everything they've done in history just by opening your textbook.
It's also interesting to note we have different television stations for nearly every religion, race and sexuality. Hopefully no one tunes into the 'Logo' station and get annoyed there's no 'straight people' television station. Because there's no need for it, it's everywhere. Or why we have B.E.T. and no W.E.T. In my opinion, that would be ABC or CBS. And then B.B.C and then wonder why there's no American Television station, well, there's no need for it and it's nice to have a separate station for the English shows. Better comedy.

This the problem, though. We want to make everyone equal yet separate at the same time. It doesn't work. You can't have Black Channel, Latino Channel, Women Channel, and a channel dedicated to every other race/gender and then ignore another race or gender. We shouldn't have books that separate the accomplishments of each race when it's part of the same history. There is no such thing as Black history or Latino history, only HUMAN history. And what people think, in the modern age, that there is somehow a complete difference between the history of one racial group and the combination of all racial groups.

There is no gap, there is no divide, we need to stop dedicating days and months to these silly and completely useless things. In fact, we should keep it all in the realms of how it should be kept. Black history in America is still American history; the same as Latino, European, and every other nationality that has graced the borders. Black History Month can easily be American History Month. A day dedicated to Latinos can be made into the same thing. But we have to remember that, first and foremost, it is HUMAN history which defines the world, not the sub-histories of every single race that we know.

[Danny_boi 16]

But, to you, is there something wrong, if you're white, to take pride in everything people of your race have accomplished? I have nothing but respect for the pioneers of other races, but their accomplishments now are being so over embellished that to mention an accomplishment of a white man or woman is now deemed "racist".

There's nothing wrong with being proud about what your race has done and what it CAN do in the future. But my God, I can't wrap my head around this line of thought that "Well, the majority of history is white people, let's just ignore THEM and focus on blacks, latinos, and every OTHER group." Seriously, if you want to play up minorities so much, go ahead; but that doesn't help the notion that people need to be aware that it's ok to be prideful of your race. That is the point I am making, which many people think is thoroughly racist.


There is nothing wrong with being white, be proud of who you are but if being white is the only accomplishment you're proud of that is pathetic. It is not racist to say the accomplishments of a white male or female, what is racist is to say 'only because of there color of their skin allowed them to do what they did'.

I'm not saying ignore the white history, because if you did you cannot teach history; like if you ignore Asian, African, or Middle Eastern history you cannot teach history.

You can find pride in your race, because I do too. The arbitrary line we call race by the color of their skin in untrue. You may have pride in your race while I can have pride in mine, for mine is the human race. And to me (and it should for the rest of the world), I don't care if your white,black, hispanic, asian, All I care about is that these accomplishments happened and humans are reasonable.

" I pray the we will all understand that there is only one race, the human race."-Abigail Adams

[LolaHaze]

Republicans like Romney aren't popular with black and hispanic voters because their social attitudes and policies do not favour those groups and frequently harm them. The same can be seen with other groups such as LGBTs.

I suggest you need to put your question to the Republican party: why do their politics make an issue of race or sexuality.

.

They don't. Democrats make an issue of race or sexuality. It's called "identity politics". Republicans believe that regardless of your race or gender or sexuality, your success is determined by you and you alone.

And the case can be made that Democratic policies are more harmful to black and hispanic voters, since they create a "cycle of dependency".

Even President Clinton admitted that this was the case when he was president.

[Majin Vegeta]

Removing black history month isn't the problem it a baby-step for the solution. The problem is parents teaching and or sub-teaching their children that the other races are inferior. What is sub-teaching you ask? here's an example: A family is watching CNN and a black (or other race that's not white) man has robed a bank and killed a guy. The children are watching the news with the parents and the mom says "Uhh, these black (or other race that's not white) people are just the worst kind of people" The child hears this and form a perspective on these kind of people, so he/ she can be like their heroes mom and dad. This goes for all equal rights groups: races, sexual orientation, or small factions. Education is the key to end the slavery of racism.

