race, the n word, cracker historical context and hate crimes

[beyelzu]

Originally Posted by Godless Dave

Today, there are some instances where a black person will have an advantage over a white person. But if you are applying for a mortgage, a car loan, a business loan, and in many cases a job, just being born white gives you an advantage.

proof please that unequal standards are applied in the cases you mentioned above.

Originally Posted by godless dave

Most importantly, I've never heard of an occasion where the slur "cracker" was followed by a white person being lynched by a mob of black people who knew they would never be arrested for murder. So I don't think the terms are equivalent.

The U.S. Justice Department has reported that 85% of all inter-racial violence in America is committed by blacks against whites.

from http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=1912


I cant seem to find it but in ga a few years ago a black man was charged with a hate crime when he told his buddies that he was going to kill the first white man he saw and then did so.

now I have no idea what he said at the time, but it wouldnt have surprised me if he called the vicitm a cracker before killing him because of race.

[D. Scarlatti]

Originally Posted by beyelzu

I cant seem to find it but in ga a few years ago a black man was charged with a hate crime when he told his buddies that he was going to kill the first white man he saw and then did so.

If that's the case he was probably charged with murder.

[beyelzu]

Originally Posted by D. Scarlatti

If that's the case he was probably charged with murder.

yeah, but hate crime legislation has added penalties when the murder is a hate crime.

I think you end up with separate charges, not real sure how it works.

[D. Scarlatti]

Right, a penalty enhancer but not a separate charge. Had he not murdered the guy he couldn't be charged for saying what he said as a separate offense.

I mention it because there is a fairly widespread misunderstanding about what "hate crimes legislation" stands for (not that you share it, mind you). It's a form of penalty enhancer, just like several other methods of penalty enhancement to which no one appears to object.

Incidentally the Supreme Court upheld this form of penalty enhancer in an opinion written by Chief Justice Rehnquist (of Shorewood, WI).

[livius drusus]

Here's a remarkably on-point article by anti-racist activist Tim Wise. I think he lays out the difference between racial slurs very effectively.

So whereas “nigger” was and is a term used by whites to dehumanize blacks, to imply their inferiority, to “put them in their place” if you will, the same cannot be said of honky: after all, you can’t put white people in their place when they own the place to begin with.

Power is like body armor. And while not all white folks have the same degree of power, there is a very real extent to which all of us have more than we need vis-à-vis people of color: at least when it comes to racial position, privilege and perceptions.

Consider poor whites. To be sure, they are less financially powerful than wealthy people of color. But that misses the point of how racial privilege operates within a class system.

Within a class system, people tend to compete for “stuff” against others of their same basic economic status. In other words, rich and poor are not competing for the same homes, bank loans, jobs, or even educations to a large extent. Rich competes against rich, working class against working class and poor against poor. And in those competitions racial privilege most certainly attaches.

Poor whites are rarely typified as pathological, dangerous, lazy or shiftless the way poor blacks are, for example. Nor are they demonized the way poor Latino/a immigrants tend to be.

[...]

Poor whites are more likely to have a job, tend to earn more than poor people of color, and are even more likely to own their own home. Indeed, whites with incomes under $13,000 annually are more likely to own their own home than blacks with incomes that are three times higher due to having inherited property.

None of this is to say that poor whites aren’t being screwed eight ways to Sunday by an economic system that relies on their immiseration: they are. But they nonetheless retain a certain “one-up” on equally poor or even somewhat better off people of color thanks to racism.

It is that one-up that renders the potency of certain prejudices less threatening than others. It is what makes cracker or honky less problematic than any of the slurs used so commonly against the black and brown.

In response to all this, skeptics might say that people of color can indeed exercise power over whites, at least by way of racially-motivated violence. Such was the case, for example, this week in New York City where a black man shot two whites and one Asian-Pacific Islander before being overpowered. Apparently he announced that he wanted to kill white people, and had hoped to set a wine bar on fire to bring such a goal to fruition.

