The Study of Racialism

Could be Baltimore is less diverse. My mother lived there and I did see a lot less mix. So ethnic people probably would stick out. Also mannerisms, dress, etc might subconsciously help in the identification of an ethnicity.
Again, I am only going by one picture, which many times can be misleading.


Actually, most Jews from those countries are not Sephardi. The ones that are migrated there from the Iberian peninsula. Sephardic means Spanish in old Ladino. They are the Latino version of the Germanic Ashkenazi. Sean Paul is part Sephardic and part Asian.
Some famous Sephardic Jews or of Sephardic ancestry are Paula Abdul, Neve Cambell, David Charvet, Emmanuelle Chriqui, me (j/k).

Typical Sephardis

Oh yeah, James Earl Jones son for reference:

also check this thread out:
http://www.backintyme.com/odr/viewtopic.php?t=1567


There are plenty, but the entertainment business is dominated by Ashkenazi Jews.


Again, I don't doubt your experience.
We have posted plenty of other people's experiences like yours here. At the same time, we have posted experiences of people who looked more obviously Afrodescent than you that were asked if they were hispanic, grew up feeling always questioned by their black side, their white side, both, etc. Each experience is unique. We even have some biracials who are very anti-black or anti-white. Some post here but the most extreme (in words) have gotten banned.


But the fact that he self-identified always as black and came specifically from that community has a lot to do with it. I know people with Harold's exact same phenotype who identify as White or other. Especially in tri-racial isolate populations.


All these guys are members of the Jackson Whites of NY.
Or lets look at some of the leaders of the Lumbees who do not classify themselves as Black, but as Indians.




The first two are related to Heather Locklear also a triracial isolate.



Incorrect. Most studies focus on race, not populations. There are plenty of rural appalachian groups and other groups most refer to as "WHite Trash" that have had cyclical, generational problems of poverty that have persisted sinceshareholder and even indentured servitude times.


A huge distrust in the system since the Tilden-Hayes betrayal and ingrained problems from past abuse are the biggest problem. Evidence for this is the upward mobility of Caribbean and African immigrants in comparison.


If the interviewee is White raised in a White population, for sure. It's called own group bias and exists in all groups. And unfortunately they still are the biggest population in this country by far. Not saying discrimination does not exist as it is quite obvious, but, by and large, they are overcomable, as recent immigrants have shown. What is harder to overcome is mutigenerational poverty and autodefeatism, which is also existent in many Latino and White poor communities.


If it was a fear of miscegenation, why use a cheesy playboy bunny? Why not make it an upscale White woman who doesn't sound like an airhead? Naw, I think they were playing on the party animal aspect.


I am in the same boat as you on this one as I can pass as White.


I am one of them. Call institutionalized racism, institutionalized racism. It is not the only kind of racism. And Blacks have discriminated in the job environment in many situations where they became the majority. Especially in many public sectors. Just like the irish did when they became influential in the police. It is not that racism doesn't exist, it is just that it will manifest itself to the degree of power each individual has. The more power the more tht racism will influence others. I have been mugged for looking white, I have had my sister called a race traitor because she was standing next to me in Penn Station. Both these occasions the perpetrators were Black. They had power to make a choice and chose the side of being racist. Period.


Beleif does not make it so. He is an African American. But not Black. He is Afrodescent. And Asian decent, predominantly.

Which is an organization for "colored" people, not just Black.
Well good. On this board the moderators love fact. In fact, if you ever question someone's beleif, in this board you have to back up your claim with quantifiable evidence/data or retract the statement. It makes for interesting debates.


Hardly saying all police brutality is color blind as I have seen racist police first hand. But police brutality towards Black people is not always racial, but some times it is just police brutality to someone who happened to be Black.


True, and even Caribbean and African ethnicities are flourishing at a higher rate than African Americans. SO it definitely is an issue that needs to be studied.


Again, I would say you need to separate ethnicities a bit more. I beleive rate in Africans and Caribbeans is lower for incarceration with the exception of Jamaica, maybe. Same with many African populations. Ghana and Nigeria have a strong record the last few decades in this country.

Fully agreed.

I believe that Jaime was using the word as it is defined in The Rules, paragraph B.4.e. As is says at the top of this screen, members are asked to read the The Rules before posting. The Rules are there precisely to avoid misunderstandings of this kind. David followed The Rules by defining what he meant by "racism" (basically, what I would call hegemonic or institutional racism) thereby avoiding misunderstanding. Jaime also followed The Rules and did not define his usage because he employed the site-standard definition posted in The Rules, paragraph B.4.e, which should also have avoided misunderstanding.

davidmatthews wrote:


Salsassin wrote:


I am one of them as well. I agree with your summation Salsassin and thank you for mentioning again (I believe Frank had a similar incident happen to him once) what happend to your sister. I can relate to this situation fully. I have on occasion (along with my family) been subjected to differential negative and sometimes even hostile behavior by certain low-income blacks. That being said my husband and I are a united front in the face of racism whatever color it comes in and would fight to the death anyone who ever attempted to harm our children. I believe this no nonsense aura has been sensed by those who've wished us harm (that and we must have a Guardian Angel) because none of the situations we've encountered (and they have thankfully been few but just enough to make me question this "blacks can't be racist" mantra I was fed in college) have ever escalated to physical violence.

