Increasing state-authorized/Mandated segregation

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

Pin the Post on the Ahab.

I thought about writing up something substantive which might contribute to the discussion but I don't feel like it right now so it's Mormon Dialogue comedy time. 

I have grandkids over, so light and short posts are all for tonight. 

[Vanguard]

9 hours ago, smac97 said:

I would like to discuss what we as individuals, and as members of the Church, do to address and correct these things.  Certainly there are legal and political options available (I'd rather not discuss them here), but are there additional things we can do as private individuals?  As members of the Church?

Individually, we can't do much on a more global basis. I do not buy into the narrative so much that all of these efforts (as you have listed) should be made in order to eventually rectify the past grievances. Take heart - there are many distinguished folks both black and white who also do not agree with what is happening and their voices are being heard - Thomas Sowell, Glen Lowery, John McWhorter, Coleman Hughes, Shelby Steele, and the list goes on. As for me, I will continue treating my black friends the way I always have. The Gospel provides an excellent foundation for approaching everyone in the manner they should be approached. As for my own anecdote, just a few weeks ago I was compelled at lunch to ask my Latino friend whether he has experienced any type of racism in his life. I took pains to make him understand that I wanted the truth from him regardless of what that truth might be. He unequivocally claimed he had not experienced anything like what he had read in the media or seen in his primarily Latino community. It's almost like there are two parallel universes marching forward - those ethnic minorities who feel to some degree (and some to a great degree!) that something must be done and those minorities who believe enough has been done.

I also believe that many stats - though admittedly not all of them - showing harm or discrepancies do not take into consideration socio-economic status. I perused Calm's link on the mortality rate for Black babies. There were two things I wondered - 1) Could it be that Black mothers-to-be were not as open with their White MDs thereby putting them at risk for problems?, and 2) How do the stats stack up against the mortality rate for lower socio-economic Whites. This to me would be more illuminating rather than using the stats from all Whites. Though I can't claim it was not addressed in the article, I do wonder.

Bottom line - speak up in defense of our Black friends when it is painfully obvious an injustice is occurring and continue being a voice of inspiration, camaraderie, and support for them when it isn't clear whether there be an injustice or not.

Edit: I should add that I am a big supporter of Pastor Corey Brooks out of Chicago. He runs a large congregration in the Southside and is openly conservative. His is an inspiration and I highly recommend everyone look him up to see what he is ACTUALLY DOING to help. He runs Project H.O.O.D. - a community based organization to help out the black underprivileged in his own neighborhood. He has BIG dreams - check him out. : )

Edited June 5, 2021 by Vanguard

[CV75]

10 hours ago, smac97 said:

I have long appreciated that the Church local congregations are largely determined by geography.  The Church does have "language" wards (our stake as a "Spanish" ward and a "Japanese" ward), but anyone can attend. 

The Church also has "Polynesian" wards that are, as I understand it, not based on "language" but on broad shared cultural/ethnic bonds.  These are something of an anomaly in the Church, but I think they persist because, well, they tend to be very effect.  My sister-in-law is from Samoa, so my brother - a haole - has for many years attended a Polynesian ward.  In fact, he is currently the bishop of the ward.

I'm not sure what the criteria are for getting records transferred to a Polynesian ward.  My sense is that the rules are somewhat lax.  We had a young man in our ward transfer his records to a local Polynesian ward for a while.  He is not Polynesian and has never lived in the islands.  But he had some Poly friends and they appeared to have an influence on him.

Anyway, there is not, in my view, race-based segregation in the Church.  I have been in my ward for 15 years, and have seen people of many, many different racial/ethnic/cultural backgrounds cycle through (I live near BYU in Provo, so we have a lot of turnover).

I am, however, concerned about the return of segregation in other segments of society.  But where old-school "segregation" favored and privileged white people, the current trend goes in other directions.

Race-based "Hang-outs" and "Safe Spaces":

• Beloit College creates blacks-only space for students to hang out.
• Black Student Union demands segregated safe spaces ‘on and off campus.’
• University promotes students’ demands, including ‘Black Student Space’ on campus.
• UVA students affirm that white people should avoid coming to campus multicultural center.
• Princeton students complain about white peers ‘invading’ ‘POC places.’
• Students demand ‘POC-only space’ at NYC university.

