Is racism/intolerance endemic to all races

[Jermyn Davidson]

I am used to defining racism as something that is systematic.

The problem with your common definition of racism is that the definition provided could very well be the definition for racial prejudice.


Racial prejudice and racism are two different things-- both wrong, and still different.

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

I am used to defining racism as something that is systematic.

The problem with your common definition of racism is that the definition provided could very well be the definition for racial prejudice.


Racial prejudice and racism are two different things-- both wrong, and still different.

Could you define the two so that we can see the difference between them?

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

It depends on the circumstances.

Setting: Mobile, AL; 1950

2 businesses:

1 owned by a white man in the wealthier part of town;
1 owned by a black man in the impoverished part of town.

The white guy hiring only whites would be in line with the systemic racism prevalent during that time.

The black guy only hiring blacks would not be practicing racism in that case.

The nuances behind their reasoning are completely different as they come to their decisions.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Setting: Mobile, AL; 2010

1 business:

Chinese Family-owned Carry-Out Chinese Food Restaurant deep in the ghetto of Mobile, AL where the local population is 90% black, 7% hispanic, and 3% white.

This Chinese business owner who only hires family members is not practicing racism.

If this Chinese business owner was to purposely hire non-family members, at the purposeful exclusion of a specific race, then this business owner is probably acting out of racial prejudice.


I understand how some could (and some do) call this racism, but it is my opinion in this situation that the Chinese business owner is wrong, but not necessarily racist, given our Mobile, AL; 2010 setting.

Prejudice is to pre judge.

You have successfully done so.

[Praxeas]

I think humans have by nature a pack mentality. If two baseball teams get into a fight, the races don't break off and fight againts different races. One team,black,white, Hispanic, Asian etc, will fight the other team despite races.

Nations do it.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

I am used to defining racism as something that is systematic.

The problem with your common definition of racism is that the definition provided could very well be the definition for racial prejudice.


Racial prejudice and racism are two different things-- both wrong, and still different.

I think that your "racial prejudice" leads to the "systemic racism" that you describe. However, in the long history of man, the institutions needed to make "racial prejudice" become "systemic racism" were not always present. Yet, racism still existed.

For purposes of understanding, I think that your usage of the term "racism" needs the appendage of the word "systemic." I didn't really even understand what you meant until you added "systemic."

The TV character Archie Bunker was a "racist," yet he actually had no institutions or societal structures that supported his prejudices. That was one of the ongoing plot lines and led to much of "Archie's" comedic dilemmas. "Nobody" seemed to understand him. The series producer, Norman Lear, used Bunker's isolation to show a hopeful portrayal that American society at large had been changing and moving away from Archie's mindset.

My father tended toward a rather inexplicable racism at times even though he didn't have any institutional or over all societal backing for such attitudes. In fact, he didn't even have any "blacks" or "Asians" within 100 miles at times against whom he might display his attitudes. His anger and prejudice seemed to exist outside of any conventional bounds in which we find such attitudes. But it was still "racism."

Racism is the belief that a particular race (usually one's own) is superior and that other races, or any particular race is inferior. I have found this attitude prevalent in the black community and to be something that other family members in the "big city" here have had to confront. Though it does appear to be "systemic" - in order that condition to exist there must first be individuals who harbor these feelings on a close personal level.

The same can be said for all racism, IMHO. It starts as what you call "racial prejudice" and develops into "systemic racism;" however it is "racism" at all levels if you were to ask me.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I think humans have by nature a pack mentality. If two baseball teams get into a fight, the races don't break off and fight againts different races. One team,black,white, Hispanic, Asian etc, will fight the other team despite races.

Nations do it.

I agree and that's a good illustration.

In antiquity, geographic isolation cause certain genes to accumulate in "eddies" of human population around the world. This is what led to the development of the different races from common ancestors.

In time, with climate changes and other factors forcing human migration, certain tribes in an area would begin to see "outsiders" appearing on their "turf." The fact that the "outsiders" had different familial features made them more easy to distinguish and to label. Language was another give away.

