Information on working terriers, dogs, natural history, hunting, and the environment, with occasional political commentary as I see fit. This web log is associated with the Terrierman.com web site.
The idea that there is no racism is as absurd as the idea that there is no sexism, no tribalism, no nationalism, and no antisemitism.
Racism is boiled in the law and history of this country, from the US Constitution, to the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korea, Brown v Board of Education, and Vietnam. The current Cheetoh-headed idiot who now running for President personally signed the most sweeping consent decree in US housing history due to his entrenched racism. Look it up.
Our congressional districts are cut up by race, zoning for liquor stores is determined by race, and so too is your ability to get a housing loan at a decent interest race.
Nothing is more transparently racist as white people saying there is no racism, and if there is then it is not deep, institutional and supported and fanned by everyone from police to banks, from courts to Congress, from highway planning departments to the way we fund our public schools.
Is EVERYTHING about race? No, and that's not what's being said here. But it this fellow dead on the money 100% right? Oh yeah. Not a question.
But of course every white person in the country is pretty damn sure this whole "race thing" is waaaay overblown. Just invented. Has to be, otherwise they are blind to which means they are part of it.
And how do white people figure there is not much racism? Simple. They've never experienced any of it, themselves.
And right there is the proof and the root of a very big problem.
I don't think I made myself clear if you think I don't acknowledge racism. It's human nature. Like nationalism sexism or tribalism as you say. (I have to disagree on antisemitism- in America there is no true antisemitism- only pro-Zionist sycophantry) Many racial stereoytpes are often true- which is why they are so hard to deal with and why hipster dudes complaining about Nigerian women bleaching their skin doesn't affect me at all. The thing is that racism is used as an excuse for liberal social engineering schemes like school busing or gun control- punishing the children and grandchildren of the perpetrators or blaming gun manufacturers for STUPID intraracial violence. I doubt that you would find ONE American today who would really be willing to give HIS or HER home back to the Indians. We are fine with all the exterminating and killing and abuse committed by our ancestors in the storied past. We are also fine with killing and abusing brown people in foreign lands now even as we speak. We Americans are not willing to look reality in the face- better to blame things on some "ism"
One more thing- here in Oakland I see one kind of real racism and that is that NO ONE really cares about the scores of kids who are shot every year by their peers- no one will actually try to grapple with the root cause of the problem. They'll have marches and lay flowers down on the street and pass ridiculous and unconstitutional gun control measures and talk about violence 'til they're blue but no one will say "quit glorifying violence and if you use a gun to kill someone you'll pay!" Most gun charges for violent crimes are dropped for plea deals and most murders (like 80%) are never cleared- no one wants to be a snitch. Black lives don't matter if the killer's black.
From >> http://www.oaklandstreets.com/2008/12/inner-city-boundaries.html
It came as something of a surprise to me to learn that the Bay Area was once racially segregated. Call me naive, but a part of me got so caught up in thinking that the Bay Area is different that I just assumed it never practiced Jim Crow-style segregation. But it did. After World War II, as the suburbs sprawled outwards, black people were basically confined to places where they had already established a presence--namely, Oakland, Richmond, San Francisco, and parts of Berkeley. I learned much of this from The Second Gold Rush: Oakland and the East Bay in World War II by Marilynn Johnson. She writes: With federally guaranteed loans provided under the Servicemen's Readjustment Act (G.I. bill) of 1944, many middle-income residents found housing among the burgeoning subdivisions of surrounding suburbs...Furthermore, black families of all income levels were barred from most suburban developments through restrictive covenants, a practice resulting in additional pressure on the central city housing market. (p. 213) Consider what happened to one black family who made the mistake of moving into a home in San Pablo, north of Richmond: When the Garys moved in, a crowd of more than 150 neighbors greeted them with jeers, rocks, a white cross planted on their lawn, and a brick through their front window. After several hours under siege, the county sheriff arrived and dispersed the crowd, but the attacks on the Garys continued intermittently for several weeks.
The local homeowners' group, the Rollingwood Improvement Association, offered to buy out the Garys at a $1200 profit--a considerable sum at the time. But the Garys refused to sell at any price, determined to keep their home. At that point, several white neighbors, including four board members of the Rollingwood Association, acquiesced and sent a letter of welcome to the Garys. At the group's next meeting, angry residents voted to recall the four board members by a three-to-one margin. (p. 227) East Oakland is today a ghetto in the sense of "a bad place to live," but it's helpful to remember that it was once a ghetto in the original sense of the term, i.e., "minorities must live within these quarters." San Leandro in particular was very aggressive in using restrictive covenants to make sure no black East Oaklanders spilled over into its borders. As quoted here: M. C. Friel and Associates, a Hayward real estate firm with expertise in racial covenants, became the East Bay's leading consultant on shoring up segregation. In 1947 Friel developed a plan to place as much of San Leandro's residential property under restrictive covenants as possible, limiting future property sales to "members of the Caucasian race." The situation began to change in the 70's, but by then the die had been cast. It's hard to believe that social policies from 30+ years ago would leave such a lasting imprint, but the evidence is right in front of our eyes.
