Interesting Article Re Byu Student Fighting Racism

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, Danzo said:

It would seem that the advantages can only be discerned by pigment in one's skin.

Don’t understand your point. 

[Danzo]

57 minutes ago, Calm said:

Part 2 on Asian privilege...discrimination towards Asians often takes the stereotype of the above which more typically applies to first and second generation Asian Americans than to third or more and applies them to any Asian American. Thus they are assumed to be very good in school or hard workers who will put the business first.  
 

Otoh, Asian immigrants at times can tend to look down on whites as lazy and keep their kids from associating with them as they get older. This was very problematic in our high school in Canada where long time friends were split up by parents, kids were moved to other schools because they were only getting 94% instead of 95 or higher in their grades (yes, I had a kid telling me they were heartbroken they were going to have to leave band because their parents were insisting they get a 98% grade and didn’t want them hanging out with the whites who were slowing them down from the serious stuff).  And of course the Asian kids would repeat what their parents said. Canadians had their own problems with racism (the worse I ever heard about First Nations/Native Americans was from a Canadian), so the white kids often had something to say about the Asians...fights were not uncommon. 
 

Asian women are often see as either submissive or over the top aggressive. All the first generation Asian moms I knew were submissive at least in public with us, especially around their husbands, but I heard of some moms that were the opposite and the kids’ stories of them at home painted a more rounded picture which made me happier for them (One of our next door neighbours I learned later from the missionaries the wife was abused and then abandoned, she was investigating the Church). I didn’t know the first generation men very well, I don’t know if they were uncomfortable and therefore withdrawn or actually saw us as a waste of their time, but unlike the women, I got to admit I had a hard time with them. The kids were great, most very respectful to adults even if a few were brats to kids their own age.
 

My view is women are not seen as equals by the men, there is an attitude that is all through their media of bosses harassing the women and the women just taking it to keep their jobs or get promoted. There is this petting behaviour of women’s heads, but apparently it doesn’t translate to as patronizing as it would be in American culture. There is difficulty in Asia for moms who have stopped work to care for their kids and husbands as is often expected being able to get back into the work force.  
 

However, a woman who grew up in the States isn’t likely to have that set of above expectations or experiences and to be patronized as if she does by whites...
 

I have heard Asian Americans say they are assumed to be prejudiced against whites, standoffish, to think they are superior...not a vibe I get off of third generation though.  There were some third generation or more Asian heritage professors who were typical in their Americanisms or Canadianisms. We celebrated American Thanksgiving a number of years when we first moved up to Canada with an Asian American family, iirc the dad was third generation and mom second. Outside some nice family heirlooms and names of their two kids, I don’t remember anything striking me as Asian culture about them, but it was a long time ago and I was just learning about Asian culture outside of trips to Chinatown as a teen in San Fran, so I might have missed the more subtle stuff. 
 

There is probably a ton of other stuff I am not aware about in Asian American experience.  I can do some research if you want rather than just going off of memory. 

You seem to know a lot about Asian Americans. 

Obviously they all seem the same regardless of what country in Asia they come from.  All the same, whether they are thai, Lao, Cambodian, vietnamese, Hmong Japanese, Mongolian, etc. 

 

Why don't people just get to know them and their individual experiences rather than grouping them together like Asia was some small place where everyone is the same.

[Danzo]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

Don’t understand your point. 

You seem to be saying that there are people who have privilege. These people who have this privilege can only be discerned by the pigment of the skin. 

I believe this is the essence of racism, judging people be the color of the skin and not by getting to know them.

[Calm]

4 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Its interesting that Cesar Chavez could be anti illegal immigrant, and he pretty much gets a pass. 

A pass in what sense?

His opposition at the time was understandable, imo, as he was attempting to organize farm workers and illegal immigrants were often used as strike breakers, I believe. Whether his view was accurate, I don’t know. I remember being taught about him in HE Social/History, hearing about him in the news but he wasn’t as active by then.  
 

Wiki walk down memory lane. 
 

It would be interesting to know what he would say about the current issues.  Circumstances and perceptions change over time, he has been gone 27 years. Then again he got kind of detailed in his later years imo. 

[Danzo]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

A pass in what sense?

His opposition at the time was understandable, imo, as he was attempting to organize farm workers and illegal immigrants were often used as strike breakers, I believe. Whether his view was accurate, I don’t know. I remember being taught about him in HE Social/History, hearing about him in the news but he wasn’t as active by then.  
 

Wiki walk down memory lane. 
 

It would be interesting to know what he would say about the current issues.  Circumstances and perceptions change over time, he has been gone 27 years. Then again he got kind of detailed in his later years imo. 

He had his reasons to oppose illegal immigration, other people today have their reasons. You may or may not agree with them. I certainly don't oppose illegal immigration. Those immigrants his organization was reporting certainly didn't like what he was doing at the time.  He opposed the bracero program which many indigenous Americans from mexico relied upon  for their support.

Today, he pretty much gets a pass on his anti immigrant view due to his percieved ethnicity.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Danzo said:

You seem to know a lot about Asian Americans. 

Obviously they all seem the same regardless of what country in Asia they come from.  All the same, whether they are thai, Lao, Cambodian, vietnamese, Hmong Japanese, Mongolian, etc. 

 

Why don't people just get to know them and their individual experiences rather than grouping them together like Asia was some small place where everyone is the same.

No doubt I overgeneralized, individual nuances would take many pages and hours.  I get annoyed when people talk about Asia as one place when it is massive and filled with very different cultures that interact in intricate ways.  I am still trying to get my head around Korea and Japan’s relationship  OTOH, there is a lot of enmity based on the occupation of Korea by Japan and yet they share at times a lot of pop culture, though I understand political issues impedes popularity.  Then there is the Chinese domination of Korea...all these a big deal in Korea storytelling, but rarely mentioned in what I see from China or Japan. OTOH, Chinese depiction of Japanese at times... but then they are talking about popping back and forth from there with their business deals.  Haven’t figured that out. Probably won’t. 
 

The role of women is confusing as well. The grandmothers are dominating the families, telling everyone what to do, often including their husbands, but then they complain about the second ‘wives’ and their involvement is more with their husband’s family than their own. They picture the middle age and younger women as CEOs or up and comers like their male colleagues, but then tons of sexual harassment and romance is more male initiated. I mentioned the petting that looks like they are treating their girlfriends like little kids (but I have been assured it is not that), there is a lot of grabbing of women’s wrists or arms and dragging them behind as romantic gestures (you always know that the guy’s lost it over the girl when he does that), kissing it is like the woman is frozen while the guy gets into it these days. So stuff that translates into American culture as submissive, that may not be.   But research says lots of equality issues, though strong progress in recent years for equality.

