filtherton

Cynthetiq, I'm not sure that it is useful to claim that racism and nationalism are the same thing.

Cynthetiq

so again, it's only when it's a white guy against a black/brown/yellow guy.

a spaniard discriminating against a frenchman isn't racist.. it's nationalist... okay. thanks for the schooling. I guess it's okay then to discriminate and hate in that fashion. /sarcasm

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an asshole or you're not.

roachboy

first off, what smooth wrote above is spot on. you could lay an image of institutional structures over it and be on your way to something of a starting point for a conversation about the central manifestation of structural racism in the united states directed against african-americans. you could generate another, parallel narrative to talk about the treatments meted out to native americans. to my mind, if you want to talk about racism, you are talking about histories that intertwine both with each other and with the institutional configurations that shape the present. and there is no running away from that history. the same would obtain if you were to talk about the histories of racism in france--which operate in different ways, manifest in different ways, but which are still forms of racism.

racism is typically organized in tandem with signifiers that shape how the "We" is staged and understood. i see nationalism as hinging on fiarly crude distinctions between inside and outside, and so as not only a kind of collective mental disorder but also as a fundamental enabling condition for racists everywhere.

now to head off the seemingly inevitable response, nationalism is not *only* and enabling condition for racism---but it is, in any situation, *also* an enabling condition---because it justifies the construction of institutionalized exclusions by giving them a way to make sense by way how nation defines the "we" which presupposes a "them" that is both outside and inside the arbitrary lines of a map that define the (capitalist) nation-state.

from this viewpoint, questions of discrimination and their reverse in questions of affinity based on race become surface repetitions of structural problems. it makes little sense to make the conservative move and try to separate present from past and then shift to abstracting racism from contexts in order to dilute the problem through sequences of superficial generalities. but this seems like a parlor game for some falk--what about this? what about this?---that i don't really find worth the trouble to play, simply because to get to it--to start playing---you have to perform the operations i just outlined, which more or less guarantee that you aren't and can't say anything interesting.

you can get worked up, but that's it.

so the main argument is that you cannot separate discrimination for racism AND that you cannot separate racism from it's histories---so that the bizarre-o post-bakke decision games that the right likes to play instead of talking in a serious manner about a structural problem within the united states---which condoleeza rice called "the american birth defect" (i will probably never quote her again) are nothing more than playing with memes in the shallow end of the pool.


aside: the email that paq pasted is amazing. what fucking planet does the writer live on?

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Cynthetiq

rb... as I rode the train to work that's what my mind settled on.... if you're taking the points from a history teacher (no disrespect meant there just a point of reference) and discussion around Racism in the context of the history of America, then yes, the institutional structure I can understand.

but when it comes to pointing things out in the manner of stating that racism is gone once th black and white have settled their situations, in my mind is not the end of racism in any fashion.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Zoolady

Racism, in my opinion, is just another form of "tribalism" and that's so deeply rooted into our species that I doubt it can ever be erased. Tribalism certainly helped band people together for survival back in the "good old days." Now that the world is so much smaller, it's no longer a helpful trait and we can't seem to get rid of it!

filtherton

Cynthetiq, with respect to #82, what the hell are you talking about? I never said that I thought that nationality-based discrimination is okay. I just said that it isn't the same thing as racism. Nationality and race are different properties.

You do realize that discrimination doesn't have to be racist to be bad, right?

dc_dux

Agreed.

Ignorance and intolerance come in many shapes, sizes and colors and should not be confused with institutional racism.

__________________
"In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican. "
~ H.L. Mencken

dksuddeth

excuse me, just what is 'institutional' racism?

__________________
"On every question of construction, let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
thomas jefferson

Cynthetiq

it's longhand for what they understand racism to mean in america.

when it's mexican against asian, it's not racist, it's nationalist, since they talk about power and dominance being held over someone else as being racism, that's the "white man keeping the black man down" type elements I guess.

at least that's how i've always understood how both filth and dc frame their racism points.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an asshole or you're not.

filtherton

Cynthetic, you'd make more sense if you were consistent with your terms. "Mexican" is a nationality. "Asian" is a race. Before you were tryng to claim that Chinese discrimination against Koreans was racist even though Chinese and Korean people are presumably of the same race. It doesn't make sense.

In any case, racism and racial discrimination aren't the same thing (unless you want to ignore informative distinctions).

Cynthetiq

Ah sorry.. Hispanic against an Asian.... thanks for the correction.

please elaborate onyour informative distinctions, because as far as I have always understood, it is by the very defition in any dictionary I read as the same thing.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an asshole or you're not.

dksuddeth

so an issue of my and my white professional colleagues denying a black man a sysadmin job would be racism, but andre and his homies spray painting 'cracker' on my car door is discrimination?

__________________
"On every question of construction, let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
thomas jefferson

dc_dux

Please read smooth's post # 52.

__________________
"In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican. "
~ H.L. Mencken

Cynthetiq

i have... and it only discusses BLACK and WHITE.