I guess you just have to be careful when to identify using race. I'll do that sometimes like say "the asian girl" when talking about someone that the other person doesn't know or whatever but doing it in front of a child when mentioning a criminal on the news is pretty messed up

Not true Black history month and or any other type time of recognition or remembrance. Is not to make people fell guilty, but rather have their wrong ideas fixed in away that strives for a more perfect union.

and during black history month they'll be saying "this is what we went through at that time" no, they're 15! they didn't experience segregation, their parents didn't experience segregation and their grandparents probably didn't either because we live in Maryland which I'm pretty sure is technically a northern state.

it's interesting how we can briefly talk about the holocaust in school without it effecting peoples views towards jews and germans. I think it's about not overdoing it


Please use the 'edit' or 'multi quote' button instead of double posting. Thanks. -StoppingTime.

[Sugaree]

There is nothing wrong with being white, be proud of who you are but if being white is the only accomplishment you're proud of that is pathetic. It is not racist to say the accomplishments of a white male or female, what is racist is to say 'only because of there color of their skin allowed them to do what they did'.

I never said I was proud of being white JUST BECAUSE I'm white. I'm saying that if a public figure were to say such a thing, they'd be getting whipped at the post. Yet if a public figure says they're proud to be Latino or Black, that's fine. Do you see the double standard yet?

Someone said it right after you posted, this is identity politics. It's disgusting and it needs to end. Yes, I recognize the fact that other races have done equally great things, even greater than their counterparts. But the double standard lies in this mentality of making an issue of people being proud to be white. Eventually, all the people on the fringe of this issue - blacks, latinos, etc. - have to let this shit go. All it does is make more racial tension than is needed.

[FreeFall]

and during black history month they'll be saying "this is what we went through at that time" no, they're 15! they didn't experience segregation, their parents didn't experience segregation and their grandparents probably didn't either because we live in Maryland which I'm pretty sure is technically a northern state.
You can't say that just because you're in a northern state. The 15 year olds, they're morons ignore them and I hate their kind, they're the reason I feel iffy about the history months. My grand-mother was born some time in the 30's in Louisiana. She can remember her Great-grandmother's back full of lashes from the "on the low employers". She can remember her grandparents telling her stories of the family they remembered. She lived in segregation and remembers it well and everyday is grateful to be able to walk anywhere anytime. She moved to Philly in the 50's. The north was safer, not heaven. Philly is one of those places, a black enclave. The people were nicer, the living was easier, in comparison to the South. Not oh it's the north it's completely fine, just that the chance of acceptance was higher than the north. My Pop-pop and Nanny, despite PA being in the north and its abolition laws, commonly found themselves denied due to race, under guise of "oh you live too far to work here". 1 mile is how far they lived from the school and under that law that was fine, that's too far? And my Pop-pop was denied a deck on his house, because they commonly "lost" his papers for the right to do so despite that he made so many copies I found some years after his death in the back of a closet. My mother was born in 61. My dad was born in 59, Michigan. He's white, but grew up very poor. His family lived in a black enclave since it was the only place they could afford. His dad, alcoholic to boot, would throw glass at the kids and said it was a shame my mother was black, because she's a nice woman. He "began to like blacks" when I was born. Bleh.
It wasn't until 1968 that the last bit of denial on race was snubbed out legally. There are many who can remember, they're dying out yes but they're still here.

This the problem, though. We want to make everyone equal yet separate at the same time. It doesn't work. You can't have Black Channel, Latino Channel, Women Channel, and a channel dedicated to every other race/gender and then ignore another race or gender. We shouldn't have books that separate the accomplishments of each race when it's part of the same history. There is no such thing as Black history or Latino history, only HUMAN history. And what people think, in the modern age, that there is somehow a complete difference between the history of one racial group and the combination of all racial groups.

There is no gap, there is no divide, we need to stop dedicating days and months to these silly and completely useless things. In fact, we should keep it all in the realms of how it should be kept. Black history in America is still American history; the same as Latino, European, and every other nationality that has graced the borders. Black History Month can easily be American History Month. A day dedicated to Latinos can be made into the same thing. But we have to remember that, first and foremost, it is HUMAN history which defines the world, not the sub-histories of every single race that we know.
I agree with you but it's not about putting them on a pedestal and saying oh we're so sorry for the things your ancestors went through here have some history months. It's so they don't believe the lies and take pride in their background. I think that's my fault for not having been clearer and assuming. I apologize.
There are splinter KKK group close to my home. There are Neo-Nazis here too. That's why I said that thing in quotes the "do not believe the lies of you being inferior". As far as I know, the ones in Lancaster and Allentown are active. They make it known, their ideals and their feelings. They're not aggressive, they're not too scary and they seem small. They're there though and moving about and are evil as ever. Our schools, my area anyways, taught us not to listen to them. This is PA.

