Post Racial America

toyracer

International
International Member
Diversity Hype Leaves Residue Of Resentment

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=532167

Recent stories out of both Philadelphia and San Francisco tell of black students beating up Asian-American students. This is especially painful for those who expected that the election of Barack Obama would mark the beginning of a post-racial America.

While Obama's winning the majority of the votes in overwhelmingly white states suggests that many Americans are ready to move beyond race, it is painfully clear that others are not.

Those who explain racial antagonisms on some rationalistic basis will have a hard time demonstrating how Asian-Americans have made blacks worse off. Certainly none of the historic wrongs done to blacks was done by the small Asian-American population that, for most of its history in this country, has not had enough clout to prevent itself from being discriminated against.

While ugly racial or ethnic conflicts can seldom be explained by rational economic or other self-interest, they have been too common to be just inexplicable oddities — whether in America or in other countries around the world, and whether today or in centuries past.

Resentments and hostility toward people with higher achievements are one of the most widespread of human failings. Resentments of achievements are more deadly than envy of wealth.

The hatred of people who started at the bottom and worked their way up has far exceeded any hostility toward those who were simply born into wealth. None of the sultans who inherited extraordinary fortunes in Malaysia has been hated like the Chinese, who arrived there destitute and rose by their own efforts.

Inheritors of the Rockefeller fortune have been elected as popular governors in three states, attracting nothing like the hostility toward the Jewish immigrants who rose from poverty on Manhattan's Lower East Side to prosperity in a variety of fields.

Others who started at the bottom and rose to prosperity — the Lebanese in West Africa, the Indians in Fiji, the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, for example — have likewise been hated for their achievements. Being born a sultan or a Rockefeller is not an achievement.

Achievements are a reflection on others who may have had similar, and sometimes better, chances but who did not make the most of their chances. Achievements are like a slap across the face to those who are not achieving, and many people react with the same kind of anger that such an insult would provoke.

In our own times, especially, this is not just a spontaneous reaction. Many of our educators, our intelligentsia and our media — not to mention our politicians — promote an attitude that other people's achievements are grievances, rather than examples.

When black schoolchildren who are working hard in school and succeeding academically are attacked and beaten up by black classmates for "acting white," why is it surprising that similar hostility is turned against Asian-Americans, who are often achieving academically more so than whites?

This attitude is not peculiar to some in the black community or to the United States. The same phenomenon is found among lower-class whites in Britain, where academically achieving white students have been beaten up badly enough by their white classmates to require hospital treatment.

These are poisonous and self-destructive consequences of a steady drumbeat of ideological hype about differences that are translated into "disparities" and "inequities," provoking envy and resentments under their more prettied-up name of "social justice."

Asian-American schoolchildren who are beaten up are just some of the victims of these resentments that are whipped up. Young people who are seething with resentments, instead of seizing educational and other opportunities around them, are bigger victims in the long run, whether they are blacks in the U.S. or lower-class whites in the U.K.

A decade after these beatings, these Asian-Americans will be headed up in the world, while the hoodlums who beat them up are more likely to be headed for crime and prison.

People who call differences "inequities" and achievements "privilege" leave social havoc in their wake, while feeling noble about siding with the less fortunate. It would never occur to them that they have any responsibility for the harm done to both blacks and Asian-Americans.
 
Diversity Hype Leaves Residue Of Resentment

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=532167

Recent stories out of both Philadelphia and San Francisco tell of black students beating up Asian-American students. This is especially painful for those who expected that the election of Barack Obama would mark the beginning of a post-racial America.

While Obama's winning the majority of the votes in overwhelmingly white states suggests that many Americans are ready to move beyond race, it is painfully clear that others are not.

Those who explain racial antagonisms on some rationalistic basis will have a hard time demonstrating how Asian-Americans have made blacks worse off. Certainly none of the historic wrongs done to blacks was done by the small Asian-American population that, for most of its history in this country, has not had enough clout to prevent itself from being discriminated against.

While ugly racial or ethnic conflicts can seldom be explained by rational economic or other self-interest, they have been too common to be just inexplicable oddities — whether in America or in other countries around the world, and whether today or in centuries past.

Resentments and hostility toward people with higher achievements are one of the most widespread of human failings. Resentments of achievements are more deadly than envy of wealth.

