Ahh, so now it’s the ‘cultural argument’. Yeah, this guy doesn’t know what he’s talking about. This is like me saying, “Indian Americans are really wealthy because they have a culture of education”, when it’s more a class issue than culture (if the latter were true, most of India would all be in school, would not be poor, etc).

The fact of the matter is that for someone like me who went to shitty schools where a lot of not so well off people lived, it’s not the ‘cultural suspicion’ rather than the lack of updated textbooks, stupid ass guidance councelors who, because of their own racism, guide non-white and non-east Asian students into manual labour classes like auto-mechanics instead of enrolling them in classes they’d need for colleges, thereby effectively ruining their trajectory in life, and so on. Even with me, who’s not black or Hispanic, the guidance counselors at my high school A) tried to dissuade me from enrolling in the AP and Honors curriculum until I really fought with her to let me take the tests to get in; and B) didn’t know jackshit about the college application process (which they are supposed to do because it’s their job).

This is what an ‘inner city’ school is like. It’s not because some people living in the ghettos are culturally inept and suspect education; it’s because these schools and their staffs are not on par with those of the schools in rich, white, upper middle class and upper class districts.

Has he been to LA and seen how the LAPD treats black youths?

“To suggest that the problems of a poor white woman and a poor black woman are the same ignores the realities of the lived experience of women of color.”

I agree with you, but I was having a conversation with someone the other day, in which I pointed out that white disadvantaged groups such as the Appalachian whites are totally absent from our conversations about poverty. So while I think it is absolutely imperative to look at the race factor, I also think that there are other disadvantaged groups racially (who are not only Black, but other ethnicities as well), and socio-economic statuses (which may and may not overlap with gender, race, etc). With that point, I agree with Shariq that socio-economic statuses need to be looked at more; I just disagree with his arguments about race.

Not sure he implied it was a racial paradise, merely that it did’nt stink as badly as everyone else.

Let it be– according to Shariq, America is the least racist country in the world (!) and it is a racial paradise. I mean, look at Condi, Obama, and Bobby– people of color who have MADE it in the US.

Of course, this shoddy thinking leads people to believe that just because Mandela was elected president in the South Africa, black South Africans are not treated badly, racism is not institutionalized de facto, etc.

Really…so when someone is dealing with more than one area of maringalzation it is all the same….Black women occupy the bottom of the racial and social hierarchy for a reason, we are black and female. To suggest that the problems of a poor white woman and a poor black woman are the same ignores the realities of the lived experience of women of color.

Really…so when someone is dealing with more than one area of maringalzation it is all the same….Black women occupy the bottom of the racial and social hierarchy for a reason, we are black and female. To suggest that the problems of a poor black woman and a poor black woman are the same ignores the realities of the lived experience of women of color.

Yes, but he also can’t raise the issue even if he wanted to, unless President. Otherwise it would simply get the backs up of whites who are voting for him simply because they want to believe that blacks face no prejudice.

In that sense, its a bit more complicated. There are lots of things Obama just can’t say. There are still rumours going around, spread mostly by Republicans, that once Prez he will deliver reparations to blacks for past injustices. If he said anything, thats the narrative Fox News will run.

I have to agree. There is a difference between Americans who hold racist views and the institutionalization of racism that we expirienced prior to the Civil Rights movement and even after. KRS-One even said that this is a class issue. It will always be a class issue for the most part. When blacks or any other minority become wealtheir, begin voting in greater numbers they will also be pandered too. Ah oh! I think I may be having a Booker T. Washington moment. Ewww…

There is definitely a correlation between being black/hispanic and being poor and disadvantaged. But it does not mean that being black – and racism – is the main cause of being poor. Indians – who are dark, have funny names, and are non-Christian – are one of the most prosperous ethnic groups in America. It seems to suggest that racism is less of deterrent to success than education and skills. The latter being difficult to attain when you are stuck in the vicious cycle of poverty.

Of course, even within the same economic class, being black or non-white means you need to be considerably better and work harder than your white colleague to level the field. Obama is far superior than McCain on any issue yet they are tied – there is no way a black McCain would have this popularity with a white Obama.

