New Racist America?

[Serephino]

I vented a little about this in the B&U yesterday, and was asked by staff to bring the conversation here.  I have a mixed race friend.  His maternal grandmother was half Mexican, half Native American.  His maternal grandfather was Cuban.  His father is a blond haired blue eyed Caucasian Brit.  But if you just go off of his appearance, you'd call him Hispanic.  He is also a police officer.  Yesterday morning he was minding his own business going into Walmart when a car sporting a Trump bumper sticker tried to run him down.  He got out of the way and was not hurt thankfully.  Since he always carries his badge and firearm with him he shot the guy's back tire out to get him to stop and then held him while he called his on the clock buddies.  The guy was ranting and raving about how 'filthy Mexicans' are ruining the country and deserve to all be run down.  An on the clock officer came out and arrested the idiot for assaulting a police officer.  I guess now the DA is taking the weekend to mull over what all to do with this piece of trash.

But um, this is not an isolated incident.  Since Trump has gotten elected my half minority friend has noticed a difference both in the way he is personally treated by people, and the calls he has been sent on as an officer.  Racist people seem to have really been emboldened by Trump's election because of all the racist and misogynistic things Trump has said.  He has always had people being assholes toward him because he's not lily white, but he says it has really gotten ridiculous in the past few months.  He's had people decide they don't have to listen to him because he's a 'filthy Mexican' and Trump is president now so Trump is gonna deport his ass anyway.  That would be kinda hard to do if you consider the fact he was born on US soil, as was his mother, and her mother, and then her father was Native American so his family line predates white people.  He's been sent on a domestic abuse call and told by the husband to go ahead and arrest him, but since Trump is president now he won't be in jail long.

Like, is this seriously the direction our country is taking?  My friend has seen his father, a British immigrant, have very little trouble with people.  People will rant about immigration is ruining the country, but hey, his dad is a white Christian immigrant, so that's okay.  Meanwhile, him, a natural born mixed race citizen has been told to go back to Mexico, and is now even being told our new president is going to deport him.  The most trouble his father has had is being called a race traitor for marrying a Hispanic woman and spawning mixed race babies.     

[Cassandra LeMay]

Like, is this seriously the direction our country is taking? 

It's not "my" country, but I would say no. It is the direction extremists are going. And they have been going there for a while. The "birther movement" started years ago, as did the Patriot groups (that seem to be drifting towards an anti-Muslim position nowadays) when Obama was elected. Nothing about race hatred or the like is really new. White racist hate groups and far-right terrorists have been around for a long while.

What is relatively new is how empowered some of them feel by the Trump presidency (and even before his election by his hate-filled campaign speeches).

But that is not the direction "the country" is taking. The country is more than some extremists. As an outside observer I often had my doubts about America being the greatest country on Earth, as some politicians and others proclaimed it to be. But I also have some faith left that the US has it in it to come out against all the hate and bile of those extremists, now that they have decided to show their ugly face to the public.

[Lustful Bride]

I'm really sorry to hear that this happened to your friend. Its not right and no one deserves that kind of treatment. :(

I wish I could say something amazing and profound but I'm not good at these kinds of things. Still, these types of acts stand out because they are still rare, even now when it seems everyone is losing their mind and being infected by hate, they are still a rarity. We cant allow its evil to drag us down with it.

[Black Howling]

It's not "my" country, but I would say no. It is the direction extremists are going. And they have been going there for a while. The "birther movement" started years ago, as did the Patriot groups (that seem to be drifting towards an anti-Muslim position nowadays) when Obama was elected. Nothing about race hatred or the like is really new. White racist hate groups and far-right terrorists have been around for a long while.

What is relatively new is how empowered some of them feel by the Trump presidency (and even before his election by his hate-filled campaign speeches).

But that is not the direction "the country" is taking. The country is more than some extremists. As an outside observer I often had my doubts about America being the greatest country on Earth, as some politicians and others proclaimed it to be. But I also have some faith left that the US has it in it to come out against all the hate and bile of those extremists, now that they have decided to show their ugly face to the public.

I typically stay out these areas, but I wanted to echo here and highlight that I believe Cassandra said it perfectly. Extremism has and always will be an issue. This resounds on all sides of the spectrum. But a small group of assholes does not represent our country as a whole, and seeing it like that is a win for the people who wish to paint it in this light. We have laws and courts in place that are meant to stop unconstitutional practices. They are barely holding in some cases here, but they -are- holding thus far.

We need to keep strong, avoid resentment and keep to our principals as we fight against the hate.  Allowing the racial tensions to divide those of us who do not make them an issue cannot happen.

[Mathim]

A friend of mine at work told me her son (both she and her son are white) was stabbed in the arm by a racist fellow student of her son's who was attempting to stab her son's Indian (from India, not Native American) friend during an art class. Her son put his arm up to defend his friend and had his own mechanical pencil jammed into his arm, requiring two surgeries. That's a less happy story since someone actually did get hurt but the cause was almost certainly the same. The bastard's parents didn't even react when he was arrested for this assault, apparently, as my friend reported when she and all the other relevant parties met with the school's administrators; presumably he learned that shit at home but they perhaps didn't expect him to act on it in that way and couldn't be bothered to accept their own responsibility for his upbringing. The stupid a-hole threw his life away for that, probably going to be in prison for years since it's not only an aggravated assault (possibly attempted murder) but also a hate crime, and will have that on his record for life. If he isn't killed in prison, which that kind of attitude is sure going to make likely.

The thing is, this sentiment has always been there, Trump is just kind of the match lighting all these short fuses. These morons just think that because Trump is in the seat, they might be able to get away with their actions. I haven't heard anything (not that I pay that much attention to the news) about Trump standing behind any of these fucks with either a commendation or something as outrageous as a pardon, but it wouldn't surprise me if he already has or will at some point.

[Lustful Bride]

A friend of mine at work told me her son (both she and her son are white) was stabbed in the arm by a racist fellow student of her son's who was attempting to stab her son's Indian (from India, not Native American) friend during an art class. Her son put his arm up to defend his friend and had his own mechanical pencil jammed into his arm, requiring two surgeries. That's a less happy story since someone actually did get hurt but the cause was almost certainly the same. The bastard's parents didn't even react when he was arrested for this assault, apparently, as my friend reported when she and all the other relevant parties met with the school's administrators; presumably he learned that shit at home but they perhaps didn't expect him to act on it in that way and couldn't be bothered to accept their own responsibility for his upbringing. The stupid a-hole threw his life away for that, probably going to be in prison for years since it's not only an aggravated assault (possibly attempted murder) but also a hate crime, and will have that on his record for life. If he isn't killed in prison, which that kind of attitude is sure going to make likely.

*nods* That's a sad truth, this attitude is a learned behavior. We aren't instinctively born racists, it has to be pounded in and built up either via experience, or being taught to think this way. The kid was indoctrinated with 'All non whites must be purged' and now he will be trapped in a cycle of violence and hatred, another mindless machine of hate. And his parents couldn't give less of a shit >:( . They doomed their child to this and don't care at all.

I feel bad for him, but he made his choice, and now must face punishment. Maybe theres a tiny chance that he will learn to let go....but its prison, where everyone is force to join a race based gang so..it might make it worse :(

[Callie Del Noire]

I got two nieces and a nephew that are half-hispanic that live in texas. I love them to death... hearing my older niece (who is 4) say 'Love you' when she speaks with me over the phone makes me cry. Luckily they share my tint of skin.. but seem to have inherited my tendency to tan a deep dark drown..

