Racism, Neo-Nazism, and Catholic Teaching

Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ll give you the click-bait spoiler for this article.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn/next-time-someone-asks-yo_b_12436340.html
So here’s the challenge, racism deniers. Prove when racism ended and its effects were allayed. Show, with data and peer-reviewed studies supporting your argument, when the effects of the hundreds of years of anti-Black racism from chattel slavery through Old Jim Crow leveled off. Show when the wealth expropriated during that oppression was repaid to those it was expropriated from and through. And remember, after you’ve addressed the end of anti-Black racism you’ll still have to explain when anti-Latinx, anti-Asian, anti-Arab, and anti-Native racism came to an end as well.
Click to expand...
Anyone up for it? 😀
 
blackforest said:
It is the structurally racist elements of our society, such as how African-Americans suffer disproportionately from poverty, routine anti-Constitutional stop-and-frisk sessions, mass incarceration, violent schools, and police brutality.
Click to expand...
Have you had a look at the statistics by race of who is committing the violent crime?

Are you defining ‘dis-proportionate’ by numbers in the society or numbers by race committing crime? There is a difference and we should be mindful of that otherwise you fall into the trap you are discussing of calling something racist, that well, isn’t.
 
Last edited:
blackforest said:
So here’s the challenge, racism deniers. Prove when racism ended and its effects were allayed. Show, with data and peer-reviewed studies supporting your argument, when the effects of the hundreds of years of anti-Black racism from chattel slavery through Old Jim Crow levelled off. Show when the wealth expropriated during that oppression was repaid to those it was expropriated from and through. And remember, after you’ve addressed the end of anti-Black racism you’ll still have to explain when anti-Latinx, anti-Asian, anti-Arab, and anti-Native racism came to an end as well.
Click to expand...
There was a lot of institutionalised racism by the Democratic Party. I don’t think anyone would deny that. To extend that racism to a particular group of people denoted by race is extremely wrong. Take the Republican Party for example, mostly made up historically of white people who did fantastically laudable things to oppose the institutionalised racism of the Democratic Party.

There is in every region of the earth, injustice going on. Where it is opposed such as with the fine example of Republicans fighting slavery and Jim Crow it should be praised to the hilt, not forgotten because it doesn’t suit the political goals of the very party who did the institutionalising of racism.

That is clearly indefensible and thwarting truth which is never good.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Zerg said:
Education is the only thing that can change people’s perceived ideas.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything above this last line. Clearly education is not the only way ideas are changed. The Lefts control of education shows that the formal institutionalised education when used as a political weapon is extremely dangerous. Hitler’s Socialists also had control of education as did the Bolshevik Socialists. Both the Hitler and Bolshevik socialists claimed victim status and the need to thwart Christianity and insert their own perceptions on the citizens. Such an approach I think is rightfully looked on with suspicion.

Neither yourself or I have control of education. In the many recently secularised education systems the people who have control of education evangelise the religion of political correctness. Such an approach I would suggest needs to be opposed not supported.
 
Last edited:
When the government outlawed denying voting rights, segregation, and discrimination in the work place based on race.
 
JanSobieskiIII said:
When the government outlawed denying voting rights, segregation, and discrimination in the work place based on race.
Click to expand...
and remember the Republicans tried to bring in civil rights for blacks in the 1860’s when they first gained power and all the way up to the 1960’s when a large enough group of Democrats finally came on board. To blame this group fighting institutionalised racism for institutionalised racism simply because of the colour of their skin IS RACISM.
 
Last edited:
JanSobieskiIII said:
But but but the parties switched 🤣
Click to expand...
I know, it is so juvenile.

Officer I might have run that red light back there but you see I’ve just switched with the guy over there. You need to blame him now. I am now the good guy. I condemn the running of red lights. Urrrrgh!!!
 
Last edited:
blackforest said:
The article doesn’t ask you to point fingers. It asks you to prove when racism ended.
Click to expand...
It asked a lot of things. Deal with the truth presented. You clearly cannot which is why you have given a brief senseless retort. If you want the world to be a better place with a decline in racism you cannot run away as you just did. Deal with what is presented not a narrow minded false Leftist narrative.

You pointed fingers with the anti black, anti Latino, anti Arab racist lines. You didn’t mention anti white racism. That is you pointing fingers. I can go through many of your posts where you point fingers. Be truthful.

Racism is alive today, it did not end. I gave you the examples of affirmative action, Liberal education and the white privilege examples to show it is still alive. I agreed that there was institutionalised racism and pointed out it was enacted by Democrats and laudably opposed by Republicans. Where is your truthful consideration of this? If we are going to talk about institutionalised racism properly it is important to discuss who did it and who opposed it. Otherwise you are following a false narrative that it is white people’s fault.