That's what I was taught about the months and why we have them. ironically though, open up a text book and you can learn what George Washington ate for dinner. Try to learn what Susan B. Anthony really did for the womens' movement or where Georg Washington Carver was born, you're out of luck and better find a library or google. In regards to the no need of a whites appreciation or white people television, it's again, there's no need. I can express pride in my white heritage, the founding fathers and inventors. I can honestly say that the only way I was exposed to black inventors or anyone who isn't Malcolm X or Martin Luther King, was through my Mother and black history month.
I should've stuck this in with the previous post, sorry again for that.

EDIT: If America wants us to forget the racial lines being drawn, they need to do what you've said. All of HUMANS history. They need to focus on everything equally. They can go into great depth of Thomas Edison and everything he did and his entire life story. But not Benjamin Benneker. You won't hear about him unless it's February, you're looking him up, or have your hands on a book of black inventors.

[janisj182]

im with you on that one

[Zenos]

I was talking to a cousin of mine that was ateen in the 80's and he has stated that in America things have become confomist since the 90's when the whole Politicla correctness thing landed in America's lap like a bomb.

So expect more things like referring to people as racist here in Ameirca in an effort to make people conform to other peoples ideas!

[Danny_boi 16]

I never said I was proud of being white JUST BECAUSE I'm white. I'm saying that if a public figure were to say such a thing, they'd be getting whipped at the post. Yet if a public figure says they're proud to be Latino or Black, that's fine. Do you see the double standard yet?

Someone said it right after you posted, this is identity politics. It's disgusting and it needs to end. Yes, I recognize the fact that other races have done equally great things, even greater than their counterparts. But the double standard lies in this mentality of making an issue of people being proud to be white. Eventually, all the people on the fringe of this issue - blacks, latinos, etc. - have to let this shit go. All it does is make more racial tension than is needed.

There is no double standard. If the president says he's proud of being black The media would 'whip him at the pole' is the vice president says he's proud of being white the media would 'whip him at the pole'. If it a high profile person of any race says his proud of being whom they are, there's always a minority of people would get upset and there going to 'whip the high profile person at the pole'. What is racist is people thinking all black people like Obama because his black or like Hip-hop music or like saying everyone in the middle east hate America. There is no double standard. The people you know or classify whom say thing against white people because there white, that is racism. The people say Romney is a racist challenge their facts. But don't say there is double standard.

[Danny_boi 16]

and during black history month they'll be saying "this is what we went through at that time" no, they're 15! they didn't experience segregation, their parents didn't experience segregation and their grandparents probably didn't either because we live in Maryland which I'm pretty sure is technically a northern state.

it's interesting how we can briefly talk about the holocaust in school without it effecting peoples views towards jews and germans. I think it's about not overdoing it

Well just because, your in Maryland doesn't mean there wasn't segregation or even slavery. In fact slavery was also predominant in the north until 1820 with the Missouri Compromise and segregation till 1954 and even after there where still segregation till Pres. Eisenhower. So if the parent are over 40 then they might experience segregation, the grand-parents most definitely experience segregation, It doesn't matter that you live in Maryland. No, the 15 year olds didn't experience it at all. And tell him/her that and ask why they feel like that.

[randomnessqueen]

the term is definitely overused today.
racism is seeing any ethnicity as being inferior in itself.
cracking a racist joke may be rude, but 90% of the time, they arent actually racist.

[LolaHaze]

they didn't experience segregation, their parents didn't experience segregation and their grandparents probably didn't either because we live in Maryland which I'm pretty sure is technically a northern state.


Please use the 'edit' or 'multi quote' button instead of double posting. Thanks. -StoppingTime.

I hate to say this, Majin... I live in Maryland, out on the Eastern Shore. Maryland was a slave holding state (Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman both lived out here as slaves). Queen Anne's County, one of the Eastern Shore counties, was one of the last two segregated counties in Maryland, desegregated in 1966.

I believe we live in a post-racial society, and I believe in equality of opportunity, rather than equality of outcome, and I do not believe in identity politics.

But there is an unpleasant history, even in Maryland.

[Zenos]

I hate to say this, Majin... I live in Maryland, out on the Eastern Shore. Maryland was a slave holding state (Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman both lived out here as slaves). Queen Anne's County, one of the Eastern Shore counties, was one of the last two segregated counties in Maryland, desegregated in 1966.