Race-based healthcare:

• Harvard-affiliated physicians want to deliver ‘preferential care based on race.’
• The Secret to Keeping Black Men Healthy? Maybe Black Doctors.
• Race and ethnicity may be deciding factors in essential workers getting vaccine prioritization.

Race-based housing and roommate selection:

• Bates College offers housing exclusively for ‘womxn of color.’
• American University announces ‘Black Affinity Housing’: Other universities across the nation have instituted similar segregated housing plans.
• Marquette explores blacks-only housing plan, hate speech punishment.
• Loyola University Chicago explores blacks-only freshman housing plan.
• New York University moves to implement racial segregation in student dorms.
• Women Plan All-Black Community in Georgia After ‘400 Years of Racial Oppression.’
• Students demand segregated ‘Black House’ so they can ‘feel included.’
• Students demand ability to select roommate based on race during days-long sit-in.
• Public university provides exclusive housing for women, black, LGBT students.
• NC State admin proposes exclusive housing for ‘women of color.’
• Williams College student newspaper demands segregated housing.
• SUNY Geneseo announces new dorm ‘for Students of Color.’

Race-based grading and selection of teachers/students:

• U. of Iowa groups demand black professors be given priority to teach some literature classes.
• Iowa State professor says she limits interactions with white people ‘as much as possible.’
• UCLA removes lecturer for questioning proposal to give black students preferential grading.
• Students call for laxed grading for black students. University goes along with it.
• CU-Boulder hosts minority-only STEM career development retreat.
• PSU women’s center holds meetings ‘solely’ for minority students.
• Whites need not apply: Campus sci-tech symposium to only feature scholars of color.
• Stanford pushes separate physics course for minority students.

Race-based student orientations and graduation ceremonies:

• University of New Hampshire hosted special graduation celebration for ‘Students of Color’ and other ‘diverse’ identities.
• Columbia University hosting 6 separate graduation ceremonies based on income level, race, ethnicities.
• University offers ten separate orientations for Native Americans, black students, others.
• More than 75 universities now host blacks-only graduation ceremonies.

Race-based student events and training/educational opportunities:

• No whites welcome at this university’s ‘Racial Trauma Yoga’ session.
• A student organization at Scripps College will host a pool party Friday night exclusively for people of color, clearly stating that there are “no whites allowed.”
• ‘Student success’ conference at Michigan State to segregate participants by skin color.
• ‘Sex Week’ at Tulane University features ‘Black Sex’ talk for ‘Black students only.’
• University of Kentucky promotes segregated ‘racial healing circles.’
• University of Florida students receive invitation to segregated town hall.
• Catholic university runs two ‘healing circles’… one for ‘White allies,’ one for ‘Black folks.’
• Maryland private academy to hold blacks-only social justice event.
• Department of Education investigating Portland State for banning whites from ‘feminist’ gathering.
• CU-Boulder hosts minority-only STEM career development retreat.
• PSU women’s center holds meetings ‘solely’ for minority students.
• Whites need not apply: Campus sci-tech symposium to only feature scholars of color.
• Stanford pushes separate physics course for minority students.
• S.F. “Basic Income” Program for Pregnant Women—But Women of the Wrong Races Need Not Apply. “Only black and Pacific Islander women are eligible — almost certainly aviolation of the Equal Protection Clause.”

Race-based "training" sessions:

• Minnesota college forces faculty to attend racially segregated anti-racism trainings.
• Public university hosts workshop for whites only — and ‘other practitioners’ of racial bias.
• Elite private school hosts racially segregated ‘dialogue sessions’ with parents, teachers.
• University offers whites-only space for students to learn how they oppress nonwhites. Nonwhite students get ‘healing’ space instead.
• Seattle held ‘segregated’ training session on ‘undoing whiteness,’ encouraged staffers to forfeit ‘guaranteed physical safety.’