My biggest fears the last 5 years tie back to that and the fact that laws are JUST short of requiring them to carry their birth certificates. Most of my sister in laws family were born on this side of the mexican/american border, but they have been bouncing back and forth for centuries.. I love the entire family... they are UNBELIEVABLY awesome folks..(though I fear for my nephew.. SIX aunts, and between two sisters.. poor boy)

[Beguile's Mistress]

It seems that daily there are more and more acts of violence in this area that used to be fairly quiet.  People in malls and restaurants accost others who they perceive to be Muslim and harass them using Trump's name. 

School events such as basketball games are disturbed by groups of kids calling out racial slurs and chanting "Build that wall!" and "Send them back!"  Trump campaign signs are waved by people in the stands.

I supervise a department of 200-300 people and we are constantly intervening to put a stop to political arguments and have had to dismiss people for inappropriate actions and speech revolving around our current president.  This is something that only began during the summer of 2016.

I personally experienced an assault recently and listened to my attacker tell me Trump said it was fine for him to do what he did.  I now have to testify against the man and might have to watch him go to jail.

People are attacking others using Trump's name as justification.  Children are seeing racist grafitti spray painted on their schools.  A Mexican market chain in our city is constantly being vandalized and other immigrant owned businesses are as well. 

Things are getting worse and shrugging them off by saying there has always been this type of thing is wrong.  Sitting around and waiting for things to get better isn't going to work these days.  Those of us who want equality, inclusiveness and peace in our daily lives need to stand up and speak out against what is happening in this country.  We need to let our president and his administration know we are mad as hell and not going to take it any more!  Nothing ever got better by waiting for it to happen.

[Mathim]

I agree that it doesn't help anything but when a problem is so deep-seated, it has to be acknowledged so as to demonstrate what a Herculean task it is to change the zeitgeist in such a way. The problem is pretty much divisiveness, how we are conditioned to compartmentalize things into different categories so we can keep track of them without our minds getting overwhelmed. Sure, part of it is a biological necessity but things like race/racism and religion are social constructs and both are major sources of divisiveness and both based around completely irrational beliefs and will alter how we compartmentalize things. If there is no way to enforce a healthy parental guideline to raising kids, they will continue to grow up learning these bad ideas and carry them throughout their lives because it's so deeply ingrained it's nearly impossible to stamp out, and even rational arguments fall apart because it doesn't matter when the basis of those beliefs are not based on anything in reality.

This whole mess is just a symptom, of course, and the causes are many and varied in their level of contributing to it, but then it becomes itself a cause of other problems because of how it affects other communities and their attitude and quality of life. There's no way to fix the symptom without stamping out the underlying problems, and that's not going to happen any time soon, because the majority of people either don't realize what the causes are, or refuse to believe that they are the cause.

[HannibalBarca]

A lot of liberals had said, after Obama was elected, that it was only a matter of time before every branch of government was liberal...that Republicans were becoming a regional party.  Boy, were they wrong.  The squeaky wheel gets the grease, doesn't it?

The United States is becoming less white.  This is a very good thing.  Unfortunately for those of us who are fair-minded and rational, the racists and fear-addicted are becoming apoplectic as this shift in demographics occurs.  When people see change arrive that is not to their liking, and see it depicted as inevitable (which it is), they can become so fearful as to resort to violence, whether that comes in words or actions.

I still see an eventual shift in the nation overall towards more tolerance.  The problem is--like any sea change in a civilization--the reactionaries get up in arms when the change occurs.  What we're seeing now as far as the behavior of the far right...is a reaction to the change they do not like.  We non-racists like the change, but we're not going to like the response by the far right to that change.

I live in a community that is not only ethnically mixed in general, but there are a lot of mixed ethnicity people, especially kids, who I have a lot of in my classes as a teacher.  Considering I grew up in the military and many of the kids around me were non-white and mixed ethnicity, I feel a lot more comfortable with this kind of population.  I have people of different ethnicities in my neighborhood and prefer it that way. 

But...my son lives in a community 45 minutes away, where the population is at least 80% white and conservative to boot.  He's white, but he's also trans and open about it, and gets harassed daily at school.  Considering he looks like a butch girl to the mostly evangelical Christian bullies, they don't go after him physically like they would someone who they thought looked like a boy, I guess because they were raised not to hit girls.  Trump's election has emboldened a lot of these assholes.  Of course, my son and his friends in the Gay-Straight Alliance at the high school chanted 'Fuck Trump' in the cafeteria the day after the election, so they made their opinions clear to everyone else...but he's got guts and makes his dad very proud <3

My youngest brother's wife is of Mexican and Filipino heritage, but they live in the same town I do, and racism here is an idiotic thing to attempt.  2/3 of the population is non-white, at least.  There are still Trump supporters but--because of the ethnic mixture here--they don't try stupid shit because they aren't of enough numbers to feel emboldened.  My neighbors on one side are Latino, and on the other side African-American.  All three of us play the drums and occasionally practice together.  I'm sure there are some people in the neighborhood who don't appreciate drummers, though.  There's always haters.

The more things change ethnically here, the more the haters are going to rant and scream.  The rest of us have to do our job and make the effort to actually affect change in our government, or else the more riled-up racist elements of our country will do so.  That's how Trump got elected, and will be again if we don't do our part.

I have a mixed race friend.  His maternal grandmother was half Mexican, half Native American.  His maternal grandfather was Cuban.  His father is a blond haired blue eyed Caucasian Brit.

Race is a social construct.  To be honest, only a small percentage of Mexicans are only descended from Spanish ancestors.  The great majority of Mexicans are of at least part Native American descent.  Many Mexicans are of only Native American descent.  Cubans, like Brazilians or Estadosunidensos (people of the United States) come in many ethnic varieties, especially mixed ethnicity.

I've come to the entirely sensible conclusion that, like dogs, humans have less problems when they aren't purebred.  J.K. Rowling did a good job of presenting the same idea with Purebloods in the Potterverse.  And one look at the royalty of Europe shows how bad it is to stick to 'your own kind'.  I prefer humans as my kind.

[elone]

The United States is becoming less white.  This is a very good thing. 

Just curious, why is that a very good thing? What does it matter? 

If I were to say the United States is becoming less black, This is a very good thing.

What would the reaction be?

[Lustful Bride]

The United States is becoming less white.  This is a very good thing.

I get what you are saying...but it comes off in a weird way. :/ Just saying it out loud makes me cringe abit at the sound of it. Might want to edit that abit for clarity's sake. Not trying to judge, and I hope im not coming off as rude.

There are still Trump supporters but--because of the ethnic mixture here--they don't try stupid shit because they aren't of enough numbers to feel emboldened.

*slips on Devil's advocate hat* Now now, lets be fair here. Not all trump supporters are raging racists. Its unfair to lump them all into the same group and pronounce them all guilty by association. If we want to make things better we have to do it everyway we can. Even small things like making the distinction of the extremists of a group vs the whole group.

I'm not saying you are trying to stereotype, but that it is easy to fall into that trap if we allow ourselves to, and it can end up driving others away and at worst can end up making them into the thing we are trying to prevent.

We cant go about fixing things and curing all this hatred by pulling what some in the extreme left are doing and declaring all those slightly right as bad. The better we bridge the gap between the two sides with dialogue and communication, and acceptance, the better we can keep this age of extremism from becoming an age of destruction.

*end of my inane rambling :P *

[Cassandra LeMay]

... Things are getting worse and shrugging them off by saying there has always been this type of thing is wrong.  ...

I am not sure if this comment was brought about by what I said or not, but just to clarify: It certainly is not what I was trying to say.

[Azikt]

There's been a lot of talk of Steve Bannon in the media visa via White Nationalism, but I think his logic is woefully under-explained to the public. We slap labels on him but don't do a deep dive into what he believes and why, which is best explained in contrast to this comment:

The United States is becoming less white.  This is a very good thing.  Unfortunately for those of us who are fair-minded and rational, the racists and fear-addicted are becoming apoplectic as this shift in demographics occurs.  When people see change arrive that is not to their liking, and see it depicted as inevitable (which it is), they can become so fearful as to resort to violence, whether that comes in words or actions.

