"I would say the holocaust was uniquely horrible. I would say the Cambodian genocide was uniquely horrible."
Did either of these happen in America? Okay then. I think I was very clear that I was talking about segregation being uniquely horrible for black people in America. Disappointed to see that I *wasn't* wrong when I suspected that th…
"I would say the holocaust was uniquely horrible. I would say the Cambodian genocide was uniquely horrible."
Did either of these happen in America? Okay then. I think I was very clear that I was talking about segregation being uniquely horrible for black people in America. Disappointed to see that I *wasn't* wrong when I suspected that the first thing you'd do is look for counterexamples. Even irrelevant ones.
It's funny, I've never seen a white person talk about how horrible slavery was when somebody brings up the Holocaust. But strangely enough, it happens all the time in reverse.
No. Lynching does not "literally" mean hanging (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching). It relates to any extrajudicial killing, usually as a form of intimidation. It's often associated with hanging, but black people were often lynched by dragging behind horses, for example, in the days of slavery. You know I write about this stuff for a living, right? I'm obviously not going to be ignorant about it. You could at least check Wikipedia before assuming I'm wrong.
Yes, I'm making assumptions about you. But they're based on what you're saying here. And more, the things your'e dodging or trying to minimise. Reading MLK, as wonderful as he was, won't tell you anything about the state if racism today. Though I'd have thought it would give you a deeper understanding than you've shown about race relations in the sixties.
Man, I'm not trying to demean you. As I said, you're just ignoring really important context. And you seem determined not to acknowledge that, even a little bit. I admit this is frustrating. I've asked plenty of questions. You just haven't answered them because they don't help you with the narrative you want to believe.
But sure, let me try some more questions:
You say I'm exaggerating greatly about mediocre success. At what point do you think employment opportunity equalised for black people and white people? What do you think, for example, of studies that show a black man with a clean record had roughly the same chances of a callback as a white felon in 2009 (https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/pager/files/annals_sequencingdisadvantage.pdf)?
Given that we can hopefully agree that during segregation and for some time afterwards, a mediocre white man would have had a much easier time getting a managerial job, say, than an exceptional black man, when do you think this part of the playing field equalised? Do you think the fact that ~86% of Fortune 500 CEOs are white men (compared to ~1% black men) is just race-blind meritocracy at work?
What makes you say that the widely quoted statistics are manipulated? By whom? And why does income matter if we're taking about the ability to get a job. I don't know if white and black women get paid the same amount for the same job. I'd be a little surprised if they didn't. But the issue is whether it's much harder for one to get a job than the other, no? Also, are you aware that white women have been largest beneficiaries of affirmative action (https://time.com/4884132/affirmative-action-civil-rights-white-women/)?
Now that you know that the last cross burning was just two years ago, can you admit that there may be a greater climate of racism today than you previously realised? Does this do anything to change your perceptions? Or do you find yourself trying to dismiss it?
Again, more interesting than the answers to these questions, (though I am interested) is your reaction to them. Is your knee-jerk reaction to try to "debunk" them instead of thinking about them seriously? If so, why? What happens if it's true that racism is still a problem that affects black people more than white people?
Is it possible that the reason you've got pushback from numerous people here, black and white, and probably get pushback most of the time when you express ideas like these, is that you're missing something?
You can Google “James Byrd lynching” for numerous others. You could do the same for Ahmaud Arbery. Yes, I know what strange fruit was about. I don’t think anybody ever claimed it was a definitive definition of lynching. Did you notice the word “often” in that wall quote?
Man, this isn’t a presidential debate. What exactly do you feel like the stakes of this conversation are? I’m not pulling rank, I’m not lecturing you. Forget my skin colour, I’m somebody who has spent years writing and learning about race and race history. I’ve had thousands of conversations about it with black and white people (come on now, I’m not bragging, but do you seriously think you’ve spent as much time as I have on this topic? Really?). Where’s your decorum? Where’s your respect?
I’m not arguing that black Americans, as a population, want to be white. That would be ridiculous. Just as ridiculous as saying that white Americans want to be black.
I’m saying, and showing you with the testimony of real
human beings, that just as with members of any marginalised group, some black people have wished they didn’t face the discrimination levelled at their group. That usually means being part of the majority group instead.
