America's racial divide is a dangerous farce (Obama, solution, crime)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From what I see....just as an employee....the likability factors makes a huge differences as well. You can have the best credentials, but if people are not comfortable with something about you, you are not going to get hired in a tight job market where there are plenty of other candidates. I mean, if it was all about qualifications....there would be no need for interviews and they would just pick based upon who looked best on paper.
Given that....likability is subjective. It has to do with your ability to make others feel comfortable and at ease. I think white people are more comfortable with white people and black people more comfortable with black people, only because we are often raised in mostly white or mostly black environments.....at least when I was growing up. The problem is whites have had a head start and own most of the major businesses....and plus its way more whites than blacks....meaning that blacks have to make white feel comfortable to get hired and promoted more so than whites have to make blacks comfortable in order for whites to be hired and promoted.
Thus, left alone.....things will generally favor whites unless counter measures are instituted to offset the legacy impact. Things in motion will continue in that motion until and unless acted upon by opposite forces. The motion of racial inequality will continue to favor whites when no action at all is taken to create opposite force to the momentum accrued from the past.
No one wants to work with an a**hole. Someone who's disruptive, lazy, a gossip, a big I AM. This is not being subjective. No one likes these kinds of people and fewer want to work with them.
So personality is an important consideration. That's the sense I mean it in. True, whites hang more with whites and blacks with blacks. But in the company I worked for everyone worked together. Both races (and others) were in the golf league, the company soccer team and so on.
And lest the most important point be missed: worked together.
I don't agree with the need for counter measures. Blacks have dominated professional sports for at least two decades despite team owners being 100% white. Why? Because blacks were the best at helping the organization meet its goals. They went from Jackie Robinson to no white NFL DBs in 50 - 60 years. White owners didn't need counter measures. Their own interests were enough. Whatever "motion of inequality" existed lifted like the morning dew. (Not to minimize the obstacles black athletes overcame, but they did overcome them.)
I've often wondered why every gas station and corner grocery in black neighborhoods is run by Indians, Vietnamese, Koreans, etc. Why don't the blacks get into these businesses (maybe they do in Brooklyn or Watts or Oakland, but not around here)? This is something that they should have an advantage at, being from the neighborhood and familiar with its residents.
Or why don't they become landlords, like the Italians used to? Live on the first floor and rent out the second. They'd know who the good tenants are and the not so good.
This might be drifting away form the threads title. Even if everything I've mentioned eventuated, it might not heal the racial divide. But its worst effects would be mitigated.
Just a random quote from one of them: “Everyone is given the opportunity to do their best and contribute to the institution equally. [Programs at the hospital] give every employee an opportunity to do their best, contribute to the progress of the institution, and get rewarded for their effort.”
How does that contradict anything I wrote? Good companies try to make their employees better, more valuable, give them chances to broaden their skills, i.e., advance. The older folk in the upper management aren't going to be there forever and they'd be derelict if they didn't prepare successors.
The racial divide part would be if they were favoring one race over the others, which I didn't pick up in these.
Just a random quote from one of them: “Everyone is given the opportunity to do their best and contribute to the institution equally. [Programs at the hospital] give every employee an opportunity to do their best, contribute to the progress of the institution, and get rewarded for their effort.”
How does that contradict anything I wrote? Good companies try to make their employees better, more valuable, give them chances to broaden their skills, i.e., advance. The older folk in the upper management aren't going to be there forever and they'd be derelict if they didn't prepare successors.
The racial divide part would be if they were favoring one race over the others, which I didn't pick up in these.
Those companies have programs to develop minority participation. It's not the sink or swim approach you have been preaching.
Those companies have programs to develop minority participation. It's not the sink or swim approach you have been preaching.
Then my communication was poor. I did not mean to imply that companies do or should use sink or swim approaches and I've never worked at one that did and none of my friends did either.
Places like Goldman Sachs, the big accounting firms do but they are not typical of businesses, either in what they do or how they treat their people.
This topic is bigger than how companies hire or treat their employees, however. I didn't look at it for a long time because I couldn't figure out what a dangerous farce was. But having entered the fray I've replied according to what my experience is, what I believe, and what I've observed.