I believe we live in a post-racial society, and I believe in equality of opportunity, rather than equality of outcome, and I do not believe in identity politics.

But there is an unpleasant history, even in Maryland.




As long as there are humans alive,there will be racism in some shape and form,no use in denying that!

Post-racial? I don't buy into that. It's a theoretical idea that has not come about.

Proof? People going on and on about How Obama's the first African American president. So if it's a post racial society we live in they'd just see him as President and not discuss the fact he's the first African-American preisdent,which by the way he's not he's the first Mixed race preisdent as his mother is white!


Defintions of Post Racial:


1)post-racial
–adjective.
beyond discussions of race & racism
Origin: 2008–10, Americanism

Word Origin & History

A term used to describe a society or time period in which discussions around race and racism have been deemed no longer relevant to current social dynamics. Popularized after the election of Barack Obama to the presidency of the United States of America in 2009.


2)Post-Racial

An utterly imaginary and fictional term, much like "pixie-dust" because there is no such thing.

The idea of a post-racial America is comforting to many, yet that does not make the idea reality.

Maybe one day America will truly be post-racial but the election of an African-American president does not mean the nation as a whole has moved beyond all racial issues and racist points of view.


Also check:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-racial_America

also:


http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/08/no-such-place-as-post-racial-america/
November 8, 2011, 1:48 pm 89 Comments
No Such Place as ‘Post-Racial’ America
By TOURé
Dear America,

Please, I beg you, stop using the bankrupt and meaningless term “post-racial!” There’s no such thing as “post-racial.” There’s no place that fits the description “post-racial America.” There’s no “post-racial era.” It’s a term for a concept that does not exist. There’s no there there.

We are not a nation devoid of racial discrimination nor are we a nation where race does not matter. Race and racism are still critical factors in determining what happens and who gets ahead in America. The election of Barack Obama ushered in this silly term and now that he’s begun running for re-election, I’m here to brusquely escort it out of the party called American English because it’s a con man of a term, selling you a concept that doesn’t exist.

“Post-racial” is a mythical idea that should be as painful to the mind’s ear as fingernails on the chalkboard are to the outer ear. It’s an intellectual Loch Ness monster. It is indeed a monster because it’s dangerous. What people seem to mean by “post-racial” is: nowadays race no longer matters and anyone can accomplish anything because racism is behind us. All of that is false. But widespread use of the term lends credence to the idea that all of that is true—I mean, why would we have a term for an idea that’s not real? In that way the lie becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and thus feeds the notion that it’s O.K. to be somnambulant about race or even aggressively dismissive of it.

Race is like weather — we only talk about it when it’s extreme but it’s always there.
If, as “post-racial” suggests, race no longer matters, then we no longer need to think about race or take the discussion of it seriously. In this way the concept becomes a shield against uncomfortable but necessary discussions allowing people to say or think, “Why are they complaining about racism? We’re post-racial.”

This barrier to conversation is dangerous in a nation where race and racism still matter very much. A place where black unemployment is far higher than white unemployment, where profiling and institutional racism and white privilege and myriad other forms of racism still shape so much of life in America. If we don’t need to discuss race then it’s allowed to fester and grow unchecked like an untreated malignant tumor. Race is an issue every American must care about. It’s not a black issue, it’s everyone’s issue. It’s relevant and important for whites because we all live here together and because the issue hurts everyone. If your neighbor’s house is on fire, or gets foreclosed, you have a problem. If your neighbor’s soul is on fire you have a major problem.

Only through being aware of racial disparities and talking about race can we have any chance of forward movement. Because nowadays there are many white people who are not racist, who are perhaps anti-racist, but who still benefit from white privilege without even meaning to. So you may not be racist but still receiving the spoils of racism. That still doesn’t make you racist. But it makes you part of the system and reveals why it’s also your responsibility to interrogate and examine how our society works and be aware of the biases that keep white supremacy functioning. The term “post-racial” is the enemy of communication, understanding and progress. (“Post-racial” is not at all synonymous with “post-black,” a term from the art world that explains modern black identity and the complexity of being black today and is the guiding force of my book “Who’s Afraid of Post-Blackness?”)

