Anti-white Prejudice - does it exist?

[K.K.]

43 minutes ago, deepthinking said:

I'm about to be investigated over a false claim of racism. False claim. 

How so? 

[lana-banana]

18 minutes ago, major_merrick said:

And if the "system" is guilty of racism, how do we deal with that WITHOUT the feeling that we as individuals are somehow guilty simply for being born into it?  And is there a way of creating opportunities for people that the system has shortchanged in life, without the "you didn't build that" pro-socialist attitudes of the leftist politicians?

1) The system is guilty, the end.

2) It's not about guilt, it's about accepting the obvious. This country (and many others, but particularly the UK) was built on the idea that white people are superior. This didn't end after the Civil War; the first children who were part of desegregated schools are still alive today! Schools, banks, colleges, sports, you name it; all of these systems privileged white men. If you can acknowledge this is true---and I think all reasonable people would---then of course you have to accept that you're guilty too, even if you don't mean to cause any harm or aren't even aware of it. You can't be born into a racist system that surrounds everything you do without being affected by it. Of course I'm racist: I'm a white person in a country built on racism. That doesn't mean I have to hate my country or whatever! It's just a fact, like anything else.

3) Of course we can create opportunities for others. This is why stuff like deliberate inclusion is so important, because otherwise systems that favor the privileged will continue to favor the privileged. When people talk about "merit" or "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" they frequently (deliberately) miss that a lot of these things are designed to keep minorities out. IQ tests, for example, are not an accurate metric of anything except for whiteness or success in conventionally white, upper-class education. If we want to help the disadvantaged, we can keep investing in community health programs, comprehensive daycare, nutrition and assistance with bills. You can't succeed at your job or take good care of your kids if you spend all your time stressed about putting food on the table. This has nothing to do with "left" or "right" politics, it's just the basic idea that nobody deserves to starve to death or die of preventable disease.

Edited June 14, 2020 by lana-banana

[K.K.]

On 6/13/2020 at 8:48 PM, homecoming said:

I'm really sorry to hear about your experiences

Thank you. And I’m sorry that you feel the way you feel about whatever you experienced. 
 

On 6/13/2020 at 8:48 PM, homecoming said:

don't know any black people with a victim mentality that everyone keeps speaking of

I think BLM as a whole has a victim mentality. And I don’t appreciate the hate that comes from them. The tearing up of history and the hatred for police when not all police are bad. What’s even worse is the white people in the BLM movement marching and down on their knees all sorry for something they weren’t even alive for. It’s embarrassing. Maybe their hearts are in the right place. But they just look stupid to me. They have no dog in the fight. And I guarantee they don’t care half as much about black lives as they put on. Black people probably know this too. 

Edited June 17, 2020 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
Removed comment suggesting violence on the basis of race.

[thefooloftheyear]

14 minutes ago, lana-banana said:

 

3) Of course we can create opportunities for others. This is why stuff like deliberate inclusion is so important, because otherwise systems that favor the privileged will continue to favor the privileged. When people talk about "merit" or "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" they frequently (deliberately) miss that a lot of these things are designed to keep minorities out. IQ tests, for example, are not an accurate metric of anything except for whiteness or success in conventionally white, upper-class education. If we want to help the disadvantaged, we can keep investing in community health programs, comprehensive daycare, nutrition and assistance with bills. You can't succeed at your job or take good care of your kids if you spend all your time stressed about putting food on the table. This has nothing to do with "left" or "right" politics, it's just the basic idea that nobody deserves to starve to death or die of preventable disease.

Designed to keep them out??

Why aren't many black folks taking high paid trade jobs and careers?  These typically require NO formal education and the shortage of labor in these industries is so bad, its reaching critical levels...Most of these jobs wind up being taken by Hispanic and some European immigrants, who have the disadvantage of a language barrier, in many cases...Its' so bad, most employers would hire donkeys or extra terrestrials if they are willing to show up and work...

No one is keeping them out of the trades....They aren't applying....I have no idea why they wouldn't try to compete with other minorities who are in the same boat(or worse) than they are..

TFY

Edited June 14, 2020 by thefooloftheyear

[salparadise]

1 hour ago, Emilie Jolie said:

@salparadiseThat's totally f***ed up, I agree. I fully get the backlash and the resigning, and I see the racial prejudice. I'm still not sure this constitutes racism. At this point, I feel this may just be just be a definition issue. Racism as a concept is different to racial prejudice. 