What's chilling is that Bannon has the same facts that you do, but he believes that demographic change isn't inevitable. If we shut off non-white immigration, encourage Europeans to move here to escape their own integrations, and deport as many people as possible there's a chance that the country will not have to change.

After the 2008/2012 losses mainstream Republicans were finally ready to listen to their election post-mortem documents and shift focus away from immigration and alienation of latinos, but in the 2016 primaries their base did not let them. They chose Trump specifically because he rejected that and instead articulated Bannon's strategy. Their grievances were ultimately given one chance to shine.

That doesn't meant that every Republican today agrees with Bannon's tactics. Trump did not win the majority of Republicans over on his merits. He won through having a core of supporters that backed him through a heavily factionalized primary with non-traditional rules for expediency, then benefited from partisanship, hacking, and Hillary's unpopularity in the general.

Despite the results of the election I'm confident that Bannonism is going to prove to be a passing fad. His ideas will inevitably bring practical ruin in the form of decaying relations, economic and otherwise, which temporarily diminish the country in a visible way that they won't be able to deny. Dems will take the house in 2018, the Presidency in 2020, and then the yo-yo will swing back. And the next time the Republicans come up to bat? They'll bring a latino-tolerant platform.

As far as whether or not individual racist actions have increased after the election? I don't know. That's an empirical question I don't have the data for.

[Cassandra LeMay]

As far as whether or not individual racist actions have increased after the election? I don't know. That's an empirical question I don't have the data for.

There is data on that, and hate crimes and hate-fueled incidents are on the rise. I am not going to link to individual articles, as the data is spread around a bit between articles adressing different topics (anti-Muslim, anti-Jew, anti-LGBT, anti-black, and pretty much any anti-.... you can think of), but a good starting point if you want to get a picture (and have some time for reading) is the SPLC's Intelligence Report: https://www.splcenter.org/intelligence-report

[Darkcide]

Racism in America isn't a new trend. Not remotely. A lot of racists just have massive chips on their shoulders because they had to deal with 8 years of a person of color being in the White House and they have this weird sort of disconnect and victim mentality that I don't understand.

[Darwishi]

Racism in America isn't a new trend. Not remotely. A lot of racists just have massive chips on their shoulders because they had to deal with 8 years of a person of color being in the White House and they have this weird sort of disconnect and victim mentality that I don't understand.

Are you implying that the only racists in the country are white?  It's an honest question, because that's the way the statement seems to be.  It also seems to be the way this thread is going, and I'm genuinely curious if that's what everyone thinks.

[Lustful Bride]

Are you implying that the only racists in the country are white?  It's an honest question, because that's the way the statement seems to be.  It also seems to be the way this thread is going, and I'm genuinely curious if that's what everyone thinks.

I don't think that's how the thread is going. Racism exists on all sides absolutely, no group of people on earth owns the monopoly on being good or bad, the victim of the victimizer, its just that as of late the white supremacists have been throwing the biggest tantrum and causing the most trouble.

[Darkcide]

Are you implying that the only racists in the country are white?  It's an honest question, because that's the way the statement seems to be.  It also seems to be the way this thread is going, and I'm genuinely curious if that's what everyone thinks.

No. And no. My statement was a lot of racists. I didn't say or even imply all racists are white. I said a lot of racists felt ways about a person of color being president. Which they did.

[HannibalBarca]

When a nation is a majority of one ethnicity, and has a history of racism, like the U.S. does, but also has a history of immigration, like the U.S. does...becoming a nation where no ethnic group is the majority is preferable.  I think every nation should eventually be of such mixed ethnic variety that no one will care what their ethnic ancestry is.  That doesn't mean ignoring their past.  Understanding history as a way to avoid our collective mistakes as a species is what is important, not holding on to outdated traditions that harm others because of ignorance or hate.

I'd like to see Europe less white, Africa less black, Asia less ethnic Asian.  I'd like to see Japan stop preventing immigration from any country other than Korea.  The U.S. definitely isn't the only country with a racism problem.

[RedRose]

I would never consider (not) voting for someone because of their skin color, origin or gender. Will I find it cool when there will be a French female president? Only if I like her as a President.

I'm all for people being proud to be white, black, Asian... It doesn't have to go along with putting down others, and even less with mistreating them. All cultures are interesting.

[la dame en noir]

This is just in response to the title itself. There is nothing new about racism in America. Apparently people are just now understanding that it never went anywhere. Now racist folks have bigger mouths and an government that will back their actions. Nothing new about it.

[la dame en noir]

Are you implying that the only racists in the country are white?  It's an honest question, because that's the way the statement seems to be.  It also seems to be the way this thread is going, and I'm genuinely curious if that's what everyone thinks.

I don't think their implying it, but white men hold the majority of power in the country. They're the ones that get away with the most. They're the ones doing mass shootings, serial killings, etc.

[Mathim]

I would never consider (not) voting for someone because of their skin color, origin or gender. Will I find it cool when there will be a French female president? Only if I like her as a President.

I'm all for people being proud to be white, black, Asian... It doesn't have to go along with putting down others, and even less with mistreating them. All cultures are interesting.

I had a multicultural studies professor tell us we shouldn't equate race with culture, though, so I don't think the right way to say that is proud to be white, black, Asian, etc., but proud to be of a particular culture. For example, I could give a shit if I'm white (but occasionally mistaken for Latino), but I'm proud to be a geek and nerd, the cultures I most closely identify with. And one of my favorite internet personalities, Andre the Black Nerd on Youtube, happens to be black. I can identify more with him because of the more significant and meaningful common ground between us than I can with most other white people because of that superficial characteristic.

Reducing the dominant numbers of a majority in any organization, from a social club to an entire country's population, naturally creates an environment less conducive for oppression via majority rule, no matter what demographic happens to be the majority, so while the 'American becoming less white is a good thing' could have been phrased better, it means essentially the same as the above sentiment. The problem is, 'white' isn't the only majority exerting WAY too much power across the board, and while I've got my own opinions on it, I'll just say that no religion should be allowed to have the same privileged position that being white seems to afford.

And no group has a monopoly on racism (I harken back to Avenue Q's classic song "Everyone's a Little Bit Racist") but any majority will naturally feel emboldened to act upon their beliefs and likely be able to shield themselves because of that dominant status quo. I would also imagine that if one belongs to the majority group, you'd be more likely to think that your actions will send a message and have it actually succeed in being received by others of your group, while those in minority groups would feel discouraged even receiving a positive message because of the perceived lack of power. Just an educated guess, but I could be wrong.

[Lustful Bride]

They're the ones doing serial killings, etc.

uuhhh....Serial killing doesn't much have that much to do with race. I mean it can but not usually. And there have been Serial killers of all races. When one of them does it its mostly about the thrill of the kill or getting sexual gratification from the harm done to a victim, or the sense of power to have this person's life in their hands and knowing that the have the power to end their existence without repercussion. Granted yes its odd that most of the serial killers caught/identified have been white, but I personally just think that its because those are the ones we have caught. And if we could catch al of them in the world and count them up, it would probably be more of an even number, which in and of itself is terrifying since it means there are a lot more killers out there that will never be identified or known about.

But back on topic I mean yeah a serial killers can target people by their race, and probably have and I just cant think of any examples at the moment. But this kind of thing tends to be similar to rape. Its not really about the sex, its about power, and harming a person in a way that cannot be healed. And some of them just do it for the recognition at times. Hence why some say we shouldn't be giving so much attention to serial killers and mass shooters since it turns them into like some evil rockstars.

