Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
You've had an agenda against me since the beginning. You exhibit the same knee jerk reaction as the others that have been called out but you actually provide no real basis for your opinion.
I will not engage with you. You clearly missed the point.
I’m well informed and I have no agenda against you.
I didn’t state my opinion in the last post, rather I challenged you - and did so apparently beyond your ability to respond. Who’s deflecting now? (Here’s a hint - you are.)
I can assure you the basis for my opinion is real, but you have no interest in learning about it.
It takes quite a bit of nerve for a person who comes to a country like the US - and who benefits from its social and economic system - to turn around and criticize the people who made it what it is all the while insulating yourself from the perils of this society related to class and race.
Sometimes, well most of the time, when talking about racism, white guys are usually too quick to make observations about what’s real and what’s not real. It would be interesting to see some of these arguments made to black people in the US. But I’m glad the conversation is continuing- convivencia is more difficult in real life ain’t it.
Yes that has been my experience as well. I do wonder though whether the simple fact of being in a foreign land doesn't just make it easier to pick up on these kinds of things, where we might be less sensitive to them at "home". The figures for France clearly show there's a deeply rooted problem with racism. It means something that the FN could systematically score in the double digits even when its leader was openly racist and openly revisionist. Just as it means something that more often than not there are manned police booths in front of the synagogues in Paris. Yet in everyday life you just don't hear as much the kind of overtly racist comments that you hear in Spain. Perhaps it bears some relationship to what Ramzi was saying. Dunno. It's certainly true that in general Spanish people would tend to think that in France we put on too many pretenses (and let's be honest, you all think that about us ^^).
As for the US, to me the debate around "race" is very difficult to understand. In some ways it feels like people are locked into an archaic way of framing the question that just doesn't lead anywhere. Of course, racism doesn't disappear just because the government says it does. But there's something very curious about people identifying with something quite as unrealistic as "race", and something even more curious about public institutions recognizing these labels. I think I've said this before on the foro, but in France calling someone "African-French" or "Asian-French" or whatever would, in most contexts, be insulting more than a celebration of someone's heritage. I'm just not sure how one is supposed to move beyond racism while at the same time upholding the very concepts that justify it.
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
I will not engage with you. You clearly missed the point.
Shroomy I've found this thread very informative and I'm certainly interested in your views. So please don't let it get personal.
You mentioned deflection but surely it is perfectly valid to compare one situation with another. This allows us to see what is really going on. It let's us see how variations in circumstance can impact thinking.
I as a child had a loving great aunt and best uncle in the world. They lived in North London. First they saw their world (typically much smaller in those days) invaded by the Irish and then the blacks. They had their house taken from them (urban redevelopment) and put into a small flat surrounded by blacks. They were too scared to go out. It killed them in the end.
It certainly gave me some racist tendencies at a young age. Those tendencies didn't leave me totally until I was 30.
Oddly recently I was accused of being racist in the UK because I support Brexit. The problem is the accusers IMHO don't understand the difference between defending your culture and racism. I don't see them as equal.
All I'm saying is that it is complex so please continue participating.
On the US I visited many parts between 1980 and 2010. The racism was more obvious to me (visible) than I've seen in other countries. (Well leaving South Africa out of it). More visible doesn't I guess mean that there is more of it. Americans (again IMHO) do tend to be bold. more obvious, more direct, outspoken, as my american diving mate offered, so I guess it maybe an illusion.
_____________________________
nigel (el raton de Watford - now Puerto de Santa Maria, Cadiz)
The original points of this debate have their pivot on 2 assertions: “shiny on the outside, empty on the inside” and (more or less) “people who have been welcomed and spoiled our health and welfare system are not entitled to despise it after”. Both are fondamentally true (the latter with some distinctions probably) without the need to call for racism. Racism is a straw man just closing any debate whereas the point here is the right of a State to rule the migration flows and after to allow just a “partial” or “gradual” integration. Borders are a necessary element of any State and integration is a complicate matter everywhere. Everywhere, not only in the USA: look at Europe with all the migrants coming in from Africa and the Middle East: same stuff. It’s interesting also the radicalisation of the second generation of migrant families, often prompted by a claimed sense of emptiness of the western society. On the other side, citizens with granted rights (both native and settled immigrants, often the latter more than the first ones) just aim to defend their status quo (money, work and welfare). It’s selfishness and survival instinct more than racism. Brexit teaches it.
