My response to Frank Bruni’s “An Abominations. A Monster. That’s Me”.http://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/09/opinion/sunday/villifying-white-men.html?comments#permid=25166570
Martin Luther King, Jr. must be spinning in his grave:
"When we are judged not by the color of our skin but the content of our character."
Showing posts with label black. Show all posts
Showing posts with label black. Show all posts
Sunday, December 10, 2017
Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Minority births now surpass white births! So what?
News organization after news organization reported recently that minority births now surpass white births or that white births are less than white deaths. Among others, see "Census: Minorities Now Surpass Whites in Births", Hope Yen, Associated Press, 2013-05-17
Duh! Given our attitude of "one drop" and of nationality what would you expect?
More and more couples are "mixed": "blacks" marry "whites", "whites" marry "Asians", "Native Americans" marry "whites", and so on. Fewer people are concerned about racial "purity" than ever before in U.S. history. And what are the offspring of "white"-"whatever" couples called in our society? It ain't "white".
Sometimes people self-select the non-white designation; sometimes others make the designation for them. For the first case, look at all the tribes that will allow a person to enroll if only one grandparent was "Indian". For the second case, look at all the people that too many designate as "black" because one grandparent was "black", or even one ancestor was "black" many generations ago!
Not all of my parents' descendants are "white". Boy, would my father's mother be horrified! Three lines have married "Asians" and another may marry a "black". As far as many of my generation and after are concerned, all of these "non-whites" are most welcome into our family.
Sorry, white supremacists, we will all be "brown" some century from now.
Duh! Given our attitude of "one drop" and of nationality what would you expect?
More and more couples are "mixed": "blacks" marry "whites", "whites" marry "Asians", "Native Americans" marry "whites", and so on. Fewer people are concerned about racial "purity" than ever before in U.S. history. And what are the offspring of "white"-"whatever" couples called in our society? It ain't "white".
Sometimes people self-select the non-white designation; sometimes others make the designation for them. For the first case, look at all the tribes that will allow a person to enroll if only one grandparent was "Indian". For the second case, look at all the people that too many designate as "black" because one grandparent was "black", or even one ancestor was "black" many generations ago!
Not all of my parents' descendants are "white". Boy, would my father's mother be horrified! Three lines have married "Asians" and another may marry a "black". As far as many of my generation and after are concerned, all of these "non-whites" are most welcome into our family.
Sorry, white supremacists, we will all be "brown" some century from now.
Monday, November 19, 2012
The idiocy of race and nationality
Several weeks ago a Duluth Fox news director caused quite a stir when he put on Facebook a derogatory, racist remark about somebody that was near his house. I don't remember if he resigned or was fired. He then said that his great-grandfather's great-grandfather was Indian or some such chain, and he claims he is Indian too. He even was admitted into an Indian journalists' group.
Come on! Just because you had an ancestor of a certain origin doesn't make you one of the group the ancestor belonged to. Many people even one generation removed from some place have none of the language or culture of where their parents came from.
My surname is Irish, but I can find no ancestor that lived in Ireland. The best I can tell is that my great-great-great grandfather, Vincent Magree, was probably born in Maryland. I am assuming that Magree is Irish because several Australians named Magree trace their ancestry back to Kilkenny.
I have great-grandparents who were born in England and Germany. I consider myself neither English or German. When I was in England and Ireland, I was called a Yank. When I was in Germany, I was called Amerikaner. Some of my ancestors born in what was then Germany may have had Polish ancestors. I do not consider myself Polish.
I consider myself an American because I was born in the U.S., had almost all of my education in the U.S., and except for some trips to Canada, never went outside the U.S. until I was 30.
So, if some ancestor long, long ago was from a certain group and some of that person's descendants claim they belong to that group, shouldn't we consider President Barack Obama a white man. His mother was a white American and a long list of her ancestors were white. Given the reasoning for people to claim Indian inheritance, then we can also say that Obama is white.
We're born here; we're Americans. End of story.
Come on! Just because you had an ancestor of a certain origin doesn't make you one of the group the ancestor belonged to. Many people even one generation removed from some place have none of the language or culture of where their parents came from.