Unless you meant something else and used the term 'serial killing' in the wrong place. Cause to become a serial killer I think its like you have to purposefully kill 3 or more people.

@ Mathim:

The problem is, 'white' isn't the only majority exerting WAY too much power across the board, and while I've got my own opinions on it, I'll just say that no religion should be allowed to have the same privileged position that being white seems to afford.

I personally feel like the abuse of religion to justify harm to others is really just a symptom of a faction having too much power. We saw that happening before in the cold war with the red scare, and that was all just about economics. :/

*Insert quote about power corrupting here.*

I really hope im not coming off as a know-it-all because i keep budding my head into things >_<.

[Oniya]

uuhhh....Serial killing doesn't much have that much to do with race. I mean it can but not usually. And there have been Serial killers of all races. When one of them does it its mostly about the thrill of the kill or getting sexual gratification from the harm done to a victim, or the sense of power to have this person's life in their hands and knowing that the have the power to end their existence without repercussion. Granted yes its odd that most of the serial killers caught/identified have been white, but I personally just think that its because those are the ones we have caught. And if we could catch al of them in the world and count them up, it would probably be more of an even number, which in and of itself is terrifying since it means there are a lot more killers out there that will never be identified or known about.

Interestingly enough, there has been research done on this, and the perception of the 'average serial killer' as being a white male has become less accurate over the years.  (The 'male' bit is still overwhelmingly typical, though.)

[Lustful Bride]

Interestingly enough, there has been research done on this, and the perception of the 'average serial killer' as being a white male has become less accurate over the years. (The 'male' bit is still overwhelmingly typical, though.)

Or it means female Serial Killers are far better at hiding their crimes....neither option is very good :(

[HannibalBarca]

I've been thinking over how some others have responded to my claiming I'd like the U.S. to be less white.  I know what it meant to me when I wrote it, but seeing other people comment on it has made me recognize other opinions.  Perhaps it would have been better to phrase it 'I'd like the U.S. to be more multiethnic'.  I'd really rather it be that every person was judged on their own merits rather than an archetype or generalized ethnicity. It is convenient to generalize in some cases, but this can be abused, as it is in racism.  I don't want white people to be removed from this country, if some people took it as that.  I'd much rather that, over the coming years, ethnic identification reduced to a minimum, as more and more people no longer fit within neatly defined ethnic groups.

[Black Howling]

Interestingly enough, there has been research done on this, and the perception of the 'average serial killer' as being a white male has become less accurate over the years.  (The 'male' bit is still overwhelmingly typical, though.)

Or it means female Serial Killers are far better at hiding their crimes....neither option is very good :(

The data used to correlate those findings are skewed by the idealism that women are notably less violent than men. As of recent, this idea has been seeming less and less true when you look at aspects such as social media. The fact is, if you look at notable female killers, they were often overlooked in the beginning based on the data given to professionals attempting to catch them. When a string of killings happens, people have an idea of a white male in their head. This isn't going away anytime soon. White Males are currently one of the most reviled creatures on the planet, and even if that isn't true, a look at most forums will certainly paint the picture that it is.

I'm not attempting to derail the topic, but people's tendency to lump all white men into a niche is one of the aspects I mentioned before. Racism exists on all sides of the spectrum. It's also not fair to dismiss this concern simply on the basis that "Well it doesn't change the fact that many are!" That is no different than someone defending a prejudice against black men on the basis that "It doesn't change the fact that many of them are criminals". Many people are many things, but if the tolerant allow this perception to cloud their judgement of an individual, it lends power to those wishing to separate us. In times like this, as I mentioned before, it's important that we not allow people to divide us like that. It's a strategy, and so far it's proving to be an effective one.

I've been thinking over how some others have responded to my claiming I'd like the U.S. to be less white.  I know what it meant to me when I wrote it, but seeing other people comment on it has made me recognize other opinions.  Perhaps it would have been better to phrase it 'I'd like the U.S. to be more multiethnic'.  I'd really rather it be that every person was judged on their own merits rather than an archetype or generalized ethnicity. It is convenient to generalize in some cases, but this can be abused, as it is in racism.  I don't want white people to be removed from this country, if some people took it as that.  I'd much rather that, over the coming years, ethnic identification reduced to a minimum, as more and more people no longer fit within neatly defined ethnic groups.

I understood what you meant, but it's one of those areas of wording. I believe this topic naturally puts people on the defensive, with each one feeling as though they or their race is being targeted. This, again, exists on all sides. I personally agree with you, for what it's worth.

[Mathim]

@ Mathim:
I personally feel like the abuse of religion to justify harm to others is really just a symptom of a faction having too much power. We saw that happening before in the cold war with the red scare, and that was all just about economics. :/

*Insert quote about power corrupting here.*

I really hope im not coming off as a know-it-all because i keep budding my head into things >_<.

Yes. Exactly. The faction having too much power is generally the one with the greater numbers. People justify the bad they do with religion the same way that racists justify their agenda, in other words, talking out their assholes. It just happens to coincide with the white, Christian majority being the most prominent face of it, frequently combining the agendas of both religious intolerance and racism. Currently the only minority with power are the 1%-ers. The only color that matters to them is GREEN.

[NotoriusBEN]

The majority of conservatives are not racist, sexist, bigots, homophobes, et al the other mantra that the left tends to paint them as. I'll ask you to listen to the news or podcasts that lean that way and tell me when they *wont* throw one of those epithets out at us.

With this whole immigration bit.

We do not care about LEGAL immigration to the United States. That means you go through the proper channels, get a visa, work as a productive member of society, pay your taxes, and adopt American values. IE, you don't want to turn America into sharia law or communism or socialism or anything that impinges on the freedoms and the way we do business or live our lives.

What we do not like and are fighting against, is illegal immigration. People who come here and get on a welfare check, food stamps, work under the table or some other black or grey market drain of money from us and then never paying the taxes you are obligated to pay.

That is not fair. That is not right. Is it an unbelievably huge understatement to correct this? Absofuckinglutely, but it has to be done and its not going to be fun.

I want the government to get out of my business, my healthcare, and to be shrunk down. The only things the American government should have an active interest in are preserving the Constitution and Rights *as* they were written *when* they were written, the Defense of this country, and the active encouragement of business and education. Not engaging in business and education because every time, its just been an atrocious money sink that achieved the opposite of its stated goals.

[HannibalBarca]

I can't speak to what the majority of conservatives are, since I've never met them.  I have to go based on conservatives who vote, and thusly who they support, and what those candidates espouse.  I also go on the conservatives I know personally, like my parents and co-workers.

When I speak to people in my own life who are white, Christian, and self-identify as conservative, I also have another factor that seems to get them to express themselves more freely.  I'm white myself, so most of them talk with me about things they don't talk about when people of other ethnicities are around.  And the things they tend to express with me and other whites when people of other ethnicities are not around are ideas that are racist.  I call them on these things, which usually ends up with me not being welcome around them anymore, or at the least, they don't express those things as often around me.  But, yeah...I find racism a much more common belief held by conservatives than liberals.

That doesn't mean liberals can't have regressive beliefs, too.  I know a fair number of liberals who claim I'm Islamophobic.  This seems to come from the fact that I'm against religion in general.  However--much like most Christian conservatives who tell me I only complain about Christianity when it comes to my atheism--these liberals say I am specifically against Islam, and completely disregard my stance against Christianity...as if Islam is an ethnicity rather than a belief system.