The hatred of people who started at the bottom and worked their way up has far exceeded any hostility toward those who were simply born into wealth. None of the sultans who inherited extraordinary fortunes in Malaysia has been hated like the Chinese, who arrived there destitute and rose by their own efforts.

Inheritors of the Rockefeller fortune have been elected as popular governors in three states, attracting nothing like the hostility toward the Jewish immigrants who rose from poverty on Manhattan's Lower East Side to prosperity in a variety of fields.

Others who started at the bottom and rose to prosperity — the Lebanese in West Africa, the Indians in Fiji, the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, for example — have likewise been hated for their achievements. Being born a sultan or a Rockefeller is not an achievement.

Achievements are a reflection on others who may have had similar, and sometimes better, chances but who did not make the most of their chances. Achievements are like a slap across the face to those who are not achieving, and many people react with the same kind of anger that such an insult would provoke.

In our own times, especially, this is not just a spontaneous reaction. Many of our educators, our intelligentsia and our media — not to mention our politicians — promote an attitude that other people's achievements are grievances, rather than examples.

When black schoolchildren who are working hard in school and succeeding academically are attacked and beaten up by black classmates for "acting white," why is it surprising that similar hostility is turned against Asian-Americans, who are often achieving academically more so than whites?

This attitude is not peculiar to some in the black community or to the United States. The same phenomenon is found among lower-class whites in Britain, where academically achieving white students have been beaten up badly enough by their white classmates to require hospital treatment.

These are poisonous and self-destructive consequences of a steady drumbeat of ideological hype about differences that are translated into "disparities" and "inequities," provoking envy and resentments under their more prettied-up name of "social justice."

Asian-American schoolchildren who are beaten up are just some of the victims of these resentments that are whipped up. Young people who are seething with resentments, instead of seizing educational and other opportunities around them, are bigger victims in the long run, whether they are blacks in the U.S. or lower-class whites in the U.K.

A decade after these beatings, these Asian-Americans will be headed up in the world, while the hoodlums who beat them up are more likely to be headed for crime and prison.

People who call differences "inequities" and achievements "privilege" leave social havoc in their wake, while feeling noble about siding with the less fortunate. It would never occur to them that they have any responsibility for the harm done to both blacks and Asian-Americans.
 
<font size="4">

Post Racial America</font size>
- I keep seeing the term in threads, on news casts and in various writings.


<font size="4">What is the origin of the term ???


And, what does the term really mean ???</font size>



  • NPR Senior News Analyst Daniel Schorr observes the ascendance of Barack Obama as a presidential candidate and wonders whether the U.S. is entering a new, "post-racial" political era. Schorr went on to say, "Welcome to the latest buzz word in the political lexicon, post-racial. It is what Senator Barack Obama signals in his victory speech in South Carolina when he tells of the woman who used to work for segregationist Strom Thurmond and now, knocks on doors for the Obama campaign.

    It is what makes Bill Clinton seemed disconnected when he compares Obama's campaign to the campaigns of Jesse Jackson in 1984 and '88. <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">The post-racial era, as embodied by Obama, is the era where civil rights veterans of the past century are consigned to history and Americans begin to make race-free judgments on who should lead them.</span>"


  • The Kansas City Star notes, 'Post-racial America' is an obvious term of fiction. Whoever came up with the insipid term “post-racial” ought to be forced to sit down and read aloud the vile commentary that pours into any newsroom after it publishes or airs a story on race. That would quickly cure the urge to insist we’ve finally reached that harmonious other side of the rainbow.


    We certainly saw no such evidence in recent days, even in the actions of Barack Obama’s White House, which is supposed to be living proof that Americans are “over” race. Administration officials acted as discreditably as the nation’s most storied civil rights organization, the NAACP, in its lame-brained, cowardly response to the latest racial provocation from the right.


    There is another racially charged dimension to this drama, one that most commentators and reporters don’t mention: The Department of Agriculture is still trying to settle lawsuits with black farmers who for decades were systematically denied loans, causing financial ruin for many in lost crops and land. (Interestingly, Sherrod herself is a former farmer who sued the government over this discrimination and won.) The Obama administration is backing legislation enabling a $1.25 billion grant to settle the outstanding claims, a plan that conservatives have attacked vigorously. That legislation was supposed to be voted on the very week Breitbart chose to release his edited video. Coincidence? And, of course, right before it nose-dived on the Sherrod story, the NAACP was battered for daring to adopt a resolution asking the tea party movement to shun the racists in its midst. The response? How dare the NAACP! And what about that New Black Panther Party? Ben Jealous, head of the NAACP, probably lost count of the number of times he was asked recently to denounce the actions of this handful of loons that decked themselves in paramilitary gear and hung out at a Philadelphia polling place in 2008.