Obviously there is some nuance and differentiation to be applied here, but in broad strokes these trends are pretty troubling.  

Much of the rot seems to be coming from college campuses and government.  In other words, from power structures and institutions.  

I would like to discuss what we as individuals, and as members of the Church, do to address and correct these things.  Certainly there are legal and political options available (I'd rather not discuss them here), but are there additional things we can do as private individuals?  As members of the Church?

Thanks,

-Smac

 

 

The vast majority of these articles (I did notice the NYT article) are from conservative news organizations, not that there's anything inherently wrong with that...   But this approach, I think, encourages someone else to counter with a few dozen articles from liberal news sources. And there are more non-partisan, neutral news sources out there as well that are probably a better representation of what is going on than either of the other two.

I find the reactionary polarization from the "more sensitive" persons -- Black or white -- more troubling than experiments in and discussion over how to better establish, use and expand the role of "safe spaces" in preparing marginalized people for more general, public participation and dialog. I believe this would involve elements of support, recovery and advocacy groups, with an eye toward collaboration between historically separate groups (like the Church and NAACP have begun to do -- I think a service and education emphasis confirms our common humanity better than anything else).

We find many examples in the Book of Mormon of marginalized and victimized groups accomplishing this (Zoramites, anti-Lehi-Nephites, etc.). These groups had very unique experiences with which they identified and by which they defined themselves. Race is another, very unique experience of Black people in America (and other groups are also making their unique race-related experience  known). White Americans generally do not understand what it is to have to consciously carry the color of their skin as a societal liability -- whatever other disadvantages they, the white people, may have as individuals. This lack of understanding is no more intentional than the identity Black people adopt from their birth.

President Nelson (and others) has counseled private individuals to reach and out and get to know people different from themselves. President Oaks has done the same, emphasizing loving those of different political leanings as well as races, and the role of the various divinely inspired principles of our Constitution in softening hearts and intentionally expanding opportunities to realize the aims delineated in the Preamble to all Americans.

ETA: Another thing I think we can do is find various articles on what we can do to improve race relations, from reliable sources. Prayerful pondering will invite the Holy Spirit to guide us.

Edited June 5, 2021 by CV75

[Dan McClellan]

8 hours ago, smac97 said:

I think it's pretty clear that there is "discrimination against white folks" going on.

Every last word of this hangs on the blithe rejection of the absolutely indisputable reality of widespread systemic power asymmetries.

You have to pretend there are no such power imbalances for any notion of "discrimination against white people" to mean anything at all, but since those power imbalances are simply a fact, you're basically spouting rhetorical prophylaxis for white supremacy by insisting the steps necessary to dismantle it would just be too unfair to white people.

And your appeal to ridicule doesn't really work.

Quote

 

I don't know what this means.

And it comes across as a strawman.

And it presupposes that which has yet to be demonstrated.

And what's thie "our interests" versus the interests "of minorities?"

 

I'll give you two examples. (1) "Our interests" are the 300 pieces of legislation written by almost unilaterally white state legislatures across this country in the past year that seek explicitly––openly––to disenfranchise minority voters. (2) "Our interests" are also unilaterally white legislative bodies in Utah writing resolutions and passing rules given to them by white right wing authoritarians that ludicrously frame critical race theory as outright racism and then seek to ban it, all while ignoring the terror this is subjecting on minorities in light of the fact that CRT is one of the keys to understanding how systemic racism works and then dismantling it.  

I prepared a response to the rest of your post, but I get the sense you're not going to engage honestly or in good faith. I'd love for you to prove me wrong, so I'm saving my response. I want to see if you blithely appeal to RWA, SDO, and CBRI in an attempt at rhetorical prophylaxis for white power structures or if you're going to actually engage the data with something approximating a critical perspective.

