5 ms·

There are efforts aimed at people whose parents didn't go to college and they don't have anything to do with race. But to answer your question, I think many of

by troupe 9y ago

There are efforts aimed at people whose parents didn't go to college and they don't have anything to do with race. But to answer your question, I think many of the groups that ostensibly were founded to fight racism are more aimed at getting better treatment for their particular race than actually doing away with racism overall. As long as we are trying to treat some people better because of their race, we are necessarily treating other people worse because of their race. If people want to fight against racism we'd be better off with groups that are fighting against people being treated differently because of their race--regardless of what race they happen to be. Imagine an organization that is just as upset about Asians needing higher test scores to get into Ivy League schools as they are about a black person being treated worse by the police than someone with lighter skin in the same situation.

adamsea 9y ago
The ACLU?
- troupe 9y ago
  Absolutely, but when you hear someone talking about racism on television are they usually from an organization promoting a certain race or from some place that is trying to remove race from the decision making process entirely?
tptacek 9y ago
I think many of the groups that ostensibly were founded to fight racism are more aimed at getting better treatment for their particular race Sure. For instance: the NAACP is actively working to improve conditions for black people. The reason they do that is that as recently as my own birthday (I'm 40), African Americans were actively excluded from American life; for instance, they were redlined out of neighborhoods across Chicago and concentrated into lower-income neighborhoods that were allocated poorer services. And that's just what happened within my lifetime. Go back just a few years earlier and black people couldn't reliably vote, and were beaten and attacked with dogs for marching for their own rights. It's not surprising that someone without African American heritage would look at this and see only an effort to improve outcomes for black people. Obviously, that's what it is. Also, though, what it is is necessary: a corrective for multiple centuries of --- let's call it what it is, I guess: institutionalized oppression.
- troupe 9y ago
  > Also, though, what it is is necessary: a corrective for multiple centuries of --- let's call it what it is, I guess: institutionalized oppression. It sounds you feel that the way to right the wrongs of racism against blacks in the past is to practice racism against other races today. I know you aren't alone in this view, but I disagree for the following reasons: First of all, if we agree that racism is morally wrong, then I don't see how practicing racism today can be considered a morally right solution to racism in the past. Second, even if we can morally justify penalizing the descendants of slave owners in order to create benefit for the descendants of slaves, categorizing people based on the color of their skin isn't a good way to do this. There are white people whose lineage had nothing to do with owning slaves and there are people whose African ancestors owned, captured and sold people into slavery.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    Basically what your argument appears to boil down to is: if white people oppress black people for 2 centuries, leaving them in a state of enduring poverty, it is unfair to correct that in any way, because any such correction would be race-based and thus "racist".
    - troupe 9y ago
      I'm all for giving people opportunities to get out of poverty. I do not think such opportunities should be limited to a particular race. Pell Grants are a good example. The grants aren't racist in that everyone can apply. However, the odds of a randomly selected Pell Grant student being black are twice as high as what should be expected if Pell Grants are evenly distributed amoung college students, but it isn't a race-based opportunity. You can give people opportunities to get out of poverty without practicing racism.

by troupe 9y ago

adamsea 9y ago

The ACLU?

troupe 9y ago
Absolutely, but when you hear someone talking about racism on television are they usually from an organization promoting a certain race or from some place that is trying to remove race from the decision making process entirely?

tptacek 9y ago

I think many of the groups that ostensibly were founded to fight racism are more aimed at getting better treatment for their particular race Sure. For instance: the NAACP is actively working to improve conditions for black people. The reason they do that is that as recently as my own birthday (I'm 40), African Americans were actively excluded from American life; for instance, they were redlined out of neighborhoods across Chicago and concentrated into lower-income neighborhoods that were allocated poorer services. And that's just what happened within my lifetime. Go back just a few years earlier and black people couldn't reliably vote, and were beaten and attacked with dogs for marching for their own rights. It's not surprising that someone without African American heritage would look at this and see only an effort to improve outcomes for black people. Obviously, that's what it is. Also, though, what it is is necessary: a corrective for multiple centuries of --- let's call it what it is, I guess: institutionalized oppression.

troupe 9y ago
> Also, though, what it is is necessary: a corrective for multiple centuries of --- let's call it what it is, I guess: institutionalized oppression. It sounds you feel that the way to right the wrongs of racism against blacks in the past is to practice racism against other races today. I know you aren't alone in this view, but I disagree for the following reasons: First of all, if we agree that racism is morally wrong, then I don't see how practicing racism today can be considered a morally right solution to racism in the past. Second, even if we can morally justify penalizing the descendants of slave owners in order to create benefit for the descendants of slaves, categorizing people based on the color of their skin isn't a good way to do this. There are white people whose lineage had nothing to do with owning slaves and there are people whose African ancestors owned, captured and sold people into slavery.
- tptacek 9y ago
  Basically what your argument appears to boil down to is: if white people oppress black people for 2 centuries, leaving them in a state of enduring poverty, it is unfair to correct that in any way, because any such correction would be race-based and thus "racist".
  - troupe 9y ago
    I'm all for giving people opportunities to get out of poverty. I do not think such opportunities should be limited to a particular race. Pell Grants are a good example. The grants aren't racist in that everyone can apply. However, the odds of a randomly selected Pell Grant student being black are twice as high as what should be expected if Pell Grants are evenly distributed amoung college students, but it isn't a race-based opportunity. You can give people opportunities to get out of poverty without practicing racism.