    Why does anybody care about the New Black Panther Party? Because Fox News will not stop excoriating the Obama administration with the false claim that it has done nothing to investigate or prosecute the group.

    The case is dredged up as a supposed example of a pattern in the Obama White House of being soft on minority “racists” and lawbreakers.


  • Ann Coulter says there is No "Post-Racial America" Under Obama. "I don't think it has been 'post-racial' for a second with this administration," Coulter said on "The Early Show."

    "You had the president calling Sergeant Crowley [the Cambridge, Mass. Police officer who arrested Henry Louis Gates at his home] saying he was acting stupidly. Up to now you had them not prosecuting the New Black Panthers on the grounds that they won't prosecute a voting rights case against blacks. You had Sonia Sotomayor saying she was a 'wise Latina' and ruling against white firemen who didn't get promotions because of their race - I mean, it's been nonstop, nonstop, nonstop."

    Coulter also blamed "liberal journalists, hundreds of them, chit-chatting about how to protect Obama.

    "You know, they're openly saying, 'We're in trouble, we need to distract from what's going on. Let's just randomly call the conservative racist.' Liberals use this all the time to distract from what's going on," she said.


  • The View From The Right says, <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">Presumably a post-racial, beyond-race America will be one in which no one thinks about race any more, an America in which we all just see each other as individuals</span>. This is most puzzling, since I was not aware that Obama has called for the elimination of the vast system of race-conscious preferences for blacks and other nonwhite groups that is institutionalized at every level of our society. Currently, blacks and Hispanics are admitted to selective universities with grades and SATs for which virtually all white and Asian applicants are automatically rejected. Blacks and Hispanics are admitted to graduate schools with grades and test scores for which virtually all white and Asian applicants are automatically rejected. In the 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger decision (see my article on it), the Supreme Court said that racial preferences for nonwhites were justified and mandated by the U.S. Constitution.

    In every area of American life, from academic achievement to fire department examinations to grade school discipline to incarceration rates to bank loans and mortgages, blacks do much worse than whites, and their lack of success is seen as a moral stain on society calling forth ever renewed efforts to "close the racial gap." One of the most written-about gaps is that black high school seniors are on average four years behind whites in reading abilities. But what such a huge differential indicates is not that blacks simply "lag behind whites," a genial image that suggests a footrace in which the blacks cross the finish line just a little bit behind the whites; what it indicates is that the blacks are not even in the same event as the whites. And this is why, in every institution, parallel tracks for blacks have been set up where they are evaluated by much lower standards than those applied to whites. At the same time, <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">to prevent whites from reacting against this massive racial favoritism for blacks, whites are required to attend "diversity sensitivity" sessions where they are told that they harbor conscious or unconscious racial stereotypes about blacks which are somehow responsible for the blacks being behind and which the whites must extricate from their psyches</span>.

    Will the elevation of Barack Obama to the presidency change any of this?




<font size="4">What is the origin of the term ???


And, what does the term really mean ???</font size>




QueEx
 
<font size="6"><center>
Burying "Post-Racial" </font size>
<font size="4">

We're so far from achieving a post-racial society
that even using the term is harmful. </font size></center>


Joel Anderson
July 28, 2010


<font size="3">Let's review the past few weeks:</font size>

  • <font size="3">The NAACP asked the Tea Party to condemn racist elements in its ranks;</font size>

  • <font size="3">The Tea Party responded with a fake letter from the NAACP to President Abraham Lincoln asking for slavery to be restored;</font size>

  • <font size="3">Shirley Sherrod was fired from her job at the USDA over video of a controversial speech that turned out to be heavily edited;</font size>

  • <font size="3">A white Bay Area Rapid Transit officer was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the shooting death of an unarmed black man, a case that renewed concerns about tensions between police and the marginalized communities they serve; </font size>

  • <font size="3">And all of this, incidentally, took place about one year after Cambridge police arrested Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. in his own home, and President Barack Obama orchestrated a Rose Garden beer summit to address tensions caused by the incident. </font size>

