Running racism in America thread

If "active" means "meant to do it" and "passive" means "bumbled into it", I agree ...

 

How many times does one get to “passively” bumble into the same old tropes before it is a well-established pattern?

 

Isn't that a line from "Blowing in the Wind"?

 

I know, right? Californians will begrudgingly wait up to an hour for two things: breakfast and a good car wash.

There’s a semi-famous breakfast joint here in Ventura called Pete’s. It has a waiting list every hour it’s open. It’s not any better than the 6 (!) other breakfast places within 1.5 miles.

 

“Ignorance” is a pretty good cover for racism.

The “boy” thing is well established. It goes back to the days of slave masters ordering around their “property.” If you graduated high school and don’t know that, I can’t help you.

You needn’t be progressive, just show some humility when you’re told something is offensive or just incorrect.

I didn’t put any thought into “spirit animal” (which was on every Tinder profile c. 2016) until it was explained that Native Americans don’t enjoy seeing the term tossed around. So fine, I don’t use it anymore.

Some of the Christians I know say even using a euphemism like JFC instead of saying the implied words is offensive. I learned.

 

For the purposes of the argument on the thread, sure. Probably sufficient.

But like "overt racism" and "covert racism" I think there are deeper, broader, more complicated definitions floating around the academy. https://news.stanford.edu/2020/06/09/seven-factors-contributing-american-racism/

That said, I'd also like to stipulate it unlikely any of the high school girls in that blackface video are from Mars.

 

Yeah.

Fuzzy Zoeller did not misspeak in 1997, nor was he misunderstood. He was cracking a joke about Black people and fried chicken. What he said wasn't 'race-tinged' or 'racist-tinged' or 'racism-tinged.'

Just straight up 'racist.'

If thereafter anyone wants to parse the question of whether or not Fuzzy Zoeller is himself a racist, good luck.

 

I’ve seen an argument that labeling an action as racist instead of a person lowers the temperature and improves the odds of a meaningful course correction. Probably something to that, although after a while some people clearly demonstrate they have covered both ends.

 

Sounds right. Especially with younger folks.

But then you also have explain why it's racist, and that means explaining its origin in race history.

Again, a good reason to be teaching this stuff in schools. Make it a unit in Civics. Or American history.

 

Ron DeSantis just banned you from entering Florida. Go away with those crazy liberal ideas.

 

History and how we talk about history are pretty dynamic. After 400 years of talking about race one way, I expect the pendulum will swing a little too far the other way.

I'm OK with that.