So when are the crimes of the past forgotten or forgiven? We as Americans are FINE with our extermination of the Indians- so I'm putting that number at about 100 years (Ishi- the last "wild" Indian died in 1916)- no matter the facts "on the ground" in the present. The book you cite is on my bookshelf- my wife has a BA in History from Berkeley- I've perused it but not honestly the whole thing. Things in 2016 are completely different- in fact ironically blacks are being displaced out of the ghetto and now that's racist. There is massive economic disparity in California and Oakland but I don't think it's due to systemic racism- politically there's no more powerful group in Oakland than African-Americans. I'd frame the problem more as unrestricted class warfare- but that's another discussion. You are confusing not liking someone or a group of people with "racism". Many people here including some African-Americans really dislike the antics of the gangbangers and idiots who run around wild in East Oakland (ghetto history or not- that is irrelevant at present)- that doesn't make them "racist"! And counter to your argument of racist "profit" and school districts there hasn't been property tax paying for schools in California since Prop 13 back when. More class warfare. Finally- antisemitism? Really? I'd argue that in our country today it is more like prosemitism- our politicians, government, military, media and economy are all rather prosemitic. Again- not liking or resenting people isn't necessarily racist- just human.
Only white people think it's OK to cut off a man's legs and then challenge him to a foot race -- one in which he is only too happy to run on a smooth flat track, while the other fellow runs uphill, and on sand. Hey it's a free race, and it's all good now, right? Right.
What's funny is the greatest fear of white people is that with shifting racial power the non-whites will treat them as bad as they once treated others. And it's not just racial minorities, is it? White men fear women too. They fear gays, Muslims, and any group that might organize or voice a claim or gain even a small lever of power.
Native Americans? Right. Let's push them into the desert, destroy their cultures, under-fund their schools, fix the price of the natural resources to be extracted from their remaining lands (coal, uranium, timber, oil, natural gas,) and talk about how we **really** have done enough already.
Most of the West, and vast tracts in the East, were stolen by gun and broken treaty and are now empty BLM, National Forest, and National Park land. Give the Black Hills back to the Sioux, as Red Cloud asked? Sure. Why is that such a massive idea to consider, especially since it was illegally stolen? We can give Yosemite back to the Paiute as well. Let them run the same lands as they are run now -- as National Park -- with the jobs and money flowing to the natives rather than foreign and out of state for-profit concession companies.
But, of course, white people think this is a bridge too far. Racism is a long time ago, and nothing can be turned back. "It's too late to sew those legs back on -- you'll just have to run on your hands." Right. Ready, set, GO!
7 comments:
The idea that there is no racism is as absurd as the idea that there is no sexism, no tribalism, no nationalism, and no antisemitism.
Racism is boiled in the law and history of this country, from the US Constitution, to the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korea, Brown v Board of Education, and Vietnam. The current Cheetoh-headed idiot who now running for President personally signed the most sweeping consent decree in US housing history due to his entrenched racism. Look it up.
Our congressional districts are cut up by race, zoning for liquor stores is determined by race, and so too is your ability to get a housing loan at a decent interest race.
Nothing is more transparently racist as white people saying there is no racism, and if there is then it is not deep, institutional and supported and fanned by everyone from police to banks, from courts to Congress, from highway planning departments to the way we fund our public schools.
Is EVERYTHING about race? No, and that's not what's being said here. But it this fellow dead on the money 100% right? Oh yeah. Not a question.
But of course every white person in the country is pretty damn sure this whole "race thing" is waaaay overblown. Just invented. Has to be, otherwise they are blind to which means they are part of it.
And how do white people figure there is not much racism? Simple. They've never experienced any of it, themselves.
And right there is the proof and the root of a very big problem.
I don't think I made myself clear if you think I don't acknowledge racism. It's human nature. Like nationalism sexism or tribalism as you say. (I have to disagree on antisemitism- in America there is no true antisemitism- only pro-Zionist sycophantry) Many racial stereoytpes are often true- which is why they are so hard to deal with and why hipster dudes complaining about Nigerian women bleaching their skin doesn't affect me at all. The thing is that racism is used as an excuse for liberal social engineering schemes like school busing or gun control- punishing the children and grandchildren of the perpetrators or blaming gun manufacturers for STUPID intraracial violence. I doubt that you would find ONE American today who would really be willing to give HIS or HER home back to the Indians. We are fine with all the exterminating and killing and abuse committed by our ancestors in the storied past. We are also fine with killing and abusing brown people in foreign lands now even as we speak. We Americans are not willing to look reality in the face- better to blame things on some "ism"
One more thing- here in Oakland I see one kind of real racism and that is that NO ONE really cares about the scores of kids who are shot every year by their peers- no one will actually try to grapple with the root cause of the problem. They'll have marches and lay flowers down on the street and pass ridiculous and unconstitutional gun control measures and talk about violence 'til they're blue but no one will say "quit glorifying violence and if you use a gun to kill someone you'll pay!" Most gun charges for violent crimes are dropped for plea deals and most murders (like 80%) are never cleared- no one wants to be a snitch. Black lives don't matter if the killer's black.