That (get to know them as individuals) would be the intelligent thing to do. I knew mostly Koreans and Chinese from Hong Kong up in Canada, they had a flood of immigrants from there due to fear that the Chinese would suppress freedoms beyond the bearable limit in Hong Kong once they got full possession of it. Took longer than expected, but they were right.  I tutored my daughter’s classmates in English. Became kind of a foster mom to two kids. My daughter’s two best friends were Korean and Chinese.  Authentic Korean food...oh man.
 

I was room mom for most of time for my daughter (so many immigrants in her class led to me and another mom trading off as many mothers weren’t great at English and were shy about coming to school, but when we convinced them we needed them for field trips, they were all in).

 I knew more Japanese descent, at least third generation growing up in the San Fran area.  They were fully Americanized, but told stories about their parents and grandparents as kids do. 

Since most of the immigrant families worked hard at fitting in (some of the kids were not allowed to speak anything but English at school, even if the teacher asked them how to say something in their native tongue), I probably missed a lot of the differences in cultures.  I am picking up more these days by watching Asian TV.  I don’t know whether it is just what is chosen to share, but there’s a huge difference in tone and style between the countries.  I watch mostly Korean, so undoubtedly I probably slant toward that culture in understanding, though I tend to do more research about stuff I see with the Chinese films.  I do a lot of ‘is this TV reality or actual culture”.  Tons of blogs and videos out there to help tell the difference.

 I have friends who work with Laotians and Cambodians, so I know just enough to know they are very different.   
 

Other than that, most my knowledge has been picked up in a long time interest reading about Asia, starting with mythology. When I was 8 or 9, I copied out the section for Japan out of our Americana? encyclopedia. I also spent way too much time checking out the frog and human biology transparencies (you know, the kind that show skin, then muscles, then blood vessels and lymphatic systems, and then organs and finally skeletons).  I had a Japanese American teacher in 4th or 5th grade. Her name fascinated me, I really liked her, and I picked up some British spelling from her...which got me in trouble with my 8th grade English teacher who insisted “colour” was a misspelling. I was disdainful. Seriously “color” as a spelling word in 8th grade?  And the dictionary approved of “colour”.

Edited July 17, 2020 by Calm

[Danzo]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

That would be the intelligent thing to do. I knew mostly Koreans and Chinese from Hong Kong up in Canada, they had a flood of immigrants from there due to fear that the Chinese would suppress freedoms beyond the bearable limit in Hong Kong once they got full possession of it. Took longer than expected, but they were right.  I knew more Japanese descent growing up in the San Fran area. I have friends who work with Laotians and Cambodias. 
 

Other than that, most my knowledge has been picked up in a long time interest reading about Asia, starting with mythology. When I was 8 or 9, I copied out the section for Japan out of our Americana? encyclopedia. I also spent way too much time checking out the frog and human biology transparencies (you know, the kind that show skin, then muscles, then blood vessels and lymphatic systems, and then organs and finally skeletons).  I had a Japanese American teacher in 4th or 5th grade. Her name fascinated me, I really liked her, and I picked up some British spelling from her...which got me in trouble with my 8th grade English teacher who insisted “colour” was a misspelling. I was disdainful. Seriously “color” as a spelling word in 8th grade?  And the dictionary approved of “colour”.

I originally come from Fresno. When I was growing up, there were many southeast Asians relocating there.  At that time there were church units and missionaries in Hmong, laotian and Cambodian.

One found memory of my childhood was when I was twelve years old and me and a Hmong youth got together and used another kids stereotype of hmongs to get 10 dollars from from him in a scam. 

One big mistake was to confuse Lao and Hmong. Even though they were from the same country, they didn't like each other and had vastly different cultures.

Later as a young adult, I had many friends from Laos.  All good people.

If you want to get an idea about hmong culture, watch grant torino with Clint Eastwood.  It brought back memories of hmong food and culture.

 

[Calm]

I should correct it, I know more first and second generation Canadians than Americans. Besides some professors and their families, most of my exposure to Asian American were long time, school age friends when growing up in the Bay Area.  The stereotyping info is coming more from research though some from our professor American friend in Canada. 
 

My school experience was very different from the Canadian experience because they didn’t hang out with each other any more than the rest of us or had any cultural differences I picked up back then, (though I did have a friend who just moved from Greece who had a hard time adjusting) but were just one of the pack of generally self centered if I am being honest upper middle class kids I belonged to while in Canada our neighbourhood included an apartment building that was mostly immigrants, so my daughter’s class was 1/3 to 1/2 immigrants from Kindergarten to 6th grade, JH was about a fifth maybe as many families were established by then and moving to newer neighborhoods.  Have to check with my son what HS was like, but where I hung out (band room and administration) about the same.
 

Most in my daughter’s class were from Asia, first Korea and Hong Kong, some Muslims from Pakistan, one Tibetan, some from the MiddleEast as well. We may have had someone from the Philippines for a short time. And the immigrant kids tended to bond deepest with other immigrants, except in the case of my daughter because I am guessing first she was so sweet and shy and little like a bird and second, they got to know me very well. 
 

Our ward had a couple of families from South America as well.
 

 I loved it. Wish I had been less shy and more willing to take risks in asking questions and trying new things. The moms generally were insecure about their English but were easily understood and willing to talk when they were there. Also very polite and generous in their gratitude for my helping their kids. The dads often worked at night making connections overseas, rarely came to school, had excellent English, but highly focused on business as far as I could tell.  I should have made more effort with the moms, they were highly involved in the local immigrant groups from what their kids would say so I made excuses as I was only really outgoing with kids back them. Adults frightened me at times. Stuck myself in Primary too, lol. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

One big mistake was to confuse Lao and Hmong

I don’t know much about either of these groups, what I do know are more from the refugee community so I may be clueless with the bigger picture.  There is little Asian TV from there on the app I use, so I don’t come up much with questions to do research about in countries outside Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan, and (a little) Malaysia. 
 

The last dive I made was off an Australian show about a terrorist attack by a minority group from Myanmar, the Rohingya.  Never heard of them and it sounded like I should, so I spent a couple of hours reading about them...which means I know very little. Heartbreaking what I learned.  I keep thinking people should be either getting more tolerant or at least realizing the political and economic benefits of not oppressing others and then I stupidly am shocked when I get disproven yet again. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_people

I need to get more systematic, but it is mostly research at night when I can’t sleep and if I get organized, that is admitting sleeping is a failure. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by Calm

[Calm]

Ach...I wrote way too much. I am so wired tonight. Insurance made me switch drugs and adjusting is interesting. 
 

Sorry Smac for detailing the thread. I should have just linked to something authoritative.  I can delete tomorrow if you want, but since Danzo responded it feels awkward to. 
 

Here is a good article imo on so-called Asian privilege:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/19/the-real-secret-to-asian-american-success-was-not-education/%3foutputType=amp

Article by Chinese American immigrant on his view of White Privilege and Black Disprivilege. 
https://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2020/june/standing-between-white-privilege-and-black-disprivilege-asi.html

Another by an Asian woman who discusses her own racism and efforts to change:

https://medium.com/@tuttitaygerly/my-asian-privilege-513ea9ac278e

The whitening of Asia Americans (but only some of them):

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/563336/

Edited July 17, 2020 by Calm

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Danzo said:

was growing up, there were many southeast Asians relocating there.