“Post-racial” is just one of several terms that only pervert and distort the discussion of race and give people who wish to disrupt the conversation a place to park their ideas. Others include “race card” and “reverse racism” and “race baiter.” The naïve term “race card” always refers to a black person racializing a situation that the person using the term thinks doesn’t need to be racialized. It’s as if race was not part of the situation, and no one was being black or white, and everybody was being color blind, and whistling sweetly, until a black person came along and ruined everything by pointing out race. But race is like weather—we only talk about it when it’s extreme but it’s always there.

Interestingly, “race card” is never used to signify a white person using race—as they do when they use the term race card thus trying to repudiate or silence discussion of race. I wonder why that is. The ludicrous term “reverse racism” has been around for a long time but has gained new force in this era in which people use the term “post-racial.” It seems to function like some sort of rallying cry. “We no longer need be cowed by your accusations of racism! We have the antidote! We have a concept called reverse racism! Whenever you cry racism we’ll retort reverse racism! Then we don’t have to take you seriously! Muahahaha!”

From a linguistic standpoint the term is meaningless: something is either racist or it’s not. Reverse makes no sense. There’s no stipulation within the definition of racism that it need be white to black. Ultimately this is another term that seeks to replace potentially productive discussions of race with noise. “Race baiter” works in the same way, as an attempt to reject the conversation about race.

I suspect “post-racial” was born benignly from the hope that Obama’s electoral success meant that the racial problems that have long plagued America were over. Kumbaya. Surely Obama’s victory revealed something had changed in America, but it was not a signal that we’d reached the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s mountaintop world where race no longer matters and equality has been achieved. During the Obama administration “post-racial” and “race card” and “reverse racism” have run amok like gremlins in the language, obfuscating race and making discussions about it harder. America still has so much work to do regarding race and racism and “post-racial” is only making that work harder to do. That’s why “post-racial” and its cohorts must be stopped posthaste.

Thank you, Touré

[LolaHaze]

Post-racial? I don't buy into that. It's a theoretical idea that has not come about...

America still has so much work to do regarding race and racism and “post-racial” is only making that work harder to do. That’s why “post-racial” and its cohorts must be stopped posthaste.

Thank you, Touré

I never mentioned the President. You did. You may not be post-racial, but to extrapolate from you to "society in general" would be like extrapolating that all kids like to do surveys on sex because a handful of kids here on VTF do.

While there may be hold-outs in society who hold deep racist views, that doesn't change the fact that most Americans could care less about the race of an individual than they do about that individuals abilities to achieve.

_THAT'S_ what makes us a post-racial society - not whether or not Barack Obama was elected President, or whether or not you believe the term is valid, or pixie-dust, or whatever.

[Zenos]

I never mentioned the President. You did. You may not be post-racial, but to extrapolate from you to "society in general" would be like extrapolating that all kids like to do surveys on sex because a handful of kids here on VTF do.

While there may be hold-outs in society who hold deep racist views, that doesn't change the fact that most Americans could care less about the race of an individual than they do about that individuals abilities to achieve.

_THAT'S_ what makes us a post-racial society - not whether or not Barack Obama was elected President, or whether or not you believe the term is valid, or pixie-dust, or whatever.



Typical typical! You obviously didn't take the time to read what i posted,other wise you'd have realized the whole post racial term go started when Obama was originally elected.

Yeh it would be nice if Ameirca was Post-racial,but despite you're claims we are not there yet,getting there yeh but there not there yet.

And talking about "extrapolating",you take your views and claim :"While there may be hold-outs in society who hold deep racist views, that doesn't change the fact that most Americans could care less about the race of an individual than they do about that individuals abilities to achieve."

Now how is a generalized claim like that not "extrapolating",your views and beliefs on the rest of America,and on me when you said "You may not be post-racial".

So how about stop "extrapolating" you're views off on me,becaus ei happen to be dating and madly in love with an individual who is asian!

But as I said America is a long way from being truly "Post-Racial".but we are slowly on the way there,to make a blanket staement that we are there is bunk what with all the racism open or hidden that is still going on.

After all remeber the Trayvon Martin stuff,the guy that shot him was Hispanic not white and yet everyone was claiming he was white and people where pissed at whites for what a hispanic man did,and the leaders of the black community where railing against whites.So no we are not there yet,but like i said simply on the way,and we may not get there in our lifetimes!

Plkus remeber in America the land of free speech ,most people hide their racial views due to the fact a perosn can lose they jobs over it!