The definition of the word racism is in flux, and it appears that Merriam-Webster is updating their definition as we speak. This was prompted by 22 year old Kennedy Mitchum, a college student from Missouri emailing the editors and stating her case in the wake of the killing of George Floyd. “Racism is not only prejudice against a certain race due to the color of a persons skin, as it states in your dictionary,” she wrote. “It is both prejudice combined with social and institutional power. It is a system of advantage based on skin color.” 

Alex Chambers, an editor at Merriam-Webster, responded, “While our focus will always be on faithfully reflecting the real-world usage of a word, not on promoting any particular viewpoint, we have concluded that omitting any mention of the systemic aspects of racism promotes a certain viewpoint in itself,” he said. “It also does a disservice to readers of all races.”

A distinction that needs to be noted is that the dictionary definition reflects real world usage. Usage dictates the definition, not the other way around. Up to this point the systemic aspect has been one of the definitions, but not requisite. Based on the NYTimes article, the systemic aspect is to be enhanced, but it is unclear if the definition will be narrowed to require it. I suspect that racial prejudice or discrimination separate from the systemic aspects will remain because it is still in use. Completely changing the base meaning is not something Dr Pragya Agarwal has authority to do.

Here is the NYTimes article:  Merriam-Webster Revises ‘Racism’ Entry After Missouri Woman Asks for Changes

*Open a private window to avoid the subscription login. 

Quote

 

Merriam-Webster Definition:

rac·ism | \ ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm  also -ˌshi- \

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

 

 

Edited June 14, 2020 by salparadise

[major_merrick]

19 minutes ago, lana-banana said:

If you can acknowledge this is true---and I think all reasonable people would---then of course you have to accept that you're guilty too, even if you don't mean to cause any harm or aren't even aware of it. You can't be born into a racist system that surrounds everything you do without being affected by it. Of course I'm racist: I'm a white person in a country built on racism.

And that right there is going to be the sticking point. 

When people are declared to be "guilty" simply for the fact of being born..... how could that be seen as anything other than a threat to a person's family and existence?  Because along with the concept of guilt comes the concepts of vengeance, punishment, reparations, wealth redistribution, and the use of force.  I can't think of an easier recipe for endless conflict.  No sane person is going to choose the cause of the "Other" over the prosperity and wellbeing of themselves and their family.  

I hope that your opinion isn't becoming a commonly held view, as that will negatively impact any possibility for a resolution to the issue.

 

 

 

[homecoming]

27 minutes ago, thefooloftheyear said:

Designed to keep them out??

Why aren't many black folks taking high paid trade jobs and careers?  These typically require NO formal education and the shortage of labor in these industries is so bad, its reaching critical levels...Most of these jobs wind up being taken by Hispanic and some European immigrants, who have the disadvantage of a language barrier, in many cases...Its' so bad, most employers would hire donkeys or extra terrestrials if they are willing to show up and work...

No one is keeping them out of the trades....They aren't applying....I have no idea why they wouldn't try to compete with other minorities who are in the same boat(or worse) than they are..

TFY

Dunno. I worked for years at a company where I was regularly named ‘employee of the week’, running my own department single-handedly. 
 

However, my white colleagues, at the same level as me, often hid outside smoking for hours on end, and shirked a lot of their duties - they’d openly joke about doing this - were promoted and given better opportunities while doing less work, because there was a sort of ‘buddy’ culture thing going on. 
 

I’m not sure if you’re speaking about manual labour jobs, but the job I was in didn’t seem interested in promoting me, only my white counterparts. I was interested in moving up, but they weren’t interested in moving me up. 

[Zona]

Quote

White people can indeed face stereotypical assumptions based on their skin colour and hence encounter racial prejudice. But this cannot be called racism, because of the inherent systemic imbalance of power between those with lighter skin colour and people of colour.

If I hear this one more time, I'm gonna puke. Of course there are bigots of all colors and ethnicities, and justifying it like this guy does really bugs me.

You can't fight racism with racism. That should be obvious.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Zona

[gaius]

1 hour ago, homecoming said:

Dunno. I worked for years at a company where I was regularly named ‘employee of the week’, running my own department single-handedly. 
 

However, my white colleagues, at the same level as me, often hid outside smoking for hours on end, and shirked a lot of their duties - they’d openly joke about doing this - were promoted and given better opportunities while doing less work, because there was a sort of ‘buddy’ culture thing going on. 
 

I’m not sure if you’re speaking about manual labour jobs, but the job I was in didn’t seem interested in promoting me, only my white counterparts. I was interested in moving up, but they weren’t interested in moving me up. 