If the Gates episode didn't make it clear, then these new events certainly should: <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">We are horrible at talking about race in this country, and it's time we retire the notion that we are "post-racial."</span>

<font size="3"><center>
The Root of Post-Racialism

The roots of post-racialism reach back to the Democratic National
Convention in 2004. Post-racialism, of course, is <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">the belief that
people of color -- particularly those of African descent -- have
no need to keep agitating about discrimination or inequality
</span>. </font size></center>

<font size="3">But the seeds truly started to sprout in November 2008</font size>, when about 69.5 million registered voters went into their respective booths, swallowed hard, and voted for a biracial man from Hawaii. Upon Obama's election, people who should have known better started to speak of racism in the past tense. Somehow, the thinking went, the U.S. had excised centuries of racial prejudice and discrimination. President Barack Obama was the living, breathing, signifying proof.

<font size="3">In the age of Obama</font size>, the inelegant pundit writes, we are now closer than ever to becoming a colorblind, post-racial society. The kind of society where, as Chris Matthews might say, you forget that black people are black. "I was trying to think about who he was tonight," Matthews said after Obama's State of the Union address in January. "It's interesting; he is post-racial, by all appearances. I forgot he was black tonight for an hour." So come, let's all share in a very special Benetton moment.

<font size="3">It's not just limited to cable-news hosts.</font size> Even the hallowed pages of The New York Times allowed the term. "Racial polarization used to be a dominating force in our politics, but we're now a different, and better, country," wrote columnist Paul Krugman in June 2008. From the moons of Neptune, John McWhorter -- in a story published in The Grio in January, accompanied by the comically clichéd headline "It's official: America is 'post-racial'" in the age of Obama" -- argued that the nation's treatment of blacks is no longer a matter of pressing concern. And in a mostly lighthearted take last week on the universal sex appeal of the Old Spice Guy, The Daily Beast's Tricia Romano quoted former National Public Radio commentator Farai Chideya referring to actor Isaiah Mustafa as "someone who is the modern, urbane, living-in-a-post-racial Fort Greene kind of guy." Because, apparently, even our leading men and fashionable neighborhoods are post-racial today.

<font size="3">In a bit of a twist, some have actually accused Obama of promising a post-racial America</font size> through, I suppose, his stirring -- and star-making -- 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention ("There's not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there's the United States of America") or, perhaps, because of his widespread political appeal despite an unusual name and sand-colored skin.

<font size="3">"Obama's special charisma</font size> -- since his famous 2004 convention speech -- always came much more from the racial idealism he embodied than from his political ideas," Shelby Steele wrote the day after the historic election. "But all this policy boilerplate was freshened up -- given an air of 'change' -- by the dreamy post-racial and post-ideological kitsch he dressed it in."

<font size="3">When post-racialism fails,</font size> many, like blogger Pam Spaulding, have resorted to relentlessly mocking the concept. All too often, I see reporters and bloggers resort to the use of "post-racial" as an ironic crutch: "Why would minority communities get fewer mortgages than white communities since the financial crisis? What did you say? That couldn't be true in our post-racial America," wrote the Booman Tribune in May.

<font size="3">Regardless, we all know -- or should know -- that this is baloney.</font size> Post-racialism is a figment of the imagination. Post-racial America is Utopia. Atlantis. Unicorns. Aerocars. Clean coal. It simply doesn't exist.

By even engaging with the term, we give it staying power and credibility with people -- mostly racists, certain right-wingers, lazy pundits, or other denialists -- who know that it's a lie or hope to convince the clueless that it's true. Tossing around the phrase gives more life to the lie, and for those interested in the truth about racism, it's a self-imposed obstacle. We can't move forward; we first have to debunk the idea of a post-racial America, and then we can have a conversation.

That conversation is necessary, and it takes only a brief swing through Google to see how institutional racism remains part of the American way. The U.S. imprisons a larger share of its black population than South Africa did at the pinnacle of apartheid; a recent study found that racial disparities in health care cost the country $229 billion from 2003-2006; and the income gap between blacks and whites has actually widened over the past three decades.