You reminded me of the Vietnamese that were coming while I was in high school. None made it to my community by the time I transplanted to BYU, but we talked about them quite a bit, think we had some fundraisers as well.  Quite a different experience than nowadays:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-camp-pendleton-20180701-story.html%3f_amp=true

[pogi]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

I believe much of the success benefit for Asian Americans comes from the fact that they have a very, very strong work ethic.

This just demonstrates my point that it is not as much about skin color and more about cultural traits, and values, etc., which can be broken down even further to familial traits and values.   Cultures who prioritize education, hard work, and smart financial prowess, succeed (in general).  Asians make far more money than white people, not just by household but by individual income on average.  If you work harder and prioritize education and high paying careers, you will succeed.  The system is built to reward those traits over skin color.  It is not about white privilege, it is about priority and value privilege's.  There can be a down-side to prioritizing money and success however, that people are not considering.  White people have suicide rates that double that of black people in America.  Is that also a white privilege? 

It is more compex than that though.  Hispanics are extremely hard workers, but they don't make as much as Indians?  Why?  Probably because the values they prioritize, and work towards, are simply different, and not because of their skin tone (which is the same).  Even hard work is not enough, it is about prioritizing traits and skills that are more profitable.  Education is not as much as a priority (in general) in Hispanic homes as it is in Indian homes.  High paying medical and technology careers are not as much a priority (in general) in Hispanic homes as it is in Indian homes.  Indians are not naturally better spellers than white people, but they excell at spelling bees because that is what they prioritize.  The system does not favor the skin color of Indians.  It favors their values, and work ethics, and learned skills.

The difference is that they don't allow others to give them their identity.  They create their own.  They are not limited by believing that they are deprivileged and can't succeed in this system.  The power of belief and self-perception is everything.  It is all about self-perception.  If one perceives and is taught from a young age, "you can't make it if you are not white", "the system is rigged", "you are not privileged", "you are less then...",   They are much more likely not to succeed.  If one is instilled with positive self-perception, "you are privileged", "you will be the top of your class", "you will succeed in life", then that person is much more likely to succeed.  It is cultural messages.   I believe it all boils down to cultural self-perception.

Think about how disempowering this message is to a people "I will use my white privilege to help disadvantaged black people."  It reinforces the harmful self-perception and unhealthy dynamic that keeps some people of color down.  It feels so patronizing. It feels so powerless and dependent on white people.  I am confident that if Indian people held that same self-perception, they would be in the same unsuccessful place.  

Cultural perspectives run deep, and I don't think any one individual is to blame for their cultural perceptions, but neither are we helping the problem with patronizing and demoralizing messages of "I will use my white privilege to help out those below me..."  Instead we need to find a way to instill positive values and self-perceptions in a culture that believes they are deprivileged, and those who truly believe that way, are more likely to act the part.  I believe that cultural self-perception changes everything.

I think when you look at families with mixed race kids, raised form infancy, I doubt that you will see much if any difference in perceptions of privilege between the kids.  A black kid who is raised by a family that prioritizes education, work ethics, and teaches sound financial skills and encourages their kids to succeed will do MUCH better than a white kid raised in the same neighborhood by a family who isn't involved in their kids education and teaches that it is too hard to compete in this world, and demonstrates terrible financial practices and lets their kids play video games all day.  Culture and self-perception is WAY more powerful than skin color.  I am not saying that skin color plays absolutely zero role, I just think we are giving it more power (which is the opposite of what we should be doing) than it deserves.  And THAT is disempowering and hurting more than helping the end goal. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by pogi

[Danzo]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

The difference is that they don't allow others to give them their identity.  They create their own.  They are not limited by believing that they are deprivileged and can't succeed in this system.  The power of belief and self-perception is everything.  It is all about self-perception.  If one perceives and is taught from a young age, "you can't make it if you are not white", "the system is rigged", "you are not privileged", "you are less then...",   They are much more likely not to succeed.  If one is instilled with positive self-perception, "you are privileged", "you will be the top of your class", "you will succeed in life", then that person is much more likely to succeed.  It is cultural messages.   I believe it all boils down to cultural self-perception.

Think about how disempowering this message is to a people "I will use my white privilege to help disadvantaged black people."  It reinforces the harmful self-perception and unhealthy dynamic that keeps some people of color down.  It feels so patronizing. It feels so powerless and dependent on white people.  I am confident that if Indian people held that same self-perception, they would be in the same unsuccessful place.  

Cultural perspectives run deep, and I don't think any one individual is to blame for their cultural perceptions, but neither are we helping the problem with patronizing and demoralizing messages of "I will use my white privilege to help out those below me..."  Instead we need to find a way to instill positive values and self-perceptions in a culture that believes they are deprivileged, and those who truly believe that way, are more likely to act the part.  I believe that cultural self-perception changes everything.

I think when you look at families with mixed race kids, raised form infancy, I doubt that you will see much if any difference in perceptions of privilege between the kids.  A black kid who is raised by a family that prioritizes education, work ethics, and teaches sound financial skills and encourages their kids to succeed will do MUCH better than a white kid raised in the same neighborhood by a family who isn't involved in their kids education and teaches that it is too hard to compete in this world, and demonstrates terrible financial practices and lets their kids play video games all day.  Culture and self-perception is WAY more powerful than skin color.  I am not saying that skin color plays absolutely zero role, I just think we are giving it more power than it deserves.  And THAT is disempowering and hurting more than helping the end goal. 

Extremely good points

[Danzo]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

This just demonstrates my point that it is not as much about skin color and more about cultural traits, and values, etc., which can be broken down even further to familial traits.   Cultures who prioritize education, hard work, and smart financial prowess, succeed (in general).  Asians make far more money than white people, not just by household but by individual income on average.  If you work harder and prioritize education and high paying careers, you will succeed.  The system is built to reward those traits over skin color.  It is not about white privilege, it is about priority and value privilege's.  There can be a down-side to prioritizing money and success however, that people are not considering.  White people have suicide rates that double that of black people in America.  Is that also a white privilege? 

It is more compex than that though.  Hispanics are extremely hard workers, but they don't make as much as Indians?  Why?  Probably because of the values they prioritize and work towards are simply different, and not because of their skin tone (which is the same).  Even hard work is not enough, it is about prioritizing traits and skills that are more profitable.  Education is not as much as a priority (in general) in Hispanic homes as it is in Indian homes.  High paying medical and technology careers are not as much a priority (in general) in Hispanic homes as it is in Indian homes.  Indians are not naturally better spellers than white people, but they excell at spelling bees because that is what they prioritize.  The system does not favor the skin color of Indians.  It favors their values, and work ethics, and learned skills.