The hardest working guy I know at one of my companies locations is black. He takes exceptional pride in his work, does it quickly and efficiently, and often fixes problems other white technicians have passed over due to laziness. And he's a nice dude to boot. I'm delighted everytime I see he's working the day I'm there.

However, at my old job the laziest tech in the office by far was black. But he actually ended up being promoted to manager over several white techs who had way better numbers than he did and often had to fix his poor work. Mostly because I think the white boss enjoyed his personality, not because of any particular racial issues. He was a cool guy to hang out with.

In all my experience so far I've never seen race be the enormously influencial factor a lot of people try to make it out to be. There's usually many other dynamics going on. Usually not primarily driven by race or merit.

[Ellener]

There is a massive difference between 'I've experienced racism myself' and 'I'm affected in every area of my existence by systemic racism'.

Did people see Kimberly Jones and her Monopoly analogy? I'll post the link.

 

Edited June 14, 2020 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[Ellener]

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-53017667/black-lives-matter-how-can-we-win-monopoly-analogy-explained

[Libby1]

I worked in a predominantly black area of London for a while.  I only recall one episode of racial hostility from anybody black, and that was from a woman who was drunk and ready to be violent to anybody.   That said, according to my sister in law my head is so in the clouds that I don't notice people being hostile.  It's not so much that I don't notice, but if it isn't right in my face in a way that I have to deal with I tend to just ignore it as not being my problem or something that is likely to lead to unnecessary conflict if I pay too much attention.  We're animals like any other, and if you're in a place where people are likely to see you as an intruder I think animal instinct about how to behave to minimise the chance of being attacked is at the fore.   The prospect of being attacked, and behaving in ways that will avoid triggering an attack is far more of an immediate concern than any sense of "they're being racist to me" outrage.

As far as my workplace went, people were lovely and I didn't get any sense of being discriminated against on the basis of being white in a predominantly black environment.  Apologies to anybody who lives in London, but of the small amount of nastiness I experienced while I was there - it was mainly from white Londoners, for being Scottish.  English people have told me they've experienced similar treatment in Scotland.  I think white v white racism is an overly minimised problem...especially in the UK, where there's a history of people from other areas or countries being seen as "less than"...and don't forget how oppressively the class system here worked against most people for centuries.

 I would see the biggest likelihood of me being treated unfairly as coming from another white person who was at pains to demonstrate how anti-racist they were - and especially if they were very class conscious and regarded me as belonging to a different class from them.  Or coming from a region they had issues with.  Depending on how much power they had, that could be a form of systemic racism.  It's been my experience that white people are not only perfectly capable of being racist to eachother, but sometimes take a bit of pride in it.  There's nothing like sitting listening to a multicultural group who have all attended public school and Oxford sneering about the chavs they regard as beneath them.  That  old Etonian/Oxbridge system really can break through the racial divides and unite the people who are doing well out of it. 

Systemic racism against white people can and does happen, and in my view anybody who denies that is subscribing to the kind of thinking that enabled the continuation of years and years of horrific abuse by organised gangs of girls (predominantly white girls) in Rotherham. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the girls in Rotherham were the victims of systemic racism based on them being white.  The Jay Report concluded that they suffered from a combination of authorities being politically correct (being afraid of complaints of racism if they intervened) and racism.  The racism was being a sort of double edged "these girls are hanging out with Pakistani men, which makes them white trash which we don't care about" thing that's racist to everybody.  But the way that racism worked out was that the girls were its victims and the men who abused them benefited from it.  What can that possibly be, if not systemic racism?

 

Edited June 14, 2020 by Libby1

[basil67]

I had an old boss who, for the admin staff, openly stated that he preferred hiring Asian women over white Australian women.  (note that part of admin hiring was also gendered)   I got a job there, but that was most likely because I started as a receptionist (is there such a term anymore?) and they needed a white Aussie face for the role.  

So, yes, white racism exists but I have not personally been discriminated against because of my whiteness.  

Edited June 14, 2020 by basil67

[Emilie Jolie]

4 hours ago, Zona said:

You can't fight racism with racism.

That's a fair statement.

I  can see how sticking too closely to the definition of racism can feel like invalidating the experiences of many,  which is obviously not a good thing.Now that our societies are more and more diverse, that the white population is in decline compared to minority groups as a whole, maybe we should consider the notion of anti-white racism.

My follow-up questions: Does this mean we are to consider all minorities as one homogeneous group when we talk of anti-white racism? And how do we explain the root causes of anti-white racism?

