Skip to main content

Without the power to act on it, racism is no more than an opinion at best, mental or emotional abuse at worse-----Before the civil rights movement racist whites had to power to do whatever they wanted to Blacks and other minorities in this country without consequence; they no long have that power. Now Blacks and other minorities in this country can go about the city where ever they want, live and work where they want, buy homes and property, go to school where they want, open businesses, get bank loans, have hope for a good future, not be lynched just for being Black or non-white, not be burned alive as they sleep along with their children just because someone hates them, or is jealous that they have a home or a nice home, or wants their land for free----all of these things are what racism has to do with power.
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
Zimbabwe's President, Robert Mugage, kicked White colonizers off of the farmland they *owned* in order to give it to native Africans. He did that because they were White and he felt that African land should belong to African people. He had the power to implement a system dominance over another race of people.
Was what he did *racism*? Confused


From your asterisks around the word 'owned'... It's kinda obvious that you are not cunfused on if that was or was not a racist act... Clearly, the Zimbabwean land rightfully belongs to the indigenous Zimbabwean people. and taking it back from the settler colonialists and their progeny, who REFUSED multiple times to allow it to be bought back AS THEY AGREED TO DO YEARS BEFORE is not a racist act... The fact that the settler colonialist land owners and their progeny were European/White demonstrates the lingering result of the aprtheid system and there... Mugabe didn't just take the land back from them because they were white, he took it back because of how they unjustly aquired it(racist settler colonialism) in the first place.
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
quote:
Originally posted by Fabulous:
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
LOL ... Smile


Well, really, I wasn't trying to 'wear you down', HonestBrother! Smile


It's just that I've self-identified as a racist for years, now!! Eek And, if this is not true, it means I need to re-evaulate my whole self-image! Big Grin

Which would be difficult enough as it is .. but... it's also a little late to be trying to teach an old dog a new trick! Razz


EbonyRose, you are not a racist even IF black ppl 'could be' racist, 'you' are not.

You may have your 'likes' & dislikes but from what I've read of your postings over the two years I've been here, a 'racist' you are not.


LOL ... well, while I certainly appreciate your attempt to 'save my soul', Ms. Fab, I would have to say that by definition (understandably not yours), but my own included, I would call myself a racist.

It's not merely about likes and dislikes ... as those don't run along racial lines for me. There is good and ugly in every race of people, and I attempt to like or dislike on a more individual basis.

However, I DO believe (rightly or wrongly) that in many aspects, Black people are indeed superior to Caucasians in several areas of life.

While I also believe that each race has certain superlatives where they are better at somethings than other races are (based on certain mental or physical conditions or attributes), I think in a head-to-head competition we are better at more things than they are!

And we won't even talk about the intellectual and character differences! Smile

To me, being *prejudiced* casts a wider net of dislike and/or hatred and isn't as specific as race. And while I would never dream of wanting to oppress White people because of what I believe is their weaker or inferior state (which to me signifies evil), it does cause me to think less of them and lowers my expectations of them as a race, which is probably unfair on a more individual level.


Ok, Ms. Ebony, Wink I do understand your perspective, so. . .if by your own definition you choose to consider yourself 'racist', you go right ahead, my sister . . . hug

I ain't mad at ya Wink

However. . .

while your beliefs are your own, without action, that's all they are -- beliefs.

Racism is an ideology of ACTION. . .one does not exist without the other

racism as we know it came about as justification for ACTIONS (aka 'slavery'). Before that, people's prejudices and biases were centered around other factors like tribal affiliation (europeans were tribal also). . .class, gender and privilege

it was not RACE BASED. . .

differences were perceived as 'other'

this is why you find blacks in positions of power and authority in ancient european cultures.

We can agree to disagree. Cool
Racism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Racism, by its simplest definition, is the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

People with racist beliefs might hate certain groups of people according to their racial groups. In the case of institutional racism, certain racial groups may be denied rights or benefits, or get preferential treatment.

Racial discrimination typically points out taxonomic differences between different groups of people, even though anybody can be racialised, independently of their somatic differences. According to the United Nations conventions, there is no distinction between the term racial discrimination and ethnic discrimination.

Definitions

Though the term racism usually denotes race-based prejudice, violence, discrimination, or oppression, the term can also have varying and hotly contested definitions.
Racialism is a related term, sometimes intended to avoid these negative meanings.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, racism is a belief or ideology that all members of each racial group possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially to distinguish it as being either superior or inferior to another racial group or racial groups.

The Merriam-Webster's Dictionary defines racism as a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular racial group, and that it is also the prejudice based on such a belief.

The Macquarie Dictionary defines racism as: "the belief that human races have distinctive characteristics which determine their respective cultures, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule or dominate others."

Legal

The UN does not define "racism", however it does define "racial discrimination": according to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,

the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life. '

This definition does not make any difference between prosecutions based on ethnicity and race, in part because the distinction between the two remains debatable among anthropologists. According to British law, racial group means "any group of people who are defined by reference to their race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origin".

Sociological

Some sociologists have defined racism as a system of group privilege.

In Portraits of White Racism David Wellman (1993) has defined racism as "culturally sanctioned beliefs, which, regardless of intentions involved, defend the advantages whites have because of the subordinated position of racial minorities,” (Wellman 1993: x).

Sociologists Noel Cazenave and Darlene Alvarez Maddern define racism as “...a highly organized system of 'race'-based group privilege that operates at every level of society and is held together by a sophisticated ideology of color/'race' supremacy.

Racist systems include, but cannot be reduced to, racial bigotry,” , (Cazenave and Maddern 1999: 42).

Sociologist and former American Sociological Association president Joe Feagin argues that the united States can be characterized as a "total racist society" because racism is used to organize every social institution (Feagin 2000, p. 16). *snip*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism
quote:
Originally posted by listener:
quote:
I'm not quite sure what his point is, but I appreciate the imput


my point is that Black people can't be racist according more accurate definitions about racism, I posted one example, which is more than just being biased. The result of racism is (white) dominance in all aspects of life, culture, economy, education etc.
I also think that it is a white/Eurocentric attitude, no other group feels such a "need" to dominate the entire world and when you think about South Africa where whites are just about 9% of the entire population there must be a cultural 'agreement' or how to call it to be able to create an oppressive system like apartheid and to keep it alive up to today. There is definitely a certain ideology behind, which is much more than just being prejudiced.


appl yeah thanks

'Right on', listener, tfro now THAT's what I'm talkin' bout. Cool I totally agree with you.
When I said:
An explanation of the ideology behind a person’s attitude isn’t necessary to determine if the person is racist or not

Fabulous replied:

(quote)
"So 'YOU' say but here's what a book "Race and Ethnic Relations" by Maring N. Marger says about it: *snip*

"Racist ideology then promotes an ethnic status quo in which one group predominates in the society's economy, polity, and other key institutions and thus receives the greatest share of the society's wealth and power."

so you see. . .an explanation of the ideology is INDEED necessary (imo). "

(reply)
Maring N. Marger does not make up the rules; just because he said it doesn't make it so.
I think I will bring up the point that made earlier; I am asking can blacks be racist, and you are responding about racism and the ideology associated with it; thus you haven't answered my question.
A racist is a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others. An explanation of an ideology is not necessary in order for a person to have this belief.

(quote)
"Tell me, what qualifies you as an authority on the subject?

Please provide your qualifications or reference at least ONE academic book or study that qualifies your statement."

(reply)
I am using the dictionary. Dictionaries define words as they are used. Academic studies and being an athority on the subject is not necessary for a question as simple as; can a person be racist, when the dictionary defines what a racist is. I think you are looking a little too far into this my friend

Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
Zimbabwe's President, Robert Mugage, kicked White colonizers off of the farmland they *owned* in order to give it to native Africans. He did that because they were White and he felt that African land should belong to African people. He had the power to implement a system dominance over another race of people.
Was what he did *racism*? Confused


From your asterisks around the word 'owned'... It's kinda obvious that you are not cunfused on if that was or was not a racist act... Clearly, the Zimbabwean land rightfully belongs to the indigenous Zimbabwean people. and taking it back from the settler colonialists and their progeny, who REFUSED multiple times to allow it to be bought back AS THEY AGREED TO DO YEARS BEFORE is not a racist act... The fact that the settler colonialist land owners and their progeny were European/White demonstrates the lingering result of the aprtheid system and there... Mugabe didn't just take the land back from them because they were white, he took it back because of how they unjustly aquired it(racist settler colonialism) in the first place.


Actually, OA ... I put the asterisks around the word *owned* to denote the colonizers' mistaken assumption that they were entitled to land that they had stolen to obtain. Smile

Secondly, I wasn't trying to feign my own confusion over the matter, I was asking for people's opinion as whether or not, by the definitions we have been discussing, what Mugabe did would be considered racism. Hence the question: "Was what he did racism?"

Mugabe is the only person I could think of who had power over over a White constituency, and used it, which is why I used him as an example.

I assure you my post was meant to be no more sinister than that. sck But I can appreciate your opinion on the matter.
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
When I said:
An explanation of the ideology behind a person’s attitude isn’t necessary to determine if the person is racist or not

Fabulous replied:

(quote)
"So 'YOU' say but here's what a book "Race and Ethnic Relations" by Maring N. Marger says about it: *snip*

"Racist ideology then promotes an ethnic status quo in which one group predominates in the society's economy, polity, and other key institutions and thus receives the greatest share of the society's wealth and power."

so you see. . .an explanation of the ideology is INDEED necessary (imo). "

(reply)
Maring N. Marger does not make up the rules;

and neither do you

just because he said it doesn't make it so.

the same applies to you, at least 'the author' STUDIED the subject, researched & published his findings. . .imo, that makes him more of an authority than you could ever be.

I think I will bring up the point that made earlier; I am asking can blacks be racist, and you are responding about racism and the ideology associated with it; thus you haven't answered my question.

perhaps you didn't like my answer but don't lie. The readers can see for themselves that I answered your question in my first post to this thread.

A racist is a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others. An explanation of an ideology is not necessary in order for a person to have this belief.

That's racism in the world according to YOU but don't get it twisted. . .

there are those who study & 'research' racism as part of their profession and I think what 'they' have to say about it is more accurate than anything 'you' could offer.

Dig what I'm sayin' to ya?

What? are folk supposed to be IMPRESSED by you? please. I'm not so easily amused. You ask a question then come off as if only YOU can provide the answer.


(quote)
"Tell me, what qualifies you as an authority on the subject?

Please provide your qualifications or reference at least ONE academic book or study that qualifies your statement."

(reply)
I am using the dictionary. Dictionaries define words as they are used. Academic studies and being an athority on the subject is not necessary for a question as simple as; can a person be racist, when the dictionary defines what a racist is. I think you are looking a little too far into this my friend

Kevin


And I'm telling you the dictionary defines 'racism' in it's simplest form but the TRUTH is not as 'simple' as folk are making it out to be.

No, a person doesn't have to be an 'authority' but you made statements as if you were one.

my point being. . . your perspective/opinion is no better than anyone else's. . .

less 'accurate' maybe Wink. . .but no better

by the way, please refrain from calling me 'friend'. . . I'm not your friend, I don't know you.

I choose my friends wisely and believe me this process doesn't include 'know-it-all' cyber folk.
Hello Fabulous! It's me again:

First of all I never claimed or even pretended to be an authority on the subject, and I never even pretended that my opinion is any better than any one elses. Yes I do have an opinion on the subject, and the reason I asked the question is because I am curious about those whose opinions are different than mine; I'd like to know how they came to those conclusion.

Yes you did mention an aurthor who wrote a book on the subject, and I disagree with this aurthor. If I could, I would debate with the aurthor on his point of views that I disagree with, but because he is not on this fourm, I will debate his points with you who seem to agree with him.

When I said:

"A racist is a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others. An explanation of an ideology is not necessary in order for a person to have this belief"
Fabulous replied:

(quote)
That's racism in the world according to YOU but don't get it twisted. . .

(reply)
No dear... racism is not a person, a racist IS a person.

(quote)
there are those who study & 'research' racism as part of their profession and I think what 'they' have to say about it is more accurate than anything 'you' could offer.

Dig what I'm sayin' to ya?

(reply)
Oh I am sure there are experts on the subject that know more than you and I put together! BUT if they say something that I disagree with, I am going to question it; and that is what I am doing now.....Dig what I'm sayin' to ya?


Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
Hello Fabulous! It's me again:

First of all I never claimed or even pretended to be an authority on the subject, and I never even pretended that my opinion is any better than any one elses. Yes I do have an opinion on the subject, and the reason I asked the question is because I am curious about those whose opinions are different than mine; I'd like to know how they came to those conclusion.

Yes you did mention an aurthor who wrote a book on the subject, and I disagree with this aurthor. If I could, I would debate with the aurthor on his point of views that I disagree with, but because he is not on this fourm, I will debate his points with you who seem to agree with him.

When I said:

"A racist is a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others. An explanation of an ideology is not necessary in order for a person to have this belief"
Fabulous replied:

(quote)
That's racism in the world according to YOU but don't get it twisted. . .

(reply)
No dear... racism is not a person, a racist IS a person.

(quote)
there are those who study & 'research' racism as part of their profession and I think what 'they' have to say about it is more accurate than anything 'you' could offer.

Dig what I'm sayin' to ya?

(reply)
Oh I am sure there are experts on the subject that know more than you and I put together! BUT if they say something that I disagree with, I am going to question it; and that is what I am doing now.....Dig what I'm sayin' to ya?


Kevin



it certainly would make your points easier to read if you would use the quote function....
"...but it is still racism"

_____________________________________________

Yeah, but someone thinking evil thoughts about you or believing ignorant information, just does not have the same effect as being hung from a tree, drug behind a truck/car, being burned alive along with your children in the middle of the night, having your land stolen away from you, winding up on a chain-gang for years because you were "lottering" not allowed to attend school/college, not being able to get a job, not being able to rent/purchase a home . . .
quote:
Originally posted by sunnubian:
"...but it is still racism"

_____________________________________________

Yeah, but someone thinking evil thoughts about you or believing ignorant information, just does not have the same effect as being hung from a tree, drug behind a truck/car, being burned alive along with your children in the middle of the night, having your land stolen away from you, winding up on a chain-gang for years because you were "lottering" not allowed to attend school/college, not being able to get a job, not being able to rent/purchase a home . . .


What you are talking about is oppression, racist oppression. And it starts very much with what people think
Originally posted by kevin1122:
Hello Fabulous! It's me again:

First of all I never claimed or even pretended to be an authority on the subject, and I never even pretended that my opinion is any better than any one elses. Yes I do have an opinion on the subject, and the reason I asked the question is because I am curious about those whose opinions are different than mine; I'd like to know how they came to those conclusion.

Yes you did mention an aurthor who wrote a book on the subject, and I disagree with this aurthor. If I could, I would debate with the aurthor on his point of views that I disagree with, but because he is not on this fourm, I will debate his points with you who seem to agree with him.

Hello Kevin and yeah yeah 'you' again Wink

First of all, you provide nothing more than the 'dictionary' to prove your point while minimizing the one source I 'did' cite.

I'm not saying the dictionary's version of the word is wrong, what I 'am' saying is there are 'other' factors to consider as well as advanced studies that go more in depth.

What is wrong with having an open-mind to what an expert has to say? Sorry but I won't ignore advanced study & research simply because 'you' do.

You are welcomed to the 'simple' answer.

although. . .

regardless of what 'you' say, racism in it's truest form is WHITE SUPREMACY

and white folk are more than willing to share this dysfunctional way of thinking with black folk. . .

that's why some of them use & 'prefer' the dictionary definition of racism so they can 'include' non whites.

sneaky bast@rds lol

A black person who has never participated in the 'actions' that accompany the ideology is not a racist.

I suggest you do more reading before you attempt to 'school' ME . . .

what constitutes a 'racist' is not a simple matter. . .as you seem to think it is.


When I said:

"A racist is a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others. An explanation of an ideology is not necessary in order for a person to have this belief"
Fabulous replied:

(quote)
That's racism in the world according to YOU but don't get it twisted. . .

(reply)
No dear... racism is not a person, a racist IS a person.

Oooooh baby. . .yes, yes, yesssssssssssssss. . .

say it! say it baby, say it!!!! Smile *ahem* "that's 'your' dang opinion". . . Razz

a racist = racism, so you can nic pick all you want.

Now sweetie. . .

I. . .I ... I mean no offense but don't step to me about racism/racists (& my thoughts on the matter) unless you're bringing more to the table.

you don't seem to have much to offer (except the dictionary), coupled with your own limited perspective, well, it's just unfortunate, that's all.

See. . . while you're still sucking milk like a babe (in regard to racism), I've moved on to 'meat'.

anyway. . .

'opinions are like azzholes and everybody's got one'

In other words, as far as 'holes' go (& assuming you're a male). . .you have your 'one' hole and (as a female)I have my two. kiss




(quote)
there are those who study & 'research' racism as part of their profession and I think what 'they' have to say about it is more accurate than anything 'you' could offer.

Dig what I'm sayin' to ya?

(reply)
Oh I am sure there are experts on the subject that know more than you and I put together! BUT if they say something that I disagree with,I am going to question it; and that is what I am doing now.....Dig what I'm sayin' to ya?

bs sugarbear. . .

what you're doing is presenting yourself as some sort of authority when all you offer is personal opinion & the dictionary's version. . .

of an ideology that has an ABUNDANCE of information available (studies, research, books, etc). And you do this as if what 'you' say is the whole truth and nothing BUT the truth.

*YAWN*

stop boring me, boo, with your 'one' shot deal. . .I'm good for 'at least' two. Wink

IMO, you're not open to different perspectives, you're tryna sell folk a bag of goods with no regard to what's inside.

you're not interested in opinion other than your own. You're the star of this show, right? Hey baby, I can dig it! 'Do you' flowers
Last edited {1}
Hello Fabulous

I started this thread becasue I wanted to know how some people came to the conclusion that Blacks can't be racist. You've answered that for me; even though I don't agree with your conclusions, you did answer that question for me and for that I thank-you.

It appears you get your information about the definition of a racist from someone who has written and studied the subject of racism, and focused his attention on insitutional racism; and I get my definition from the dictionary which defines a racist as a single person with a particular point of view. I am reluctant to accept your definition because as far as I know the aurthor who wrote the book and studied the subject might have an agenda that he want's to promote and/or may even be a racist himself; and may wanna point his finger at someone else without having to accept the fact that he has 3 fingers pointing at himself. And I am sure your reasons for not accepting the dictionaries definition are many.

Don't get me wrong, I do listen those who may be an athority on subjects have to say, but I am too much of a skeptic to take what they say at face value. If what they say doesn't make sense to me, I will ask questions until it does, or until we agree to disagree.

I think we are gonna have to agree to disagree on this subject; you've told me your opinion on this subject, you told me where you get your information, and why you believe the way you do which is what I wanted to know when I started this thread. And even though I disagree, those are your opinions, I respect that, and I ain't gonna try an take that away from ya

Peace
Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
Hello Fabulous

I started this thread becasue I wanted to know how some people came to the conclusion that Blacks can't be racist. You've answered that for me; even though I don't agree with your conclusions, you did answer that question for me and for that I thank-you.

It appears you get your information about the definition of a racist from someone who has written and studied the subject of racism, and focused his attention on insitutional racism; and I get my definition from the dictionary which defines a racist as a single person with a particular point of view. I am reluctant to accept your definition because as far as I know the aurthor who wrote the book and studied the subject might have an agenda that he want's to promote and/or may even be a racist himself; and may wanna point his finger at someone else without having to accept the fact that he has 3 fingers pointing at himself. And I am sure your reasons for not accepting the dictionaries definition are many.

Don't get me wrong, I do listen those who may be an athority on subjects have to say, but I am too much of a skeptic to take what they say at face value. If what they say doesn't make sense to me, I will ask questions until it does, or until we agree to disagree.

I think we are gonna have to agree to disagree on this subject; you've told me your opinion on this subject, you told me where you get your information, and why you believe the way you do which is what I wanted to know when I started this thread. And even though I disagree, those are your opinions, I respect that, and I ain't gonna try an take that away from ya

Peace
Kevin


YOU SEEM TO HAVE LIMITED CONCERNS TO ONLY THE ASPECT OF THE THREE PART DEFINITIONS WHICH CONFIRMS YOUR PREVIOUSLY HELD BELIEFS.

BUT AS WE CAN SEE, THERE ARE THREE PARTS AND AT LEAST ONE OF THEM ENTAILS POLICY AND SYSTEMS, INDICATING THE BEHAVIOR OF A GROUP WITH POWER TO ENACT SUCH.
FORTUNATELY, THERE'S A BREADTH AND WEALTH OF INFORMATION ABOUT RACISM IN SEVERAL FIELDS INCLUDING SOCIOLOGY WHICH DON'T LIMIT THEMSELVES TO THE 1/3 OF A DICTIONARY ENTRY THAT A BLOKE FINDS COMFORTING




The definition of racism is :

1.a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2.a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3.hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.


P.S.- it would be easier to read your posts if you learned how to use the quote function.
I just look in' on this post.

You are right, it has been discussed on this forum.

The suffix 'ism' is an indicator of 'man-made'.

All 'ism's' are tools.

Tools are made to be used.

Without the power to use them, tools wither away...rust...warp...become not useable.

'...a policy, system of government, etc.,...---Kevin1122 is the inclusion...the citation of power.

Racism has not 'teeth' without the power to apply it...make it true.

Racism is not about (independent)exercise of personal discretion.

Personal decisions and practices exercized within a facilitating structure...enabling power from the top...is racism.

In theory, therefore, anyone can be racist.

If I belong to an organization that is structured to specifically,or negligently enable decisions to be made solely, or principally on the basis of race, that decision is racist.

PEACE

Jim Chester
Negrospiritual said:

(quote)
quote:


(reply)
The 3 definitions you listed make my point.

*The first is a belief system; You can believe other people are inferior to you and still have love for them

*The second one is bacisally "Institutional Racism" That envolves laws and policies that are racist

*The third is simply hatred for someone because of their race.

I noticed you highlighted #2 to make your point; the question I am asking is can an individual black person be a racist. thus only #1 and #3 can apply because those types of racism can be accomplished by one person; #2 cannot.

If you agree that an individual black person is capable of believing our race is superior to others, (definition #1) and/or you agree that a black person is capable of hatred and intolorance of another race, (definition #3) then by your own definition you must admit; black people can be racist

Kevin
Kevin tried using the quote button and messed up! I shall repost my old way.

Negrospiritual said:

(quote)
"YOU SEEM TO HAVE LIMITED CONCERNS TO ONLY THE ASPECT OF THE THREE PART DEFINITIONS WHICH CONFIRMS YOUR PREVIOUSLY HELD BELIEFS.

BUT AS WE CAN SEE, THERE ARE THREE PARTS AND AT LEAST ONE OF THEM ENTAILS POLICY AND SYSTEMS, INDICATING THE BEHAVIOR OF A GROUP WITH POWER TO ENACT SUCH.
FORTUNATELY, THERE'S A BREADTH AND WEALTH OF INFORMATION ABOUT RACISM IN SEVERAL FIELDS INCLUDING SOCIOLOGY WHICH DON'T LIMIT THEMSELVES TO THE 1/3 OF A DICTIONARY ENTRY THAT A BLOKE FINDS COMFORTING



The definition of racism is :

1.a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2.a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3.hatred or intolerance of another race or other races."

(reply)
The 3 definitions you listed make my point.

*The first is a belief system; You can believe other people are inferior to you and still have love for them

*The second one is bacisally "Institutional Racism" That envolves laws and policies that are racist

*The third is simply hatred for someone because of their race.

I noticed you highlighted #2 to make your point; the question I am asking is can an individual black person be a racist. thus only #1 and #3 can apply because those types of racism can be accomplished by one person; #2 cannot.

If you agree that an individual black person is capable of believing our race is superior to others, (definition #1) and/or you agree that a black person is capable of hatred and intolorance of another race, (definition #3) then by your own definition you must admit; black people can be racist

Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
Zimbabwe's President, Robert Mugage, kicked White colonizers off of the farmland they *owned* in order to give it to native Africans. He did that because they were White and he felt that African land should belong to African people. He had the power to implement a system dominance over another race of people.
Was what he did *racism*? Confused


From your asterisks around the word 'owned'... It's kinda obvious that you are not cunfused on if that was or was not a racist act... Clearly, the Zimbabwean land rightfully belongs to the indigenous Zimbabwean people. and taking it back from the settler colonialists and their progeny, who REFUSED multiple times to allow it to be bought back AS THEY AGREED TO DO YEARS BEFORE is not a racist act... The fact that the settler colonialist land owners and their progeny were European/White demonstrates the lingering result of the aprtheid system and there... Mugabe didn't just take the land back from them because they were white, he took it back because of how they unjustly aquired it(racist settler colonialism) in the first place.


Actually, OA ... I put the asterisks around the word *owned* to denote the colonizers' mistaken assumption that they were entitled to land that they had stolen to obtain. Smile


Yes, that's what I got out of it, hence your 'question' seemed odd.

quote:
Secondly, I wasn't trying to feign my own confusion over the matter, I was asking for people's opinion as whether or not, by the definitions we have been discussing, what Mugabe did would be considered racism. Hence the question: "Was what he did racism?"


who in their right mind would think such a thing? Con-Fed hasn't been posting for awhile...lol

quote:
Mugabe is the only person I could think of who had power over over a White constituency, and used it, which is why I used him as an example.


But you didn't yourself believe it was a viable example, and that's why I posted a response... There haven't been any institutional/systemic ways that African people have oppressed and exploited European folk... They just don't exist in the historical record...

quote:
I assure you my post was meant to be no more sinister than that. sck But I can appreciate your opinion on the matter.


I never thought you had a sinister intent whatsoever(because of the asterisk)... The 'example' just seemed ridiculous, and for the benefit of any trolls around, I wanted to eliminate any possibility that it be made legitimate... Didn't mean to step on your attempt at discussion about it...

As for the general post...

quote:
Can Black people be racist?


As individuals I would say yes, although I really like what Fab was posting about. I also wonder why it matters if there are no systemic/structural ways for this 'personal racism' to be implimented to oppress and exploit(or wreak genocidal havock)? Individuals of any race(or any other grouping) will express personal racism/bigotry/prejudice, but who gives a fart if they can't act upon it in an organized way?

In other words, what's the point of arguing the 'individual racism' point for 4 pages? Why would it be that important a point of discussion/argumentation for any African/Black person? That seems odd to say the least... Not that I'm saying anyone has any 'sinister' motivation... This is a discussion forum, but I just don't 'get it'...
Last edited {1}
JWC says:

(quote)
"Racism has not 'teeth' without the power to apply it...make it true.

Racism is not about (independent)exercise of personal discretion.

Personal decisions and practices exercized within a facilitating structure...enabling power from the top...is racism."

(reply)
So you tellin me that when James Byrd was dragged to death for 3 miles, chained to the rear bumper of a pick-up truck; the poor white trash who had no political power and admited the motives for doing it were racial, were not racist? I disagree! You don't need power to hurt someone.

Kevin
So you tellin me that when James Byrd was dragged to death for 3 miles, chained to the rear bumper of a pick-up truck; the poor white trash who had no political power and admited the motives for doing it were racial, were not racist? I disagree! You don't need power to hurt someone.---kevin1122

Yes, I am.

Such blatant acts are done in a climate of permissiveness.

The upper echelons of that community made it known that such acts could be done with impunity, or minimal consequence.

They were probably the most surprised of all the people in that town.

Not that they were caught, but that someone in power would exact consequences once they were caught.


PEACE

Jim Chester
WC

(quote)
“Such blatant acts are done in a climate of permissiveness.

The upper echelons of that community made it known that such acts could be done with impunity, or minimal consequence.”

(reply)
How do you know? How do you know the upper echelons (whoever that is) lied and convinced them that whites can kill blacks with minimal consequences? Is this something that came out in trial or is it just something you choose to believe

Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
WC

(quote)
“Such blatant acts are done in a climate of permissiveness.

The upper echelons of that community made it known that such acts could be done with impunity, or minimal consequence.”

(reply)
How do you know? How do you know the upper echelons (whoever that is) lied and convinced them that whites can kill blacks with minimal consequences? Is this something that came out in trial or is it just something you choose to believe

Kevin


Ok, now you are really loosing me... Are you trying to imply that this 'individual lynching' occured in some type of race/power social/historical vacuum? If you are that's beyond...

18 bs
How do you know? How do you know the upper echelons (whoever that is) lied and convinced them that whites can kill blacks with minimal consequences? Is this something that came out in trial or is it just something you choose to believe---kevin1122

Living.

Observing.

Learning.

And...if you are so inclined...reading.

This is the way it has worked for centuries.

If you are an American of unknown African ancestry, you need to read more.

If you are not, it doesn't matter.


PEACE

Jim Chester
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:


If you are not, it doesn't matter.[/i]

PEACE

Jim Chester




He is not, so it doesn't matter, but the fact is made glaringly obvious by

1. the refusual to put his words in the format used by everybody else on this website which makes it easier to keep up with what is being quoted

2. His only interest is finding out whether blacks can be racist is because he believes they can be and are...

3. He has attempted to refute any other viewpoint using a dictionary.

He is not black and has no interest in blackness, other than to paint it as racist.

IMHO He deserves no more consideration.
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
Zimbabwe's President, Robert Mugage, kicked White colonizers off of the farmland they *owned* in order to give it to native Africans. He did that because they were White and he felt that African land should belong to African people. He had the power to implement a system dominance over another race of people.
Was what he did *racism*? Confused


From your asterisks around the word 'owned'... It's kinda obvious that you are not cunfused on if that was or was not a racist act... Clearly, the Zimbabwean land rightfully belongs to the indigenous Zimbabwean people. and taking it back from the settler colonialists and their progeny, who REFUSED multiple times to allow it to be bought back AS THEY AGREED TO DO YEARS BEFORE is not a racist act... The fact that the settler colonialist land owners and their progeny were European/White demonstrates the lingering result of the aprtheid system and there... Mugabe didn't just take the land back from them because they were white, he took it back because of how they unjustly aquired it(racist settler colonialism) in the first place.


Actually, OA ... I put the asterisks around the word *owned* to denote the colonizers' mistaken assumption that they were entitled to land that they had stolen to obtain. Smile


Yes, that's what I got out of it, hence your 'question' seemed odd.

quote:
Secondly, I wasn't trying to feign my own confusion over the matter, I was asking for people's opinion as whether or not, by the definitions we have been discussing, what Mugabe did would be considered racism. Hence the question: "Was what he did racism?"


who in their right mind would think such a thing? Con-Fed hasn't been posting for awhile...lol



When people who are victims of a racist construct attempt to act in their own best interests within the constraints of that construct ... then race will inevitably be a feature.

But that mustn't stand in the way of taking your own interests to heart.

Which is why I guess it makes so little sense (to many folks) to say that blacks can be racists.

True. "Race" is social construct with no basis in biology.

But race is the social reality with which we must live.

In the final analysis, race is not our fault. That was somebody else's doing. Somebodies who had power.
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:


If you are not, it doesn't matter.[/i]

PEACE

Jim Chester




He is not, so it doesn't matter, but the fact is made glaringly obvious by

1. the refusual to put his words in the format used by everybody else on this website which makes it easier to keep up with what is being quoted

2. His only interest is finding out whether blacks can be racist is because he believes they can be and are...

3. He has attempted to refute any other viewpoint using a dictionary.

He is not black and has no interest in blackness, other than to paint it as racist.

IMHO He deserves no more consideration.


Well that answers my question about 'why'!
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
Zimbabwe's President, Robert Mugage, kicked White colonizers off of the farmland they *owned* in order to give it to native Africans. He did that because they were White and he felt that African land should belong to African people. He had the power to implement a system dominance over another race of people.
Was what he did *racism*? Confused


From your asterisks around the word 'owned'... It's kinda obvious that you are not cunfused on if that was or was not a racist act... Clearly, the Zimbabwean land rightfully belongs to the indigenous Zimbabwean people. and taking it back from the settler colonialists and their progeny, who REFUSED multiple times to allow it to be bought back AS THEY AGREED TO DO YEARS BEFORE is not a racist act... The fact that the settler colonialist land owners and their progeny were European/White demonstrates the lingering result of the aprtheid system and there... Mugabe didn't just take the land back from them because they were white, he took it back because of how they unjustly aquired it(racist settler colonialism) in the first place.


Actually, OA ... I put the asterisks around the word *owned* to denote the colonizers' mistaken assumption that they were entitled to land that they had stolen to obtain. Smile


Yes, that's what I got out of it, hence your 'question' seemed odd.

quote:
Secondly, I wasn't trying to feign my own confusion over the matter, I was asking for people's opinion as whether or not, by the definitions we have been discussing, what Mugabe did would be considered racism. Hence the question: "Was what he did racism?"


who in their right mind would think such a thing? Con-Fed hasn't been posting for awhile...lol



When people who are victims of a racist construct attempt to act in their own best interests within the constraints of that construct ... then race will inevitably be a feature.


Yes, 'a feature' because it was the reason/excuse for the initial injustice towards us... It is not 'the reason' on our part when we try to correct the situation...
Oshun Auset said:

(quote)
"Ok, now you are really loosing me... Are you trying to imply that this 'individual lynching' occured in some type of race/power social/historical vacuum? If you are that's beyond..."

(reply)
No I am simply making the point that there are at least 3 types of racism and there are those who want to pretend that there is only 1.
*Racism can be a belief that one race is inferior to another,
*Racism can be a system designed to racially discriminate (AKA institutional racism)
*Racism can be simply hatred because of race.
There are those who want to act like institutional racism is the only type of racism that exist.
If that were the case the James Byrd murder would not be considered an act of racism because political power was not an issue.

When I asked:

"How do you know? How do you know the upper echelons (whoever that is) lied and convinced them that whites can kill blacks with minimal consequences? Is this something that came out in trial or is it just something you choose to believe---"

JWC replied

(quote)
"Living.

Observing.

Learning.

And...if you are so inclined...reading.

This is the way it has worked for centuries.

If you are an American of unknown African ancestry, you need to read more.

If you are not, it doesn't matter. "

(reply)
In other words, you just makin s**t up as you go along huh? If there were any truth to your claims, you would have listed your sources.


Kevin
In other words, you just makin s**t up as you go along huh? If there were any truth to your claims, you would have listed your sources.---Kevin1122

I don't know how you came to that conclusion from the list of 'observing'...'learning'...'reading'.

When I sent my second book to a friend (for his critique) whose integrity I held, and continue to hold, in the highest regard, and who is a Professor Emeritus at a major university...that I will name if it is important to your rationale.

Included in his critique was concern that the contention of my book was 'undocumented'.

I included his comments on the back cover of the book.

The substance of my reply I am offering to you.

Personal conclusions are the property of the person who gives it, and are given under the personal sovereignty of that person.

It does not require the approval of any other person.

Whether that opinion is right or wrong must be proven by facts that can be measured by the same standard as the original opinion.

Some people call this logical reasoning.

Some people call this bullsh**t.

Most people learn from their experiences.

Many learn from what they read.

Almost all people learn from what they see.

What is your method of learning?


PEACE

Jim Chester
Reading, observing, and learning is an excellent way of obtaining information; but when you claimed that those in power convinced James Byrd’s murder that it was okay to kill blacks, you listed your source as; reading, observing, and learning and it just didn’t seem to hold water, thus I was not convinced.

So tell me; what did you observe and learn about that particular neighborhood that convinced you that your claims are true, and what books, newspapers, etc did you read that backs up your claims?

Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
Oshun Auset said:

(quote)
"Ok, now you are really loosing me... Are you trying to imply that this 'individual lynching' occured in some type of race/power social/historical vacuum? If you are that's beyond..."

(reply)
No I am simply making the point that there are at least 3 types of racism and there are those who want to pretend that there is only 1.
*Racism can be a belief that one race is inferior to another,
*Racism can be a system designed to racially discriminate (AKA institutional racism)
*Racism can be simply hatred because of race.
There are those who want to act like institutional racism is the only type of racism that exist.
If that were the case the James Byrd murder would not be considered an act of racism because political power was not an issue.


You do relaize that the letter emboldened part negates your original 'no' right? Political power is AUTOMATIC when dealing with white male privilege... and has been for years! You ARE analyzing the Jsames Byrd lynching in a vacuum to come to any other conclusion...

Also, you haven't simply made any point, but you sure have beaton a dead horse... I also notice how you pick and choose what you respond to... I asked WHY this subject would be your, or any African/Black person's focus... Please answer... Are you a European/White?

quote:
There are those who want to act like institutional racism is the only type of racism that exist.


What your failing to realize is that institutional racism is the only type of racism THAT MATTERS.
Last edited {1}
Oshun Auset said:

(quote)
"Ok, now you are really loosing me... Are you trying to imply that this 'individual lynching' occured in some type of race/power social/historical vacuum? If you are that's beyond..."

(reply)
No I am simply making the point that there are at least 3 types of racism and there are those who want to pretend that there is only 1.
*Racism can be a belief that one race is inferior to another,
*Racism can be a system designed to racially discriminate (AKA institutional racism)
*Racism can be simply hatred because of race.
There are those who want to act like institutional racism is the only type of racism that exist.
If that were the case the James Byrd murder would not be considered an act of racism because political power was not an issue.

When I asked:

"How do you know? How do you know the upper echelons (whoever that is) lied and convinced them that whites can kill blacks with minimal consequences? Is this something that came out in trial or is it just something you choose to believe---"


And then....

JWC replied

Just to get the facts straight.

In my reply, I was not being specific to that incident.

So you are correct.

And...my answer remains the same.

To try to be complete in your in answering your question, I come to my conclusion in the same manner as I conclude that the power structure of the State of Texas knew...while all the things that were done to African Americans between January 11853 and June 19, 1865 occurred...there was a document issued called 'The Emancipation Proclamation'.

That document had zero validity in The Confederate States of America..., that includes the State of Texas.

That failure was permission.

All that occurred is a part of the onus of that implicite approval.


PEACE

Jim Chester

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×