I just want to point out that you are engaging in the very act that you are fighting against. This is not to put you down, a lot of people do this.  You are succumbing to the temptation to engage in generalizing people acording to superficial traits.  We Americans just love to group people into categories that make no sense.  We use whole continents to categorize people "African Americans", "Asian Americans", "indians" (actually the same continent as Asia).   All of these are stereotypes and using them prevents us from actually getting to know the richness of the the various countries, cultures and individuals from those countries.

You may think Hispanics are extremely hard workers, but there are many who are very lazy. You may think they don't make as much as Indians, but I know many who make more than Indians I know. Asians are extremely diverse, not something you could every generalize with these trite sayings.  I Know many that are extremely poor.

My hope is that we can learn to eliminate all these artificial categories.  Only then can we overcome racism.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

I just want to point out that you are engaging in the very act that you are fighting against. This is not to put you down, a lot of people do this.  You are succumbing to the temptation to engage in generalizing people acording to superficial traits.  We Americans just love to group people into categories that make no sense.  We use whole continents to categorize people "African Americans", "Asian Americans", "indians" (actually the same continent as Asia).   All of these are stereotypes and using them prevents us from actually getting to know the richness of the the various countries, cultures and individuals from those countries.

You may think Hispanics are extremely hard workers, but there are many who are very lazy. You may think they don't make as much as Indians, but I know many who make more than Indians I know. Asians are extremely diverse, not something you could every generalize with these trite sayings.  I Know many that are extremely poor.

My hope is that we can learn to eliminate all these artificial categories.  Only then can we overcome racism.

Yes, I admit that these are generalizations.  Not allowing oneself to recognize individuality within cultures is limiting.  But culture itself is a generalization, and it is a phenomenon that is real and observable between peoples.  We shouldn't limit ourselves to only see diversity between individuals, but we should allow ourselves to see diversity between cultures as well.  We need to generalize to do that.   To only allow oneself to see generalizations in culture is limiting, but I would argue that to only allow oneself to see the individual is also (if not even more) limiting to understanding people and how and why they work and do what they do.     Every culture has sub-cultures and sub-sub-cultures, and it is important to understand that within cultures are true individuals.  Cultures are not monochromatic, but they are helpful in understanding patterns and trends in group and even individual behavior.

I think it would be a sad day when we stopped noticing diversity in cultures and peoples and became truly color-blind (not just to skin color but to culture).   

We can't fully understand an individual by only looking at their culture, but we can't fully understand an individual by neglecting it either; and furthermore, we can't fully understand a culture by only looking at the individual. 

Culture (and thus generalizations) is an important tool to understand individuals. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by pogi

[Calm]

9 hours ago, pogi said:

think when you look at families with mixed race kids, raised form infancy, I doubt that you will see much if any difference in perceptions of privilege between the kids. 

You should read the links I posted by Asian Americans and their perception of privilege. I found it quite interesting. 

[BlueDreams]

13 hours ago, smac97 said:

Broadly speaking, it is faulting white people collectively for being wrongs committed against non-white people, regardless of whether the individual white person has said or done anything wrong.

 

Okay, I think I follow you one this. Though I do think this is more of a common misunderstanding of what's being said. What's usually meant is that there is a collective culture and systems in place that tend to favor one group over another both historically and currently. The historical context fed current disparities and some of the cultural and systemic practices now maintain it. And it's very likely that individuals benefit and carry things from that said legacy. This doesn't mean that I expect one specific individual to fix racism in all its forms....anymore than I think one person recycling will save all the trees. 

 

Quote

Not around the corner.  It's here.  Now.

I'm not sure what this means.

OK....I still don't know if that's the best approach to take on a topic as this one. It tends to breed and cycle defensiveness and push back and self-justification. 

And I mean that there are specific terms, conclusions, experiences, etc that you've already at least partially written off as not a means for description but as more politically oriented and therefore circumspect. These are terms that I find very useful to describe the experiences of me and others around me. That frames from the start what can or cannot be discussed without it really turning into a debate and/or me needing to defend my position as valid. Which is something I'm really not willing to do right now. 

Quote

We are being bombarded with "talk about race/racism" advocacy.  I think the context means to talk about the bad stuff, rather than the banal stuff.  Am I wrong?

Again, bombarded has a connotation of going to battle almost or attacking. I've definitely talked a ton about race from june to early july, but it wasn't to "bombard" but to educate, discuss, and move a conversation that often gets sidelined for other issues and thus never really gets a resolution. You're right, it wasn't on just the "banal stuff"....Because what illicited the start of these conversations simply wasn't banal. 

 

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

Okay.

Okay.  This is helpful.  When is coloblindness a bad thing?  What are the circumstances?

Sure.  Mutual consent is an important factor.

This is still a bit too abstract for me to grasp.  I'm trying to grasp what you are saying, honest.  But I don't know wha tyou mean by "what constitutes evidence or reality."  Evidence pertaining to what? 

What is the predicate for "litmus test?"  Colorblindness?

What does "discarding the 'evidence'" mean?

What does "they don't really end up seeing me" mean?

I think it's easier to start with when it is good. The initial intent is usually good. They're trying to usually say something along the lines that they're not racist and that color doesn't inform or dictate how they interact with the individiual. Treating people respectfully is generally a good thing. 

The problem is the context in which it comes up, the misunderstanding of focus in said context, and the inability to confront beliefs or behaviors that do not fit said philosophy of colorblindness. 

On context, these pronouncements are usually happening when trying to open a general dialogue about racism and societal problems. This is in part to assuage that they, the individual, aren't the problem. But it ignores that the problem isn't a specific individual most the time, but the culture, social heritage, and institutions that  were built on racist policies and practices and still hold a residue of the problem. It may ignore things as simple of low representation of racial and ethnic groups in numbers...that also ends up meaning low representation of views and perspective and experiences that differ from their own. And all of that is not really touched on when being viewed as colorblind or "not racist" is viewed as sufficient. A religious comparison would be assuming that getting baptised into the church is sufficient for one's spiritual journey. It's not....it's a bare minimum. 

This brings another problem....where colorblind means not-racist as in you don't hate others and believe generally in the principle of we're all brothers and sisters. Most people when we're trying to talk about racism assume that the people we're talking to don't hate brown or black folk. We assume they don't secretly nod at white nationalist talking points. But this is often said defensively in such a way that their own biases and problem spots in race issues continue to go unchecked. So here's an example that was told to me recently with a friend. I'll blur out some details for privacy. Theirs stake had a stake activity where they decided they wanted a representative dance from one of the specialty ward's culture represented. They had a specific picture in their mind as to what that culture looked like and acted like. They asked someone from the ward to do such. They agreed and asked/explained some common dances that they do for such events. The people involved asked if they'd wear something they'd seen before in other dances. He explained that they couldn't because that emblem had special meaning and only certain leaders in their community could wear it and only for special occasions (in which a stake activity definitely didn't count). So they decided to not have him dance and instead had a white guy dress up the way they pictured the culture in question and act out what they assumed was a normal dance for them. The ward members of this ethnic group got to sit and watch this uncomfortably at what the rest of the stake presumed was honoring their culture. This isn't a one off. I've heard stories similar to this more than once. This isn't the form of racism that fits under "hating others..." and it goes unadressed when all one needs is to be colorblind and to assume we're all basically the same and thus a white person can basically play out the role and represent another community. 