This is what I really like about Obama: that despite this injustice, he doesn’t play the race and victim card, which is so prevalent in the Left narrative. Instead he says “Yes, we can”, he works harder, and he will open the door to a new generation of people that will not self-impose glass ceilings and restrictions to what you can achieve. And that is the way to go forward: each generation breaks a glass ceiling, and make it easier for the next one. Obama certainly needs to thank – and he has numerous times – the previous generation for enabling his candidacy.

Who do you think has the potential to inspire young black kids to do greater things? A black President with a “yes we can” attitude, or Al Sharpton by crying racism on any opportunity he can?

In other cases, its not racism but cultural prejudice that creates a glass ceiling. In industries like the media for example, its all about networks and understanding the internal culture. If you can’t do that, as many minorities don’t make an efffort to learn, then you don’t get far enough. I’m not saying all don’t do this… I’m just saying I see too many Asians in this country making no effort to learn about the media industry.

“Obama gets elected) not because racism has been obliterated off of the map of the US, but because their politics are acceptable to mainstream, white, pro-capitalist America. Please read up on Piyush’s campaign, his platform, and his policies to see what I mean.”

By sheer coincidence, all candidates that get elected have views that are acceptable to mainstream. And fringe candidates, even the white ones, do not get elected.* I will let you figure that one out.

The point here is that 40 years ago, it wouldn’t have mattered if Obama had the most pro-capitalist mainstream agenda: he would have been utterly rejected for being black. It doesn’t mean that racism is dead, but that there are other factors at hand.

There is definitely a correlation between being black/hispanic and being poor and disadvantaged. But it does not mean that being black – and racism – is the main cause of being poor. Indians – who are dark, have funny names, and are non-Christian – are one of the most prosperous ethnic groups in America. It seems to suggest that racism is less of deterrent to success than education and skills. The latter being difficult to attain when you are stuck in the vicious cycle of poverty.
—
* Of course in Louisiana, Bobby Jindal’s views are mainstream. But in the 90′s, David Duke – the grand wizard of the KKK – managed to lose the same gubernational seat by a few hundred votes. So, it is nothing short of remarkable, and shows that America is indeed changing for the better.

Would be interested to hear your take on Bill Clinton’s welfare reforms. Did they put money into black women’s hands and reduce disincentives to employment as its supporters would say or were they did they make the lives of black women more difficult by reducing necessary financial support?

Again, I’m saying that there are a range of factors. Cultural differences, family connections, old boys clubs and the cynical use of race by some and the overt use of race by others would all come into it.

Also if you really care about glass ceilings than why denigrate the achievements of a man who could break the biggest glass ceiling of them all.

I will accept the fact that there is a substantial overlap between race and the plight of the inner cities. If they were of a different colour, the media may well have treated their problems differently.

Yet some cities have managed to regenerate themselves whereas others have gotten left behind, so its got to be too simplistic too boil everything down to racism.

Out of interest did you watch The Wire?

I just read them, and they seem to be the clearest possible example of taking a boring, if important economic issue and trying to make it sexy by pretending that it is really about race.

If poor people are being preyed on by dodgy bankers, is it really true that the only way you can be persuaded to care about that is if someone counts the number of people of different skin colours affected and finding that the proportion differs from the last national census?

In the US, for a lot of historical reasons, arguments based on sharing, fairness, or common welfare have no traction (outside of the North-East)[1]. For equally good historical reasons, arguments based on redressing racial injustice have proved highly persuasive, able to prod people into taking action.

Even when they are stretching a point, to say the least. I’m sure someone, somewhere in the US has claimed CO2 emissions to be a racial issue…

There are two viewpoints promoted by virtually every single US film and TV series made since approximately the first series of Star Trek:

1. individualism and self-reliance are good.
2. racial discrimination is bad.

[1] The big cultural differences between the ex-Puritans of New England and the ex-cowboys of Texas is just one of the reasons the category ‘white’ is simply wrong if you are trying to talk about ethnic or cultural groups rather than some imaginary biological sub-species.

‘Still, average household income of $53,500 isn’t terrible. ‘

Its better than $20,000. But still its pretty rubbish. You did say household?