From >> http://www.oaklandstreets.com/2008/12/inner-city-boundaries.html
It came as something of a surprise to me to learn that the Bay Area was once racially segregated. Call me naive, but a part of me got so caught up in thinking that the Bay Area is different that I just assumed it never practiced Jim Crow-style segregation. But it did. After World War II, as the suburbs sprawled outwards, black people were basically confined to places where they had already established a presence--namely, Oakland, Richmond, San Francisco, and parts of Berkeley. I learned much of this from The Second Gold Rush: Oakland and the East Bay in World War II by Marilynn Johnson. She writes:
With federally guaranteed loans provided under the Servicemen's Readjustment Act (G.I. bill) of 1944, many middle-income residents found housing among the burgeoning subdivisions of surrounding suburbs...Furthermore, black families of all income levels were barred from most suburban developments through restrictive covenants, a practice resulting in additional pressure on the central city housing market.
(p. 213)
Consider what happened to one black family who made the mistake of moving into a home in San Pablo, north of Richmond:
When the Garys moved in, a crowd of more than 150 neighbors greeted them with jeers, rocks, a white cross planted on their lawn, and a brick through their front window. After several hours under siege, the county sheriff arrived and dispersed the crowd, but the attacks on the Garys continued intermittently for several weeks.
The local homeowners' group, the Rollingwood Improvement Association, offered to buy out the Garys at a $1200 profit--a considerable sum at the time. But the Garys refused to sell at any price, determined to keep their home. At that point, several white neighbors, including four board members of the Rollingwood Association, acquiesced and sent a letter of welcome to the Garys. At the group's next meeting, angry residents voted to recall the four board members by a three-to-one margin.
(p. 227)
East Oakland is today a ghetto in the sense of "a bad place to live," but it's helpful to remember that it was once a ghetto in the original sense of the term, i.e., "minorities must live within these quarters." San Leandro in particular was very aggressive in using restrictive covenants to make sure no black East Oaklanders spilled over into its borders. As quoted here:
M. C. Friel and Associates, a Hayward real estate firm with expertise in racial covenants, became the East Bay's leading consultant on shoring up segregation. In 1947 Friel developed a plan to place as much of San Leandro's residential property under restrictive covenants as possible, limiting future property sales to "members of the Caucasian race."
The situation began to change in the 70's, but by then the die had been cast. It's hard to believe that social policies from 30+ years ago would leave such a lasting imprint, but the evidence is right in front of our eyes.
So when are the crimes of the past forgotten or forgiven? We as Americans are FINE with our extermination of the Indians- so I'm putting that number at about 100 years (Ishi- the last "wild" Indian died in 1916)- no matter the facts "on the ground" in the present. The book you cite is on my bookshelf- my wife has a BA in History from Berkeley- I've perused it but not honestly the whole thing. Things in 2016 are completely different- in fact ironically blacks are being displaced out of the ghetto and now that's racist. There is massive economic disparity in California and Oakland but I don't think it's due to systemic racism- politically there's no more powerful group in Oakland than African-Americans. I'd frame the problem more as unrestricted class warfare- but that's another discussion. You are confusing not liking someone or a group of people with "racism". Many people here including some African-Americans really dislike the antics of the gangbangers and idiots who run around wild in East Oakland (ghetto history or not- that is irrelevant at present)- that doesn't make them "racist"! And counter to your argument of racist "profit" and school districts there hasn't been property tax paying for schools in California since Prop 13 back when. More class warfare. Finally- antisemitism? Really? I'd argue that in our country today it is more like prosemitism- our politicians, government, military, media and economy are all rather prosemitic. Again- not liking or resenting people isn't necessarily racist- just human.
Only white people think it's OK to cut off a man's legs and then challenge him to a foot race -- one in which he is only too happy to run on a smooth flat track, while the other fellow runs uphill, and on sand. Hey it's a free race, and it's all good now, right? Right.
What's funny is the greatest fear of white people is that with shifting racial power the non-whites will treat them as bad as they once treated others. And it's not just racial minorities, is it? White men fear women too. They fear gays, Muslims, and any group that might organize or voice a claim or gain even a small lever of power.
Native Americans? Right. Let's push them into the desert, destroy their cultures, under-fund their schools, fix the price of the natural resources to be extracted from their remaining lands (coal, uranium, timber, oil, natural gas,) and talk about how we **really** have done enough already.
Most of the West, and vast tracts in the East, were stolen by gun and broken treaty and are now empty BLM, National Forest, and National Park land. Give the Black Hills back to the Sioux, as Red Cloud asked? Sure. Why is that such a massive idea to consider, especially since it was illegally stolen? We can give Yosemite back to the Paiute as well. Let them run the same lands as they are run now -- as National Park -- with the jobs and money flowing to the natives rather than foreign and out of state for-profit concession companies.
But, of course, white people think this is a bridge too far. Racism is a long time ago, and nothing can be turned back. "It's too late to sew those legs back on -- you'll just have to run on your hands." Right. Ready, set, GO!
Whoo boy! Think we're at the end of this road- next you'll be talking reparations...
Post a Comment