Election 2012

[Clodfobble]

According to that set of definitions, it's not possible to "be" racist at all, unless you are the embodiment of an entire society. If you want to insist on your definitions--which are certainly not the same as the vernacular usage common today, but the common person isn't always right, it's true--then you might be better served by saying, "an individual cannot be racist, you mean discriminating," rather than leading with the notion that white people can't experience it, since that's bound to be inflammatory to those who are in all good conscience using the terms racism and discrimination as synonyms.

[DanaC]

rac·ism
   [rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA

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.

By strict definition, an individual can be racist and a white person in America can experience racism at the hands of a black person.

I don't think the two experiences of racism in any way equate, mind you. There is a power differential to consider.

[sexobon]

Ibby, English is a living language with streamlining changes often occurring to suit a particular purpose; unfortunately, sometimes at the loss of specificity. Frankly, you haven't been living long enough for your endorsement of such changes to carry much weight.

Go back to Webster's New World Dictionary Second College Edition, Copyright 1976 and we find:

ra.cial.ism n. 1. a doctrine or teaching, without scientific support, that claims to find racial differences in character, intelligence, etc., that asserts the superiority of one race over another or others, and that seeks to maintain the supposed purity of a race or the races. 2. same as RACISM (sense 2) ---ra'cial.ist n., adj.

The first sense of the above word is where the "institutionalized" aspect comes from as doctrines and teachings are primarily the purview of the prevailing culture.

ra.cism n. 1. same as RACIALISM (sense 1) 2. any program or practice of racial discrimination, based on racialism ---rac'ist n., adj.

This is the word that was intended to describe "any" (i.e. institutional and individual) racial discrimination.

In the good ol' USA, the word "racialism" fell out of popularity with "racism" being substituted for it while maintaining its application for describing individuals as racists. The definition you presented seems to drop that application which, as Clod said, would preclude any individual from being called racist; unless, their whole cultural social structure exhibited the same behavior. This reeks of agenda. I don't buy it; but, I can see how it would appeal to a connoisseur of poppycock.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by sexobon

In the good ol' USA, the word "racialism" fell out of popularity with "racism" being substituted for it while maintaining its application for describing individuals as racists. The definition you presented seems to drop that application which, as Clod said, would preclude any individual from being called racist; unless, their whole cultural social structure exhibited the same behavior. This reeks of agenda. I don't buy it; but, I can see how it would appeal to a connoisseur of poppycock.

I agree and disagree.

I disagree because the definition of racism implies a social doctrine. Even though discrimination and racism are considered synonymous in our society, I would argue that there has to be some social structure behind a racist. This social structure does not have to be very severe, but I believe it has to exist.

I agree because I believe a person can be racist by attempting to promote a prejudice in society. If I somehow promote that Mongolians are lazy and try to get society to embrace that view, I would consider that racism because of the interaction with society. If you discriminate without promoting the behavior I would not consider that racism. It is semantics at this point but I think, for definition sake, they should be separate.


I think this addresses your point?

[sexobon]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

... I think this addresses your point?

I believe there is also induced individual racism. A victim of racism, who has not been a racist, may become a racist if there's no remedy after being victimized due to a dominant racist social structure behind the perpetrator. The victim's social support structure may become racist in response to the victim's situation rather than the other way around. It's a learned behavior that can be taught both ways.

I don't believe discrimination and racism are synonymous. Racism is just one of many forms of discrimination and its relative importance varies among societies around the world.

I do believe that promoting racial prejudice in any way, words (e.g. defamation) or actions (e.g. discrimination), is racism in any instance since even if we had a racism free social structure there would always be individuals who buck the system.

[Ibby]

I'm'a believe the huge body of scholarly/academic literature written by PoC over a dictionary written by (very very likely racist) white people.

[Ibby]

Not particularly bovvered i gotta say.

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by Ibby

Attachment 41507

Not particularly bovvered i gotta say.

In particular, the all-important Ohio:

[DanaC]

Nice post pierce.

The thing with race and racism is it isn't half as simple as it first appears to be.

Life is messy. Society is messy.

Race is one factor in a nexus of factors that defines an individual's experience of and place in the world. Race, class and gender in particular work together to produce a particular experience in society.

If a middle-class black manager passes over a working-class, white woman because he prefers to employ/promote black workers then she is experiencing racism. The power differential isn't coming from race, it's coming from a combination of class and gender, but the act of passing over is an expression of racism.

[xoxoxoBruce]

True Dana, 35 years ago at Westinghouse Steam Turbine, complaints by civil rights groups prompted the hiring of a black man to head up personnel. But after he'd hired over 150 black people and no whites or Asians, they found out it isn't that simple.

[maineiac04631]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Of course not, none exists, but I believe he was addressing the reality that the two parties have locked up sufficient control to squash a third party run for anything but a local post.

Originally Posted by Adak

Oh, you can have more than two political parties, (and we do), but the way our gov't is set up by the Constitution, only two parties are ever likely to dominate any election.

The day will come when elections will not have primaries but there will be runoff elections, people will choose between 5 or 6 parties in the first round and then between the top two finishers in the second round.

This will probably happen after we start driving flying cars that run on sunlight, America is not that advanced yet.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I've been disappointed in Obamas lack of aggressiveness, and unwillingness to go back to the voters for support before the reelection campaign. I'll still vote for him.
This article sums up pretty how I feel about this election.

Here are the facts. The majority does not want war, it does not want unnecessary intrusions, and it wants to be humane toward the poor and sick and immigrants and gays. The other side is running out of angry white men to win elections. If this historic election goes to Obama, then the Republicans will never again mount a campaign based on such extremism, because the limited electoral appeal of this repressive ideology will have been exposed.
If even conditions of economic distress (though they’re much exaggerated by the Republicans) can’t secure a national election, then the Tea Party will be dead, extremism will be dead, and the Republicans might start contemplating moderation again, a la Jeb Bush or Jon Huntsman. They will pull back from the brink of extinction.

[ZenGum]

Well I hope so, but we shouldn't underestimate the tenacity of power-hungry shysters.

On the other hand ... Christie-Huntsman 2016!

Seriously, Christie is about as good a leader as I can see anywhere in the US. Huntsman seems sane, despite coming from Utah.

[orthodoc]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

On the other hand ... Christie-Huntsman 2016!

Seriously, Christie is about as good a leader as I can see anywhere in the US. Huntsman seems sane, despite coming from Utah.

You're so far ahead of most North Americans, it's scary.

[piercehawkeye45]

I would have seriously considered Huntsman over Obama.

Christie seems more popular among Democrats than Republicans right now. However, he was told by Republicans that his "endorsement" of Obama won't be forgotten. We will see.


Also, I find it funny that the best (most realistic) critiques of the Obama administration have come from Obama endorsements.