If true the circumstances you describe regarding “free immigration and cultural diversity” had little to do with the development of flamenco.
Flamenco music has its roots in Arabian, Moorish, Turkish, Persian, Jewish, Roma and Spanish folklore music. You can't deny it. This is fact. As I wrote free migration of people and coexistence and inter-influence of different cultures gave rise to flamenco. So free immigration and cultural diversity have a lot to do with what flamenco is today. Flamenco music has developed even further and had a fusion with jazz which has evolved under similar circumstances.
quote:
It takes quite a bit of nerve for a person who comes to a country like the US - and who benefits from its social and economic system - to turn around and criticize the people who made it what it is all the while insulating yourself from the perils of this society related to class and race.
You have no clue about it man. Neither legal nor illegal immigrants are a burden to the social system. Both group of people come and keep living fully at their own expense. This is also true for people who received permanent residence. Plus they help you even boost your economy doing a hard and odd job you don't want to do.
Those who are a burden to social system are asylum seeker and people who own the citizenship, for example you. In fact, asylum seeker as a whole cost less than your military expenditure.
...and now with the Trump administration. You just skipped over that part as if it was nothing. Yet, that is probably the biggest thing to talk about because his support brings out the REAL side of a lot of Americans. All you gotta do is take the bag out of your heads. Bill particularly has a very outdated image of immigration in this country and in the world even though he should be the most sensitive to it due to his diplomatic career.
The question at the beginning of your comment, "You guys done jerking each other off?" is at the level of a high school sophomore and says it all.
Your continued misrepresentation of my comments and thoughts, as well as those of others in this thread, demonstrates that you are not serious in engaging in a real discussion and debate over the issues raised. You appear to just want to mount ad hominem attacks against those with whom you disagree. As I stated above, you should look elsewhere if all you want to do is engage in a pissing match. The Foro, and this thread (which, ironically, you started), deserve better.
Regarding your quote above questioning my knowledge and experience about immigration, I quote from my comment on immigration: "I don't present these thoughts as "ground truth." Rather, I have developed them over a lengthy period of time based on my experience and knowledge of U.S. immigration and asylum law, as well as international refugee and asylum conventions. I have had direct, first-hand experience with immigrant visa cases overseas. As a junior Foreign Service Officer at the U.S. Embassy in Manila, I spent one year of my assignment split between acting as a liaison officer between the Embassy and Subic Naval Base and Clark Air Base, and working in the immigrant visa section adjudicating cases." I continue following the immigration and asylum debate and know it well. I don't need lectures from you on the topic.
And as to your charge that everyone skipped over the effects of the Trump administration, I quote from my comment about racism in the U.S.: "We are living in a political era that has enabled more blatant expressions of racism than has occurred in a long time. Nevertheless, I don't think racism has increased; rather, I think that the existing racists have been more emboldened to express their venom publicly."
You obviously did not read my comments or you deliberately engaged in further misrepresentation, as if I had never written them. Nevertheless, your arrogance in suggesting that I don't know about immigration in the U.S., after having handled it as part of my career in the Foreign Service and continuing to be interested in it today, says more about you than it does about me.
This is an interesting discussion about important topics: racism and immigration. I hope Simon does not lock this thread just because of one individual's continued rants, ad hominem attacks, and misrepresentations.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
Flamenco music has its roots in Arabian, Moorish, Turkish, Persian, Jewish, Roma and Spanish folklore music. You can't deny it. This is fact. As I wrote free migration of people and coexistence and inter-influence of different cultures gave rise to flamenco. So free immigration and cultural diversity have a lot to do with what flamenco is today. Flamenco music has developed even further and had a fusion with jazz which has evolved under similar circumstances.
If you read my post again you will notice that I did, in fact, deny your argument. Using terms that have become common in recent years to describe past behavior is misleading and wrong. At the time of the Inquisition there wasn’t much “free immigration” in Spain. That was my point. Also, there are many places in the world where cultures coexist and those circumstances haven’t created new forms of music. Something more is at wok here.
quote:
You have no clue about it man. Neither legal nor illegal immigrants are a burden to the social system. Both group of people come and keep living fully at their own expense. This is also true for people who received permanent residence. Plus they help you even boost your economy doing a hard and odd job you don't want to do.