So thus, racism is only a black/white, power/domininance thing..

and isn't and can't be (based on post #52) anything involving any othe races, hispanics against blacks, asians against hispanics, etc.

it's narrow minded and short sighted, again, talking from the point of historical context, instituational racism as a historical talking point, but racism isn't as simple as just black/white which is what these discussions seem to only center around.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an asshole or you're not.

dc_dux

Cyn..you conveniently changed your earlier post when you raised the issue of Koreans/Chinese (asian on asian) and Mexican/Guatamalan (hispanic on hispanic)

The discussion on the thread had been BLACK AND WHITE until you added ASIAN on ASIAN AND HISPANIC on HISPANIC...commingling ethnicity or nationality and race.

I would suggest that smooth's description ncludes WHITE (in power and position of dominance) and ANY MINORITY who face institutional barriers based soley on race....the only difference being that the WHITE/BLACK relationship has a longer history in the US.

__________________
"In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican. "
~ H.L. Mencken

Cynthetiq

It's not convenient... it was answered by filth as being NATIONALISM not RACISM.

But yet there is still Asians against Hispanics, and Blacks against Hispanics.... don't think so? Check out the gangs in LA.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an asshole or you're not.

filtherton

Well, like everything else, racism has an academic definition and a conventional one (though the academic definition is conventional for a lot of people). Racism, as defined by people who spend a lot of time thinking about it, is inextricably linked with societal power-- people without power can't be racist. Now, you may disagree with that definition, but in doing so you're really inadvertently losing the ability to talk about what makes discrimination by those in power against those without power so much more insidious than plane old racial discrimination (which is itself pretty insidious).

The expected outcome of members of race A actively discriminating against members of race B changes dramatically depending on whether or not race A has the institutional power to facilitate that discrimination. Power is relevant in discussions on race. If you pretend that it isn't, you miss out on a whole lot of the important details.

Nobody is saying that discrimination is great, just that it is the kind of thing that is informed by an awareness of social context. We probably won't ever achieve a colorblind society. We certainly won't achieve one if we don't allow ourselves to take a good honest look at how things are and how they got to be that way.

Cynthetiq

see your answer is below... it isn't racism because they don't have the power.

I don't disagree with the definition, because I acknowledge the existence and ability to discuss from that point. But if those "racism thinkers" never step foot to the conventional defintion and see that it isn't just a black/white power/subjugation situation, this discussion stays as theoretical diarreah of the mouth.

There is a simpler every day concept of common sense and this discussion always talked about from that higher point never seems to bridge to the practical day to day reality of life.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an asshole or you're not.

dc_dux

I just find it hard to equate an ugly temporary inconvenience (having your card spray painted) with race based sentencing disparities in the criminal justice system...or race based lending disparities... or race based disparities in standardized college admission testing....that have a far more lasting impact.

If you think that is diarrhea of the mouth, I guess the discussion ends here.

__________________
"In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican. "
~ H.L. Mencken

Cynthetiq

no one is equating it... it is just that a word's definition is what the word means... if the academics seem to require it to mean instiutional and historical contexts because it needs to have all that baggage.... well that's why you posted #99.

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" is the idea here, but you guys don't see it as such.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an asshole or you're not.

dc_dux

That "baggage" is what creates a far more insidious and lasting impact.

__________________
"In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican. "
~ H.L. Mencken

filtherton

I imagine that the folks who concern themselves with the rigorous study of race relations don't care about the conventional definition of racism because it actually reduces the amount of detail possible in a discussion. Especially when the conventional definition so frequently is completely at odds with the academic definition. That's why the distinction is made between racism and racial discrimination.

Common sense is the problem here; it is too superficial to say anything interesting. Common sense is what people rely on when they lack the ability or desire to think about something analytically. The usefulness of the mythical concept of common sense lies solely in the fact that "COMMON SENSE!!!!" makes a useful rallying cry for people who believe in it.

There are no common sense solutions to intractable political and social problems and common sense ways of looking at these problems frequently make them worse.

roachboy

well, cyn, there's a way in which there's no disagreement and another in which there are two sets of folk talking past each other. *in the united states* i would make a distinction between the nature of racism directed at native americans and african-americans and other forms of discrimination--and i would make distinctions between those two generalities as well (if you think about it, the aggregation is itself a reflection of racism, but that's another matter)----because these forms of racism are in a way written into the history of the united states *from the outset*--so in a sense they're *structural features* of what the united states is. that's a feature that makes the western hemisphere different from europe, and the ways in which the histories have played out distinguishes different histories within the western hemisphere. [[i think i have the hemisphere name right--something's bugging me about it--i chock that up to just having stopped riding a lead bicycle that doesn't go anywhere]]

discrimination amongst groups that are differentiated from one another by surface features like skin color or other, deeper features like language seems to me to be *linked* to these other, structural features in that they operate with similar logics, but they're not the same as them. this seems to be the point at which the talking-past happens and the explanation seems to me to follow from the way the noun "racism" gets applied. the word racism equates things in a way that is in this case deceptive--and you see how that works in this thread.


the problem with this distinction is that you could see it as trivializing discrimination in general by making it not as bad---and i would say that making a distinction doesn't imply that, only that the two forms i started off talking about are different in kind from other forms of discrimination because of the status they have in the history of the us. that's all.

the place of agreement is that no-one is saying that discrimination between other communities is not ugly. it is. and we'd all be better of were it to go away.

if we can agree to make some kind of distinction between them--not sure how exactly--if we can keep straight that there is a shift in register