OT: Cam Newton & the race card

[Tony2046]

I only asked because I've heard that statement from people and I've never liked it. Oddly enough, the last time I heard it it came from a man who claimed to be a staunch social liberal

I also know from experiences with one of my sons that people from other countries don't believe in dating out of their race. He dated women in Korea who couldn't tell their parents that they were dating a white man.

It's true in Asia. Asians do not like interracial relationships in general but it's more prevalent in older generations which the same could be said here.

 

[rochrist]

Meh, what of it. That's what we're there for. To tear the flags up ourselves

And you'd be leading the cheers if Brady tore them down.

 

[Fencer]

You're embarrassing yourself, but I'm too tired to dismantle it tonight. Tomorrow. Give you a chance to walk it back a little.

Maybe when you sleep on it you'll see how dumb your reaction has been, and let it go.

 

[Fencer]

It's true in Asia. Asians do not like interracial relationships in general but it's more prevalent in older generations which the same could be said here.

I knew a Chinese-American guy -- who based on accent was either born in this country or got here young -- whose grandmother disinherited him because his girlfriend's family was from the wrong part of China.

To put this into the context of eras: Based on when I met him in school, I'd guess he was born in 1954 or so.

He was named Mike Hu. A group of us where in the dorm room next to his, and one of the girls asked "What's Mike's last name?" I said "Hu". She said "You know, the guy with the short black hair." I said "Mike Hu."

She didn't catch on until the sixth time through.

 

[Fencer]

Well.....not sure what to say about your reply. Is it condescending? Possibly. Is it a representation of your elitist world? Possibly. Do I admire your command of the english language? Absolutely and I actually envy it.

I will respond from my "simplistic" world view.

I think it's clear that a racist would hate Obama more than a non racists.

I don't think a non racists would hate Obama's politics more simply because he is black.

I don't think that the voting results support your statement of, "But the venomous hatred directed at them far exceeds what's been shown for any white male politician of similar leanings.". Unless you are simply stating that a racist white or a misogynistic guy (I guess you are combining the two ) will hate the president's policies more because he is black (or a women) which I would then consider a redundant statement.

Anyways, thank you for your reply.

I think our core disagreement may be that you're assuming a binary test -- "racist" or "non-racist" -- whereas my whole point is that there different kinds and degrees of racism. The worst kinds of racism have been largely stamped out in this country, except in small fractions of the population. Other kinds of racism, however, are widespread, and are damaging even though they're much less bad or badly-intentioned than what came before.

 

[1960Pats]

How is Wilson "annoying" and Newton's "lookie ME" display behavior isn't? Perhaps you should stop watching the No Fun League and find something that's more entertainment/less sporting event. The reason Newton's self-aggrandizing antics irritate people is because they detract from football's inherent team-first orientation. If you paid any kind of attention you'd realize that Brady's celebrations almost always involve his teammates and Newton's almost always just himself. Grumpy old men? Maybe you should stop being a flaky li'l whelp.

In Wilson's first 4 years he's made the playoffs every season, won at least one playoff game each year, the NFC title twice and the SB once. And yet, I can't recall him acting like a self-promoter as Cam has . The only complaint that I can remember hearing about Wilson came from some of his teammates who didn't think he was black enough. Talk about racists.

Almost every time I hear Brady talk about the games he uses the word "we." Cam almost always uses the word "I." Anyone who enters the NFL proclaiming that he wants to become an icon (as Cam has done) is someone who clearly isn't in it for the team aspects of the game.

 

[Galeb]

Not necessarily, it depends on their intention and reasoning behind the wish. Sociological studies have confirmed that couples from like backgrounds (racially/culturally/economically/educationally) have the most stable, longest-lasting marriages.

Every relationship is unique, and supportive families have a much greater effect on the quality and duration of marriages than does social or racial distinctions. Cherry picking numbers to justify racist views is still racist.

 

[Galeb]

In Wilson's first 4 years he's made the playoffs every season, won at least one playoff game each year, the NFC title twice and the SB once. And yet, I can't recall him acting like a self-promoter as Cam has . The only complaint that I can remember hearing about Wilson came from some of his teammates who didn't think he was black enough. Talk about racists.

Almost every time I hear Brady talk about the games he uses the word "we." Cam almost always uses the word "I." Anyone who enters the NFL proclaiming that he wants to become an icon (as Cam has done) is someone who clearly isn't in it for the team aspects of the game.

Get used to it. This is they type of people our culture is currently producing. Empathy and compassion have given way to self gratification and entitlement more with each generation.