All four of my grandparents emigrated to the US after WWI. This was a time when the Klan’s membership swelled to meet the threat of Catholic immigrants. I know a lot about what immigrants go through - you’re the one who is clueless.
Illegal immigrants who are engaged in the drug trade and gang activity are a huge burden to this society.
I never mentioned anything about immigrants taking people’s jobs. Also, Shroomy is an engineer and Ramzi is an MD. Are you suggesting that US citizens don’t want to be engineers or doctors?
If your goal was to make unfounded assumptions and assert the most pedestrian arguments you’ve succeeded admirably.
Sometimes, well most of the time, when talking about racism, white guys are usually too quick to make observations about what’s real and what’s not real. It would be interesting to see some of these arguments made to black people in the US. But I’m glad the conversation is continuing- convivencia is more difficult in real life ain’t it.
There is a solution at hand to solving the problem of illegal immigrants entering the U.S., if only our Congress, Executive, and business community demonstrated the courage to implement it. And it does not involve Trump's "wall," which will not solve the problem, even if it were to be built.
A program called E-Verify already exists, and there are already laws on the books to sanction employers who hire illegal immigrants. E-Verify matches Social Security numbers of potential employees, submitted by employers, against those listed by the Social Security Administration to ensure the person seeking employment is authorized to work in the U.S. If the potential employee does not match the SSA's profile under that number, he is not authorized to work and the employer would not hire him. And, of course, illegal immigrants who lack even forged SS numbers would not be considered for employment.
The sanctions already on the books against employers who hired illegal immigrants under this system would be applied, and the punishment would be severe enough to serve as a deterrence. That was the problem under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (otherwise known as the Simpson-Mazzoli Act) passed under President Reagan. Approximately three million illegal immigrants achieved legal status under the amnesty, but the employer sanctions were never implemented, leading to more illegal immigrants entering the U.S. hoping for the next amnesty.
As to who would work in jobs now held by illegal immigrants, the solution to that already exists as well. Two non-immigrant visa categories--H-2A and H-2B--are for temporary workers. The H-2A visa is for temporary, seasonal, agricultural work for which no, or insufficient numbers of Americans are available. The H-2B visa is for temporary, non-agricultural, unskilled work for which no, or insufficient numbers of Americans are available. An employer would obtain authorization from the Department of Labor, as is done now, and upon approval would receive an approved petition from Immigration authorities to hire the workers, who would then apply for their visas at the American Embassy or Consulate in their country.
We could have been doing this all along, but there is great resistance from the business community and their Congressional representatives because the businesses would have to adhere to labor laws, including appropriate salary, living conditions, etc. I suspect that ordinary Americans would not like it much either, as the price of their lettuce, vegetables, fruit, and non-agricultural products would rise. But it could be done if enough people, including Congressional leaders and businesses, would demonstrate some courage.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
I lived in the US on a L1 visa but they won't let me back in because they claim I still live there and I cannot prove a negative. No rush to go back while Trump is in the White House, anyway.
I lived in the US on a L1 visa but they won't let me back in because they claim I still live there and I cannot prove a negative. No rush to go back while Trump is in the White House, anyway.
That is strange, Simon. Any idea why they think you still live in the U.S.? If and when you want to visit the U.S. again, an immigration attorney might be able to solve the problem with the Department of Homeland Security or the State Department.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
I lived in the US on a L1 visa but they won't let me back in because they claim I still live there and I cannot prove a negative. No rush to go back while Trump is in the White House, anyway
I wonder what would happen if you were in the US. Would they have to let you stay if your L1 visa had not expired?
Bill that seems to all hang together. Hopefully after Brexit the UK will be implementing such a system.
But I think one needs to be careful. I know the US jobs market is looking good at the moment but one needs a system that works in the bad times and not just the good.
There are of course two types of immigrants (I simplify). Those who are qualified and/or have experience. And those looking to do low pay jobs the locals do not want or need to do.
I feel rather embarrassed that the UK raids countries of their young qualified talent rather than train the local population (e.g. nurses). And am also embarrassed when workers in the second group are abused with as you mentioned employers who do not want to pay the minimum and/or liveable wage.