Another example that's more personal is with my mother. I think she would at the very least describe herself as not racist if not colorblind. She texted me after I'd made one or two posts on FB about george floyd and police brutality. After a fairly kind gesture towards me, she a day or two later sent me a video by candace owens and wanted to know what I thought about it, as she found it compelling I guess. I explained my problem with her (she's not representative of the vast majority of the black american communities thoughts was the basic gist), which she never responded to. She also asked me if I'd ever experienced racism, which surprised me. I answered yes, but the conversation I didn't have with her and the reason it took me aback, was that I'd experienced racism from her. Multiple times. Sometimes painfully and extremely personally. In just the last couple of years. She honestly didn't see it or understand it that way. And because her biases couldn't be confronted or recognized (she's shut down conversations about this or  gets defensive quick....which is common with a lot of "colorblind" people....but people in general I think) it never could get corrected and she couldn't fully see or understand my experiences in this arena. I love my mother. I love large swaths of my white, conservative, often mountain west family. But it is a simple fact for me that there are parts of my life they do no have access to and do not really see...no matter how long they've known me.

I know this doesn't answer all of these questions you had, but I hope it illustrates somewhat the problem. This may not seem directly tied to the more serious versions of racism....but they often tied and reflect cultural devaluations or misrepresentations of people that fuel other problems that are less innocuous. 

Quote

Talking about this in the context of "evidence" helps, as I'm a lawyer and utilize that framework a lot.  If we can expand on that framework, I'd like to understand what what the "claim" is for which you are presenting "evidence."  What are you trying to prove to a "colorblind" friend?

To be honest, it's actually a little harder for me to work in said framework. It's not my natural go-to. I'm an artist and gardner by passion and therapist for work. I don't think I'm necessarily trying to "prove" something to a colorblind friend, per se. I'm more likely trying to assert my experiences and explain why seeing color and cultures can be extremely important. 

Quote

 

I am not suggesting that the "court" framework can or ought to be applied stringently.  But it does help clear the air.  I'm reading what you are writing.  Closely.  I want to understand your position.  We're being told to talk about race/racism, so here we are.

I don't want to force any discussion that you don't want to have.  I am asking for information and explanation, not expecting or demanding such.

 

I didn't think you were. I volunteered to answer, knowing it may end up being more time consuming than I prefer. 

Quote

 

I see your point.  And I'm not sure one's personal life needs to be put on public display.  

But if we're supposed to be talking about race and racism, I think we need to get down to brass tacks.  For example, the article in the OP is notably vague about Mr. Aidoo:

If I were a BYU student, or if I worked at BYU in some capacity, I would read that and say to myself "Huh.  It sounds like this 'huge difference' in terms of experience at BYU was negative and unpleasant.  I would like to better understand what those negative experiences were.  But the article is silent."

Now, let's say that I took it a step further and privately contacted Mr. Aidoo, saying something like "I read the article about you in The Universe and appreciate your advocacy for anti-racism.  From the article it seemed that you had some unpleasant race-based or race-related experiences at BYU.  I'd like to better understand what happened so that we can improve the BYU environment at BYU.  Could you provide more information?"

In attempting to open such a discussion I am not looking for him to "'prove' an experience," just articulate it with more information and detail than what was provided in the in article (which, again, was quite vague).  I would like to understand his experience.  And then perhaps discuss some parts of it.  

And if he uses terms that you're not comfortable with to help explain his experience, such as white privilege or microagressions? I'm curious how you would see it from there. As someone who's had a few opportunities at this point to talk more than I normally would of my experiences (off-forum), I don't mind responding to people earnestly wanting to know about my experiences or how I view this or that around race and racism. I've been pleased to do so the times people have PM'd me or asked if they could share my experiences/thoughts with others. But my concern is when people move from asking for more details about my experiences, to insisting that what I experienced isn't really what I experienced. Or because they don't see it that way, it must not actually be that way. 

Quote

Sure.  Assumptions are applied to me as a Latter-day Saint, me as a Utahn, me as a white person, me as a lawyer, me as a male, me as an adult, me as a sociopolitically conservative person, and so on.

I'm assuming you mentioned these to connect with my experiences. Which I can understand....it's natural to do. But with all due respect there is a limit to that. You as a utahn who if I remember correctly lives (lived?) in UT county as an active Latter-day saint in a white collar career path and with political views that generally mirror a majority of the county may have moments or conversations that remind you of what I said. But the experiences I've had are more constant and obtrusive in an environment that I simply don't fit into (also UT county) and that I've had to carve out and actively seek space that's more comfortable for me to exist in. 

Quote

I also think that the "tak{ing} correction and input when needed" can, and should, be a two-way street.  I think white people would like their perspectives understood as well.  I think they become annoyed and frustrated with assumptions and stereotypes about them.  

I'm hesitant about this one. Not because I don't think white people shouldn't be heard. But moreso because without meaning to or knowing it, what they say and some of the inadvertent power they hold can shut down conversations about this. I've seen it happen. I've done it myself. Most PoC have learned that there are topics best talked about among ourselves. What's currently been happening in our society is an active breach in the usual protocol. People got tired of tip-toeing around the elephant in the room. 

My other concern is that without knowing it, on race conversations a lot of white people come at a distinct disadvantage. They've largely swum in a thought bubble. Most their friends are white, their lives are white, their experiences are white, and their closest relationships and conversations are with white people. I don't ever fault them for it, but it is what it is (and note, I didn't say all and most also have at least some exposure to different communities of color or at least individuals in said communities). So when they start talking about racial issues they're coming from a distinct disadvantage and limited information. IIN short, this isn't an equal conversation in knowledge base, experience, or lived effect and giving equal air time can actually be its own form of unequal.

Ironically I would see this the most at byu in a number of classes I took where I and the 2 other minority students in the classes would often become the unofficial experts on the topics the other white students were working to wrap their minds around. 

Quote

 

I guess when you said colorblindness "ignores social problems that maintain racial disparities," I took that as an imputation onto people who claim to be colorblind.  That these people are "ignor{ing} social problems that maintain racial disparities."

But I don't think that's necessarily the case.  I think a person can be "colorblind" and still cognizant of racial problems.  I think the individual can commit to and work hard at giving equal treatment and respect to people of different races, while still understanding that other people in society may not be doing that.

 

I've probably written enough to indicate why I disagree on this...but I disagree. In religious terms I think of it as similar to the concept of pride. Where it is easiest to note and see issues of pride in others....but it's harder to acknowledge and recognize issues of pride in oneself.  