As somebody with a marked last name,  I have experienced racism myself growing up, which I dismissed by trying to hide my mixed background out of determination to 'fit in' with the strictly white people I was surrounded by. I wanted to be more white than I actually was, to have an easy ride basically. I wanted to blend in, I didn't want to stick out like a sore thumb. Claiming whiteness got me out of a lot of trouble, to be honest, so my personal experience is that being white gives you less hassle, generally speaking. I eased into my heritage when I started working in a very multicultural environment.

One experience I have was at the airport on arrival to the USA on my second trip there in my 20s. I went there with my very white, very 'English' boyfriend at the time - blond, blue eyes, fairly tall - with a very English surname. We went through customs in separate lanes. When it came to me, the officer looked at my passport, questioned me about my last name and how it didn't match my looks, grilled me about why I was coming to visit the USA for an embarrassing 10 minutes, thoroughly searched my suitcase and handbag in a way I hadn't seen him do with other passengers, and asked me if I came on my own. I pointed to my boyfriend and his demeanour immediately changed. He looked at his passport and apologised to him for the wasted time, helped me put my now scattered belongings into my suitcase and allowed us to go through. That was a pretty weird moment.

To your point: 

On the face of it, the 'system' isn't helping. Nobody likes to think of themselves racist, yet here we are more divided than ever.  antisemitism, anti-Muslim sentiments, anti-black prejudice, anti-Asian feelings are all a form of racism also. So how do we, the average people living our average lives in our mostly multicultural settings, can help each other be less racist?

Edited June 14, 2020 by Emilie Jolie

[CaliforniaGirl]

6 hours ago, K.K. said:

Thank you. And I’m sorry that you feel the way you feel about whatever you experienced. 
 

I think BLM as a whole has a victim mentality. And I don’t appreciate the hate that comes from them. The tearing up of history and the hatred for police when not all police are bad. What’s even worse is the white people in the BLM movement marching and down on their knees all sorry for something they weren’t even alive for. It’s embarrassing. Maybe their hearts are in the right place. But they just look stupid to me. They have no dog in the fight. And I guarantee they don’t care half as much about black lives as they put on. Black people probably know this too. Which is why if any one of those white BLM protestors were to be out in the wrong hood come darkness, they’d find out exactly what’s thought of them simply for having white skin. As did I at the job  where I painfully learned this fact. 

We ARE alive for more blacks being arrested for identical crimes, fewer opportunities for blacks, and other CURRENT issues that split us and encourage hatred, disrespect for one another, and seriously difficult lives for minorities.

[lana-banana]

6 hours ago, major_merrick said:

And that right there is going to be the sticking point. 

When people are declared to be "guilty" simply for the fact of being born..... how could that be seen as anything other than a threat to a person's family and existence?  Because along with the concept of guilt comes the concepts of vengeance, punishment, reparations, wealth redistribution, and the use of force.  I can't think of an easier recipe for endless conflict.  No sane person is going to choose the cause of the "Other" over the prosperity and wellbeing of themselves and their family.  

I hope that your opinion isn't becoming a commonly held view, as that will negatively impact any possibility for a resolution to the issue.

Is your argument that choosing to acknowledge a fact (the existence of structural racism) is going to make too many people uncomfortable and angry, so the solution is pretending it's not true?

I have no idea why you seem to think this requires anger or "vengeance". It certainly doesn't require any physical force or violence. We can repair structural inequities by replacing old institutions and creating new ones that support equality in justice. Personally I support reparations; it'd be a good use of tax dollars. But at any rate I support the changes needed to help give everyone a shot.

You are the only one talking about violence and conflict and "the Other". Who's an other? These are my fellow neighbors and Americans, and their success is my success. We can help each other without setting off some kind of apocalyptic war (which honestly sounds like something you're hoping for).

[Emilie Jolie]

1 hour ago, lana-banana said:

Is your argument that choosing to acknowledge a fact (the existence of structural racism) is going to make too many people uncomfortable and angry, so the solution is pretending it's not true?

That's the key right here. If you ignore structural racism, you sweep too much under the rug. 

I think the larger point is this: if we accept the concept of anti-white racism (theoretically, please bear with me, I'm trying a meet each other half-way approach for the purpose of this thread  ) we also need to define the root causes of this anti-white racism.

Where does it come from? What is the profile of the anti-white racist? Why does it even exist?