The Bible illustrates some of these events. The two spies who came to Rahab were easily identifiable as "outsiders" by those who saw them go to the prostitute's house. Judges 12:5-6, illustrates how linguistic variations were used to identify an "outsider." Language "evolves" in a manner that is similar to genetic evolution and both circumstances will produce "different types" of people.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by BishopMHaywood

I would also say it could be simply stated as "racially based prejudice".

Yes, you are correct (at least in my opinion you are correct).

But a lot of folks tend toward the shorthand method of using a single word instead multi-word phrases.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Sam

Once while at a UPC Bible School I mentioned to a young minister from Kentucky that people of different races would be in Heaven together and he retorted that they wouldn't be black then so it would be OK.

We have the case of Ota Benga. He was a black pygmy from africa that lived in the

One of the most fascinating historical accounts about the fallout of biological evolution theory on human relations is the story of Ota Benga, a pygmy who was put on display in an American zoo as an example of an evolutionarily inferior race. The incident clearly reveals the racism of evolutionary theory and the extent that the theory gripped the hearts and minds of scientists and journalists in the late 1800s. As humans move away from this time in history, we can more objectively look back at the horrors that evolutionary theory has brought to society of which this story is a poignant example

. http://www.rae.org/otabenga.html

One of the more interesting incidences in the history of evolution and racism is the story of the man who was put on display in a zoo (Brix, 1992). Brought from the Belgian Congo in 1904 by noted African explorer Samuel Verner, he was soon "presented by Verner to the Bronx Zoo director, William Hornaday" (Sifakis, 1984, p. 253). The man, a pygmy named Ota Benga (or "Bi" which means "friend" in Benga's language), was born in 1881 in Africa. When put in the zoo, he was about 23 years old, four feet-eleven inches tall, and weighed a mere 103 pounds. Often referred to as a boy, he was actually a twice married father-his first wife murdered by the white colonists, and his second spouse died from a poisonous snake bite (Bridges, 1974).

Once upon a time long ago Darwinists say man evolved from apes and used "inferior" races to say they have proof.

[coadie]

After Benga left the zoo, he was able to find care at a succession of institutions and with several sympathetic individuals, but he was never able to shed his freak label history. First sent to a "colored" orphanage, Ota learned English and also took an interest in a certain young lady there, a woman named Creola. Somehow even Ota's supporters half believed some of the stories about him, andd an incident" soon took place there which touched off a controversy. As a result, Ota was soon forever shuffled miles away from Brooklyn and Creola. In January 1910 he arrived at a Black community in Lynchburg, VA, and there he seemed to shine.

Black families [there] entrusted their young to Ota's care. They felt their boys were secure with him. He taught them to hunt, fish, gather wild honey ... The children felt safe when they were in the woods with him. If anything, they found him overprotective, except in regard to gathering wild honey - there was no such thing as too much protection when it came to raiding hives .... A bee sting can feel catastrophic to a child, but Ota couldn't help himself, he thought bee stings were hilarious (Bradford and Blume, 1992, pp. 206-207).

He became a Christian, was baptized, and his English vocabulary rapidly improved. He also learned how to read-and occasionally attended classes at a Lynchburg seminary. He was popular among the boys, and learned several sports such as baseball (at which he did quite well). He later ceased attending classes and became a laborer on the Obery farm for 10 dollars a month plus room and board (Bradford and Blume,1992, p. 204). The school concluded that his lack of education progress was because of his African 'attitude" when actually probably "his age was against his development. It was simply impossible to put him in a class to receive instructions ... that would be of any advantage to him" (Ward, 1992, p. 14). He had enormous curiosity and a drive to learn, but preferred performance tests as opposed to the multiple choice kind.

Christianity offer hope. Darwinism offered despair and torment.

Darwinism has been a scourge to this planet and Is extremely damaging to human respect for all of man kind.