The other thing I think is how people who cannot work are handled. Just putting them on the next boat back to hell, or leaving them dying on the streets, or ignoring them - I think no one wants. There for sure needs to be a fair system that doesn't leave people in limbo for years
One reason I supported Brexit was that, in a very small way, qualified Spaniards might be encouraged to stay in Spain and help build the economy rather than running to the UK. But that's a different topic
_____________________________
nigel (el raton de Watford - now Puerto de Santa Maria, Cadiz)
That's what happened a few years back in France with so-called "accidental Americans". These were French people who on paper also had US citizenship because they were born there but otherwise had no real ties to the country. Usually the children of French expatriates who had worked a few years in the US. Some of them weren't even aware that they had US citizenship. Then FATCA came along, which essentially forced French banks to report the financial information of their American clients. And, as non compliance meant hefty fines for them, they did their due diligence and really hunted down those American clients. So these "accidental Americans" were in a bind. If they chose to ignore it, their banks would ask them to leave. Not only that, but they would be open to potential lawsuits by US authorities. The other option was to renounce US citizenship. But here's the kicker: before they could renounce this citizenship they hardly even knew they had, they had to file taxes to the IRS going back several years and pay back taxes on it all (I forget exactly how taxes between the US and France work, but there's a non negligible risk of having to pay twice on certain things). Some of them quite simply couldn't afford it. Happened to an acquaintance of mine who had left the US when he was 2 years old and had never set foot back there since. I didn't follow the full story but it took years to sort out. He doesn't think kindly of the US now.
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
Maybe you should travel a bit more. My mom was born in the south, and despite having very light colored skin, she had some black blood, which, as far as the locals were concerned, made her a negro. She had to drink from the designated water fountains, had to ride on the back of the bus, even had to walk on the other side of the street, and endured the worst kind of discrimination. Her family moved to Oregon when she was a girl, and later she moved to San Francisco where she met my dad, a first generation immigrant. I doubt that him obtaining citizenship was as difficult as it is today. My mom's birth certificate says she was a negro. Mine says my mom was white....so just a little move could change your race. Absurd but true.
I have endured some personal racism based on my name, and the features of my person. I've never let it get me down, or limit me in any way. I realize that is not possible for everyone, but I have friends who are latino and black small business owners, and they are millionaires self made through their own hard work. They aren't racists. And some voted for Trump and will again. He might be a jackass, but that 20% tax break for pass through businesses when you are paying hundreds of thousands in fed/state taxes every year is a significant factor. Makes it hard to vote for someone who is pledging to raise taxes on the "rich"
To be in the 1%, you have to make 425k or so. Anyone who thinks people making 425k are running the world and repressing the working class is misinformed, to say the least.
You could move to the Bay Area shroomy, and likely make lots more money, probably have a lot more access to flamenco, and deal with less racism.....but be prepared for a different type of intolerance, the intolerance of the left. That might not be an issue for you.
Finally, for those who think reparations are in order for blacks, if that foolish idea ever comes to fruition, I'm going to pull out my mom's birth certificate and put in for my share. Stupid government will probably give it to me.....
quote:
ORIGINAL: Shroomy726
But the spotlight of this thread is on the USA. And for a reason. In no other super developed country in the world are the disparities between original national races as large as in this country. African Americans have been a part of American history as much as white folks. Yet they are still undermined and disenfranchised in today's society.
Why are other countries in question here? Nice deflect. There is no denial that every country in the world exhibits racism. That's not a surprise.
That was definitely a false equivalency- there is a vast difference between a black person or a Spanish Gitano making a racist comment and a white person using it as reason to claim a race blind society because even black people say racist things. The difference is subject, object and property. It’s a false equivalence because black people were property of white people for several hundred years. It’s fact that must taken in context it US history.
And to the point that the US has made great strides to a culture with minimal racism, not so fast. It’s still a radically racist country, only the majority of white citizens are unaware of or in denial of the kinds of Jim Crow policies we still live with right now. Voter suppression and redlining are alive and well unfortunately. And trump admin has been an organization which exacerbates these structures of racism. Both by encouraging white rage even though whites still retain main privileges in society, and by creating executive orders that seek to govern in a racist way.
It’s been said test trumpism is popular because it’s lifted whites who previously didn’t have a voice, to get the working class attention they deserve. This is completely false- the very notion that the trump admin and people like Bernie Sanders frame the issues around a notion of white working class is perniciously racist and sexist. It’s not an economy that ignored white Americans that begot trump, it’s the backlash of white rage his predecessor was black, and that his potential replacement was a woman. White wants to keep the power structure the same. White patriarchy doesn’t want to share power. Trump represents the belligerence of White power that refuses to share into the future.