As for immigration...well, I've lived in California for most of my life, and I've known a lot of people who were illegals who have worked hard, loved their children, and paid taxes.  There are losers who are natural and illegal who try to game the system, but among illegals, I've seen a greater percentage of them who are highly motivated and work their ass off, because it takes a hell of a lot of motivation to risk your life and freedom to come to another country to find a better way of life for themselves and their children.  I haven't for a moment seen the vast numbers of welfare-loving illegals here that are supposed to exist.  I have, however, seen the vast number of crop-picking illegals who keep the agriculture industry alive, in California, in areas that are predominantly conservative-voting in this state.  Georgia tried banning illegals, passed legislation, and then the very next harvest, saw a 40% drop in workers to harvest, and this resulted in a $140 million dollar loss for the state.  I'm guessing all those crop-picking jobs that were available weren't the ones people were interested in.

[Azikt]

The majority of conservatives are not racist, sexist, bigots, homophobes, et al the other mantra that the left tends to paint them as. I'll ask you to listen to the news or podcasts that lean that way and tell me when they *wont* throw one of those epithets out at us.

While I agree that the left overuses the charge of bigotry, I think the right doesn't take such criticism of their ideology seriously enough. I am not certain that the majority of conservatives lack racial bias anymore than I am that they possess it. I am certain that the right backs a lot of ideas that disproportionately help whites and hurt minorities, but don't seem interested in any kind of introspection on the issue of race.

We do not care about LEGAL immigration to the United States. That means you go through the proper channels, get a visa, work as a productive member of society, pay your taxes, and adopt American values. IE, you don't want to turn America into sharia law or communism or socialism or anything that impinges on the freedoms and the way we do business or live our lives.

This, I think, is simply not true of your average conservative anymore. Conservatives overwhelmingly support the Trump immigration ban which is on legal immigrants who have earned their visas through a 2 year long vetting process.

[TheGlyphstone]

In the process of Googling how one can even get food stamps while being illegal, I ended up running into the Mexican Migration Project data (through Reddit of all places).

http://mmp.opr.princeton.edu/home-en.aspx

Reportedly, something around 15% of undocumented immigrants receive federal assistance (i.e., welfare/foodstamps), and 50% of them pay federal taxes. Without looking at the raw data myself, though, I don't know how the actual dollar amounts compare, but I suspect it'd still be a net gain for the US there.

[Mathim]

My roommate is actually an illegal immigrant (I was in a really bad place financially and have to live in a ghetto pretty much) and he's driving me crazy. I don't want him to get deported but in his particular case, he doesn't seem interested in improving his English and can't even afford a cell phone which seems to make things all the more difficult for him and would only make things better if he made that extra effort. And he only does under the table yardwork as far as I know. But he never fails to offer to share whatever food he makes or brings home even though I never ask for it, so he's got a good heart. I'm not entirely sure how he affords whatever school he manages to enroll in or how he finds time to go to classes or study given how insanely busy he always is working or looking for work. I know plenty of legal immigrants who can't speak English worth a damn and it makes it insanely difficult to help them at my job (I work at a financial aid office) and so many of them are failing classes left and right because of their inexperience with the English language. Honestly, I don't know what the criteria are for entering the country legally but I would have to assume it's nowhere near as stringent as it probably ought to be. Also most of said people also report being only on some form of government assistance as their sole source of income, so it's entirely a one-way street as far as who's helping whom. So both people like my roommate and people like those students who attend school at my workplace, are clearly not making productive use of their residence here. Whether legal or illegal, immigration needs a serious overhaul before the negatives can stop massively overshadowing the positives. But since a lot of the legal immigrants that I work with happen to be Eastern European (white) who barely speak English and live off of things like SSI, it's hardly a purely race-based issue at the heart of immigration's problems.

Obviously the entire economic system needs to be reformed for even the most basic improvements to actually work, but everyone also needs to take responsibility for making the most of their free education, responsibility for their reproduction (don't even get me started on our culture's insane sexual obsession - primarily obsession with stopping people from having it and all the implications that go along with it) and responsibility for their ethical choices (being cooperative rather than competitive, for example) that affect others' quality of life when one doesn't have to make massive sacrifices on one's own limited resources to help others. But rather than making it possible for all this to happen, and letting the wound scab over and heal, it's growing like it's being devoured by a flesh-eating bacteria strain.

[RedRose]

There are many legal immigrants who don't deserve it, while many illegal immigrants would be great citizens. I also know of European people who would be great assets but it's such a nightmare to immigrate that they give up. The problem is in the vetting... both ways.

I can't remember who wrote that white males are totally hated on these days, because I have the flu and can't think straight - but yup. They're THE group you can bash...

[Trigon]

I think this recent article by Chris Hedges does a good job summarizing the problem of "whiteness" in contemporary society: http://m.truthdig.com/report/item/james_baldwin_and_the_meaning_of_whiteness_20170219

At the end of the day, it's not about the color, or even the gender. It's ultimately a social relation. And at the present time, the white male needs to recognize that there is a societal structure (which is global, mind you), which does favor them disproportionately. 

The NY Times not too long ago (back in 2012) wrote about this: https://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/opinion/sunday/the-myth-of-male-decline.html

In my view it is more pertinent now than ever before, especially with Bannon at the helm of our national security apparatus...

[Silk]

At the end of the day, it's not about the color, or even the gender. It's ultimately a social relation. And at the present time, the white male needs to recognize that there is a societal structure (which is global, mind you), which does favor them disproportionately. 

At the end of the day, its not about the color, or even the gender. It's ultimately a social relation. And at the present time, the Black male community needs to recognize that there is a cultural criminal structure (Which is global, mind you), which does represent them disproportionately.

Find that connotation racist? Good I found yours the same.

[Trigon]

At the end of the day, its not about the color, or even the gender. It's ultimately a social relation. And at the present time, the Black male community needs to recognize that there is a cultural criminal structure (Which is global, mind you), which does represent them disproportionately.

Except that there isn't, so the analogy is false...

Find that connotation racist? Good I found yours the same.

I guess a nerve has been struck then!

Really, though, there is no need to rush in to defend such a system, and we should certainly call it out on its failures at every instance (and yes, also to name the problem...)

Also be mindful of the fact that those in power will always view the "cadres" as expendable, no matter your devotion to it...

[Missy]

At the end of the day, its not about the color, or even the gender. It's ultimately a social relation. And at the present time, the Black male community needs to recognize that there is a cultural criminal structure (Which is global, mind you), which does represent them disproportionately.

Find that connotation racist? Good I found yours the same.

mm, yeah that would fall more along the lines of stereotypes.

Patriarchy on the other hand is not stereotypical and very real.

[Azikt]

It's difficult to deny that White Men have most of the power in the west when you examine the makeup of the most powerful people in the world.

The percentage of the House that is nonwhite at 22 percent and the same figure in the Senate at 9 percent. Women make up about a fifth of each body -- 19 percent of the House and 21 percent of the Senate.

[...]

So 88 percent of white Americans are represented by someone white in the House, versus 37 percent of black Americans and 26 percent of Hispanics. (For these calculations, we looked at non-Hispanic white and black population counts.) Eighty-one percent of men are represented by a man -- which makes sense, given that only 19 percent of the members of the House are women. But a remarkable 70 percent of white American men live in a congressional district which is also represented by a white man.

[RedRose]

No one could deny the powerful people are generally older white males.
In every day life though, white men are easier to bash without consequences...

[Darkcide]

No one could deny the powerful people are generally older white males.
In every day life though, white men are easier to bash without consequences...

We have an entire generation that has been taught that it is alright to hate Middle Eastern people, and black people saying "We don't want to get shot by cops" offends the hell out of people to where they are likened to terrorists.