Our insistence on being ironic, cute, or lazy when talking about race makes it much harder to engage with the very serious ways in which race figures into our lives. We're wasting time, column space, and precious bandwidth. And, unfortunately, the post-racial idea is an excuse for many who are disingenuous, or worse, to ignore these facts and argue there's no more racism to address. For them, post-racialism is merely a cudgel used to quiet those who insist that America deliver on its promise of equality for all its citizens.

Which brings us back to Sherrod, who survived the racially motivated murder of her father as a teenager and spent enough years fighting for restitution for poor black farmers to know the deal. She was collateral damage in a race war, realizing that the NAACP's resolution to the Tea Party prompted her unfortunate moment in the spotlight. The NAACP "got into a fight with the Tea Party," she said, "and all of this came out as a result of that."

It's telling that Sherrod suffered this indignity for being unusually honest about her struggle to move beyond race to help those in underserved communities. Post-racialism, anyone?

Ta-Nehisi Coates had it right when commenting on Gates's arrest: "The only people I ever heard claiming that we were post-racial were cable news hosts setting up the straw man."

<font size="3">I, obviously, can't tell you how to use language. But I excised "post-racial" from my vocabulary</font size> a long time ago. I'm not interested in making hard truths easy to digest for racists and syndicated conservative columnists. Playing around with post-racialism only distracts from the issues that matter: wealth disparity, inequality in our criminal-justice system, immigration reform.

<font size="3">There's a lot of work left to be done, but we have to bury this idea first. So let's each grab a shovel. And maybe a thesaurus. </font size>

____________________________

joel_bio.jpg

Joel
Anderson


Joel Anderson is better known in the blogosphere and Twitterverse as blackink12 of PostBourgie. He is currently a newspaper reporter in Tampa and has worked at several news organizations, including The Associated Press, for nearly a decade.


http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=burying_post_racial
 
Tavis needs to quit.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/l-mdbkshudo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


Tavis Smiley To Obama: Blacks "Ought To Be Looked Out For"

Tavis Smiley says the President is ignoring blacks, the "most loyal" part of his base who "ought to be looked out for." Smiley spoke to NBC's Lester Holt. In April, Smiley said the 2012 elections will be "the most racist in the history of this Republic.

"It's just not that black folks are hurting the most now. It's that there's no sign that it's going to get any better. There really are two questions in black America, I think, Lester, have to wrestle with. At least two questions. Number one: what is the pain threshold in black America? What is our pain threshold, number one. And number two, what is the presidency really worth? Is it worth not saying anything? Is it worth being silent when you're catching the most hell, when you're suffering the most pain? Especially, when you're the most loyal part of the President's base," Smiley said.

"That's not hating on the President, it's defending your own flanks. And whatever happened to that notion that to the victor goes the spoils? If anybody ought to be looked out for, it ought to be the persons who represent the most significant and the most loyal part of the base. That would be African-Americans."

Smiley says he understands that President Obama is taking the "political risk" looking "tribal" if he were to look out for the concerns of his race. "What makes presidents great, makes them transformational is taking risks," Mr. Smiley says.

At the conclusion of the interview, Mr. Smiley says America is "less racist" but not post-racial.
 
<IFRAME SRC="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15765349" WIDTH=760 HEIGHT=1500>
<A HREF="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15765349">link</A>

</IFRAME>
 
hmm

“Hating people because of their color is wrong. And it doesn't matter which color does the hating. It's just plain wrong.”
“I wish I could say that racism and prejudice were only distant memories. We must dissent from the indifference. We must dissent from the apathy. We must dissent from the fear, the hatred and the mistrust…We must dissent because America can do better, because America has no choice but to do better.”
“Ignorance and prejudice are the handmaidens of propaganda. Our mission, therefore, is to confront ignorance with knowledge, bigotry with tolerance, and isolation with the outstretched hand of generosity. Racism can, will, and must be defeated.”
“You can't hate the roots of a tree and not hate the tree.”
“Some white people Hate black people,
and some white people Love black people,
Some black people Hate white people,
and some black people Love white people.
So you see, it's not an issue of black and white,
it's an issue of Lovers and Haters.”
“It was civil disobedience that won them their civil rights.”
“I always looked upon the acts of racist exclusion, or insult, as pitiable, for the other person. I never absorbed that. I always thought that there was something deficient about such people. ”
“[Prison] relieves us of the responsibility of seriously engaging with the problems of our society, especially those produced by racism and, increasingly, global capitalism.”
 
Back
Top