[Dan McClellan]

8 hours ago, smac97 said:

Imagine if this was a white person: 

No, because this a rhetorical ploy that is based on the idiotic assertion of a level playing field. Every time you say "Imagine if a white person said that," you're saying, "we can switch these roles, and none of the power dynamics would change, so if it sounds racist for a white person to say it, then it is obviously racist for a Black person to say it." This is the flagrant rejection of systemic power asymmetries. White folks have safe spaces all over the country. I can go months on end without ever seeing a Black person, much less have them invade a space I'm occupying, hijack a conversation, or insert their perspectives. They do not have that privilege, and particularly in places like most universities, and when they try to assert that privilege that we can enjoy without even having to think about it, they get demonized by folks who remain willfully blind to that power imbalance. It's the privileging of white perspectives over minority because it asserts that the overwhelming consensuses not just of minorities, but of the fields of study that look at race and racism, are all wrong, while the white assertions are just arbitrarily right. This is textbook social dominance orientation and colorblind racial ideology. It is literally white supremacy because it's insisting that white folks are the ones who get to dictate the terms and the premises. 

[Dan McClellan]

7 hours ago, smac97 said:

You seem to be conflating race with socioeconomic status.  I don't think that works.

Ah, so it's not relevant that the average white family has more than 10 times the wealth of the average Black family? It's not relevant that the structures put in place a century ago to support and perpetuate segregation continue to do their jobs phenomenally well? It's not relevant that redlining maps from the 1930s are still overwhelmingly accurate predictors of where white folks and minorities will live? You know, the GOP certainly seemed to think conflating race with socioeconomic status "works." I mean, that was one of the foundations of their Southern Strategy, as Lee Atwater, one of the architects of that strategy, explicitly explained:

Quote

You start out in 1954 by saying, “N****r, n****er, n****r.” By 1968 you can’t say “n****r”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “N****r, n****r.”

 

[Dan McClellan]

7 hours ago, smac97 said:

I don't like the idea of race-based privileges. 

Then why are you fighting so hard to protect yours?

[rodheadlee]

2 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

You apparently have the ability to cut your hair. 

Yeah but i choose not to. In solidarity with my brothers. Say you don't think that influences my ability to get a TR , do ya? I actually did cut it last month for the first time in years. Not to short though. I wouldn't want to get a redneck. 

[Dan McClellan]

Quote

 

The biggest threat to black people is . . . other black people.  

-Smac

 

Wow, this is wildly false, deeply stupid, and profoundly racist. You're appealing to the fact that the overwhelming majority of people responsible for the murders of Black folks are other Black folks, and you acknowledge that most white murders are committed by other white folks. You know why? Because murders tend to take place among people who live near each other, and segregation still has its claws deep in this nation. You know, there was a reason they built highways and interstates to split the projects off from the wealthier white neighborhoods. You know what is a much stronger predictor of violent crime than race? Urban poverty. Poor urban white communities experience the same rates as poor urban Black communities, but there are far more poor urban Black communities because we did such a good job ensuring Black folks stayed poor and stayed on the bad side of town. Now, am I responsible for the people who did that? Absolutely not. The effects are still very active, though, and I benefit from them, and I am absolutely responsible for what I do about that power imbalance. That's really the lynchpin to understanding why so many people laugh out loud at people who insist white people are being held responsible for the sins of others. Nothing could be further from the truth. No one says that. What we are responsible for is what we do about the system as it exists now. Are we going to defend and perpetuate it, or are we going to dismantle it. I've made an informed decision. You appear increasingly committed to a dogmatic one. 

Edited June 5, 2021 by Dan McClellan

[Dan McClellan]

7 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

Excellent post. These "reform" websites seem to be about deflecting attention away from entrenched racism. Black people face constant discrimination in many aspects of life? Who cares? Harvard has a "safe space" for black students! The horror!

White folks have never once had to think about the fact that the overwhelming majority of us can entirely isolate ourselves from Black folks without a single thought. "Black folks should not be allowed to have spaces that I am not allowed to invade and hijack" is just such a bafflingly stupid and racist thing to say.

[Dan McClellan]

Also, because it's definitely relevant here, Christian nationalism is white supremacy, and it's not where we will find the right answers to these social ills. It is built on right wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and colorblind racial ideology. If you don't know what those technical terms mean, educate yourself.

[provoman]

10 hours ago, Dan McClellan said:

and colorblind racial ideology for the gospel. 