There is no doubt his act was one of racial bigotry, and that to those he was attempting to murder his power must have seemed quite real. Yet there are problems with claiming that this “power” proves racism from people of color is just as bad as the reverse.

First, racial violence is also a power whites have, so the power that might obtain in such a situation is hardly unique to non-whites, unlike the power to deny a bank loan for racial reasons, to "steer" certain homebuyers away from living in “nicer" neighborhoods, or to racially profile in terms of policing. Those are powers that can only be exercised by the more dominant group as a practical and systemic matter.

Additionally, the "power" of violence is not really power at all, since to exercise it, one has to break the law and subject themselves to probable legal sanction.

Power is much more potent when it can be deployed without having to break the law to do it, or when doing it would only risk a small civil penalty at worst. So discrimination in lending, though illegal is not going to result in the perp going to jail; so too with employment discrimination or racial profiling.

There are plenty of ways that more powerful groups can deploy racism against less powerful groups without having to break the law: by moving away when too many of "them" move in (which one can only do if one has the option of moving without having to worry about discrimination in housing.)

Or one can discriminate in employment but not be subjected to penalty, so long as one makes the claim that the applicant of color was "less qualified," even though that determination is wholly subjective and rarely scrutinized to see if it was determined accurately, as opposed to being a mere proxy for racial bias. In short, it is institutional power that matters most.

[Godless Dave]

Of course I am not so naiive to think that only white people* can be racist. I've met racist black people; I've delivered pizza to them.

What I'm saying is that on aggregate, non-whites are still at a social disadvantage in the US because of past and present racism, and for this reason "nigger" is a more threatening slur then "cracker". Is "cracker" (in most contexts) still a demeaning and threatening slur? Absolutely. I'm talking about a difference of degree, not of kind.

Some people do assert that the difference between white racists and non-white racists is a difference in kind. IMO they are wrong.

Yes, there are African-Americans and other non-white Americans who hate white people. But there has never been a time in this country when that hate was codified into law. But white-on-nonwhite racism was codified into law until the mid 1960s. That's less than forty years ago.

----

* In the US. If you think white people are the only racists in the world, or that we invented racism, spend some time in southeast Asia.

[Dingfod]

Originally Posted by Tim Wise

Poor whites are rarely typified as pathological, dangerous, lazy or shiftless the way poor blacks are, for example. Nor are they demonized the way poor Latino/a immigrants tend to be.

My BS detector went off big time on this statement. "Trailer trash", "poor white trash", "from the poor side of town", "from the wrong side of the tracks", "worthless bums", "ne'er-do-wells" and even "redneck" are terms often slung in the direction of poor whites with no other purpose than to denigrate and demonize. I don't think it is rare at all. Admittedly, most of the time it is done by more well off whites. In societal ranking, I'd say poor whites aren't viewed much more highly than poor minorities if at all.

[livius drusus]

I don't think his point is that no insults for poor white people exist. None of those terms you cited are used as to describe how white people as a group are scary, violent, riotous, whereas racial slurs against blacks and other minorities most certainly are.

In other words, poor whites described in unflattering terms, sure; poor whites as examples of their race characterized as pathological and dangerous, no.

[Godless Dave]

I agree, Liv. But it does demonstrate that one of the purposes of racism is to get the disadvantaged to attack and hate each other rather than the rich people who are exploiting them.

I think context matters quite a bit here. The term "cracker" is not particularly insulting to me. But to a white kid in a school where 70% of the student body is black it would have far more threatening connotations.

Similarly, if the year were 1942 or 1917 and someone called me a Kraut or a Hun I'd be pretty worried. But if someone did it now I'd laugh at them (on the off chance anyone even noticed my German ancestry).

[The Lone Ranger]

Originally Posted by Godless Dave

But it does demonstrate that one of the purposes of racism is to get the disadvantaged to attack and hate each other rather than the rich people who are exploiting them.