As far as I can tell, nobody made that equivalency.
I certainly didn't. The point about gitanos was in response to devilhands' statement that you have no place on a flamenco forum if you support right wing policies. Best he be aware what he's likely to encounter if ever he wants to come here. That's all.
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
And to the point that the US has made great strides to a culture with minimal racism, not so fast. It’s still a radically racist country, only the majority of white citizens are unaware of or in denial of the kinds of Jim Crow policies we still live with right now. Voter suppression and redlining are alive and well unfortunately. And trump admin has been an organization which exacerbates these structures of racism. Both by encouraging white rage even though whites still retain main privileges in society, and by creating executive orders that seek to govern in a racist way.
I pretty much agree with what you say about the state of racism today. The fact that such pervasive racism persists, and the fact that the country has made such great strides to reduce racism during my lifetime only goes to show how truly terrible it was 60 years ago in Texas, and even worse in the Deep South.
In a book called "Identity Crisis" the political scientists John Sides, Michael Tesler, and Lynn Vavreck conclude that a trait they call "modern racism" was a deciding factor among the relatively small number of voters in swing states who gave Trump his Electoral College victory.
Political science proceeds by devising sets of questions which they hope will reveal the traits motivating voters. They subject the answers to statistical analysis. Having spent 43 years as mathematician, physicist and engineer, I am tempted to write it as political "science." Different researchers put together different sets of questions, and different researchers interpret the meaning of the questions in various ways. But still, I think they tend to agree on gross effects. The effects of "modern racism" and "white identity" are seen by the authors of "Identity Crisis" as the most powerful among the Trump swing voter traits--stronger than "economic distress."
You have to page over to the back of the book and wade through an appendix to find out what statistical methods they used. People argue about statistical methods, but I think the problem of reproducibility in political science is more due to the formulation of questions and the interpretation of answers.
quote:
Shroomy726
I also love that a lot of the defending opinions come from the white American/British folks LOL You aren't biased, guys...
I'm about as white American/British as you can possibly be, so I guess I'm qualified to respond to this. I had to look up "racism" to be sure I was using the word correctly:
quote:
Merriam-Webster
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles b : a political or social system founded on racism
3 : racial prejudice or discrimination
Shroomy726's statement quoted above doesn't strictly qualify as racism under any of the definitions, but posting such a statement in an anti-racism rant is skating on pretty thin ice.
In fact, aside from his intemperate rhetoric and personal attacks, I am actually Shroomy's ally. I deplore the racism which pervades U.S. culture and politics. My residence in Louisiana 45 years ago left a bad taste in my mouth which persists to the present day.
A question for Shroomy:
You write,
quote:
The opinions I hear daily from my professional peers say it all.
What do you say to them when you hear these opinions? If they are your peers and not your superiors, you need not fear immediate organizational consequences. Sure, if you were to unite them in being pissed off at you, it could be a problem. But you can indicate your disagreement without serious confrontation.
Why do I think so? My father was a racist until he was nearly 50 years old. Not in a hateful way. According to the mores of his social class, he thought black people were inferior and needed to be taken care of, while being made to live separately from whites. My mother was not a racist. Outright racist remarks were rare in our house, but they were always met with polite dissent. I think this was a significant factor in his changing his mind after being given the task of leading the first integrated Air Force Base.
If you drop a few hints to your peers, they might even stop telling you their opinions. Unlike Ramzi I prefer peaceful hypocrisy to open malice. The hypocrite at least acknowledges opposition, though he inevitably betrays his true colors at some point. I'm just being a 12th generation white southerner, I suppose.
I happened to know the first black undergraduates at the University of Texas. The only place the men could get a room was at the University YMCA, where one of my best friends stayed. Of course the students were hand picked by the black community. They were a lively and interesting bunch. The movie theater next door refused to admit blacks. The black students organized a protest. I was invited to participate. There were probably a few more whites than blacks in the group that assembled outside the theater carrying signs and chanting slogans.
After a while the theater caved and admitted blacks.
The only effect on me was to be called a "n***er lover" a few times. I responded that the black girls were formidably intelligent and self-confident, and they weren't interested in white boys.
I didn't think I would change the world, but I found I was less angry after I made a few small gestures in support of decency.
I can't imagine having not gotten the hell out of south Louisiana.