Are you suggesting that God and or the Gospel  are respecter of persons? Are you also suggesting that God and or Gospel regard skin tone? 

 

President Russell M. Nelson declared: ‘The Lord has stressed his essential doctrine of equal opportunity for his children. … Differences in culture, language, gender, race, and nationality fade into insignificance as the faithful enter the covenant path and come unto our beloved Redeemer’ 

 

[provoman]

35 minutes ago, Dan McClellan said:

White folks have never once had to think about the fact that the overwhelming majority of us can entirely isolate ourselves from Black folks without a single thought. "Black folks should not be allowed to have spaces that I am not allowed to invade and hijack" is just such a bafflingly stupid and racist thing to say.

 

How can society eliminate racism and promote harmony; not being racist is a start. Yet you and many loud vocal others promote segregation and racism (sure rewrite 'racism' to mean only those in power can be racist) as though it is a virtue.

 

Edited June 5, 2021 by provoman

[rodheadlee]

31 minutes ago, Dan McClellan said:

White folks have never once had to think about the fact that the overwhelming majority of us can entirely isolate ourselves from Black folks without a single thought. "Black folks should not be allowed to have spaces that I am not allowed to invade and hijack" is just such a bafflingly stupid and racist thing to say.

I'm really curious as to where you live and where you have lived and if you've been to the big city like LA or New York or Detroit or anything?

There are entire sections where white people don't go. Not if you value your health. That's the only part of town I had to carry a 10 mm in my nail bags to build stairs.

[Dan McClellan]

2 minutes ago, provoman said:

Are you suggesting that God and or the Gospel  are respecter of persons? Are you also suggesting that God and or Gospel regard skin tone? 

 

President Russell M. Nelson declared: ‘The Lord has stressed his essential doctrine of equal opportunity for his children. … Differences in culture, language, gender, race, and nationality fade into insignificance as the faithful enter the covenant path and come unto our beloved Redeemer’ 

 

The notion that our goal of achieving true colorblindness as followers of Christ means we must also *IGNORE* the *INDISPUTABLE REALITY* of widespread systemic racism around this country at the hands of the hundreds of millions of other Americans who hold to no such ideal is just absolutely laughable, and that's not counting the significant portion of American Latter-day Saints who openly promoted nationalism, bigotry, jingoism, and xenophobia over the course of the previous administration and to this day, and so clearly are not living up to President Nelson's ideal. Maybe go learn what colorblind racial ideology actually is before just blithely spouting quotes from President Nelson. 

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

There are entire sections where white people don't go.

And why are whites not living there in the first place?

Perhaps they could afford to move out and had places to move to where other minorities could not. 

Edited June 5, 2021 by Calm

[Dan McClellan]

9 minutes ago, provoman said:

 

How can society eliminate racism and promote harmony; not being racist is a start. Yet you and many loud vocal others promote segregation and racism (sure rewrite 'racism' to mean only those in power can be racist) as though it is a virtue.

 

Lol, no, I'm not rewriting anything whatsoever. I'm a linguist who's been studying racism for a decade. The term was coined in reference to the government's oppression of America's First Peoples, and it has absolutely always been used to refer to the actions of the powerful against the powerless. During the Civil Rights Movement, a lot of white folks decided "racism" was just too powerful an accusation not to be able to use against Black folks, so they came up with the concept of "reverse racism" to hurl at Black folks. Already the power directionality is made explicit, but white folks soon realized their term wasn't incredibly useful, so they retreated to the dictionary fallacy and just started insisting that "racism" refers to racial prejudice in any direction. *That* is the revisionist conceptualization of the term, and over the last ten years, every time a white dude tells me they just a priori know better than me, I invite them to show me just one use of the word "racism" from before the Civil Rights Movement in reference to Black>white prejudice. No one has ever once even attempted to go dig up an example. I know this is because there's no way they're actually gonna do any research, especially research that might undermine their worldview, but I extend the invitation anyway. So, by all means, prove me wrong and show me usage of the term "racism" prior to the Civil Rights Movement entirely divorced from very specific power dynamics. Take your time.