 

With luv,

BD

[BlueDreams]

On 7/16/2020 at 2:25 PM, pogi said:

I do wonder if it is actually my skin color that privileges me, or if it is more my cultural traits that privilege me.  Even within cultures, there are micro cultures that may benefit or harm economic outlook. 

Does anyone disagree that different racial groups have different cultural traits (generally speaking)?

Does anyone disagree that our capitalist system rewards certain cultural traits more than others because they are more profitable?

Does anyone disagree that black Americans have different cultures from black Africans?  If white privilege was a thing, we would expect to see black Americans and black Africans equally deprivileged when compared to white Americans. But if the privilege favored culture over color, then we would expect to see diversity in economic success between the two black groups, and even between white groups of different cultures.  And we do:

Furthermore:

Why are black haired and brown skinned groups outperforming white-privilege?  How is that possible unless the system favored cultural traits instead of color?

The quotes are from the following article.  I think it makes some really compelling points.  What do y'all think?

https://nypost.com/2020/07/11/the-fallacy-of-white-privilege-and-how-its-corroding-society/

While I don't doubt that there is racism, and maybe even systemic in some systems.  Is the overall economic success we see in different cultural groups really due to the color of their skin, or is it due to the profitability of their cultural traits (generally speaking)?

Race and culture definitely overlap....and having cultural experiences that work in the US where specific european cultures dominated standard practices would definitely lead to an advantage. BUT there is a limit to this and economic success is only one measure of privilege in the US. 

For example my bio-dad is nigerian by birth. So he didn't have the same cultural baggage and disadvantage that black americans faced. His american journey started in his 20's and to get here, he also had to be extremely resilient and scrappy in the first place. Most of his siblings still live in Nigeria and several simply didn't have the potential opportunity to move here. That in and of itself is a sifting process that makes the comparisons a little uneven. 

Fast forward a bit and my father lives a very comfortable life. He lives in a middle-upper middle class home. He's received a college education, and his children received good educations. But that doesn't mean he doesn't have a reduced experience of privilege in his community and a fair share of prejudice. It just means he's financially privileged at this point in his life (not when he was living in a warehouse). There are different forms of privilege and one form of privilege doesn't necessarily cancel out others.

 

With Luv,

BD 

 

[Danzo]

On 7/17/2020 at 11:07 AM, pogi said:

 

I think it would be a sad day when we stopped noticing diversity in cultures and peoples and became truly color-blind (not just to skin color but to culture).   

 

 

When using terms like "Asian Americans" you actually stop notice diversity and replacing it with a simple term that ignores culture.

Asia is a very big continent with many diverse languages, cultures, countries and ethnicity. 

Its an entire continent for Pete,s Sake! The most populated continent in the world!

There are a huge amount of countries Russia, Iran, China, Indonesia, Thailand, Mongolia, Israel, Turkey, Japan, India, just to name a few. Many different regions and cultures. 

Simplifying all of these to some overreaching "asian" means that you are at that sad day when you stop noticing diversity in cultures and peoples.

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Danzo

[Meadowchik]

On 7/17/2020 at 12:49 AM, Amulek said:

https://policy.byu.edu/view/index.php?p=26 [emphasis added]

Brigham Young University and other Church Educational System institutions exist to provide an education in an atmosphere consistent with the ideals and principles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That atmosphere is created and preserved by a community of faculty, administration, staff, and students who voluntarily commit to conduct their lives in accordance with the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ and who strive to maintain the highest standards in their personal conduct regarding honor, integrity, morality, and consideration of others. By accepting appointment, continuing in employment, being admitted, or continuing class enrollment, each member of the BYU community personally commits to observe these Honor Code standards approved by the Board of Trustees “at all times and in all things, and in all places” (Mosiah 18:9):

• Be honest.
• Live a chaste and virtuous life, including abstaining from any sexual relations outside a marriage between a man and a woman.
• Respect others, including the avoidance of profane and vulgar language.
• Obey the law and follow campus policies.
• Abstain from alcoholic beverages, tobacco, tea, coffee, vaping, and substance abuse.
• Participate regularly in Church services (required only of Church members).
• Observe Brigham Young University’s Dress and Grooming Standards.
• Encourage others in their commitment to comply with the Honor Code.

 

Do you have any evidence to suggest that students attending BYU think it's okay to be racist?

 

If you say so. That wasn't my experience though. 

I attended BYU in the late 90's - early 00's (back when we had a good football team), and I was never taught any 'racist ideas.' YMMV.

 

I was there at the same time Helaman Halls 95-96. Listening to Black students who also there then and more recently, it does sound like they experienced racism while there.

[Meadowchik]

On 7/16/2020 at 11:18 PM, smac97 said:

That wasn't Nephi.  See 1 Nephi 4:13.  And it was a prospective statement on what would happen if Nephi did not obtain the brass plates.  And I believe the angel was telling the truth.  

"But slavery not?"  Where are you getting that idea?

Thanks,

-Smac

It was Nephi's testimony of what he says he was told. 

My question responds to your denial of the generational impact of slavery: 

"I reject the notion that the sole cause of "the average Black American{'s} ... plight" is what happened to his great-great-great-great-grandparents.

I just don't buy that."

I don't think anyone is saying it is the sole cause, but that it is severe enough to be a major cause for existing institutional and social structures.

[smac97]

2 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

It was Nephi's testimony of what he says he was told. 

My question responds to your denial of the generational impact of slavery: 

Quote

If we studied the prosperity of the average black American compared to the average white American, at what point after the civil war was the Black American responsible for his or her own plight?

"I reject the notion that the sole cause of "the average Black American{'s} ... plight" is what happened to his great-great-great-great-grandparents.

I just don't buy that."

I don't think anyone is saying it is the sole cause, but that it is severe enough to be a major cause for existing institutional and social structures.

I still have a hard time with that.  I think the Civil Rights Act went a very long way is dismantling "institutional ... structures" that treated people differently (in employment, education, housing, commerce, etc.) based on race.

I don't know what you mean by "social structures."

A big problem with these sorts of the discussions is the persistent and stubborn vagueness of the claims.  We don't really get into a level of specificity and detail such as could allow for reasoned discussion, empirical analysis, etc.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

Here's an interesting perspective:

Quote

'My Nigerian great-grandfather sold slaves'
19 July 2020

Amid the global debate about race relations, colonialism and slavery, some of the Europeans and Americans who made their fortunes in trading human beings have seen their legacies reassessed, their statues toppled and their names removed from public buildings.

Nigerian journalist and novelist Adaobi Tricia Nwaubani writes that one of her ancestors sold slaves, but argues that he should not be judged by today's standards or values.

I'm not sure we can completely divorce our views of historical events and persons from "today's standards or values."  Nevertheless, there is some value in construing past events in their historical context.  Not to justify, but rather to understand.