[Doomblade403xxx]

I will start by saying that I am a conservative and have been for a very long time. Why? Because frankly the democratic party does not seem to uphold the values that I hold dear. {Democrats created the KKK...true story...Hillary Clinton's best buddy and mentor Robert Byrd was a KKK leader} I HATE RACISM in all forms and function. There is no place in my country for it and frankly there are too many organizations in my country that use race to their advantage as a recruitment tool. These organizations aren't just white either. I live 60 miles from the birthplace of the Black Lives Matter movement, and quite frankly most people don't get to see how mean spirited and hateful that organization really is. Also my home area really got put under the microscope because a man was murdered by his wife and stepson, and he was apparently a grand someshit or another of the KKK. Well I guess I am clueless because I never knew there was even a KKK chapter in this area.

The point I'm making is my color and who I voted for doesn't define me. We got two choices this last election and one was just as terrible as the other. You all see color as the new racism...I have seen people harrassed for their ideals...even assaulted and held hostage in traffic...and to me...being held up in traffic because your not the right color and or having a bumper sticker for the 'other side' is just as bigoted.

[la dame en noir]

I feel like people forget the basic American history they learned in school. The democratic and republican parties switched ideals in what...the 60s? So using that as an argument is completely irresponsible. Especially if we're talking about Trump's America where the KKK backs him 100% and the alt-right(aka neonazi's/white supremacy) are mostly made up of conservative people.

[HannibalBarca]

Sigh.

Once upon a time, there was a greater spread of political representation in both major parties.  Once upon a time, there were liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats in their respective parties.  The original progressives were led by Theodore Roosevelt, after all, who for his time was a liberal Republican.  The parties were very different, in different regions of the country.  A Massachusetts Democrat was very different from a Mississippi Democrat a hundred years ago.  Or even sixty years ago.

The rise of the Civil Rights movement changed all of that.  Franklin Roosevelt managed to be elected by a diverse coalition of Democrats, from white liberal northerners and blacks to white southern conservatives.  Those southern conservatives had hated the Republican party for generations--the 'party of Lincoln' who had represented what they saw as the northern aggressors.  It took Truman integrating the military to finally antagonize those conservative Democrats into leaving the party.  Strom Thurmond led those, now called the States Rights Democrats--Dixiecrats--and ran against Truman.  Despite splitting the party, Truman still beat Dewey--and that's one of the reasons why his win was so surprising.

Those Dixiecrats, those conservative Democrats--they became the modern Southern Republican party, after they joined the Republicans for good.  However, you still get arguments from people who don't know their history...who say that the Democratic Party was the party that advocated slavery.  The Southern Democrats sure did.  Many Southern Republicans did, too.  The parties really did differ regionally back in those days.  Northern Republicans and Democrats were generally opposed to slavery, if not equality.  Nowadays, you hardly see any liberals in the Republican ranks.  There are more conservatives still in the Democratic ranks, however.  Moderates come in both flavors, though true moderates are rare.  Most moderates lean one way or another.

The KKK was founded by Nathan Bedford Forrest, a former Confederate Army officer and Southern Democrat.  However, considering he, like the rest of the Confederates, were traitors to the United States, it hardly makes sense to call them Democrats.  Once they left the Union, Democrats and Republicans alike from the South were no longer members of the political process of the United States.  They were conservative, however, regardless of political affiliation.  Liberalism is not a political stance associated with slavery in any sense in the modern era.

[Doomblade403xxx]

I'm not using an argument...im reciting history.

I've also sat on the sidelines and noticed most of the name calling and divisive talk comes from the left. Trump was not my first pick by a longshot...but I would be damned if I was going to put hillary in the white house. In fact you democrats should be up in arms over the DNC cheating Bernie Sanders out of the nomination.

[elone]

As a Sanders supporter, I agree. He got screwed by the Democratic National Committee. With no repercussions for all the cheating by the Clintonites.

HannibalBarca: nice history lesson, many probably do not know those things. Also add to the racial aspects of politics, George Wallace, the ultimate segregationist, ran in the turbulent year of 1968, winning 5 states, 13% of the vote (nearly 10 million votes), and 46 electoral votes. He was an independent and probably cost Humphrey the election as he  siphoned off Dixiecrat votes. Nixon won.

[la dame en noir]

I'm not using an argument...im reciting history.

I've also sat on the sidelines and noticed most of the name calling and divisive talk comes from the left. Trump was not my first pick by a longshot...but I would be damned if I was going to put hillary in the white house. In fact you democrats should be up in arms over the DNC cheating Bernie Sanders out of the nomination.

Most of the name calling comes from the left? Where is your evidence of that? What about the slew of crazy folks that went up in arms when Obama got a second term, making dolls out of him with a noose around his neck, go crazy about him being in office - then telling non-trump supporters to get over it because they had to through 8 years of Obama presidency.

And what is this "you democrats" lol

Are we 12?

[TheGlyphstone]

As a Sanders supporter, I agree. He got screwed by the Democratic National Committee. With no repercussions for all the cheating by the Clintonites.

HannibalBarca: nice history lesson, many probably do not know those things. Also add to the racial aspects of politics, George Wallace, the ultimate segregationist, ran in the turbulent year of 1968, winning 5 states, 13% of the vote (nearly 10 million votes), and 46 electoral votes. He was an independent and probably cost Humphrey the election as he  siphoned off Dixiecrat votes. Nixon won.

Has anyone ever obtained hard numbers on how many Bernie supporters jumped the aisle to vote Trump over Clinton? There certainly weren't any official repercussions, but if there's a possibility that the DNC's open and unapologetic bias cost Clinton the election in a few of the key swing states, that might qualify.

[Doomblade403xxx]

Most of the name calling comes from the left? Where is your evidence of that? What about the slew of crazy folks that went up in arms when Obama got a second term, making dolls out of him with a noose around his neck, go crazy about him being in office - then telling non-trump supporters to get over it because they had to through 8 years of Obama presidency.

And what is this "you democrats" lol

Are we 12?

Well read your own follow up post to mine. I had the guts to admit to being a conservative in what is basically the lions den, and you basically said conservatives are racists, after I gave chapter and verse how horrible racism is and how it has no place in this country. I've been called a racist for the crime of disagreeing with a liberal. Told my opinion was offensive because it didn't fit their ideology.

I NEVER made a obama noose...

I was not an obama fan by any stretch, mostly because of obamacare, but I never used a racial word to name/describe him....

Point is we CAN have different views and this doesn't mean someone is waving a nazi flag

[la dame en noir]

Without Obamacare, I wouldn't have had insurance. Insurance in Georgia is fucking awful because the republicans voted against things like medicare & obamacare. I can't afford 150+ a month for Obamacare. When I lived in Michigan, I had Obamacare and only had to pay few of my doctors visits. Now I can get penalized if I can't pay for insurance or don't find a job that offers insurance. The ACA/Obamacare is not bad. In fact, many conservatives didn't realize they were the same thing and complained about losing it.

[Doomblade403xxx]

Penalties for not being able to afford insurance is communist.

[la dame en noir]

Welp, thats the world we live in now.

[Oniya]

Restricting a large economic bracket from getting healthcare is a setup for breeding epidemics.

[Vekseid]

I feel like people forget the basic American history they learned in school. The democratic and republican parties switched ideals in what...the 60s? So using that as an argument is completely irresponsible. Especially if we're talking about Trump's America where the KKK backs him 100% and the alt-right(aka neonazi's/white supremacy) are mostly made up of conservative people.

The Southern Strategy was invoked by Nixon in the late 60's, as LBJ noted with the civil rights act "We have lost the South for a generation." The roots of it go back to FDR's time, however, and the switch did not really start happening until the 90's with Clinton's election.

Back in the 90s as a kid I remember watching attack ads repeating 'liberal liberal liberal' in a rather familiar tone.

You know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAPeFRNtTP4

And the opposition to the ACA is entirely built on this.

The sole, singular reason that the United States does not have free health care for all, is to prevent you from getting free health care.

Because you are black.

That's it.

That is the only reason.

