5 ms·

Yeah, as someone from the South this bothers the crap out of me too. Bill Gates went to an elitist private school that is still having problems with diversity:

Yeah, as someone from the South this bothers the crap out of me too. Bill Gates went to an elitist private school that is still having problems with diversity: http://crosscut.com/2007/04/lakeside-schools-dirty-little-secret/ http://crosscut.com/2007/04/lakeside-schools-dirty-little-se... There was a really good article in a Boulder (where I live) newspaper recently about how living in a majority white area can really skew people's ideas of racism since they aren't confronted with its challenges on a daily basis like people in the South: http://www.boulderweekly.com/news/black-in-boulder/ http://www.boulderweekly.com/news/black-in-boulder/ I mean, just go to certain parts of LA, or the entirety of Boston, to get a good dose of any kind of racism. The idea that racism is the South's problem or that all racial tension is the South's fault boggles my mind and has, in my personal experience, been a extremely accurate indicator that the person who parrots such things has never in their life had to live in an area where you are forced to coexist with people of a different race or ethnicity. It's been found time and time again that the refusal to acknowledge racist attitudes within one's own community, regardless of one's personal or outward ideology or rhetoric, is one of the largest contributors to the vicious cycle that perpetuates discrimination. But I guess given recent events I shouldn't be surprised that we're still seeing such denial. It's just funny to me how the vast majority of the POC I know from my hometown and college ended up moving to "racist" places like Greenville, Nashville, New Orleans, and Atlanta instead of "enlightened" cities like Seattle, Denver, San Francisco, and Portland. Weird, huh?

kbenson 10y ago
The point, as I see it, was to compare and contrast the experiences people may have had growing up 30-50 years in the past, not to say anything about the current state of the South. Part of accepting past bad behavior and mistakes is letting it be used as examples where applicable. The only thing getting defensive in this case does it make it harder to discuss past mistakes, which in turn makes it easier to repeat them. Every state (or country, for that matter) has parts of its past it would rather not discuss, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be discussed. I think if you feel the South is being attacked in this instance, it's more your perception than reality.
- pdeuchler 10y ago
  I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say here, but if you don't think GGP's almost explicit inference that if those men had been in the "racist" (read: "South Eastern") parts of the US we wouldn't have had their contributions to society isn't a form of dog whistle than we're not going to have a constructive conversation here. P.S. I'd invite you to visit any of the southern cities I mentioned above to discuss past inequities with any of the hundreds of political organizations that make it their duty to right those past wrongs. Regardless of what you want to believe, we're not all hillbillies spitting into confederate spitoons whenever someone of color walks by, and we most assuredly do not deny the atrocities that occurred in the name of our geographical region. Something tells me you won't take me up on that offer though.
  - kbenson 10y ago
    > I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say here, but if you don't think GGP's almost explicit inference that if those men had been in the "racist" (read: "South Eastern") parts of the US we wouldn't have had their contributions to society isn't a form of dog whistle than we're not going to have a constructive conversation here. I don't think that was what was being said at all, if I did then I would agree with you. I think "tech luminaries" were used as examples of people that would be known here, and that have fairly liberal views on race that could have been different with a different environment when young. That the South has in the recent past (relatively, as in people are alive today that experienced it) had policies that contributed to racism and occurrences of extreme racism is not in question. That makes it fair game to illustrate a point. That point was to explain to some degree why Americans have "thin skin" regarding some race issues. As I understand it, the point was to point out that people have seen fairly distinct differences in how different parts of the country have treated people based on race, within their lifetime. None of that says anything about the South as it is now. It does say some factual things about the South as it was. By conflating this with some negative assessment of the South as it currently is, I think you're accidentally presenting a straw man argument. To put this another way, I will make a definitive statement. The South had racist policies. Unless you find reason to argue against that statement, I'm not sure what your problem is with the original comment, since I think for the purpose of what you're upset about, they reduce to the same thing.

kbenson 10y ago

The point, as I see it, was to compare and contrast the experiences people may have had growing up 30-50 years in the past, not to say anything about the current state of the South. Part of accepting past bad behavior and mistakes is letting it be used as examples where applicable. The only thing getting defensive in this case does it make it harder to discuss past mistakes, which in turn makes it easier to repeat them. Every state (or country, for that matter) has parts of its past it would rather not discuss, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be discussed. I think if you feel the South is being attacked in this instance, it's more your perception than reality.

pdeuchler 10y ago
I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say here, but if you don't think GGP's almost explicit inference that if those men had been in the "racist" (read: "South Eastern") parts of the US we wouldn't have had their contributions to society isn't a form of dog whistle than we're not going to have a constructive conversation here. P.S. I'd invite you to visit any of the southern cities I mentioned above to discuss past inequities with any of the hundreds of political organizations that make it their duty to right those past wrongs. Regardless of what you want to believe, we're not all hillbillies spitting into confederate spitoons whenever someone of color walks by, and we most assuredly do not deny the atrocities that occurred in the name of our geographical region. Something tells me you won't take me up on that offer though.
- kbenson 10y ago
  > I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say here, but if you don't think GGP's almost explicit inference that if those men had been in the "racist" (read: "South Eastern") parts of the US we wouldn't have had their contributions to society isn't a form of dog whistle than we're not going to have a constructive conversation here. I don't think that was what was being said at all, if I did then I would agree with you. I think "tech luminaries" were used as examples of people that would be known here, and that have fairly liberal views on race that could have been different with a different environment when young. That the South has in the recent past (relatively, as in people are alive today that experienced it) had policies that contributed to racism and occurrences of extreme racism is not in question. That makes it fair game to illustrate a point. That point was to explain to some degree why Americans have "thin skin" regarding some race issues. As I understand it, the point was to point out that people have seen fairly distinct differences in how different parts of the country have treated people based on race, within their lifetime. None of that says anything about the South as it is now. It does say some factual things about the South as it was. By conflating this with some negative assessment of the South as it currently is, I think you're accidentally presenting a straw man argument. To put this another way, I will make a definitive statement. The South had racist policies. Unless you find reason to argue against that statement, I'm not sure what your problem is with the original comment, since I think for the purpose of what you're upset about, they reduce to the same thing.