Has Multiculturalism Failed in America? (own, differences, stereotype, racism)
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.
Do you consider the culture in Arkansas to be identical to that in Louisiana to that in Massachussets to that in California and so on? If not, which culture best represents the nation?
y
Exactly!
I'm still waiting for a definition of "American Culture" and no that does NOT mean "White American Culture".
The irony here is that American Indians that fought in the American Revolution were never given full rights of citizens and many Black Americans that were slaves that fought in the war were given the promise of freedom that was in some cases later rescinded.
The treatment of non-White people by the Founding Fathers of this country is really nothing to feel proud of unless you are a racist of the highest order.
As with Native Americans, more Blacks fought for the crown than for the colonists.
In some cases, the British did keep their word to those Blacks who fought (Sir Guy Carleton, for instance); the shipped them to England or Nova Scotia rather than return them to as slaves.
They left the NAs to the colonists though, and most of us know what happened next.
I love it... because my family had to come through Ellis Island and do it the right way, and because my expectations are that others should follow the same rule of law makes me a racist?
Why do you think you're losing popular support for your insane way of thinking? You can only use the race card so much before it becomes a joke. It's long past that point!
Chances are if your family came though Ellis Island and they were Italian, Greek, Polish, Irish, Russian, German, or anything other than Anglo-Saxon they faced some level of discrimination or exclusion in employment, housing, banking, education and other areas of life. So what did they do?
They formed ethnic enclaves with other people of the same nationalities, ethnicities and cultures. Within these communities immigrants gained a measure of economic and political power. In mores cases than not political and economic power was used by various immigrant groups to promote a system of patronage.
The patronage system functioned on the basis in return of economic or political support an individual in a immigrant group could get a job or access to credit and the basic tools to gain economic, political enfranchisment. The flip side of patronage is that it encouraged discrimination of other groups deemed economic competitors. That's one reason why early labor unions dominated Euorpean immigrants did not admit Black Americans. To this day the police fire and civil service departments or cities in the Northeast and Midwest still tend to be dominated by certain ethnicites and why in some cases these ethnic groups work to keep others not in their groups out of these organizations or in lower levels. This is all starting to change with time and demographics.
What I find ironic is the people that are complaining against multiculturalism could be in fact complaining against the same thing their descendents did with they first came to this country and faced exclusion by Americans already here.
The irony here is that American Indians that fought in the American Revolution were never given full rights of citizens and many Black Americans that were slaves that fought in the war were given the promise of freedom that was in some cases later rescinded.
The treatment of non-White people by the Founding Fathers of this country is really nothing to feel proud of unless you are a racist of the highest order.
You didn't have to be non-White to be treated shabbily. Haym Solomon. Anna Ella Carroll.
You didn't have to be non-White to be treated shabbily. Haym Solomon. Anna Ella Carroll.
Thanks for the input you are absolutely right but discrimination against non-Whites seem to united European Americans not matter what kind of grievances they had with each other.
Dare I add that even when folks "assimilated" it didn't help prevent them being ethnically cleansed from their homes (see Cherokees) or confined to detention camps (see Japanese).
What assimilation REALLY means is the acceptance of White Americans as the poltically dominant poltical, social and economic group in the United States.
Based on the thoughts and actions of many White Americans they don't "accept" other groups of people as much they "tolerate" them. Their level of tolerance is based on how threatened they feel by a groups ability challenge their power.
Many of them are deeply pissed off at Barack Obama for challenging the prevailing social order.
It is also why illegal immigration is such a hot button issue. In the next 10 to 20 years Latino political and economic power is going to assert itself in such a way it will make many White Americans very uncomfortable.
What has White Americans concerned now is that they die has been cast and the demographic trends DO NOT WORK IN THEIR FAVOR. The fight against multiculturalism is a power play nothing more and nothing less.
The point remains that your study does not support the position that racism is hard wired.
Yep. It sure does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude
It is merely a discussion of the general inability of the human brain to account for more than about 150 individuals (of any race) at a time.
Right. So if a person sees a black person look, talk and act one way, and sees another black person look, talk and act the same way, it's the brain's natural tendency to lump all black people together not because that person is a horrible racist, but because it's the brain's natural tendency to lump people/things it thinks are similar into one category. That's how it deals with being overwhelmed by more than 150 people. It puts them into categories, race being one of them.
I think you feel that because the 150 rule doesn't deal with race absolutely, that it doesn't deal with race at all. Not true. Race is one (but not the only) category in which you can put someone.
As with Native Americans, more Blacks fought for the crown than for the colonists.
In some cases, the British did keep their word to those Blacks who fought (Sir Guy Carleton, for instance); the shipped them to England or Nova Scotia rather than return them to as slaves.
They left the NAs to the colonists though, and most of us know what happened next.
In many cases Native Americans and Black Americans were often treated better by the English than they were by colonial Americans. Keep in mind the abolition movement started in England much earlier than it did in America and England freed slaves much earlier than did the United States.
You keep saying that. Unfortunately, the actual study does not.
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.