There's probably something to that. Howard Zinn argues in A People's History of the United States that from the earliest days of the United States, those in power have encouraged racism as a means of distracting poor whites and poor blacks and so keeping them from recognizing that they're both being manipulated and exploited by the rich and powerful.


I've worked a number of manual labor jobs where most of my co-workers were African-American and Hispanic. On the job, we all got along quite well, because we were quite well-aware that we were all in the same boat. But it was simply shocking to talk with these guys about their lives outside the workplace. Almost all of them had spent a good deal of time in jail, for instance. What's shocking is why. They'd quite casually mention that they'd be walking down the street and a police car would stop, and they'd be picked up and taken in for an overnight stay in the slammer -- for no apparent reason other than that they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and were the wrong color.

What I found so astonishing about it was how casual most of them were about this. They were so used to being treated with suspicion wherever they went that they considered it normal to be hauled off to jail at least once or twice in the average year for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Some of them were surprised that I found this so shocking -- they thought of it as perfectly normal, and had long ago accepted that this was simply the way things were, and the price they had to pay for being born with dark skin.

[Dingfod]

I wasn't trying to say what poor whites suffer is in any way comparable to that of poor blacks, only to point out that terms of derision toward poor whites are not rare at all. I beg to differ that they are not seen as dangerous and criminals. People see an unkempt unshaven man with a bad haircut and make all sorts of assumptions about them being wife-beaters or worse. I don't know how many times I've heard the neighborhood a mile or so away from my house referred to as the meth capital of Oklahoma, or heard something like "Only criminals and drugged out white trash live in Blahville", or "You don't really drive through there, do you?" There aren't any minorities at all in this village that lies on my road to my workplace, only poor people, some working poor, some just dirt poor. Some probably are criminals and on drugs, but I'd say the vast majority of them are law abiding citizens, their only problem is not having much of a say as to where they live because of economic circumstance.

[Dingfod]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

I've worked a number of manual labor jobs where most of my co-workers were African-American and Hispanic. On the job, we all got along quite well, because we were quite well-aware that we were all in the same boat. But it was simply shocking to talk with these guys about their lives outside the workplace. Almost all of them had spent a good deal of time in jail, for instance. What's shocking is why. They'd quite casually mention that they'd be walking down the street and a police car would stop, and they'd be picked up and taken in for an overnight stay in the slammer -- for no apparent reason other than that they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and were the wrong color.

What I found so astonishing about it was how casual most of them were about this. They were so used to being treated with suspicion wherever they went that they considered it normal to be hauled off to jail at least once or twice in the average year for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Some of them were surprised that I found this so shocking -- they thought of it as perfectly normal, and had long ago accepted that this was simply the way things were, and the price they had to pay for being born with dark skin.

That's just sad.

[Shake]

Originally Posted by warrenly

My BS detector went off big time on this statement. "Trailer trash", "poor white trash", "from the poor side of town", "from the wrong side of the tracks", "worthless bums", "ne'er-do-wells" and even "redneck" are terms often slung in the direction of poor whites with no other purpose than to denigrate and demonize. I don't think it is rare at all. Admittedly, most of the time it is done by more well off whites. In societal ranking, I'd say poor whites aren't viewed much more highly than poor minorities if at all.

Right, but this sort of misses the point that those terms don't have as much impact coming from non-whites. Wise even says that each "class" competes against itself. What he's saying is that within each class, rich, middle-class, and poor, the whites tend to retain some sort of advantage or at least some perceived edge over the non-whites within their class.

[livius drusus]

Originally Posted by warrenly

I beg to differ that they are not seen as dangerous and criminals.

Of course individuals can be seen as dangerous based on class prejudice and some white neighborhoods can be seen as criminally dangerous. The point I was trying to make is that terms like "poor white trash" do not pathologize a race and are thus not even on the same scale as anti-black racial slurs.

The "meth capital" reputation is an insulting generalization for the honest working poor in that neighborhood, but that doesn't get extrapolated into de facto assumptions of criminality based on white skin, just as idiotic college open container riots are never characterized as race riots even though they are massively, overwhelmingly white.

