Aka "that they deliberately cal their kids racially profane names in order to immunise them "

You may be proving the point of the article.

That and more moderate conditioning of children to expect racism will create attitudes which generate negative reactions which then get intepreted as racism. A self fulfilling cycle regardless of the actual amount ofracism in the community.

It's more than likely that kid's conditione that way (and with the same message in a more subtle form) will interact in a negative manner with those they've been taught are racist and likely to look down on them because of race. The kid who's been taught to expect racism will more than likely find evidence by the nature of the way they interact with others outside their own grouping, not generally because of racism but rather the way they then interact outside their own grouping.

That does not discount the possibility of actual racism occuring but it does significantly overstate how much actual racism someone comes across.

R0bert

Hi Aka,

When you write, " .... I have been told by parents (even though I find this really disturbing) that they deliberately call their kids racially profane names in order to immunise them .... "

my response is "Complete bullsh!t !" And I DON'T apologise for the rudeness. That is a contemptible interpretation of a contemptible act perpetrated on small children. It is a vile excuse for the inexcusable.

Apart from that, congratulations for snatching defeat from the jaws of a mutual victory.

And no, I most certainly would never advise people to 'forgive and forget', or to turn the other cheek - which, in the quote above, you seem to actually advocate. Or have I got that wrong ?

In the cases I cited, those two kids are probably dead by now: after all they would be at least forty, and guys in communities often don't live past forty. Which is why, if I was in the position to, I would advise people to get the hell out of communities, get to the towns or cities, get skills and never look back. And also never forget who it was who called you foul names.

OF COURSE injustice must be combatted whenever and wherever it occurs - but are you saying that includes within one's family as well ? When one's nearest and dearest call you names as if they mean it, what is one to believe about oneself ? What is the worse injustice to bear - some yob stranger calling you names, or your own ?

You can do better than that, Aka - you surely have not sunk that low ?

Joe

Malcolm X on House negro's (1965)

"If the master's house caught on fire, the house Negro would fight harder to put the blaze out than the master would. If the master got sick, the house Negro would say, "What's the matter, boss, we sick?" We sick! He identified himself with his master, more than his master identified with himself. And if you came to the house Negro and said, "Let's run away, let's escape, let's separate," the house Negro would look at you and say, "Man, you crazy. What you mean, separate? Where is there a better house than this? Where can I wear better clothes than this? Where can I eat better food than this?" That was that house Negro. In those days he was called a "house nigg*ers." And that's what we call them today, because we've still got some house nigg*ers running around here."

Aka, your contributions are valued, as are everyone else's. I am not an academic, but I was taught from an early age not to believe something just because somebody also believes it or asserts it as truth. I was also taught, that if a lot of people believe something or assert its truth, then it should be questioned. I guess the reason is, that consensus is no substitute for truth. I have not read the works of the authors you have quoted (and would likely have difficulty understanding scholarly works given my limited education), but I think it is helpful if you provide some clarification for your claims for simple people like me.

From what I can interpret here, most agree that racism, in some form, and to varying degrees exist. Some claim that any such racism has a direct impact on the person for whom the racism was intended. That is a worthwhile claim, but given the counter examples given in this lengthy discussion (and I see that as good), some are questioning that claim. If I say all swans are black, and you present me with a white swan, then that would be a counter example that casts doubt on my claim.

If somebody, or even many people say something like "Tony Abbott makes me angry," are we to really believe that it is Tony who makes these people angry (and he possibly has never ever met them) simply because they say so?

No R0bert, I do not agree with the article.
My argument is that racism can be so bad that people use the inexcusable tactics I described - in sheer desperation. Mind you it does not work. Just as friends may call each other b*stards, they would be likely to take offense if anyone else called them that. Actual racism can be far worse than reported.

Joe,
I also said bulldust, when I first witnessed the shameful tactic. The kids are now young adults and rightly take offense at those names. It does not work.

I most certainly do NOT suggest turning the other cheek.

Puppydog68,

I am sure your educational status would not hinder your understanding of the articles. Many of the articles are online - google scholar is great. It is good to see you interested.

For the record, if I said that Tony Abbott made me angry, why would you question it? To question is to assume that you knew more about myself than I do. If you do not believe me when I say I have experienced racism, that would no doubt make me angry. Would you then question whether I was angry?

It is patronising.

Rainier, sadly, I know what you mean.