One man's response to the question of whether blacks can be racist or not can be found at the following link http://backintyme.com/odr/viewtopic.php?t=2753

I agree with Debra Dickerson's take on the issue.

Privileged people fight to hold on to privilege. Not because they're white (or black) but because they're human, and no one wants to give up power.

The less privilege people have, the more tightly they hold on to what little they've got. So the most outwardly racist people are often those at the bottom rungs of the society. The ethnic Russian gangs that roam the streets of Moscow, beating, robbing, and killing anyone who looks different, especially people of color. The black American gangs who do the same to both foreign born blacks and non blacks in just about every major city in the US. The Latino gangs who periodically murder their black neighbors just for walking down the street here in LA.

wow, some really insightful responses here, some of which i agree with, most of which i (very respectfully ) absolutely disagree with. when my flu subsides a bit, i will post an entirely too long reply, but i want to do the quality of discourse on this page justice, the kind of justice that can't be meted out in a robitussin haze.

best,
d.

p.s.
for those of you with access to the ny times; i have an essay in the "lives" section of the times tomorrow, on what else?.. . race.

This thread was a tangential sub-thread of The Passing of David Matthews in the “Issues for Biracial Americans” forum, and has been split off to here.

Let me express a grandfatherly concern in my role as site administrator. The thread possibly opens some interesting topics regarding inter-group conflict. Among the possibilities are:

Is institutional intergroup hostility more or less harmful (in whatever way) than individual intergroup hostility? Does subtle, even subconscious, disdain of The Other harm society more or less than overt intergroup violence (rape, murder, lynchings, beatings)? Do the ways that groups delineate their differences produce different forms of intergroup hostility? For example, how does gender discrimination differ from interethnic hostility? How is hostility across the U.S. color line different from hostility across socio-economic classes, religions, or nationalities? Are some groups within each category more prone to intergroup hostility than others (Are women more hostile than men? Italians worse than Puerto Ricans? Rich versus poor? Catholics versus Muslims? And, of course--the central topic: Is U.S. White hostility towards U.S. Blacks more or less harmful than vice-versa, taking into account the disparity in their respective institutional component?)

My concern is that this thread could easily degenerate into a semantic debate over the “correct” definition of “racism.” We already know that participants differ in what they mean by the word. And we already know how each person differently defines it. Hence, a purely semantic debate over its meaning would be sterile and pointless. There is no “correct” meaning in this context. It is the referent behind the word that should be of interest. As site administrator, I shall encourage discussion/debate of intergroup hostility and how it is expressed by different groups, especially its institutional versus individual components. As site administrator, I shall discourage arguments over the mere “correct” meaning of a word.

I see no reason to believe that AA's could not commit acts of racism. Many feel that racism is exclusively "white". I knew somebody who felt this way...she said that only white people could be racist because they hold the power. This person has questionable views on many things, however.


I feel that, yes, blacks can be as racist as anyone...the only caveat is that it goes unnoticed when you compare it to how white-on-black racism/crime is discussed.

It's my belief that this new-fangled definition of racism is a dodge. It's invoked to excuse similar behavior by people from groups deemed victimized. Seriously, how much power does some low-income white loser who joins a white supremacist organization have? In prisons where white racist groups thrive (often out of necessity) they have much less power (defined as influence in the prison system) than other races, but they are still motivated to commit acts of violence based on racial animus and are still seen as racist.




True and goes unnoticed in other areas and between non-white groups as well. I live near and work in Washington DC. Here the predominantly black police force has/had a serious issue with police brutality within the Latino (Central American) community here. All of the police officers in these cases were black, but their racism and abuse of power is ignored in some quarters because they are black and do not have power (whatever that means). I've come across arguments from activists and others that abusive and racist behavior exhibited by black police officers here toward Hispanics, which includes racist behavior toward Hispanic police recruits, is really the fault of whites. As I heard one person put it whites had established a culture of white male dominance. So ultimately, whites are responsible for their own misbehavior and everyone else's.

I hear that, brother!

I don't know...I don't want to veer off topic here but I've been pondering an issue lately. You notice how black-on-white crime is rarely covered in the media, but the reverse sparks controversy? And I notice that when missing persons are involved, the minority victims don't receive as much airplay.

True on both counts.

A definition of racism:



Source: Stokely Carmichael and Charles Hamilton, Black Power: the Politics of Liberation in America, pp. 3.


Can blacks be 'racist' according to this definition? In theory, yes. As a practical consideration, probably not.

Considering Stokely Carmichael is not a linguist, nor is that the definition of racism in any dictionary, not really concerned.

I understand. Dictionaries come in handy when you want simplicity . . . even at the cost of accuracy.

"Accuracy" is meaningless in this context. Peer-reviewed college-level dictionaries tell how a word actually is used, not how it should be used. This topic is now locked per rule 3.7. How the word "racism" is actually used in the U.S. vernacular is a legitimate topic. But the next person who argues that any definition is more "correct" or "accurate" than any other in any forum will be immediately suspended without warning.

Daily.