My brother did his medical residency in Lafayette. Once when I was grousing about Louisiana my sister-in-law took mild offense, saying they had known many fine people there. I responded that I had too, but the rest of the people really annoyed me.
And to the point that the US has made great strides to a culture with minimal racism, not so fast. It’s still a radically racist country, only the majority of white citizens are unaware of or in denial of the kinds of Jim Crow policies we still live with right now. Voter suppression and redlining are alive and well unfortunately. And trump admin has been an organization which exacerbates these structures of racism. Both by encouraging white rage even though whites still retain main privileges in society, and by creating executive orders that seek to govern in a racist way.
It’s been said test trumpism is popular because it’s lifted whites who previously didn’t have a voice, to get the working class attention they deserve. This is completely false
Stephen--To recognize that the U.S. has made significant strides in reducing racism over the last 60 years and yet understand that there is still much to be done are not mutually exclusive points. As I mentioned above, when the Air Force sent me to Keesler Air Force Base in biloxi, Mississippi for a seven-month intelligence course in 1963, there were separate facilities for "Whites" and "Coloreds." Those were the days of the so-called "night-riders," murdering both blacks and the "Freedom Summer" whites who went to the South. Today, there are many cities in the South governed by blacks, and Atlanta is one of the most progressive cities in the nation. That in no way obscures the fact of voter suppression and redlining that goes on today. Blacks are still on the lower rung of the economic ladder. Both of these facts can coexist as parts of reality and are not contradictory.
I agree that Trump has not lifted up whites who previously didn't have a voice. Trump is a liar and a fraud. But the fact is there were many whites who thought Trump was their savior, and they weren't all racists. Several post-election studies have demonstrated that many voters in crucial counties, primarily in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, voted for Obama in 2008 and 1012, and voted for Trump in 2016. These voters could hardly be called racists; rather, they voted for Obama thinking he would benefit them, and when they perceived that he didn't, voted for Trump for the same reason. These voters apparently voted for the candidate they thought would lift them up, first Obama and then Trump.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
It’s not an economy that ignored white Americans that begot trump, it’s the backlash of white rage his predecessor was black, and that his potential replacement was a woman. White wants to keep the power structure the same. White patriarchy doesn’t want to share power. Trump represents the belligerence of White power that refuses to share into the future.
Some handful of rednecks sure. From what I can tell, it was more about the condescending attitude that pushed the majority towards trump. Saying it was racist backlash because Obama was black is just more insult that they don’t like, because it’s often not true as far as I can see. What I see is people trying to fight hate with more hate, as I stated before, finger pointing “calling it out” etc, with this false superiority. That doesn’t work it just makes it worse. Calling all rich white guys who strive to stay on top of the economic game white supremacy advocates is ridiculous. It might be true in some cases of course but how do you know if you don’t know them personally? Again fighting hate and resentment with more hate and resentment achieves nothing good.
And to the point that the US has made great strides to a culture with minimal racism, not so fast.
The goal of eliminating racism might not be realistic as it is unconstitutional to force people to think a certain way in the US. The goals of affirmative action have mostly to do with eliminating obstacles on a societal level regarding opportunities related to housing and employment while providing access to social and educational institutions.
If you aren’t already aware of this: In 2003 a Supreme Court Justice who supported affirmative action suggested it was a time-limited program that will most likely be discontinued in 25 years.
This is the case I’m referencing: Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)
‘In her majority opinion, O'Connor wrote that "race-conscious admissions policies must be limited in time," adding that the "Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today."’
ORIGINAL: Ricardo From what I can tell, it was more about the condescending attitude that pushed the majority towards trump. Saying it was racist backlash because Obama was black is just more insult that they don’t like, because it’s often not true as far as I can see. What I see is people trying to fight hate with more hate, as I stated before, finger pointing “calling it out” etc, with this false superiority. That doesn’t work it just makes it worse.
I think you have put your finger on something important.
The work force I led at Kwajalein definitely had a caste system at the time I was made manager. Engineers, many with advanced degrees from prestigious universities, were at the top. One step down were non-degreed but highly qualified field engineers and technicians with years of experience in digital, microwave and large scale electromechanical systems. At the bottom were people with few qualifications, who worked under the direct, constant supervision of the field engineers and techs, mostly on stuff like antennas and transmitters, that required some heavy lifting and dirty hands during periodic maintenance.