We will never eliminate racism because we cannot change people's hearts. We can at least dismantle the systemic power asymmetries that continue to reify it every single day all over the nation entirely independently of individuals. Oh, also, folks like you can get better educated.

[provoman]

2 minutes ago, Dan McClellan said:

The notion that our goal of achieving true colorblindness as followers of Christ means we must also *IGNORE* the *INDISPUTABLE REALITY* of widespread systemic racism around this country at the hands of the hundreds of millions of other Americans who hold to no such ideal is just absolutely laughable, and that's not counting the significant portion of American Latter-day Saints who openly promoted nationalism, bigotry, jingoism, and xenophobia over the course of the previous administration and to this day, and so clearly are not living up to President Nelson's ideal. Maybe go learn what colorblind racial ideology actually is before just blithely spouting quotes from President Nelson. 

I'll accept the Prophets words over your condescending demands.

I have confidence that defense of or promotion of race based segregation, is clearly not living up to President Nelson's ideal, which ideal he attributed to Christ.

[Dan McClellan]

20 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

I'm really curious as to where you live and where you have lived and if you've been to the big city like LA or New York or Detroit or anything?

There are entire sections where white people don't go. Not if you value your health. That's the only part of town I had to carry a 10 mm in my nail bags to build stairs.

No, there are no parts of this country where white people "don't go." There are parts where they may not like to go, or where they feel scared to go, but white people still go to those places. You even acknowledged in your own post that you go to those places. Also, those places where white folks don't like to go are precisely the places to which white folks spent generations trying to confine Black folks. They have been trapped there. They want to get out of those places real bad, but we continue to reinforce the systems that trap them there, all the while blaming them for what we've done to them.

Now, can you tell me precisely where on Harvard's campus those places are where white people "don't go"? 

Edited June 5, 2021 by Dan McClellan

[Dan McClellan]

2 minutes ago, provoman said:

I'll accept the Prophets words over your condescending demands.

No, you'll just pervert the Prophet's words for the sake of your blithe defense of white supremacy.

Quote

I have confidence that defense of or promotion of race based segregation, is clearly not living up to President Nelson's ideal, which ideal he attributed to Christ.

It's not segregation, it's an attempt to dismantle systemic power asymmetries. It's just framed as segregation for folks who feel their privilege is threatened by it. 

[provoman]

 

43 minutes ago, Dan McClellan said:

Oh, also, folks like you can get better.

Edited June 5, 2021 by provoman

[provoman]

2 minutes ago, Dan McClellan said:

No, you'll just pervert the Prophet's words for the sake of your blithe defense of white supremacy.

It's not segregation, it's an attempt to dismantle systemic power asymmetries. It's just framed as segregation for folks who feel their privilege is threatened by it. 

You are the one perverting the words of the Prophet with your defense of and promotion of race based separation of peoples.

[Dan McClellan]

1 minute ago, provoman said:

Your smug holier than thou pompous-$&@hatery is why I do not engage with you so very very much....yes we get you are better than all of us, thank you for responding to me - one so unworthy of your presence.

If you don't want me to criticize your rhetoric, don't so blithely promote white supremacy.

[Dan McClellan]

5 minutes ago, provoman said:

You are the one perverting the words of the Prophet with your defense of and promotion of race based separation of peoples.

No, I'm promoting allowing oppressed minorities to have safe spaces. Like I said to smac, none of your rhetoric works at all unless you deny the reality of systemic power asymmetries. There has to be a level playing field for your rhetoric to work, and you know there isn't, so you just have to refuse to address it. You have to just keep insisting on your rhetoric. It's just laughable. 

[provoman]

1 minute ago, Dan McClellan said:

No, I'm promoting allowing oppressed minorities to have safe spaces. Like I said to smac, none of your rhetoric works at all unless you deny the reality of systemic power asymmetries. There has to be a level playing field for your rhetoric to work, and you know there isn't, so you just have to refuse to address it. You have to just keep insisting on your rhetoric. It's just laughable. 

I get it, 

All racism is bad, but some racism isn't as bad as others.