The divide is greater than discrimination which does exist but which is only one facet of it. The divide is dangerous. I'd characterize as tragic instead or farcical. How to deal with it has confounded the best and best intentioned of people. I can't pretend to be one of them.
My own approach is to treat every person as an individual. Not a member of this group or that race. I've never understood how more can be done than that.
...I'd characterize as tragic instead or farcical. How to deal with it has confounded the best and best intentioned of people. I can't pretend to be one of them...
I agree with your characterization of the divide.
Race relations have seen ups and downs, but generally it has improved over time. But it'll never improve without the work of the best intentioned Americans. Starting from the low of point of slavery, the best intentioned Americans fought to free them, the others, not so much. After they were freed the best intentioned Americans sought to improve relations thru reconstruction, but the others were able to foist Jim Crow as the law of the land. During the 60's our best intentioned Americans sought to give blacks their civil rights, the others not so much.
I suppose you could claim that the white racists had the "best intentions" for their white friends and family as they saw it, but that wouldn't actually make relations better, would it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troyfan
...My own approach is to treat every person as an individual. Not a member of this group or that race. I've never understood how more can be done than that.
Treating every person as an individual is a good approach, but it's no guarantee of better relations. Racist police have been pulling individual blacks over for DWB since they started driving and racist restaurant owners required individual blacks to order food from their back doors for example. Looking at our history from slaverty to now, I believe our race relations have generally improved. But just recently since Republicans chose a documented racist, not so much.
"...In February, the law center reported that its count of hate groups in the country increased for the second consecutive year and that the number of anti-Muslim organizations had nearly tripled within a year. It attributed the growth to “Trump’s incendiary rhetoric”..."
So I disagree, banning together as a group is sometimes the only way to move forward and has worked since we got together in loose tribes as cavemen. Women banned together for their rights starting with their right to vote, or how about the individual colonies, they had to ban together to fight for their independence. So why do so many whites have an issue with black organizations?!?
Given our history, as long as our country stands, overcoming our strained race relations will take the very best of intentions of everyone for everyone ...
Race relations have seen ups and downs, but generally it has improved over time. But it'll never improve without the work of the best intentioned Americans. Starting from the low of point of slavery, the best intentioned Americans fought to free them, the others, not so much. After they were freed the best intentioned Americans sought to improve relations thru reconstruction, but the others were able to foist Jim Crow as the law of the land. During the 60's our best intentioned Americans sought to give blacks their civil rights, the others not so much.
I suppose you could claim that the white racists had the "best intentions" for their white friends and family as they saw it, but that wouldn't actually make relations better, would it?
Treating every person as an individual is a good approach, but it's no guarantee of better relations. Racist police have been pulling individual blacks over for DWB since they started driving and racist restaurant owners required individual blacks to order food from their back doors for example. Looking at our history from slaverty to now, I believe our race relations have generally improved. But just recently since Republicans chose a documented racist, not so much.
"...In February, the law center reported that its count of hate groups in the country increased for the second consecutive year and that the number of anti-Muslim organizations had nearly tripled within a year. It attributed the growth to “Trump’s incendiary rhetoric”..."
So I disagree, banning together as a group is sometimes the only way to move forward and has worked since we got together in loose tribes as cavemen. Women banned together for their rights starting with their right to vote, or how about the individual colonies, they had to ban together to fight for their independence. So why do so many whites have an issue with black organizations?!?
Given our history, as long as our country stands, overcoming our strained race relations will take the very best of intentions of everyone for everyone ...
Overall that's a very good post, and I appreciate your incorporating history into it. I do think I would change one word -- from intentions to efforts. You know the old saying: the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I often think back of one of the things that Hubert Humphrey said in a speech when he was in his last days due to cancer: "It doesn't matter what you could have done or should have done. It only matters what you actually did." (paraphrase).
