Sure. Racism can be found among all groups and layers of society. Doesn't mean its evenly distributed in how it influences the lives of the groups discriminated though.
The problem, I think, is a near complete lack of understanding on the part of most as to exactly what constitutes 'racism.' Nevermind different types/degrees of racism; most are oblivious to the basic definitions. I am (and I think we all are to X degree) a racist, but mine is of a decidedly atypical variety where I believe blacks are generally superior to whites. Most people can't wrap their heads around the notion of a white guy being a 'black supremacist.' :-)
Edit: That's not to say that I would discriminate against members of my own race, or that I would be willing to tolerate such abuse from others regardless of race.
This post was edited by Transquesta at October 5, 2016 2:48 AM MDT
I did a course in Aboriginal Studies, taught by Aboriginals from a wide variety of backgrounds. The first was a man in his forties famous for his extreme tactics. He stood down on the stage in the auditorium, looking up at a thousand or so of us teacher-trainees. When he had our complete attention and silence, he screamed into the microphone turned up to full volume, "I hate the lot of you!" The sound was so loud it hit through the body, made us jerk in our seats, and left us shaking with adrenaline. Most of us were white. Only a sprinkling of Chinese, Indians and others. It was the start of his three weeks with us. He challenged us to walk into an Aboriginal pub in Redfern and promised us that if we did, we'd be beaten to a pulp and left for dead. He told us that many Aboriginals hate and distrust all whites automatically. And then he told us why. I started hating myself for being white and for what my ancestors did. I hate the colour of my own skin. There's much more to the story.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at October 5, 2016 1:29 PM MDT
In a professional context I can't imagine a more horrendous and counterproductive encounter! All this man did is demonstrate a complete lack of the capacity to LEARN from the atrocities of the past.
As long as the controversy revolves around what each of our ancestors did to others in the past, we will never be free of the 'race issue.'
This post was edited by Transquesta at October 5, 2016 1:36 PM MDT
Of course. Anyone can be. Reverse racism though is a myth. No such thing. It's all just racism. In my experience it's often the case that people who use the reverse racism term frequently are just racists who are P.O.'ed they can't be more open about it.
Next question. Are the concepts of prejudice and racism synonymous? Is being prejudice and being racist the same thing?
it would be good to post those two questions in order to get more replies.
My answer: they are not quite synonymous. One is a set or category inside the other. In the same way that all mosquitos are insects, but not all insects are mosquitos, so all racism is prejudice, but not all prejudices are racist.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at October 5, 2016 1:42 PM MDT
Well they are really two parts of the same question. Though I believe you are correct. Racism is a deep seated belief that one ethnic group is stronger or has some supremacy over another. Prejudice is having a belief in a quality or characteristic of a person based on ethnic, social, or other groupings. One can have prejudices without being a racist.
I would add that prejudice has an additional meaning: assumption or pre-judgment about a person - (due to an arbitrary characteristic over which they usually have no control (due to birth, circumstances etc)) - to the point of not seeing that person's true characteristics.
I would emphasise the word "belief." Scientifically and genetically it has been proven beyond a doubt that there is no such thing as race. We are all one species.
The idea of racism is a cultural hang-over from historical and cultural evolution. It is untrue, invalid, unjust, and one of the greatest causes of human suffering. It is way past time for humans to abandon this idea and begin the processes of healing the damage done by generations of trauma.
Totally agree. That's what I was getting at but you said much more eloquently. Though a prejudice doesn't have to be due to genetics or birth. It could be based on religion, tastes, culture. While prejudices are fallacies, faulty, and wrong. I also see them as a natural and sub-conscious response. A prejudice comes from limited experience and ignorance. I'm not condoning it, but saying we all have them and fall into them often without even realizing it. As about the myth of race. That's why I chose the words ethnic groups.
Agreed that prejudice can also be based on religion, tastes or culture -- in this sense it can often be inculcated within a family or local social environment.
Prejudice is a fallacy by several criteria: logically unsound, factually a myth or lie, ethically wrong because it causes serious and lasting harm.
About the idea that prejudices are natural - I am not so sure. Babies are not born with prejudice. Small children left to play freely together will pay no attention to skin colour. If prejudices develop it is always later, around 6 or & years and even then, only when the social environment in some way fosters it. Prehistoric paleontology and archeology suggest that people did not fight other tribes until population pressure created competition for land and resources. The modern echo of this is that racism increases dramatically in times and regions of economic stress but decreases in times and places of prosperity.