 

[Galeb]

I knew a Chinese-American guy -- who based on accent was either born in this country or got here young -- whose grandmother disinherited him because his girlfriend's family was from the wrong part of China.

To put this into the context of eras: Based on when I met him in school, I'd guess he was born in 1954 or so.

He was named Mike Hu. A group of us where in the dorm room next to his, and one of the girls asked "What's Mike's last name?" I said "Hu". She said "You know, the guy with the short black hair." I said "Mike Hu."

She didn't catch on until the sixth time through.

He was on first.

 

[1960Pats]

Get used to it. This is they type of people our culture is currently producing. Empathy and compassion have given way to self gratification and entitlement more with each generation.

I don't think I'll ever get used to it.

 

[Galeb]

I don't think I'll ever get used to it.

It's amazing what people can get used to. I suspect that as the older population starts to thin, the younger generations will lose more and more of the compassionate people that surround them that feed their intense feelings of self importance. It is my hope that their growing isolation, combined with mass communication and instant access to information, will result is a massive, cultural awakening. In my experience, desperation often leads to a shift in consciousness resulting in epiphanies or eureka-like moments.

 

[primetime]

FWIW, I do appreciate the feedback. My opinion is based off of what I've read or experienced. Liam Ham's article is incredibly interesting but leads me into that freaking same old dilemma of who is right or is it both are partially right.

I have some talents but none of them include knowing which side to believe. I read a book reviewed by the NY Times, London Times, etc... and your referenced article written by a seemingly knowledgeable historian. Both have striking differences regarding "white slavery". It would be nice to know the truth.

Anyways thanks for the feedback.

Hogan did a Q&A on Medium that might be worth checking out where he goes into more detail on the claims made in White Cargo specifically. A lot of the "white slavery" thing seems to go hand in hand with Holocaust denial as a big white supremacist thing; I'm not accusing you of that, though. I suspect the narrative is comforting but it also plays into the idea that chattel slavery wasn't uniquely horrifying.

I'll willingly concede that chattel slavery and indenture weren't all that different up until the late 17th century, by the way, mainly because no one really lived long enough for it to matter. But once the surplus population of England was needed for industry so there wasn't enough labor to meet the growing demand for tobacco, and people in the colonies were living longer so servants were reaching the end of indenture, it took on a qualitatively different character (particularly in law). Black slavery became the only means to provide that labor so a trickle of blacks slaves turned into a waterfall, and racism became an ideological means by which a group of people could be cut off from Lockean conceptions of freedom or liberty.

A good book (rather two books) on this is Ted Allen's Invention of the White Race, though there's a shorter "summary of the arguments" available online (Google summary of the arguments of invention of the white race). Allen did extensive primary source research on Virginia and Ireland. His primary rhetorical flourish is to show that the racial power structures used under the Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland are the same as in Virginia, with Protestants and Catholics taking the place of white and blacks. In other words, there's no biological "races," they're invented for political purposes. In the US the marker was skin color and in Ireland religion, but other countries in the Americas had a very different racial power structure despite a history of chattel slavery (in Jamaica, for instance, there's a difference between black and "colored" that doesn't exist in the US).

 

[jah]

Get used to it. This is they type of people our culture is currently producing. Empathy and compassion have given way to self gratification and entitlement more with each generation.

So you're one of those people who actually believes the world is going to **** because of the younguns......

 

[aluminum seats]

OK, let's unpack this mess in the hopes that future posts may somehow be less terrible...

They would have said that about any autocratic torturer who violated the Bill of Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and general human decency.

OK, this hall of fame bad post starts with your response to the fact that many on the left compared George Bush to Hitler. You had said that you "didn't recall" Bush being subjected the kinds of attacks that Obama has been, asserting that the "vehemence" of attacks on Obama is likely attributed to racism.

But of course Bush faced similar, and worse, attacks, including the frequent comparisons to Hitler. A softball for you really, to simply acknowledge that there is overheated rhetoric on both sides of the political aisle.

Instead, you choose the...curious...route of echoing the Hitler charges. Agreeing with them. That alone pretty much removes you from any reasonable conversation.

Somehow, the 6 million Jews and all that are seen as secondary when judging the aptness of Hitler comparisons. Equating Bush to Hitler was bad use of language, more than it was a serious accusation of him being as bad as Hitler REALLY was.

The first part of this is truly something to behold. "Somehow the 6 million Jews and all that...." Yeah, you know--the millions of Jews, etc. Yadda-yadda. But it turns into excuse making that the people equating George Bush with Adolf Hitler didn't really mean it...when they said it over and over. And you just implicitly agreed with. Just clumsy language. Ooops!