I'll give you an example. In my school (I was the principal), the feeder elementary schools would bring lists of students to recommend for one of the gifted programs, and for each child they would take a minute or so to give a verbal justification for their nomination. We had a half-dozen feeders. Some schools were diverse in their nominations, others not so at all. I could have just taken their recommendations and kept my mouth shut. Instead, I advocated for some minority students who were the school's "fringe candidates...who always seemed to be Black or Latino. I took minority kids on private field trips to help balance out the experiences our rich White kids had (such as summering in France or spending Christmas in Hawaii) with the very different kind of experiences our poor kids had, some of which hadn't ever been taken by their parents just to see Washington's landmarks (our school was 7 miles from the National Mall). I still wish I had been more of an advocate. But I believe that in regard to "America's racial divide" each person is literally part of the problem or part of the solution; there is no neutral ground.
I think back to our PTA (middle school). One year they had a brilliant idea to have "open houses" where parents could meet a team's teachers informally for a couple of hours one evening. And they literally wanted the "open houses" at their houses...all White upper class. I refused because I knew our minority parents wouldn't attend, but would be more likely to attend at a neutral location -- the school. This festered for several years. And finally I allowed the PTA to try it their way. Of course, not one minority parent attended. Afterward I said, "I told you so." They wanted to know why they wouldn't come to a house worth a million dollars. I said, "Would you have gone to their house or apartment over along US-50?" "Well no, but that's different." No, it's about people getting out of their comfort zones. And that's one major factor in the "racial divide".
Race relations have seen ups and downs, but generally it has improved over time. But it'll never improve without the work of the best intentioned Americans. Starting from the low of point of slavery, the best intentioned Americans fought to free them, the others, not so much. After they were freed the best intentioned Americans sought to improve relations thru reconstruction, but the others were able to foist Jim Crow as the law of the land. During the 60's our best intentioned Americans sought to give blacks their civil rights, the others not so much.
I suppose you could claim that the white racists had the "best intentions" for their white friends and family as they saw it, but that wouldn't actually make relations better, would it?
Treating every person as an individual is a good approach, but it's no guarantee of better relations. Racist police have been pulling individual blacks over for DWB since they started driving and racist restaurant owners required individual blacks to order food from their back doors for example. Looking at our history from slaverty to now, I believe our race relations have generally improved. But just recently since Republicans chose a documented racist, not so much.
"...In February, the law center reported that its count of hate groups in the country increased for the second consecutive year and that the number of anti-Muslim organizations had nearly tripled within a year. It attributed the growth to “Trump’s incendiary rhetoric”..."
So I disagree, banning together as a group is sometimes the only way to move forward and has worked since we got together in loose tribes as cavemen. Women banned together for their rights starting with their right to vote, or how about the individual colonies, they had to ban together to fight for their independence. So why do so many whites have an issue with black organizations?!?
Given our history, as long as our country stands, overcoming our strained race relations will take the very best of intentions of everyone for everyone ...
If that's the Southern Policy Law Center, leave me out. Their sole purpose is to denigrate Republicans and compile dossiers and enemies' lists and to pass on to similarly minded groups. They hate Catholics and believe Catholicism automatically disqualifies one from judicial appointment. (Sounds familiar..)
Policing is a topic all its own. My opinion is that where is has been withdrawn or watered down crime has increased proportionately. There have been studies that have documented this. Although the battlefield is littered with corpses of studies that have purported to show this vs. that when it comes to race.
I have no issue with black groups except BLM and the various Black Panther Party factions. It's too bad the NCAAP has lost its way because it was very successful in its day.
If that's the Southern Policy Law Center, leave me out. Their sole purpose is to denigrate Republicans and compile dossiers and enemies' lists and to pass on to similarly minded groups. They hate Catholics and believe Catholicism automatically disqualifies one from judicial appointment. (Sounds familiar..)
Policing is a topic all its own. My opinion is that where is has been withdrawn or watered down crime has increased proportionately. There have been studies that have documented this. Although the battlefield is littered with corpses of studies that have purported to show this vs. that when it comes to race.
I have no issue with black groups except BLM and the various Black Panther Party factions. It's too bad the NCAAP has lost its way because it was very successful in its day.
No problems with black groups except the SPLC, the BLM and the NAACP. Right, and I have no problem with conservative groups except the ones that have majority of white people...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