Finally, and I mean this with no disrespect, your insights aren’t different. I’ve heard them from hundreds of people I’ve already spoken to. They’re the insights of somebody who has given a great deal of thought to how racial discourse impacts white people in America and very little thought to how racism affects black people in America.
They’re the insights of somebody who is sick and tired of being told that they’re racist simply because of the colour of their skin, this is perfectly understandable. But who hasn’t truly considered that some of the pushback they receive isn’t about the colour of their skin but the fact that they do have some racist attitudes.
They’re the insights of somebody who treats the idea that racism affects black people as an accusation they need to defend themselves from.
So sure, here’s a question: why do you think you receive the pushback you do for your insights? Not just from black people either.
"Steve, I don’t generally get pushback from black people"
You're the one told me you have black people trying to "pull rank" on you. I'd categorise that as pushback. Man, I'm not finger wagging. I'm not bullying you. I'm not asking you to submit. This is absolutely ridiculous.
I'm not interested in compliments if they're followed up with rudeness and, especially, mischaracterisations. I'm not perfect. I've never claimed to be. If you have a problem with something I've actually said, not your misreading, let me know, and I'll apologise. As I already did about the Fox News comment. But don't lie about me. And don't play the victim when you've been quite rude over the course of this conversation.
If you think I have nothing of value to say because I'm not American enough for you, no problem. Let's just drop it in that case. Again, just for the record, *this* is an ad hominem.
"I have tried repeatedly to deescalate, every single time. I’ve said we need treat each other like we are sitting at the table."
It seems that your version is deescalating is demanding respect that you've repeatedly refused to show me and misinterpreting my words to paint yourself as a victim. Maybe not the best strategy.
Here's an idea, try recognising that your behaviour here has been far from perfect. It's obviously not only me who noticed this.
Try re-reading your posts and thinking how they might come across to you if our positions were reversed. Try re-reading *my* posts and recognising that I've not directed any personal attacks at you. I made an unfair comment about Fox News, and apologised. This alone is far more grace than you've shown.
I am nice. I'm pretty well known for it. But not to people who aren't nice in return. And especially, as I've said, to people who mischaracterise me. That I won't stand for.
"I would say the holocaust was uniquely horrible. I would say the Cambodian genocide was uniquely horrible."
Did either of these happen in America? Okay then. I think I was very clear that I was talking about segregation being uniquely horrible for black people in America. Disappointed to see that I *wasn't* wrong when I suspected that the first thing you'd do is look for counterexamples. Even irrelevant ones.
It's funny, I've never seen a white person talk about how horrible slavery was when somebody brings up the Holocaust. But strangely enough, it happens all the time in reverse.
No. Lynching does not "literally" mean hanging (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching). It relates to any extrajudicial killing, usually as a form of intimidation. It's often associated with hanging, but black people were often lynched by dragging behind horses, for example, in the days of slavery. You know I write about this stuff for a living, right? I'm obviously not going to be ignorant about it. You could at least check Wikipedia before assuming I'm wrong.
Yes, I'm making assumptions about you. But they're based on what you're saying here. And more, the things your'e dodging or trying to minimise. Reading MLK, as wonderful as he was, won't tell you anything about the state if racism today. Though I'd have thought it would give you a deeper understanding than you've shown about race relations in the sixties.
Man, I'm not trying to demean you. As I said, you're just ignoring really important context. And you seem determined not to acknowledge that, even a little bit. I admit this is frustrating. I've asked plenty of questions. You just haven't answered them because they don't help you with the narrative you want to believe.
But sure, let me try some more questions:
You say I'm exaggerating greatly about mediocre success. At what point do you think employment opportunity equalised for black people and white people? What do you think, for example, of studies that show a black man with a clean record had roughly the same chances of a callback as a white felon in 2009 (https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/pager/files/annals_sequencingdisadvantage.pdf)?
Given that we can hopefully agree that during segregation and for some time afterwards, a mediocre white man would have had a much easier time getting a managerial job, say, than an exceptional black man, when do you think this part of the playing field equalised? Do you think the fact that ~86% of Fortune 500 CEOs are white men (compared to ~1% black men) is just race-blind meritocracy at work?