My surname is Irish, but I can find no ancestor that lived in Ireland. The best I can tell is that my great-great-great grandfather, Vincent Magree, was probably born in Maryland. I am assuming that Magree is Irish because several Australians named Magree trace their ancestry back to Kilkenny.
I have great-grandparents who were born in England and Germany. I consider myself neither English or German. When I was in England and Ireland, I was called a Yank. When I was in Germany, I was called Amerikaner. Some of my ancestors born in what was then Germany may have had Polish ancestors. I do not consider myself Polish.
I consider myself an American because I was born in the U.S., had almost all of my education in the U.S., and except for some trips to Canada, never went outside the U.S. until I was 30.
So, if some ancestor long, long ago was from a certain group and some of that person's descendants claim they belong to that group, shouldn't we consider President Barack Obama a white man. His mother was a white American and a long list of her ancestors were white. Given the reasoning for people to claim Indian inheritance, then we can also say that Obama is white.
We're born here; we're Americans. End of story.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Extremism continues on the Unfair campaign
The most ridiculous thing concerning the Unfair campaign, unfortunately to be expected, is from those who are truly racist. They have been sending hate emails to the Mayor of Duluth, Don Ness. The Mayor is a supporter of this campaign. I didn't read the full article about his email, but I know that some of it comes from places far from Duluth.
The next ridiculous thing, though far more justified than the hate mail, are those who persist in objecting to criticism of the Unfair campaign as using a broad brush to describe people who are "white".
This latter was brought home to me when I checked the usage this morning of my blog. I had over twenty links from http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2012/02/09/see-racism-when-white-unfair-campaign/ to "Is the Un-Fair Campaign Unfair?"
Thanks for the interest, but the link to my blog entry proves my point of the campaign itself being unfair: "much less learning to notice white privilege". I don't think the writer read my blog entry with an open mind.
Let me give a couple examples from my bus driving days in the Twin Cities. The employees and the customers were all over the map as far as wealth, race, and religion. The employees and the customers were all over the map as far as promptness, courtesy, and consideration. The two categories did not map one to one with each other.
The first example started and stopped in a minute. I picked up a busload of kids from an inner-city community center. They were probably all black as were most of the adults. I was driving down a long street with a string of traffic lights. Like a good driver, I was looking well ahead. Except, I was looking too far ahead. One of the adults pointed out that I had run a red light. I acknowledged that I had and I thanked him for pointing it out. I certainly didn't have any "white privilege" that made me right and him wrong.
The second example was a charter that left an extremely angry customer who we lost for repeat business. About six buses were sent out to pick up kids and adults from a all-white church camp about two hours away; the drivers were all white except maybe a Central American Indian. We had no appointed leader and relied on those who had made the trip before on what to expect.
This being before cell phones were so ubiquitous, we had to rely on the camp phone to talk to our Jewish dispatcher to try to resolve some of the problems. He was unsuccessful in mitigating some of the problems, but we did get all the campers back to the Twin Cities, late.
When we got back to the terminal, the black dispatcher was on duty. Boy! Did he lay into us as a group. And he was right; he had probably spent far more time on the phone with the customer than he would have liked.
The only complaint I had with the dispatchers is they didn't appoint a trip leader; we were just a milling crowd at every problem point. Maybe I should have exercised "age" privilege and taken leadership?
The next ridiculous thing, though far more justified than the hate mail, are those who persist in objecting to criticism of the Unfair campaign as using a broad brush to describe people who are "white".
This latter was brought home to me when I checked the usage this morning of my blog. I had over twenty links from http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2012/02/09/see-racism-when-white-unfair-campaign/ to "Is the Un-Fair Campaign Unfair?"
Thanks for the interest, but the link to my blog entry proves my point of the campaign itself being unfair: "much less learning to notice white privilege". I don't think the writer read my blog entry with an open mind.
Let me give a couple examples from my bus driving days in the Twin Cities. The employees and the customers were all over the map as far as wealth, race, and religion. The employees and the customers were all over the map as far as promptness, courtesy, and consideration. The two categories did not map one to one with each other.