When I was promoted to boss, in my view there was a serious problem in attitudes between the top two castes. Too often the engineers were condescending, especially the younger ones from highly prestigious universities, and too often the field engineers and techs had entrenched resentful attitudes, the result of condescension toward them over long careers at different places, from people who actually knew less about the work than the field engineers and techs did.
I did what I could to close the gap. I included both top castes in discussions of modifications and modernization of the high tech equipment, and I made sure that the expertise of the field engineers and techs was applied and recognized in the frequently required troubleshooting of equipment failures. I did what i could to make sure that the lowest caste was treated with respect.
I thought things improved, but of course I was criticized both by my boss and by my employees for occasional failures of my strategy.
Ten years after retirement some of my best friends from those years remain some of the highly experienced field engineers. They all voted for Trump. They still support him.
One flaw I see in political science methods is that you only find things you set our looking for. You might conclude that X didn't matter in an election, but you don't find out that Y did matter if you don't start off trying to find out for whether it did.
I don't remember reading any political science stuff that looked for resentment of condescending attitudes, but you see plenty of that resentment on Facebook, and I hear some of it from my friends.
After reading this I’m not going to quote anything-
Some points •
Coming off a two term democratic president it’s typical in the US cycle to elect a Republican. It was in trend that an R won.
Shroomy makes the case that that particular republican pick has exacerbated racial ( and gender) division, and further exploited it to get elected and stay in power. He’s got a strong notion that this is reflected in his workplace in bullying comments because people are emboldened to act out on racist ideas before thinking better of it or evolving into a higher way of thinking.
To say he’s not effected by it or that if he’s a good engineer his status as an employee is safe is probably true in his case. But that doesn’t excuse the harassment he feels he’s subject to. The problem with systematic racism in America is that it has conditioned the white majority and especially men ( gender biases) to accept harassment as a part of workplace life. If he’s getting chided at work for his views, or being singled out by a band of guys who make comments he thinks are outside of office decorum and morality then that’s a form power exploitation, it’s straight up bullying. The employer should put a stop to it.
I’ve observed Shroomy for about ten years on the Foro and he’s been one of the most level even keeled persons to be a part of this group. His judgment on character and who’s opinions to place stock in are very good. When I read that he’s agitated about something I took notice, because his judgment and take on fairness are quite real.
To dispute his own personal experience or try to dissuade him from looking at racism in the context of his office is also part of America’s systemic race issues. Never believe the person who cites they are being hassled. Blame the person who is the victim. Allow your wildest and most inhumane confirmation biases to run afoul of reality. These are all ways trump projects his permissions into our culture, he sheds this toxic dandruff onto anyone without the self discipline to wash it off. He uses the existing formal structure of racism to his advantage.
I get it. I get what Shroomy is saying. I think by way of knowing his character even online he’s straight up correct, and very frustrated about the workplace gabbing and jabbing of people who give trumps toxicity a full pass. It’s wrong. I also see he’s frustrated by pretty much being gaslighted by people he’s hung around with for ten years and lived fairly nicely with, and he’s not a quarrelsome guy. When a person says I have an experience of being subjected to racism or epithets against who they are, I reckon the community they discuss music with wouldn’t immediately try to tell them it’s all in their head. But I could be wrong.
As for the selection of the mr. toxic as the president- it’s a complex phenomenon and it’s not normal to our politics, we’ve had some real pieces of work in politics. However the fact is he was picked to run over a solid republican, Jeb Bush, who would have up held the same republican values on the normal republican issues like taxes and business. He was pushed out of the way by hate chanting nationalists who were demonstrably receptive to Mr. Toxic and in fact were of such large majority among republicans that they pushed out a sure shot vetted republican Bush, who wasn’t espousing the rabble rousing racist and Highly misogynistic rhetoric from the stump.
He was most assuredly selected because he provided a vector for racist speech to have new permissions granted to it. To speak against the granting of those kinds of odious permissions isn’t snobbery, it isn’t virtue signaling or moralistic one upping, its saying to others your racism is wrong and it’s been going on long enough. Stop it. If they get angry while expressing that, well that’s being human.
As for the point of the US so virtuously correcting- the US isn’t doing anything it should brag about or pride itself on in terms of saying look how far we’ve come. Quite the opposite. The US was forged by 400 years of chattel slavery culminating in the right of the enslaved population being released from its bondage and only given the full power of suffrage over suffering about 50 years ago.