Quote

My great-grandfather, Nwaubani Ogogo Oriaku, was what I prefer to call a businessman, from the Igbo ethnic group of south-eastern Nigeria. He dealt in a number of goods, including tobacco and palm produce. He also sold human beings.

"He had agents who captured slaves from different places and brought them to him," my father told me.

Nwaubani Ogogo's slaves were sold through the ports of Calabar and Bonny in the south of what is today known as Nigeria.

People from ethnic groups along the coast, such as the Efik and Ijaw, usually acted as stevedores for the white merchants and as middlemen for Igbo traders like my great-grandfather.

They loaded and offloaded ships and supplied the foreigners with food and other provisions. They negotiated prices for slaves from the hinterlands, then collected royalties from both the sellers and buyers.

Should Ms. Nsaubani be condemned for the actions of her GGF? 

Are all people of African ancestry to be condemned because some of their ancestors were active participants in the slave trade?

Quote

About 1.5 million Igbo slaves were shipped across the Atlantic Ocean between the 15th and 19th Centuries.

More than 1.5 million Africans were shipped to what was then called the New World - the Americas - through the Calabar port, in the Bight of Bonny, making it one of the largest points of exit during the transatlantic trade.

It has been my understanding for a while now that, per the above graphic, the vast majority of slaves were not transported to the United States.  See, e.g., here:

Quote

The most comprehensive analysis of shipping records over the course of the slave trade is the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database, edited by professors David Eltis and David Richardson. (While the editors are careful to say that all of their figures are estimates, I believe that they are the best estimates that we have, the proverbial “gold standard” in the field of the study of the slave trade.) Between 1525 and 1866, in the entire history of the slave trade to the New World, according to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database, 12.5 million Africans were shipped to the New World. 10.7 million survived the dreaded Middle Passage, disembarking in North America, the Caribbean and South America.

And how many of these 10.7 million Africans were shipped directly to North America? Only about 388,000. That’s right: a tiny percentage.

This certainly does not excuse the practice of slavery in the United States.  But it does cast some reasonable doubt on the near-total focus on slavery as something white Americans did.

Slavery is a human sin.  It is far from being a unique and exclusive wrong committed by antebellum white folks.

Anyway, back to the article:

Quote

The only life they knew

Nwaubani Ogogo lived in a time when the fittest survived and the bravest excelled. The concept of "all men are created equal" was completely alien to traditional religion and law in his society.

It would be unfair to judge a 19th Century man by 21st Century principles.

Assessing the people of Africa's past by today's standards would compel us to cast the majority of our heroes as villains, denying us the right to fully celebrate anyone who was not influenced by Western ideology.

This is an interesting statement.  The slave trade involved white Europeans and Arabs buying slaves from black Africans.  See, e.g., here:

Quote

In East Africa a slave trade was well established before the Europeans arrived on the scene. It was driven by the sultanates of the Middle East. African slaves ended up as sailors in Persia, pearl divers in the Gulf, soldiers in the Omani army and workers on the salt pans of Mesopotamia (modern Iraq). Many people were domestic slaves, working in rich households. Women were taken as sex slaves.

Arab traders began to settle among the Africans of the coast, resulting in the emergence of a people and culture known as Swahili. In the second half of the 18th century, the slave trade expanded and became more organised. There was also a huge demand for ivory, and slaves were used as porters to carry it.
...
There were three main reasons why more slaves were required:

1. The clove plantations on Zanzibar and Pemba set up by Sultan Seyyid Said, needed labour.

2. Brazilian traders were finding it difficult to operate in West Africa because the British navy was intercepting slave ships. The Brazilians made the journey round the Cape of Good Hope, taking slaves from the Zambezi valley and Mozambique.

3. The French had started up sugar and coffee plantations in Mauritius and Reunion.

A number of different people -Arabs and Africans - were involved in supplying slaves from the interior, as well as transporting ivory. They included:

• the prazeros, descendants of Portuguese and Africans, operating along the Zambezi,
• the Yao working North East of the Zambezi
• the Makua operating East of the Yao, closer to the coast
• the Nyamwezi (or Yeke) operating further north around Lake Tanganyika under the leadership of Msiri and Mirambo, who established a trading and raiding state in the 1850's which linked up with the Ovimbundu in what is now modern Angola

The most famous trader of all was Tippu Tip, (Hamed bin Mohammed) a Swahili Arab son of a trader, and grandson of an African slave. He was born in Zanzibar of African Arab parentage and went on to establish a base West of Lake Tanganyika, linking up with Msiri. He and his men operated in an area stretching over a thousand miles from inland to the coast.

Again, slavery is far from being a sin unique to antebellum white Americans.

Back to the article first linked above:

Quote

Igbo slave traders like my great-grandfather did not suffer any crisis of social acceptance or legality. They did not need any religious or scientific justifications for their actions. They were simply living the life into which they were raised.

That was all they knew.

"That was all they knew."

Can we use that to contextualize slavery?  Should we use that to contextualize slavery?

Quote

Slaves buried alive

The most popular story I've heard about my great-grandfather was how he successfully confronted officials of the British colonial government after they seized some of his slaves.

The slaves were being transported by middlemen, along with a consignment of tobacco and palm produce, from Nwaubani Ogogo's hometown of Umuahia to the coast.

My great-grandfather apparently did not consider it fair that his slaves had been seized.

Buying and selling of human beings among the Igbo had been going on long before the Europeans arrived. People became slaves as punishment for crime, payment for debts, or prisoners of war.

The successful sale of adults was considered an exploit for which a man was hailed by praise singers, akin to exploits in wrestling, war, or in hunting animals like the lion.

Igbo slaves served as domestic servants and labourers. They were sometimes also sacrificed in religious ceremonies and buried alive with their masters to attend to them in the next world.
...
The arrival of European merchants offering guns, mirrors, gin, and other exotic goods in exchange for humans massively increased demand, leading people to kidnap others and sell them.

And yet the supply long predated "[t]he arrival of European merchants."

Quote

Resisting abolition

The trade in African people continued until 1888, when Brazil became the last country in the Western hemisphere to abolish it.

When the British extended their rule to south-eastern Nigeria in the late 19th Century and early 20th Century, they began to enforce abolition through military action.

But by using force rather than persuasion, many local people such as my great-grandfather may not have understood that abolition was about the dignity of humankind and not a mere change in economic policy that affected demand and supply.

"We think this trade must go on," one local king in Bonny {in present-day Nigeria} infamously said in the 19th Century.

Quote

"That is the verdict of our oracle and our priests. They say that your country, however great, can never stop a trade ordained by God."

As far as my great-grandfather was concerned, he had a bona fide trading licence from the Royal Niger Company, a British company that administered commerce in the region in the last quarter of the 19th Century.

So when his property was seized, an aggrieved Nwaubani Ogogo boldly went to see the colonial officers responsible and presented them with his licence. They released his goods, and his slaves.