I believe that one way to dramatically reduce racism is to dramatically increase the ease of getting decently paid work. When an economic system deliberately organises to have 6% or more unemployment in order to maintain competition for jobs and keep wages low, those who suffer the brunt of racism get the least opportunities. Another means is to put more funds into the quality of free education for the disadvantaged and to fix the appalling lack of civic maintenance of basic utilities in ghettos. Another is to train volunteers to go out into the communities to form support groups for healing from trauma.
I do think limited experience and ignorance play a large part. Psychologists in experiments have found that one of the best ways to end an individual's racism is to make him or her a work partner with someone of the race he or she has prejudice towards. The daily experience of getting to know the person quickly undoes the perceived stereotypical ideas.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at October 5, 2016 1:47 PM MDT
Being born with or without something isn't criteria for natural behavior. As the human mind develops it starts to look for patterns and creates generalizations based on them. Prejudices are often an unfortunate result of that. At one time in our primitive history doing this would have been a benefit. to avoid hostile tribes. Outside of generalizing people this trait is of great benefit. We learn that hot things glow red, so we generalize that anything with a red glow is gonna be hot and avoid touching them. The trait isn't perfect and also causes conflicts, but that's true for all natural traits.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at October 6, 2016 3:47 PM MDT
Each of these terms (epithets, really) have differing definitions, so no, in general, they are not the same thing.
Every human being makes snap judgements without knowing each/every/all element, facet or characteristic of a given individual or situation. That is prejudice or, literally, pre-judging. If we make those judgements on the basis of an assumption of superiority of one race over another, we are prejudiced AND racist.
Yes they can be racist. The term reverse racism is used incorrectly on both sides of the debate. There is no such thing as reverse racism.. there is just racism. The second definition of racism means prejudice. On one side the people arguing that black people can't be racist comes from the equation of racism= power plus privlidge (which was started by some author in the 70s who also wrote some manual.) Which basically amounts down to that black people can't be racist, they can only be prejudice because black people don't have widespread power to be racist (though I disagree on the power bit and will explain further.) Those SAME individuals will tell you that black people can't be racist.
For that side even if they don't know they are rehashing that "equation" that's where that mindset originates from.
On the other side of the debate they name "reverse racism" as making it seem like whites (the reverse of black) can be the victims of racism. Which they are partially right but in actuality there is no such thing. There's JUST racism.
The problem with that is that times are changing. I would say during slavery they probably had an excuse (and a rather legit one) to be on guard around other people. The problem lays in the meaning of power however when applied in a modern context since you know as mixed races grow in America it's getting harder to make it seem like whites have all the power (and it will continue to be more harder as decades go by.) ANYONE who has a prejudice could potentially hold power over someone at that moment in time.
There's nothing stopping someone from let's say bullying you, they could target you because of your skin color, they could r-pe you, murder you... they could basically make your life a living hell all because they have a prejudice that no one notices.
I would say in any point in time where people have the power to stop something or continue it that's also power.
So both sides are correct/incorrect at the same time. The problem is if you have to define racism.. isn't that racist?
I would argue not viewing white as a skin color (which is what they do when they say there's no such thing as reverse racism) is partially racist in itself. Not viewing white people as an actual race, thinking that we all originated from slave masters, we all held slaves, we are by default racists.. are all racist ideas based on pure bias... using history as leverage to be racist and I'm pretty sure is a logical fallacy being as history is written by evil men. The irony of history is that we all have something to be mad at honestly.
The thing is there are poor whites who wanted no part of slavery. The truth is there is STILL slavery epidemic going on in Africa and Nigeria to this very day. The truth is hardly white vs. black or black vs. white.
I was looking up the history of the medical field yesterday turns out ALL OF OUR MODERN advances were thanks to serial killers. They would kidnap people and perform science experiments to see how people reacted. These were often prisoners of war, civilians, people that nobody would miss. I learned later that America pardoned their war crimes in exchange for the "cures" they found. Later they went on to deny it.
If you want to look at the history of the human race.. all of our advances have been on the backs of other people. I'd say racism is a human problem just specifically because of that.
Also I wanted to add that I read the article I think many of those highlighted "points" is based on comments that got overheated in debates on both sides. It doesn't prove that racism doesn't exist against whites.
And you're right to differentiate between racism and institutional racism. Until such time as a minority group achieves majority status they cannot be (institutionally) racist by definition. They can still be racist on an individual level, however.
Oh I don't blame them for being mad but it makes me sick when people deny that racism happens to others because they are that narcissistic that they feel having any empathy for the person they are talking to would be essentially giving into the enemy (by enemy I mean "other side" or whatever political party they choose to affiliate with doesn't matter which.) It's pathetic really. I mean it doesn't hurt to always ask what each individual experiences may be BEFORE reacting right?
Benedict Arnold 