That’s nothing to brag about or feel comfortable with. Citing progress as an indication that we’re moving forward isn’t too virtuous, it’s perhaps even tinged with the flavor of pernicious spices. After 400 years of holding a vast number of our citizens in a state of personhood on the same level with livestock to be bought and traded we’ve go to do better than rest on the idea that we’ve come a long way.
We haven’t come very far at all when you consider that Jim Crow still exists in underground forms, supported by the state in some cases ; and that moving from 400 years of being a total slave holding nation to country that is a non slavery state is a moral slamdunk. It’s the least one can do~ don’t be too proud by claiming we have extraordinary moral character simply because we have made a slippery modicum of progress.
In my reply to Ricardo's post I didn't mean to say racism wasn't a factor in Trump's election. Trump is clearly a racist, and solicits racist support. I think racism played a significant role in his election and continued support.
My point, hastily made, was that I think people resenting condescension was also a significant factor, and I haven't seen any "resentment of condescension" political science pieces.
My personal experience observing racism in the USA goes back more than 70 years. The personal horizons of few people here, if any, go back that far. I believe that the racism of 70 years ago in the South is just about unimaginable to most people alive today. I can't imagine what racism was like in the time of my slave owning Confederate great-grandfathers.
I have read about it and tried to imagine that world from time to time. I have puzzled over the records in a family bible of marriages, births and deaths among enslaved people. Why are they in the family bible, and not just in the account books? Why are the records so few compared to the number of enslaved people? What was the reality behind all this? I imagine different things, but I realize I don't know what the reality was.
I find the mental contortions of the "intellectual" supporters of slavery simply incomprehensible, while I find the indictment of the institution of slavery by slave owners like Jefferson to be vivid, thoughtful and cogent. Which view, if either, did my ancestors endorse? I don't know.
But I do know that by 1865 my ancestors had lost their a$$es and all the fixtures.
I also know that one of their sons, born after the Civil War, put a stop to a rebellious response to the Supreme Court's 1954 decision integrating public schools. He was Chairman of the school board in Vicksburg, Mississippi. The newspaper clipping says, "After some speeches strongly denouncing and advocating defiance of the Court decision Mr. Jernigan spoke last. He said, 'Father told us many stories of the War. As I recollect, we lost.' He then appointed committees to plan for the coming changes." Such a sentiment could have gotten him tarred, feathered and ridden out of town on a rail in 1864.
My first boss at Kwajalein was a black man. His grandparents were enslaved. He grew up on a tiny farm in Alabama, plowing behind a mule. He achieved an education, got an engineering degree, got a job with General Electric, rose through the ranks, and was given major responsibility. At Kwajalein he was one of the most respected members of the American community. He was elected Chief Justice of the Community Court, which heard and resolved disputes within the civilian community. I admire him, and consider myself fortunate to count him as a friend.
That doesn't mean that nobody resented him, or that none of his employees held a racist grudge against him. But a personal history like his would have been utterly inconceivable in Alabama in 1950.
I say the country has made progress in my lifetime because I have seen it.
That progress does not excuse a single particle of the racism we now have. The only thing I have meant to say by citing progress is to encourage the hope of further progress, and to urge people not to lose hope due to the present setback.
My response to Shroomy's brief remark about his peers at work was conditioned on my own experience living in south Louisiana in the second half of the 1970s. Last I knew, Shroomy lived in New Orleans. As recently as the 1990s New Orleans had a significant non-racist (anti-racist?) mixed race "Creole" population. I have read that hurricane Katrina and its aftermath drove out a large part of the black population.
In 1970s Baton Rouge physically violent racism and utterly endemic political corruption turned my stomach and enraged me. I taught at Louisiana State University. Don't think the faculty weren't racist because they were educated. At least half of them were racist to the bone--maybe many more.
But people didn't make racist remarks around me because they knew my position on the subject. It didn't take confrontation to let them know, and I never saw my position against racism affecting my job evaluation. Maybe this has no bearing on Shroomy's situation, but it's what my experience was. If I offended Shroomy, I apologize.
I decided to get the hell out of that toxic part of Central America and move back to Austin.
Back here in Austin where I retired after being away for 25 years, we pride ourselves on our liberal, Democrat-voting population. We delude ourselves by thinking there's hardly any racism here. When someone mentions there is a much lower percentage of black population in Austin than in other big Texas cities, we can't figure out why.
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread