I am saying, for the last time, what I have said already: All American citizens are legally the EQUALS of all others -- regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, or anything else. Thus, what we -- ourselves -- choose to make of our lives is entirely up to us. If you have become even slightly familiar with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, you understand exactly what the protected status of each American citizen is. But if you continue to prefer polls reflecting mere 'opinions' over fact-based, legal reality, that is your prerogative....
I read through the link. What I find is evidence of confirmation bias. Let's start with this ... "The election of Donald J. Trump as the 45th President of the United States with the support of antiimmigrant and white nationalist groups highlighted the persistence of racial resentment." I did not believe then, and I do not believe now, that Trump was elected because of white "racial resentment." There were plenty of reasons why he was elected, and they have nothing to do with that. People who would have voted for him for a primary reason of their own racist beliefs would be a tiny, insignificant minority. And yet, the researchers just had to take this shot at him and the people who voted for him, exposing their own political biases. Second, the survey omits information. While it points out that white-sounding names got 36% more callbacks, it doesn't say in what percentage did the black-sounding name get a callback, but not the white-sounding name. It also fails to point out that if white-sounding names got 36% more callbacks, then in 74% there was no difference. And if confirmation bias ruled their process, one wonders who they contacted and where. If it wasn't representative of the whole country, then the results are suspect.
Truth? It's fair to say that ALL polls, to one degree or another, are slanted in one way or another. This appears to be true of polls conducted by both lib-pollsters and conservative ones, too. By contrast, the wonderful thing about a LAW like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is that it says exactly it means, on its face, verbatim. Its viability and applicability is not interpreted by some bunch of anonymous people in a random phone call conducted by some polling org with "an axe to grind"....
It just occurred to me that the poll in this thread offers no choices. What kind of an idiot ... Never mind.
Then we have a definitional problem. I am white, married to an Asian, but all of my friends are either Asian, Hispanic, or White. I live in a mixed Asian and White, but not black or Hispanic, neighborhood. That may be a manifestation of latent racism on my part. I can only say I hope not. Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock don't play colleges anymore because everything is racist, sexist or homophobic to a minority that are determined to suck the fun out of every thing. At some point the majority will hopefully stand up and say, you know what? I'm tired of apologizing for a tiny minority's hurt feelings and faux outrage.
No. All US citizens are not equal. If that had been Black people doing the insurrection at the Capitol on Jan 6th, how many do you think would have made it out alive?
You usually do a much better job of thinking things through and then expressing your observations and arguments better than you did in the post above. Parenthetically, have you ever actually read either the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or, the Voting Rights Act of 1965...?
Most likely, like most people, you chose to live in the nicest neighborhood you could afford, not by its racial makeup. There is nothing wrong with you for that.
I don't think they are serious about answering the question. Their aim after being presented with evidence of the opinion of those who are the target of racism is to minimize or dismiss those people's opinion. That "demographic" seems to be in denial of African American's reality, so I would say racism in a certain sectors of society is alive and well. The question of this thread is "how big a problem is racism in the USA?" Quoting the US law doesn't answer that question unless you are under the delusion racism stopped in '65 or you're dodging the question. Blacks, Latinos and Asians are acutely aware racism still exists. It seems your "opinion" is that it is cured. There is hard evidence of racism if you get out of your bubble and look, but I'm sure you will dismiss it as well because it does not fit your world view. Speaking of confirmation bias this is a study about racism. It is highlighting the continued racism in the US and white nationalism grew 55% under Trump. That sounds to me like a lot of racial resentment and they loved Trump, but of course more non-white nationalists voted for Trump. That is obvious. So you don't think 36% is a significant number and that there has been improvement in the last 20 years? So you do not believe there is any bias in hiring? I await any study proving racism is nonexistent and Black people are wrong about it.
I don't think racism is nonexistent, but I'll stand by all of my earlier comments. I think this is a generally good country, and people can be successful in this country, no matter what their race is.
² Non-existent? I fear you'll be waiting a while, since literally no one here claims racism is non-existent. So you're demolishing a straw man. And I don't think anyone (with one exception) has made any derogatory remark about anyone's else's race. The thread is not "Is one race inferior to another? " or "Should civil rights laws be repealed?" African Americans work in every sector of my community. Hispanics absolutely RULE the trades, except maybe for air conditioning and plumbing. And Trump lost his bid for re-election, notwithstanding all the supposed systemic racism, voter suppression and the Citizens United decision. So that argument fails spectacularly.
Thank you for that compliment. I am well aware of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights act of 1965. What do those laws have to do with the fact Whites and Blacks are treated differently in the USA?
"Racism", per se, does exist, Edna... and it always has, throughout human history. There has always been, and likely will continue to be for hundreds of years to come, a certain percentage of people who will dislike, distrust, and dismiss people of different races and ethnicities from their own. It is an unfortunate and unfair trait of human culture going all the way back to humanity's beginnings. And that is exactly WHY I keep harping on the fact that the only effective method that we have to fundamentally root out real racism is through the force and effect of LAW in our civilization! The first and most vital ingredient in any nation's panacea against racism must (MUST) be the acknowledgement that -- yes -- there actually ARE differences between the races! . But, (BUT), the all-important thing that must be embedded in our behavior is that in spite of these differences between us, we must (MUST) treat all of our citizens equally BEFORE THE LAW. Everything else must proceed and develop on that bedrock conviction! You cannot make one person treat another person equally or fairly unless you first enact penalties in your society which punishes those who violate other persons' rights as citizens in that society! Law itself is not the 'end-all, be-all', Edna, but it is the anchor-point for real, meaningful change. We cannot make Blacks love Whites, or Whites love Blacks, or East-Asians love Whites, or Blacks, or any of the rest of it. BUT, in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, we laid groundwork establishing that FACT that in the United States we had adopted the very compelling LEGAL precept that all persons are equal-before-the-law. "Love" is optional, Edna -- but "Law" is mandatory!
Members of all three major racial identities in the United States cannot be made to love each other, Moriah, but, through the power of the LAW in this country, they can all be forced to treat each other EQUALLY! I have tried to amplify this viewpoint in my post #91, above. But rather than continue harping on a concept that you reject, I will simply suggest that any person -- of any color -- can engage an attorney on a purely contingency basis, and, with proof, sue the living hell out of any entity, organization, or person that has violated their civil rights or their right to vote. What else is there, Moriah? We cannot legislate "love" or subjective interpretations of what "fairness" would be like, but, we can inflict punishment for breaking the law!
Pollycy, if you truly believe we are all equal, would you be willing to live as a Black person for a year?
The honest answer to your question is, "yes", I would be willing to live being the same internal person I am -- except that instead of being what I am racially, I would be Black instead. Note: I live in the State of Colorado, and we tend to get along well with each other out here. My neighborhood has a few Black people, a few Latinos, and some White people in it. Collectively, we're probably what everyone has called "middle-class" in this country, and there's certainly no stigma of any kind on anyone. We are tolerant, respectful, and pleasant toward each other, and everybody gets along well. If I were Black, honestly, it would make no real difference at all. Actually, being Black might lighten my brooding disposition, and improve my sense of humor!
I used to think there were basically 3 as well, but now I think there are probably at least seven: 1) native American, 2) Indian/Pakistani, 3) Oriental Asian, 4) European/Slavic (Caucasian/White), 5) Sub-Saharan African; 6) Arabic; and 7) Hispanic. Jewish is arguably an 8th. Each has its own separate history, problems, outlooks, and culture. Growing up in Louisiana, I thought Mexican/Latin American was the same as white. When I moved to Texas, I learned that they have been considered and treated as a separate group for so long that whites deem them, and they deem themselves, brown. I never once heard that term growing up.
I would not, and I know what you're talking about, but not every reality is a problem in the sense of "having a solution." That's why I didn't ask originally "Do black persons face obstacles that whites do not?" I think that they do, but there's no solution to that other than the anti-discrimination legislation that already exists. What is left? Reparations? CRT education?That would make things worse, and solve nothing, not to mention the impossibility of implementing it (reparations I mean). Bonus question: what would the final exam questions of a CRT course look like? "Name 5 ways whites are more privileged than blacks. Explain your answer. Define 'white' while you're at it." Good to see you here, by the way.
Up to this point, I've read that in addition to the original three races identified in mankind, two others have been named, after having demonstrated significantly identifiable genetic/physiological differences from the Caucasian, East-Asian (Oriental), and Black races. Those two others are "Amerindian" (American Indian, in both North and South America), and, "Australoid Aborigine" (Australia). Suggestion: It is likely unless we humans kill ourselves off, possibly during the 21st-century, that in another few thousand years we could actually become one race after all, by 'cross-pollination' (interbreeding). No one alive today will live to experience anything like that, of course, and that is yet another reason why we need the rock-solid RULE OF LAW to maintain order for a very long time to come....