The first example started and stopped in a minute. I picked up a busload of kids from an inner-city community center. They were probably all black as were most of the adults. I was driving down a long street with a string of traffic lights. Like a good driver, I was looking well ahead. Except, I was looking too far ahead. One of the adults pointed out that I had run a red light. I acknowledged that I had and I thanked him for pointing it out. I certainly didn't have any "white privilege" that made me right and him wrong.
The second example was a charter that left an extremely angry customer who we lost for repeat business. About six buses were sent out to pick up kids and adults from a all-white church camp about two hours away; the drivers were all white except maybe a Central American Indian. We had no appointed leader and relied on those who had made the trip before on what to expect.
This being before cell phones were so ubiquitous, we had to rely on the camp phone to talk to our Jewish dispatcher to try to resolve some of the problems. He was unsuccessful in mitigating some of the problems, but we did get all the campers back to the Twin Cities, late.
When we got back to the terminal, the black dispatcher was on duty. Boy! Did he lay into us as a group. And he was right; he had probably spent far more time on the phone with the customer than he would have liked.
The only complaint I had with the dispatchers is they didn't appoint a trip leader; we were just a milling crowd at every problem point. Maybe I should have exercised "age" privilege and taken leadership?
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Is the Un-Fair Campaign Unfair?
An advertising campaign has started in Duluth to call attention to racism. One of its major slogans is "It's hard to see racism when you're white." A backlash has come about that has surprised the supporters of this initiative. A backlash is to be expected from a certain segment of the population that is truly racist (or anti anything or anybody different from themselves).
The other more reasoned backlash is that made by Phil Pierson who is quoted in the Duluth News Tribune: "The issue of racism is real, but it doesn't only pertain to whites. A campaign directed only to white people is by definition racist." See "Backlash slams 'Un-Fair' anti-racism campaign in Twin Ports", Duluth News Tribune, 2012-01-31. I can't find the Facebook page he and others apparently started.
I've long resented those who talk of "white privilege". If I'm so privileged, how did Herman Cain and Oprah Winfrey become so much better known than I am and far wealthier than I'll ever be?
I also resent people categorizing me by my skin color; that is also racist.
Just like too many people assume that because someone is black, Asian, Indian, whatever, they have such and such characteristics, it is unfair to assume that because someone is white they are "privileged". People have a wide range of characteristics that defy stereotypes.
What goes through my mind on "white privilege" is that those stating this don't know me. They don't know who I consider a relative and who considers me a relative. They don't know who I have befriended and who has befriended me. They don't know who I've regularly had meals with. They don't know who I've helped and who has helped me. They don't know who I've proven wrong and who has proven me wrong. They don't know who has looked up to me and who I've looked up to.
See also "Extremism continues on the Unfair campaign".
The other more reasoned backlash is that made by Phil Pierson who is quoted in the Duluth News Tribune: "The issue of racism is real, but it doesn't only pertain to whites. A campaign directed only to white people is by definition racist." See "Backlash slams 'Un-Fair' anti-racism campaign in Twin Ports", Duluth News Tribune, 2012-01-31. I can't find the Facebook page he and others apparently started.
I've long resented those who talk of "white privilege". If I'm so privileged, how did Herman Cain and Oprah Winfrey become so much better known than I am and far wealthier than I'll ever be?
I also resent people categorizing me by my skin color; that is also racist.
Just like too many people assume that because someone is black, Asian, Indian, whatever, they have such and such characteristics, it is unfair to assume that because someone is white they are "privileged". People have a wide range of characteristics that defy stereotypes.
What goes through my mind on "white privilege" is that those stating this don't know me. They don't know who I consider a relative and who considers me a relative. They don't know who I have befriended and who has befriended me. They don't know who I've regularly had meals with. They don't know who I've helped and who has helped me. They don't know who I've proven wrong and who has proven me wrong. They don't know who has looked up to me and who I've looked up to.
See also "Extremism continues on the Unfair campaign".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)