Edited June 14, 2020 by Emilie Jolie

[basil67]

I can only give you the profile of the only anti white racist I knew - my previous boss.   He was also white Australian, but had a background of religious bigotry - he was a Protestant who openly HATED Catholics.   I though that clashes between the two religions in Australia had died out decades ago, but it was alive and well with him.   

So perhaps part of the profile is bigotry on more than one front?

[Emilie Jolie]

5 minutes ago, basil67 said:

I can only give you the profile of the only anti white racist I knew - my previous boss.   He was also white Australian, but had a background of religious bigotry - he was a Protestant who openly HATED Catholics.   I though that clashes between the two religions in Australia had died out decades ago, but it was alive and well with him.   

So perhaps part of the profile is bigotry on more than one front?

I assume so, yes. Is it the same guy who gave you a receptionist job anyway? I'm not sure I see how being anti-Catholic is being anti-white necessarily - there are catholics with all sorts of backgrounds, so what makes him a racist specifically? 

[basil67]

Yep, same guy.  You were asking for profile and I perhaps clumsily suggested bigotry across more than one area could be part of a profile.  Both religion and race.  

What made him a racist?  Frequent disparaging remarks about white Australian women vs Asian women 

Edited June 14, 2020 by basil67

[homecoming]

5 hours ago, Libby1 said:

 

Systemic racism against white people can and does happen, and in my view anybody who denies that is subscribing to the kind of thinking that enabled the continuation of years and years of horrific abuse by organised gangs of girls (predominantly white girls) in Rotherham. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the girls in Rotherham were the victims of systemic racism based on them being white.  The Jay Report concluded that they suffered from a combination of authorities being politically correct (being afraid of complaints of racism if they intervened) and racism.  The racism was being a sort of double edged "these girls are hanging out with Pakistani men, which makes them white trash which we don't care about" thing that's racist to everybody.  But the way that racism worked out was that the girls were its victims and the men who abused them benefited from it.  What can that possibly be, if not systemic racism?

 

The grooming gangs didn't target the girls because they were white. You have even written 'predominantly white' - so it cannot have been because they were white. They were targeted because the majority of young girls out on the streets and 'available' for grooming/abduction were white, and young Muslim girls in the same area were more likely to be kept at home by their families. This is also an issue of sexual exploitation, not racism. It is not systemic, because this happened in Rotherham (and other northern towns), and is not repeated throughout the world. 

The Jay Report did not find a 'combination' of what you mentioned. They found that officers didn't intervene because they didn't want to be accused of racism - that is not an act of racism, but perhaps an act of political correctness 'gone mad' (or whatever the phrase is). 

While it's understandable that you feel passionate about this, none of this is systemic racism. Systemic racism is opression by institution, when the laws of a place create unequal treatment of a specific social identity group or groups. 

No one has argued that racial prejudice is a good thing, but this is not systemic racism. That is not my opinion, but written, documented, and studied fact.

[homecoming]

I would like to know why many posters here feel so strongly about wanting to be confirmed as having experienced systemic racism, and dispute that they have experienced racial prejudice? Neither is better than the other, and no one is condoning either act. 

If myself, as a black woman, wrote in the same tone as some posters here, I imagine that I'd be labelled as wanting to be a victim, or having a chip on my shoulder, or some other variation (as I have read comments here directing that tone at black people who aren't present in this thread) 

If someone has pointed out that a person hasn't experienced something negative, why is it that many people seem to want to have experienced it? Surely the response should be "phew, I'm glad I haven't experienced that!" ??

Edited June 14, 2020 by homecoming

[homecoming]

One other point I'd like to add, which I hope isn't too crude. 

The grooming gangs... I presume these men wanted sexual acts with these girls, so pedophilia... which means they were attracted to these girls, then? They were attracted to white girls? In the same way that an older man might groom young teenage boys, because that's what he's into? Seems an issue of pedophilia, not race.

Edited June 14, 2020 by homecoming

[Libby1]

20 minutes ago, homecoming said:

I would like to know why many posters here feel so strongly about wanting to be confirmed as having experienced systemic racism, and dispute that they have experienced racial prejudice? Neither is better than the other, and no one is condoning either act. 

 

I'll address your post to me later, when I have a bit more time...but regarding the post above, this thread asks a very specific question.  What's wrong with posters answering it?

[Emilie Jolie]

13 minutes ago, basil67 said:

What made him a racist?  Frequent disparaging remarks about white Australian women vs Asian women 

Fair enough. I still only see racial prejudice against a subset of the white community rather than actual racism but that's fine, we can agree to disagree