Some members on this forum have even made the outright argument that it would cost too much, using medicare costs for blacks as justification.

Has anyone ever obtained hard numbers on how many Bernie supporters jumped the aisle to vote Trump over Clinton? There certainly weren't any official repercussions, but if there's a possibility that the DNC's open and unapologetic bias cost Clinton the election in a few of the key swing states, that might qualify.

About 30% of Trump voters would have voted for Bernie or sat it out, according to polls. It's hard to tell, exactly.

There are a lot of reasons for Hillary's loss, because she lost by such a tiny, razor-thin margin. You can blame nearly anything.

The biggest issue, though, is twofold:

1) She was forced at many points in her career to sacrifice who she was, at one point or another, leading up to the 'public and private persona' debacle. This in turn makes her hard to relate to, for one. More importantly, however, it mutes her speaking ability, especially compared to the likes of Bernie.

2) Political stability is strongly correlated with home ownership. This is more for the younger folks who support Trump / were Bernie or bust. People who feel they have less ownership of society, so they start throwing spanners in the works.

Republicans are committing political suicide by ignoring the second issue.

Penalties for not being able to afford insurance is communist.

Do explain how the mandate correlates with state ownership of the means of production.

[la dame en noir]

@Vekseid || It's always nice when you show up! :)

[Doomblade403xxx]

It's easy...

Do you pay for anything you don't want in everyday life? If the state mandates you pay for something you cannot afford then fines you for not having it with the argument of fines...that's theft. We fought a whole revolution in this country over taxation without representation, and THIS is the exact same thing.

Also you see obamacare and say look at how many it covers...well lemme tell you what you don't see.

Medicare and medicaid have been shaved to the bone to the point where they hardly cover anything anymore. I work in health care. Do you know how many people I treat a month who don't get the meds they need because they can't afford the insurance, or because medicaid/medicare doesn't cover it? LOTS. ALOT of COPD patients NEED supplemental oxygen and inhaled corticosteroids for their illness. Big pharm is so out of control many of them have to make a choice...eat or buy they medicine. When they don't take the proper meds they get placed in the hospital. One inhaler of advair is almost 300 dollars and about half that with insurance.

Then lets take a look at what's happened with AZT and the EPIPEN. These meds went from affordable to outrageous and what did the government do about it. Both of them life saving drugs. Both of them necessary for people with specific ailments. Essentially if you have aids or a strong allergy we will gouge you.

Hell it didn't even stop there. Alot of hospital employees have been cut back to part time status because of obamacare. This means no insurance, they wont be able to afford a premium, thus more fines for the government. The whole system is a rigged taxation/fine scheme that makes the rich richer and the poor poorer, and contrary to what people think, EVERY DEMOGRAPHIC on the racial spectrum is a victim of corporate and government greed.

So let us not pretend that the government really cares about any one of us as people. We are and always will be the backs on which the government fat cats rest. I WANT quite simply the ability to take care of me and mine with the minimum in government involvement and intervention. This means I don't need them telling me what to buy and when I have to buy it. When I need it, I'll get it myself.

[Vekseid]

You didn't answer the question.

How is the mandate communism?

[Azikt]

The Supreme Court ruled that the mandate is a 2.5% income tax on those who do not purchase health insurance that could have for less than 8.13% of their adjusted gross income.

Communism is a political theory that advocates for a society in which all property is publicly owned and everyone is provided for and works according to their abilities and needs.

Equating the two is a hard circle to square. I don't really see any obvious correlations, nor have I seen such outrage at the other ways in which the tax code has been used to encourage normative behaviors in the public such as marriage, having children, starting a business, etc.

[la dame en noir]

It's easy...

Do you pay for anything you don't want in everyday life? If the state mandates you pay for something you cannot afford then fines you for not having it with the argument of fines...that's theft. We fought a whole revolution in this country over taxation without representation, and THIS is the exact same thing.

Also you see obamacare and say look at how many it covers...well lemme tell you what you don't see.

Medicare and medicaid have been shaved to the bone to the point where they hardly cover anything anymore. I work in health care. Do you know how many people I treat a month who don't get the meds they need because they can't afford the insurance, or because medicaid/medicare doesn't cover it? LOTS. ALOT of COPD patients NEED supplemental oxygen and inhaled corticosteroids for their illness. Big pharm is so out of control many of them have to make a choice...eat or buy they medicine. When they don't take the proper meds they get placed in the hospital. One inhaler of advair is almost 300 dollars and about half that with insurance.

Then lets take a look at what's happened with AZT and the EPIPEN. These meds went from affordable to outrageous and what did the government do about it. Both of them life saving drugs. Both of them necessary for people with specific ailments. Essentially if you have aids or a strong allergy we will gouge you.

Hell it didn't even stop there. Alot of hospital employees have been cut back to part time status because of obamacare. This means no insurance, they wont be able to afford a premium, thus more fines for the government. The whole system is a rigged taxation/fine scheme that makes the rich richer and the poor poorer, and contrary to what people think, EVERY DEMOGRAPHIC on the racial spectrum is a victim of corporate and government greed.

So let us not pretend that the government really cares about any one of us as people. We are and always will be the backs on which the government fat cats rest. I WANT quite simply the ability to take care of me and mine with the minimum in government involvement and intervention. This means I don't need them telling me what to buy and when I have to buy it. When I need it, I'll get it myself.

you not wanting the government to have to control on what we do or have is literally what liberal minded people push for....

[RedRose]

I don't identify as democrat or as republican, if only because I'm not American. BUT. I have both (and others) in my FB contacts, and the endless mud slinging is crazy. Unfortunately, while both sides bash the other candidate, I've noticed that there is one side who is more likely to attack other people, including people like me who are supporting neither. And those are not the Republicans. I've noticed it on forums, friends' walls...

[Lustful Bride]

I feel like this thread is starting to get kind of hostile and we are edging towards pointing fingers, accusations and defensiveness.

We're all friends here, and we are all on the same side, just in different ways.

[Valerian]

I don't identify as democrat or as republican, if only because I'm not American. BUT. I have both (and others) in my FB contacts, and the endless mud slinging is crazy. Unfortunately, while both sides bash the other candidate, I've noticed that there is one side who is more likely to attack other people, including people like me who are supporting neither. And those are not the Republicans. I've noticed it on forums, friends' walls...

I'm always surprised to hear this -- I don't know if it's something to do with regional variations or just sheer luck, but my experience has been the exact opposite.  These last few months I've unfollowed several people on Twitter, for instance (who I was originally following solely because they were fellow movie fans), turn into rabid Republican activists who are falling all over themselves to be as offensive as possible.  The response from the left has been for the most part quite tame.

But admittedly there's also always going to be observer bias.  If you're expecting a certain group to be offensive, then you will naturally be more likely to notice evidence that supports your opinion, and the same for groups you expect to be better behaved.  It's human nature not to like seeing anything that disagrees with our belief system because that can be incredibly jarring.  Generally the best way to change someone's views in the long term is for that change to happen gradually.  Sudden shocks only unsettle people for a short time and then, usually, result in them holding more tightly to their original convictions.

In other words, a little kindness and patience on all sides is going to go a lot farther than any kind of name-calling.  First you have to make sure that everyone remembers that we're all people, even when all you're seeing are words on a computer screen.

[TheGlyphstone]

Quite possibly/likely observer bias, but at least through my own filter, I see individuals of the liberal persuasion using attacks more frequently on individuals - calling a person racist or bigoted, implying they are a Nazi, take your pick, but applications across broad groups are rare (with exceptions for vague mass-coalition labels like "Trump Supporters" or "The Alt-Right", which I do call them out on for the failing of assuming a coalition is monolithic). Conservatives seem far more likely to issue attacks on groups - Muslims are all terrorists, Mexicans are lazy illegal immigrants, liberals are all hypocritical bleeding-heart cucks, transgenders are perverts sneaking into bathrooms, etc. But the conservatives (that I know personally) are simultaneously likely to see specific people as exceptions when presented with them.