How many of those working poor, for instance, get arrested a couple of times a year for being in the wrong neighborhood? I'll wager exactly none of them have. Class bias and its attendant slurs just don't operate on the same principles that racial slurs against black people do.

Oh, and what Shake said.

[Dingfod]

Granted.

[beyelzu]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

I've worked a number of manual labor jobs where most of my co-workers were African-American and Hispanic. On the job, we all got along quite well, because we were quite well-aware that we were all in the same boat. But it was simply shocking to talk with these guys about their lives outside the workplace. Almost all of them had spent a good deal of time in jail, for instance. What's shocking is why. They'd quite casually mention that they'd be walking down the street and a police car would stop, and they'd be picked up and taken in for an overnight stay in the slammer -- for no apparent reason other than that they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and were the wrong color.

What I found so astonishing about it was how casual most of them were about this. They were so used to being treated with suspicion wherever they went that they considered it normal to be hauled off to jail at least once or twice in the average year for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Some of them were surprised that I found this so shocking -- they thought of it as perfectly normal, and had long ago accepted that this was simply the way things were, and the price they had to pay for being born with dark skin.

what I am amazed by is that you believed that they were all arrested for no reason.

you have to be incredibly naive.

police dont just cruise around arresting black people for no fucking reason.

in short I would like some proof that this assertion has anything at all to do with mainstream reality.

[Beth]

Ok, I agree that the minority groups do feel the oppression of the majority group. I am well aware of racism and rather agree with the article from Tim Wise that Liv posted. I just do not put up with it from any side.

I have experienced slurs from black girls in a predominately black school. I was transferred there after attending another predominately black school in the projects where I had tons of black friends, the girls would take turns plaiting my blonde hair, we would cut up, I would marvel at their hair and at how cool it was that it would just stay in place in a braid with no need of a holder...the hair thing was the only asthetic difference we took note in and we loved that difference. Other than that, we were just giggling girlfriends. (I might also add that before this school, I had only known a few other black girls, one in my neighborhood, and a few from school.)

When I transferred to this other school, it was hell from the start. In the locker room, on my first day, I was pinned by a group of black girls using every slur that I imagine can be used for a white girl. They threatened me, tripped me, and told me that they were gonna push me down the stairs one day if I did not change my stuck-up honkey attitude. This went on constantly. In the halls, I would be tripped by some black girl for being a honkey, I would have black boys threaten me with knives, or until I became the resource officer's assistant. I, not once, adopted a racist attitude, never decided that my oppression and the hatred I was dealing with justified the way my family spoke of the black people and it helped me understand some of the hatred black people do experience from whites.

My son is now in a predominately black middle school, he was given a concussion by a black boy a few weeks ago because my son is a cracker. My son tried to avoid the boy, to be the better person and sit at his table and behave and the kid decided that he would hit my son in the back of the head. So after this racially motivated incident that the school ignored (until I threatened filing complaint with the school board), I decided that when another child a called my son a cracker with a hateful and racist tone that I would make sure the offender was punished. Especially because of the last incident and since it is a violation of the hate crimes act in Florida and that is a punishable offence by the school board, I felt I should not just ignore the racism just because my son was white.

I understand the vileness of the 'n' word. I never say that word. I did once as a child until someone explained to me the meaning of it. I also accept when people call me a cracker, although I am not one, because it is basically like calling a northerner a Yank. Just a term, no really bad connotations and I usually make some sort of joke. I accept black people calling me a cracker or using 'you crackers' as long as there is not a hateful implication there and yes, I can tell the differences.

I think that we must say enough.

Now days, I rarely face any sort of racism.I smile widely to both blacks and whites or just ignore them equally. I am kind and polite and usually feel at ease in black neighborhoods (except for one area). I can understand that most in racial minority groups are not honestly able to say that they rarely continue to face racism. Because of this, I accept that the "n" word has a history of oppression and really is not exactly the same as cracker. But, to me, both words can be used in hate and to reopen racial divides that we are trying to mend through education down here. So these inciting words should not be tolerated.