"The white people apologised to him," my father said.

White people apologized to a black man for seizing his slaves, and released those slaves back to him.

Quote

Slave trade in the 20th Century

Acclaimed Igbo historian Adiele Afigbo described the slave trade in south-eastern Nigeria which lasted until the late 1940s and early 1950s as one of the best kept secrets of the British colonial administration.

While the international trade ended, the local trade continued.

"The government was aware of the fact that the coastal chiefs and the major coastal traders had continued to buy slaves from the interior," wrote Afigbo in The Abolition of the Slave Trade in Southern Nigeria: 1885 to 1950.

He added that the British tolerated the ongoing trade on political and economic grounds.

They needed the slave-trading chiefs for effective local governance, and for the expansion and growth of legitimate trade.

Sometimes, they also turned a blind eye rather than jeopardise a useful alliance, as seems to have been the case when they returned Nwaubani Ogogo's slaves.

That incident deified Nwaubani Ogogo among his people. Here was a man who successfully confronted the white powers from overseas. I have heard the story from relatives, and have read about it.

It was also the beginning of a relationship of mutual respect with the colonialists that led to Nwaubani Ogogo being appointed a paramount chief by the British administration.

He was the government's representative to the people in his region, in a system known as indirect rule.

The Brits "tolerated the ongoing trade" of slaves by Africans of other Africans.  This continued into my father's lifetime (1950!).

Ogogo was "deified" for his success in demanding, and receiving back, his slaves seized by the Brits.

Quote

In December 2017, a church in Okaiuga in Abia State of south-eastern Nigeria was celebrating its centenary and invited my family to receive a posthumous award on his behalf.

Their records showed that he had provided an armed escort for the first missionaries in the area.

My great-grandfather was renowned for his business prowess, outstanding boldness, strong leadership, vast influence, immense contributions to society, and advancement of Christianity.

The Igbo do not have a culture of erecting monuments to their heroes - otherwise one dedicated to him might have stood somewhere in the Umuahia region today.

"He was respected by everyone around," my father said. "Even the white people respected him."

Slavery was (and is) a terrible thing.  It is also a complex thing.  It is also not a wrong exclusively practiced by white antebellum Americans.

Thanks,

-Smac

[bluebell]

42 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Here's an interesting perspective:

I'm not sure we can completely divorce our views of historical events and persons from "today's standards or values."  Nevertheless, there is some value in construing past events in their historical context.  Not to justify, but rather to understand.

Should Ms. Nsaubani be condemned for the actions of her GGF? 

Are all people of African ancestry to be condemned because some of their ancestors were active participants in the slave trade?

It has been my understanding for a while now that, per the above graphic, the vast majority of slaves were not transported to the United States.  See, e.g., here:

This certainly does not excuse the practice of slavery in the United States.  But it does cast some reasonable doubt on the near-total focus on slavery as something white Americans did.

Slavery is a human sin.  It is far from being a unique and exclusive wrong committed by antebellum white folks.

Anyway, back to the article:

This is an interesting statement.  The slave trade involved white Europeans and Arabs buying slaves from black Africans.  See, e.g., here:

Again, slavery is far from being a sin unique to antebellum white Americans.

Back to the article first linked above:

"That was all they knew."

Can we use that to contextualize slavery?  Should we use that to contextualize slavery?

And yet the supply long predated "[t]he arrival of European merchants."

White people apologized to a black man for seizing his slaves, and released those slaves back to him.

The Brits "tolerated the ongoing trade" of slaves by Africans of other Africans.  This continued into my father's lifetime (1950!).

Ogogo was "deified" for his success in demanding, and receiving back, his slaves seized by the Brits.

Slavery was (and is) a terrible thing.  It is also a complex thing.  It is also not a wrong exclusively practiced by white antebellum Americans.

Thanks,

-Smac

If slavery, and racism with it, had truly ended in 1865 this topic really would be a historical issue and nothing more in the US today.

That’s why slavery of blacks by blacks is a different can of worms than slavery of blacks by whites.  It has created a different legacy in their society, one not shaped by racism for hundreds of years, like it has in ours. 

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Here's an interesting perspective:

I'm not sure we can completely divorce our views of historical events and persons from "today's standards or values."  Nevertheless, there is some value in construing past events in their historical context.  Not to justify, but rather to understand.

Should Ms. Nsaubani be condemned for the actions of her GGF? 

Are all people of African ancestry to be condemned because some of their ancestors were active participants in the slave trade?

It has been my understanding for a while now that, per the above graphic, the vast majority of slaves were not transported to the United States.  See, e.g., here:

This certainly does not excuse the practice of slavery in the United States.  But it does cast some reasonable doubt on the near-total focus on slavery as something white Americans did.

Slavery is a human sin.  It is far from being a unique and exclusive wrong committed by antebellum white folks.

Anyway, back to the article:

This is an interesting statement.  The slave trade involved white Europeans and Arabs buying slaves from black Africans.  See, e.g., here:

Again, slavery is far from being a sin unique to antebellum white Americans.

Back to the article first linked above:

"That was all they knew."

Can we use that to contextualize slavery?  Should we use that to contextualize slavery?

And yet the supply long predated "[t]he arrival of European merchants."

White people apologized to a black man for seizing his slaves, and released those slaves back to him.

The Brits "tolerated the ongoing trade" of slaves by Africans of other Africans.  This continued into my father's lifetime (1950!).

Ogogo was "deified" for his success in demanding, and receiving back, his slaves seized by the Brits.

Slavery was (and is) a terrible thing.  It is also a complex thing.  It is also not a wrong exclusively practiced by white antebellum Americans.

Thanks,

-Smac

Blacks owning Black slaves was also practiced here in the USA throughout the south. This fact further complicates the entire discussion about reparations and who would pay for those reparations. 

I have stated repeatedly that slavery has been and continues to be practiced throughout the world. Every people, race, and culture has been enslaved at some point. Throughout the world today, American Blacks are the only group that continues to play the victim. I know that sounds harsh, but I don't know how to state it in a better way. 

I remember reading an article about the Jewish people. They represent a people that has been persecuted for thousands of years wherever they have lived. Yet, they continue to succeed. If Nobel prizes are a sign of success, then the Jewish people have excelled.  Nobel Prizes have been awarded to over 900 individuals, of whom at least 20% were Jews although the Jewish population comprises less than 0.2% of the world's population.  How does one group excel so well and others only assess blame on others for the condition of their people?  

In the past week I listened to several commentators discuss how terrible the US was to the Black people; in particular, the abuse of the police and their racist murders of unarmed Black individuals. Not a single one of them discussed that more unarmed Whites were killed by Police than Blacks - if the Police were so racist why are any unarmed Whites dying?  

I have also stated that this subject is far more complex than just blaming White people and the police. This is a topic that Blacks need to handle first - without blaming anyone else - and address reasons for not excelling in school, having single parent households, incarceration rates, parenting, and child expectations.