It's a research based fact that people with first names that sound "black" (like Lashika, for instance) are much less likely to be called in for interviews than people with old English sounding names (like Frank).

Would you say that's a sign of systemic racism? I'm asking.

The essential problem centers around acquiring and maintaining power or advantage. People don't discriminate against those with superficial differences for no reason. In order to correct the unfair practices, you need to address whatever established taxonomy has been used. Naturally, it will be an uphill battle because people generally hate giving up an advantage.

I can agree with that. I just think the very first step to correcting them should be to refuse using those taxonomies. They automatically lead to the hastiest of generalizations, unable to account for the disparities between individuals who may or may not be a part of those groups.

I'm just curious: you're not in the US, so is there a minority in your country that suffers from discrimination?

I just think the very first step to correcting them should be to refuse using those taxonomies. They automatically lead to the hastiest of generalizations — NOS4A2

One of the first steps, in my opinion, would be to look at these 'hasty generalizations' that you mention. Look at what's behind the taxonomies.

It's a research based fact that people with first names that sound "black" (like Lashika, for instance) are much less likely to be called in for interviews than people with old English sounding names (like Frank).

Would you say that's a sign of systemic racism? — frank

No.

No. — praxis

:up:

When we talk about systemic racism are we mainly talking about demographics?

For instance, if Latinos are statistically poorer than blacks, would we see that as a sign of more potent racism for Latinos vs blacks?

Or are there upstream facts that we use to make our assessments?

Race-ism (the belief in race)... — NOS4A2

Bullshit.

Belief in race does not equate to devaluing one because of their race. The former is necessary for the latter, but not all belief in race includes devaluing one because of race. The former is not what we are referring to by "racism". Rather, it's the latter.

You're abusing language here.

To defeat racism is to value people equally regardless of their race.

Good. Now what do you think is keeping the disparities in play?

Mostly the way you frame them. If you view it through the lens of race, racial disparities necessarily arise. — NOS4A2

If you do not include race in the discussion, then racial disparities aren't able to be identified!

:brow:

Hence, one can claim color-blindness as a means to intentionally not address the problems.

Or are there upstream facts that we use to make our assessments? — frank

Yes.

Yes. — praxis

Like what?

The overwhelming problem in this thread is the failure to distinguish race from ethnicity.

Sort that one out, folks.

There are examples in housing, loan practices, the judicial system, health and environment. None of them will be very overt, in this day and age. Do you need convincing or what? It seems like many of those who don't want to see it can't see it. Well, I don't want to see it but the evidence is there.

I could go on and on, dividing up black perspectives into categories like the Spike Lee attitude, the Bill Cosby viewpoint, etc. etc. etc.

I don't join teams because it's not a football game to me. What I'll note is that though many fans of systemic racism have spoken in this thread, none of them seem to be able to give a specific example of it or even explain what the hell it's actually supposed to be.

I thought you might correct that. And you better be friendly to me or I'll bombard your inbox with youtube videos about American expressionism.

It’s not a game to you but you won’t even exert the marginal effort it would take to look this shit up yourself. :chin:

Where I live are racial disparities, yes, and a legacy of racism and racial policies.

It’s not a game to you but you won’t even exert the marginal effort it would take to look this shit up yourself. :chin: — praxis

That's it. Say hello to Jackson Pollack.

Where I live are racial disparities, yes, and a legacy of racism and racial policies. — NOS4A2

Are racial policies still in place?

Bullshit.

Belief in race does not equate to devaluing one because of their race. The former is necessary for the latter, but not all belief in race includes devaluing one because of race. The former is not what we are referring to by "racism". Rather, it's the latter.

You're abusing language here.

To defeat racism is to value people equally regardless of their race.

I never said the belief in race equates to devaluing one because of her race. What I’m trying to say is that the belief that the species can be divided into such subgroups, it’s assumptions, the race-thinking, provides the foundation for all racist discriminations and hatred. It’s a false, a superstitious and dangerous taxonomy. To see it continue to metastasize in government, corporate, and cultural institutions should be cause for grave concern.

Racial policies still exist but in the form of affirmative action.

I never said the belief in race equates to devaluing one because of her race. — NOS4A2

Right!

You said belief in race is racism. It's not!

Racism is devaluing someone based upon race. Belief in race is not racism.

If you do not include race in the discussion, then racial disparities aren't able to be identified!

:brow:

Hence, one can claim color-blindness as a means to intentionally not address the problems.

We’re talking about race. At no point do I deny or ignore the legacy of racism.

Racial policies still exist but in the form of affirmative action. — NOS4A2

Affirmative Action is an American thing, sparky. Good try, though. :kiss:

We’re talking about race. At no point do I deny or ignore the legacy of racism. — NOS4A2

Good. Assuming you - like other reasonable considerate people - want to work on correcting racism, you must realize that it cannot be corrected by denying race.

Right!

You said belief in race is racism. It's not!

Racism is devaluing someone based upon race. Belief in race is not racism.

And next you’ll appeal to the dictionary.

Appeal to the dictionary? For what. Belief in race is not racism. It's necessary for racism, but not sufficient.

And next you’ll appeal to the dictionary. — NOS4A2

You dont buy that definition of racism? How do you define it?

Nice try. They go under different names elsewhere.

They go under different names elsewhere. — NOS4A2

You mean for college admissions? Affirmative action was much bigger than that. So no, it's not the same thing.

Appeal to the dictionary? For what. Belief in race is not racism. It's necessary for racism, but not sufficient.

Race-ism. It’s quite simple. The suffix ‘ism’ is attached to the root word ‘race’.

You mean for college admissions? Affirmative action was much bigger than that. So no, it's not the same thing.

About one quarter of nations across the world use some form of affirmative action for student admissions into higher education.

https://ejournals.bc.edu/index.php/ihe/article/download/5672/5065/

Don't be such a dumb fuck! There is a long history of what racism is, of how the word is used, of what it refers to, of what it picks out to the exclusion of all else....

It does not pick out belief in race.