I think that the racial tensions in this nation will not ease until the south no longer has those alive that remember being oppressed by the law or those who remember being superiors to those oppressed. I do not think that until those who felt what it was like to be forced to stand "n" the back of the bus or to use a different toilet or to use a different water fountain or to be refused service simply because their skin was a different color, or those who felt the empowerment of suppressing that group and relishing the good ole days when the whites were legally superior to the inferior black man pass into the annuls of history that any racial divides will truly be bridged.

[The Lone Ranger]

Oh, I don't think the police are all going around looking for black people "out of place" in order to arrest them. Nor do I even believe that all the people who told me they were just minding their own business when they were picked up were telling the truth. What I found so shocking about the whole thing was how many of these people seemed to think that getting arrested once or twice a year was normal.

Maybe they were all a bunch of hooligans for all I know. Still, it was a pretty graphic reminder that I -- a poor white guy -- lived in a very different world than the poor brown and black guys did.

Cheers,

Michael

[beyelzu]

Originally Posted by livius drusus

Of course individuals can be seen as dangerous based on class prejudice and some white neighborhoods can be seen as criminally dangerous. The point I was trying to make is that terms like "poor white trash" do not pathologize a race and are thus not even on the same scale as anti-black racial slurs.

The "meth capital" reputation is an insulting generalization for the honest working poor in that neighborhood, but that doesn't get extrapolated into de facto assumptions of criminality based on white skin, just as idiotic college open container riots are never characterized as race riots even though they are massively, overwhelmingly white.

How many of those working poor, for instance, get arrested a couple of times a year for being in the wrong neighborhood? I'll wager exactly none of them have. Class bias and its attendant slurs just don't operate on the same principles that racial slurs against black people do.

Oh, and what Shake said.

blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime, and I am perfectly willing to accept that it is almost certianly because of economic reasons.

and while I probably cant speak for others, I rarely feal uncomfortable in any environment. I think that certain cultural identifiers are probably what people key off of more than simply skin color. The hiphop look if you will. I just dont think that people are going to fear a middle age black man in a suit.

I think the mixture of gangsta rap with its glorification of crime and violence, the fact that blacks are more likely to commit crime and the fact that many black youth's embrace the thug look is as much responsible for the stereotyping as the evil white man.

[beyelzu]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

Oh, I don't think the police are all going around looking for black people "out of place" in order to arrest them. Nor do I even believe that all the people who told me they were just minding their own business when they were picked up were telling the truth. What I found so shocking about the whole thing was how many of these people seemed to think that getting arrested once or twice a year was normal.

Maybe they were all a bunch of hooligans for all I know. Still, it was a pretty graphic reminder that I -- a poor white guy -- lived in a very different world than the poor brown and black guys did.

Cheers,

Michael

or conversely, maybe they just didnt want to admit what crimes they had actually committed.

or maybe their cultural meme allows for the possibility that police do go around arresting blacks for no reason and that everyone knows that.

Much as a majority of blacks seemed to think that OJ was innocent and that he was framed for little or no reason.

[The Lone Ranger]

Originally Posted by beyelzu

blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime, and I am perfectly willing to accept that it is almost certianly because of economic reasons.

It's certainly true that blacks earn much less, on average, than do whites. I think it's fair to point out that some of this disparity is due to poor attitudes within the black community, sadly. Bill Cosby got a lot of grief for pointing this out, but he had a legitimate point.

I've had more than one African-American student complain to me that their peers criticize them for "acting white" if they spend too much time studying.



The question is: Why the prevalence of this negative attitude toward academic achievement (which is doubtless partially responsible for the economic disparity)? I suspect a lot of blacks feel the system's set up against them anyway and they're doomed to fail regardless, so there's no point in fighting it. A self-defeating attitude if there ever was one, sadly.