If that is not pointing fingers (falsely and racistly) I don’t know what is.
 
Last edited:
I do have concerns that many Americans don’t have enough concern for their neighbors. It seems like America’s dark secret that the odds, statistics and prospects (i.e poverty and life expectancy) of many people from minority backgrounds are poorer than the majority. Additionally, many Americans have been isolated due to the legacy of redlining (which is compounded by highly inequitable school funding and we’re not talking about a few dollars but the difference between an overcrowded class size of 30-40 students over 15-20, between being able to see a school counselor/psychologist/social worker, between going to a school with all the amenities to a school in disrepair). Some people point out cultural issues but if people are hoarded and corralled into poor and desolate communities who is really to blame?

I remember Trump calling some gang members animals but the reason many join gangs is due to coming from a desolate community with a lack of support. Who are the true animals, them or those who influenced their social conditions?

Disclaimer: I know I’m pouring oil and gasoline into the fire, but I would like genuine answers. Just dialogue.
 
Last edited:
RCIAGraduate said:
I remember Trump calling some gang members animals but the reason many join gangs is due to coming from a desolate community with a lack of support. Who are the true animals, them or those who influenced their social conditions?
Click to expand...
It is a big discussion on who influences all of our social conditions. It is of course not just one group of people but it is multi-connected.

Christianity teaches us to take responsibility for our own formation in communion with God. I would say that in the places where the gang members come from a big influencer in social conditions should be the Catholic church. Perhaps we can start our discussion there?

Would you call the Catholic church animals? (To ask the question is to answer it - no).

This whole mode of thought that some other people who set social conditions are the real evil animals is exactly what is wrong with the debate. It is the Marxist thinking that some other evil is responsible for ones plight and it is just to attack that perceived evil - hence white privilege concepts and defining law against certain races etc. (affirmative action).

That mode of thinking leads to the real evil in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Of course racism still exists: anything the devils can use to divide us, right?

I think that for some people, what constitutes racism has changed, which is not to say that the old-style racism no longer exists, but with an expansion of the idea of what constitutes racism, there is a perception that there is more racism out there.

When a person can look on the internet and read African-Americans saying that these three things: not smiling when greeting a black person is clear evidence of racism; smiling too much is evidence of overcompensation for racism; and smiling the normal amount shows that the white person is racist by ignoring the differences between them (and yes, I do wish I had recorded those links!), that is confusing.

There is also the idea that (and disagreeing with this idea is also deemed racist) all negative disproportionate outcomes are caused by systemic racism. So, in a school that has black, white, and Asian children, the general facts that the black children are not doing as well as the white children is attributed to systemic racism, but that Asian children are doing better is attributed to the cultural Tiger Mom effect.

I do agree that racism exists. I do not agree that every problem African-Americans experience is due to racism. For example, the police shootings: some may indeed have been due to racism, but a lot of them seem to have been either not-so-unjustifed or the result of bad police work or training.

The problem with attributing every problem to racism, instead of teasing out the differences, is that the wrong solutions will be sought and applied. Instead of improving police training in the areas of dealing with mentally ill people, or better training on when shooting is justified, etc., a diversity trainer may be brought in.

Continued…
 
Last edited:
It made it illegal. It’s impossible to completely eliminate racism in individual hearts and not even worth trying to do, waste of time and resources. Instead you focus on making it impossible for them to live that hate out openly (and in a way that directly harms another individual, such as violence or refusal of service) without severe consequences.
 
Last edited:
I think the US has come a long way in reducing racism. Do we still have a ways to go? Yes, But has the situation overall for Afican-Americans improved? I would also say yes to this.

No one will ever be able to wave a magic wand and make all problems for African-Americans disappear.

However, I think that when people attack others with accusations of racism, it stops communication. This is really bad.

Maybe we could have two changes: one an acknowledgement that racism is still manifested in the US, and the other an acknowledgement that the situation for African-Americans has improved since the days of Bull Connor.
 
So for those who say racism doesn’t exist. If I, a non-white Canadian citizen were riding in a train and was told by anyone, white or otherwise, to “go back to my country” what is that?
 
I find your apparent conflation of racism and neo-Nazi/white supremacist movements disturbing. Was that unintentional?
 
Jingoism. Nationalism. Or maybe it is racism. Who knows, but are those words alone really enough to ruin someone’s day? If it is it shouldn’t be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top