What makes you say that the widely quoted statistics are manipulated? By whom? And why does income matter if we're taking about the ability to get a job. I don't know if white and black women get paid the same amount for the same job. I'd be a little surprised if they didn't. But the issue is whether it's much harder for one to get a job than the other, no? Also, are you aware that white women have been largest beneficiaries of affirmative action (https://time.com/4884132/affirmative-action-civil-rights-white-women/)?
Now that you know that the last cross burning was just two years ago, can you admit that there may be a greater climate of racism today than you previously realised? Does this do anything to change your perceptions? Or do you find yourself trying to dismiss it?
Again, more interesting than the answers to these questions, (though I am interested) is your reaction to them. Is your knee-jerk reaction to try to "debunk" them instead of thinking about them seriously? If so, why? What happens if it's true that racism is still a problem that affects black people more than white people?
Is it possible that the reason you've got pushback from numerous people here, black and white, and probably get pushback most of the time when you express ideas like these, is that you're missing something?
“Wikipedia is your source? Give me a historic headline about a lynching that wasn’t a hanging.”
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/john-william-king-executed-in-infamous-lynching-case-said-attorneys-had-violated-his-right-to-present-innocence-defense
You can Google “James Byrd lynching” for numerous others. You could do the same for Ahmaud Arbery. Yes, I know what strange fruit was about. I don’t think anybody ever claimed it was a definitive definition of lynching. Did you notice the word “often” in that wall quote?
Man, this isn’t a presidential debate. What exactly do you feel like the stakes of this conversation are? I’m not pulling rank, I’m not lecturing you. Forget my skin colour, I’m somebody who has spent years writing and learning about race and race history. I’ve had thousands of conversations about it with black and white people (come on now, I’m not bragging, but do you seriously think you’ve spent as much time as I have on this topic? Really?). Where’s your decorum? Where’s your respect?
I’m not arguing that black Americans, as a population, want to be white. That would be ridiculous. Just as ridiculous as saying that white Americans want to be black.
I’m saying, and showing you with the testimony of real
human beings, that just as with members of any marginalised group, some black people have wished they didn’t face the discrimination levelled at their group. That usually means being part of the majority group instead.
Finally, and I mean this with no disrespect, your insights aren’t different. I’ve heard them from hundreds of people I’ve already spoken to. They’re the insights of somebody who has given a great deal of thought to how racial discourse impacts white people in America and very little thought to how racism affects black people in America.
They’re the insights of somebody who is sick and tired of being told that they’re racist simply because of the colour of their skin, this is perfectly understandable. But who hasn’t truly considered that some of the pushback they receive isn’t about the colour of their skin but the fact that they do have some racist attitudes.
They’re the insights of somebody who treats the idea that racism affects black people as an accusation they need to defend themselves from.
So sure, here’s a question: why do you think you receive the pushback you do for your insights? Not just from black people either.
"Steve, I don’t generally get pushback from black people"
You're the one told me you have black people trying to "pull rank" on you. I'd categorise that as pushback. Man, I'm not finger wagging. I'm not bullying you. I'm not asking you to submit. This is absolutely ridiculous.
I'm not interested in compliments if they're followed up with rudeness and, especially, mischaracterisations. I'm not perfect. I've never claimed to be. If you have a problem with something I've actually said, not your misreading, let me know, and I'll apologise. As I already did about the Fox News comment. But don't lie about me. And don't play the victim when you've been quite rude over the course of this conversation.
If you think I have nothing of value to say because I'm not American enough for you, no problem. Let's just drop it in that case. Again, just for the record, *this* is an ad hominem.
"I have tried repeatedly to deescalate, every single time. I’ve said we need treat each other like we are sitting at the table."
It seems that your version is deescalating is demanding respect that you've repeatedly refused to show me and misinterpreting my words to paint yourself as a victim. Maybe not the best strategy.
Here's an idea, try recognising that your behaviour here has been far from perfect. It's obviously not only me who noticed this.
Try re-reading your posts and thinking how they might come across to you if our positions were reversed. Try re-reading *my* posts and recognising that I've not directed any personal attacks at you. I made an unfair comment about Fox News, and apologised. This alone is far more grace than you've shown.
I am nice. I'm pretty well known for it. But not to people who aren't nice in return. And especially, as I've said, to people who mischaracterise me. That I won't stand for.