What's more -- the number of Americans who think Obama is a treasonous atheist commie Muslim far exceeds the number who equated Bush to Hitler.

But you want to get back to your main point...all those racists against Obama. So never mind that Hitler stuff, the true "vehemence" is from the racists. Of course.

Just awful.

 

[Tunescribe]

Every relationship is unique, and supportive families have a much greater effect on the quality and duration of marriages than does social or racial distinctions. Cherry picking numbers to justify racist views is still racist.

Your response has nothing to do with my post. I didn't "cherry pick" any numbers and nothing I wrote even remotely smacks of racism. You're reaching (badly) for something that isn't there so you can feel righteous. The simple fact remains that interracial marriages in America have a higher divorce rate:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracial_marriage_in_the_United_States

http://www.blogher.com/latest-statistics-divorce-rates-among-interracial-marriages

 

[Fencer]

I don't know whether you're misreading my post deliberately or by accident, but I'm disappointed in you either way.

1. It is my contention, which you studiously ignore, that the people comparing Bush to Hitler were VASTLY fewer than those who hate Obama. If you can find polls that get affirmatives to "Is Bush like Hitler" in percentages that rival those who'd say Obama is a traitor, or a secret Muslim, or a Kenyan plant, or whatever, please feel free to exhibit them and prove me wrong. But I would be very surprised.
2. I recall some of the Hitler analogies and the so-called "reasoning" behind them. Few people making them seemed to actually view Bush as a genocidal maniac. You are right that equating Bush to Hitler is totally ridiculous. But I believe the people who did so were in most cases mischarcterizing Hitler, not Bush.

I think both of those points should have been clear already from my previous posts in this thread.

OK, let's unpack this mess in the hopes that future posts may somehow be less terrible...


OK, this hall of fame bad post starts with your response to the fact that many on the left compared George Bush to Hitler. You had said that you "didn't recall" Bush being subjected the kinds of attacks that Obama has been, asserting that the "vehemence" of attacks on Obama is likely attributed to racism.

But of course Bush faced similar, and worse, attacks, including the frequent comparisons to Hitler. A softball for you really, to simply acknowledge that there is overheated rhetoric on both sides of the political aisle.

Instead, you choose the...curious...route of echoing the Hitler charges. Agreeing with them. That alone pretty much removes you from any reasonable conversation.



The first part of this is truly something to behold. "Somehow the 6 million Jews and all that...." Yeah, you know--the millions of Jews, etc. Yadda-yadda. But it turns into excuse making that the people equating George Bush with Adolf Hitler didn't really mean it...when they said it over and over. And you just implicitly agreed with. Just clumsy language. Ooops!

But you want to get back to your main point...all those racists against Obama. So never mind that Hitler stuff, the true "vehemence" is from the racists. Of course.

Just awful.

 

[Galeb]

So you're one of those people who actually believes the world is going to **** because of the younguns......

Read my next post after that. Although I do think there are serious problems, I do not perceive the world as going to ****. The root of the problem is not the people themselves, but the poisoning of our culture and it's dramatic effect on the way we socialize our population. My generation has less compassion and empathy than the previous one, and each successive generation has less than the one before it. If you read the next post I made you would see that I hope and believe that the lack of empathy and compassion will come to a head when the older folks start to fade, and that it will result in a cultural revolution. In other words, I believe the younger folks will become the salvation of not just our culture, but our species.

 

[Fencer]

He was on first.

What?

Seriously, I'm pretty sure that I was thinking of "Who's on first?" back at the time. My excuse for not being totally certain is that the conversation happened in 1976.

 

[Galeb]

Your response has nothing to do with my post. I didn't "cherry pick" any numbers and nothing I wrote even remotely smacks of racism. You're reaching (badly) for something that isn't there so you can feel righteous. The simple fact remains that interracial marriages in America have a higher divorce rate:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracial_marriage_in_the_United_States

http://www.blogher.com/latest-statistics-divorce-rates-among-interracial-marriages

Your wild guess at my intentions and feelings is far from accurate. Racism doesn't change simply because you use numbers to justify it. It's ironic, people on the opposite end of the spectrum as you consider me racist instead of self-righteous.

Try taking this test. In fact, I urge everyone to take it.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/user/agg/blindspot/indexrk.htm

 

[XLIX]

tl;dr: You like the black guy that acts like a white guy but not the black guy that acts like a black guy

Comments like these are part of the problem, whereby you establish that there is a "white" way to act and a "black" way to act.

How about we judge a guy by how he acts instead of saying "he belongs to a certain ethnicity, therefore he is supposed to act a certain way"?