[Beth]

The question is: Why the prevalence of this negative attitude toward academic achievement (which is doubtless partially responsible for the economic disparity)? I suspect a lot of blacks feel the system's set up against them anyway and they're doomed to fail regardless, so there's no point in fighting it. A self-defeating attitude if there ever was one, sadly.

Many white poor aknowledge 'the man' also with distain. I do think they feel that one must not become part of the oppressor. Fortunately, also, there are many good mothers out there that drill into their kids that an education is the only hope to escape the cycle of poverty.

So perhaps there is a cultural myth exists that educating oneself and obtaining a higher social status is the equivilant of buying into a corrupt system.

[Godless Dave]

Originally Posted by beyelzu

blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime.

That's true, but I also think blacks are arrested a disproportianate amount of the time and receive disproportionate sentences.

And where I live some cops do arrest black people for no reason. "He fit the description" is good enough. A black man robs a convenience store -- call goes out on the radio with a description of a black man of a certain height -- certain cops arrest the first black man they see about that height.

Black people get pulled over for minor violations like having an air freshener hanging from their rear-view mirror far more often than white people.

When a white person in a trashy car gets pulled over, how likely is it that he will be ordered to lie face-down on the ground while the cops aim guns at him?

The head of the Minneapolis Civil Rights Commission, a black man, was questioned by police who were conducting an investigation. The fact that he was questioned was not in itself alarming. The fact that they asked him 6 times who his Mercedes really belonged to - after he had produced ID and proof of title to the car - was.

There was a case here a few years ago where a woman called 911 because two American Indians were passed out on her front step. She expected them to send an ambulance. Instead, the police came and loaded the men into the trunk of their car, closed it, and drove them to detox.

Originally Posted by Beth

I think that the racial tensions in this nation will not ease until the south no longer has those alive that remember being oppressed by the law or those who remember being superiors to those oppressed.

It's not just the south. Duluth, Minnesota had a lynching in the 30s. There was, and still is, plenty of oppression in the north.

[Beth]

Sorry, I think I was using the South as an example because of the slavery that once existed here.

[livius drusus]

Originally Posted by beyelzu

blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime, and I am perfectly willing to accept that it is almost certianly because of economic reasons.

You don't actually know that, though. All you know is that black people are arrested and convicted for a disproportionate amount of crime. Given the classist and racist mechanics of the drug war - the emphasis on street busts, the constant patrolling of "at risk" neighborhoods while completely ignoring toney neighborhoods despite the large number of rich white people doing expensive drugs - there's no way of knowing if the disproportion reflects a genuine difference in criminal behavior.

and while I probably cant speak for others, I rarely feal uncomfortable in any environment. I think that certain cultural identifiers are probably what people key off of more than simply skin color. The hiphop look if you will. I just dont think that people are going to fear a middle age black man in a suit.

Do you have any evidence of that? Off the top of my head I would say statistics like those uncovered in the 1996 New Jersey racial profiling case that black drivers were 5 times more likely to be pulled over by state troppers than white people contradict the baggy jeans principle. You can't tell how someone is dressed when they're driving by you, but you can tell what color their skin is.

Incidentally, there is also no study at all to indicate that minority drivers commit a disproportionate number of traffic violations, and yet the Interim Report of the State Police Review Team Regarding Allegations of Racial Profiling found that 77.2% of consent searches involved black or Latino motorists. Consent searches, mind you, which means the troopers asked permission before searching and which not surprisingly means more often than not they don't find shit.

Here's a document with a collection of links on state profiling studies. I don't think you'll find that rap or couture have a thing to with it.

I think the mixture of gangsta rap with its glorification of crime and violence, the fact that blacks are more likely to commit crime and the fact that many black youth's embrace the thug look is as much responsible for the stereotyping as the evil white man.

You disappoint me, beyelzu. I never created any such "evil white man" chimera and I don't appreciate having my point (or Tim Wise's point) caricatured. If you have nothing to say about the article, fine, but your post doesn't even begin to rebut its arguments which are no more grounded in the instrinsic depravity of white people than they are that of black people.