Also that is your opinion,but for example 200-300 years in the future people today of the early 21st century might be viewed as the most racist,violent hate filled war mongering examples of humanity ever but then that would be their opinion doesn't make it fact ,just as just because your opinion is we are a post racial nation does not make it fact just your opinion.

[LolaHaze]

Typical typical! You obviously didn't take the time to read what i posted,other wise you'd have realized the whole post racial term go started when Obama was originally elected.

Yeh it would be nice if Ameirca was Post-racial,but despite you're claims we are not there yet,getting there yeh but there not there yet.

And talking about "extrapolating",you take your views and claim :"While there may be hold-outs in society who hold deep racist views, that doesn't change the fact that most Americans could care less about the race of an individual than they do about that individuals abilities to achieve."

Now how is a generalized claim like that not "extrapolating",your views and beliefs on the rest of America,and on me when you said "You may not be post-racial".

So how about stop "extrapolating" you're views off on me,becaus ei happen to be dating and madly in love with an individual who is asian!

But as I said America is a long way from being truly "Post-Racial".but we are slowly on the way there,to make a blanket staement that we are there is bunk what with all the racism open or hidden that is still going on.

After all remeber the Trayvon Martin stuff,the guy that shot him was Hispanic not white and yet everyone was claiming he was white and people where pissed at whites for what a hispanic man did,and the leaders of the black community where railing against whites.So no we are not there yet,but like i said simply on the way,and we may not get there in our lifetimes!

Plkus remeber in America the land of free speech ,most people hide their racial views due to the fact a perosn can lose they jobs over it!

Also that is your opinion,but for example 200-300 years in the future people today of the early 21st century might be viewed as the most racist,violent hate filled war mongering examples of humanity ever but then that would be their opinion doesn't make it fact ,just as just because your opinion is we are a post racial nation does not make it fact just your opinion.

Please... your opinion is not any more or less valid than mine is... and your belief that America is not post-racial is just that, your opinion!

And you are incorrect to assert that the term "got started" when President Obama was elected. It was in use well before that, as a simple Google Search will show. And that's a fact.

What concerns me is that the people who are the most loudly complaining that America is NOT post racial, are the people who stand to lose the most should America BE post racial.

And I think people who have a vested interest in an outcome shouldn't be the ones on whose pronouncements we ought to rely.

I have no vested interest in whether or not America is post-racial. It would neither benefit me nor harm me regardless.

What I do know is that I take the Declaration of Independence to heart, and that numerous studies have shown that for our generation, especially, we do not care a bit about someone's race.

[Zenos]

Please... your opinion is not any more or less valid than mine is... and your belief that America is not post-racial is just that, your opinion!

And you are incorrect to assert that the term "got started" when President Obama was elected. It was in use well before that, as a simple Google Search will show. And that's a fact.

What concerns me is that the people who are the most loudly complaining that America is NOT post racial, are the people who stand to lose the most should America BE post racial.

And I think people who have a vested interest in an outcome shouldn't be the ones on whose pronouncements we ought to rely.

I have no vested interest in whether or not America is post-racial. It would neither benefit me nor harm me regardless.

What I do know is that I take the Declaration of Independence to heart, and that numerous studies have shown that for our generation, especially, we do not care a bit about someone's race.


Opinions being what they are,.if we get there we get there,if we don't we don't,I just wnat to be left alone to live my life as I so choose as long as I am not infringing on others nor being infringed upon!

But I will say this you do realize studies can and do get manipulated on a daily basis to promote one groups viewpoints to seem like the mojorites don't you?

Thats the reason I stopped listening to said studies,and simply observe people regardless of race and those who show themselevs to be worth befriending I get to know.

[LolaHaze]

Opinions being what they are,.if we get there we get there,if we don't we don't,I just wnat to be left alone to live my life as I so choose as long as I am not infringing on others nor being infringed upon!

But I will say this you do realize studies can and do get manipulated on a daily basis to promote one groups viewpoints to seem like the mojorites don't you?

Thats the reason I stopped listening to said studies,and simply observe people regardless of race and those who show themselevs to be worth befriending I get to know.

Which means that you're post racial.

[Zenos]

Which means that you're post racial.

No i just don't label myself!

Though i will admit yes I am white,and my ethnic orgins is Celtic (Irish,Welsh,Scottish).

But is asked what race I am I always reply Celtic!