[la dame en noir]

No one should be an exception to a group of any kind. :/ People aren't exceptions. It's like someone saying "I'm not racist, my best friend is black - I just think black people are more violent. My friend is the exception."

[RedRose]

To be totally honest, I expected my Democrat contacts to be more likely to accept diversity of opinion and my Republican contacts not to take gloves... And this isn't what happened on my FB.

I think I agree with Glyphstone, by the way.

[TheGlyphstone]

No one should be an exception to a group of any kind. :/ People aren't exceptions. It's like someone saying "I'm not racist, my best friend is black - I just think black people are more violent. My friend is the exception."

Yeah, it wasn't meant to be an endorsement of the behavior, just an observation of the phenomena.

[Lilias]

I had the guts to admit to being a conservative

Then could you please explain to us baffled ones what exactly do you think you are conserving?

[la dame en noir]

Yeah, it wasn't meant to be an endorsement of the behavior, just an observation of the phenomena.

I know! I was just giving an example for those that think that sort of behavior is okay.

[Trigon]

I think there will always be an element of aggression in these sorts of debates, especially when it comes to an online media such as Facebook, or an online forum (such as this one).

One the one hand, these debates are emotionally fraught, and unavoidably so. But especially when it comes to an online forum or social media, one does not see each other face to face, and do not expect to do so for the most part. So it can be very easy just simply let loose and not worry about any consequences.

Also, there the fact that an online medium can be the coldest form of expression, as it is very difficult to guess how someone is feeling on the other side, or interpret their intentions (since you can't see the other guy and infer from body language).

I suppose the only solution is you just have to be mindful of that, avoid launching ad hominems, and stick with the facts as best you can. And above all, avoid taking it personally. I know I try to!

[Vekseid]

I don't identify as democrat or as republican, if only because I'm not American. BUT. I have both (and others) in my FB contacts, and the endless mud slinging is crazy. Unfortunately, while both sides bash the other candidate, I've noticed that there is one side who is more likely to attack other people, including people like me who are supporting neither. And those are not the Republicans. I've noticed it on forums, friends' walls...

A part of this may be due to you not seeing dog-whistles, so to speak? I mean, this goes beyond fluency in the English language and into just being a part of American culture.

I mean, we have conservative papers actively calling for the murder of scientists.

You are not going to find similarly influential liberal papers doing the same to conservatives of any stripe.

Quite possibly/likely observer bias, but at least through my own filter, I see individuals of the liberal persuasion using attacks more frequently on individuals - calling a person racist or bigoted, implying they are a Nazi, take your pick, but applications across broad groups are rare (with exceptions for vague mass-coalition labels like "Trump Supporters" or "The Alt-Right", which I do call them out on for the failing of assuming a coalition is monolithic). Conservatives seem far more likely to issue attacks on groups - Muslims are all terrorists, Mexicans are lazy illegal immigrants, liberals are all hypocritical bleeding-heart cucks, transgenders are perverts sneaking into bathrooms, etc. But the conservatives (that I know personally) are simultaneously likely to see specific people as exceptions when presented with them.

Conservatives are more moved by individual stories than liberals are.

So you get things like "It feels like crime is going up!" even when it is going down. Because as crime gets rarer it is easier to focus on the times where it does happen.

No matter what, one murder is too many.

[Doomsday]

America is a settler colonial state, founded on genocide, land theft and slavery of indigenous people, its racism is nothing new.

Penalties for not being able to afford insurance is communist.

As a Marxist-Leninist, believe me when I say, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of communism.

[Lustful Bride]

America is a settler colonial state, founded on genocide, land theft and slavery of indigenous people, its racism is nothing new.

Be that as it may, for centuries we have been slowly improving on ourselves to not be that ugly side. And then just took a knock that sent us socially falling back by a decade or two. :./

As a Marxist-Leninist, believe me when I say, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of communism.

Not to mention that there are different forms of communism and ways that it can be applied. Or at least that's what ive been told, like the communism from back in the day is different than what the Soviet Union used, and that is different from how China applied its communism and etc.

I might be wrong though, im not an economics expert so *shrug*. :/

[Doomsday]

Not to mention that there are different forms of communism and ways that it can be applied. Or at least that's what ive been told, like the communism from back in the day is different than what the Soviet Union used, and that is different from how China applied its communism and etc.

I might be wrong though, im not an economics expert so *shrug*. :/

That's incorrect, sorry. There are many divergent theories on Marxism, but communism is generally agreed upon; Most lines drawn between leftist camps are on the question of imperialism, the necessity of the state in transition to communism, revisionism, etc.

The USSR and today's PRC are not communist strictly speaking. Communism is, in simplistic terms, a post-socialist society that is classless and nationless. Those two states you mentioned are socialist, they enforce a dictatorship of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie by means of state control.

The United States government doing and owning stuff is not socialism or communism because capitalism is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Actions like building highways or mandating healthcare are not socialism or communism, because those are mere acts, not a mode of production. I would not argue that state services like highways, Obamacare, etc. are bad, but they are fundamentally not socialist or communist programs.

The tl;dr of my long-winded rant is that calling Obamacare communist is incorrect and just an attempt to red-bait.

[gaggedLouise]

As a Marxist-Leninist, believe me when I say, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of communism.

Maybe he meant: state monopolies of any kind are essentially communism. (I've heard people arguing the same about government monopolies on certain kinds of goods and services here in Sweden).

In this case, the chain of thought would be roughly: The government has a monopoly on recognized insurances - > Gov't forces everybody to pay steep fees without regard to what kind of services they need -> Punishments and heavy fines are written up against those who cannot or won't pay.

From what I've heard about the ACA and from talking to a bunch of Aemricans, here at E and in other places, also in real life, neither of those three sound like really fair descriptions of how it works.

[RedRose]

I have American contacts who use socialist and communist randomly, without knowing there are huge differences. As a European, it always puzzles me so much.

[Kythia]

Maybe he meant: state monopolies of any kind are essentially communism. (I've heard people arguing the same about government monopolies on certain kinds of goods and services here in Sweden).

Might not be communist, but your Systembolaget system is just crazy.  When I was over I didn't know about it and I had to go like twenty hours without booze. 

[Azikt]

There is a misconception in politics that serves the right extensively in political discussion, the idea that 'racist' is an insult, slur, or attack. Calling someone a racist or accusing them of racism is merely an allegation of a pattern of thinking, voting, political support, etc that hurts minority communities disproportionately. Pretending that it's 'namecalling' really just helps people who are racist hide their behavior and avoid having it drawn out, criticized, and considered.

Saying that 'your policies are racist' is namecalling is equivalent to liberals claiming that conservative charges that they are 'fiscally irresponsible' is mudslinging. Both are substantive critiques of individuals that merit consideration, not immediate defense and outrage.

I think this is one of the reasons why liberals often get a bad name for attacking the other side -- they're justifiably challenging their opponent's ideology, the same as everyone does in politics.

[gaggedLouise]

Might not be communist, but your Systembolaget system is just crazy.  When I was over I didn't know about it and I had to go like twenty hours without booze.

Yeah, the liquor and wine trade monopoly is one that gets invoked and used all the time by populist parties and folks who insist that state monopolies are communism. It's become a lot more shot through with holes in the last ten years, but if you arrive here on a quick trip or a two-week visit, never heard about the "System Company" and don't have any channeIs you know where to go to get the stuff (beyond the dedicated stores of the Systemet, I mean; there are now some ordinary foodstores selling wine too, just like in most other countries) and how it works, then it can be fairly tricky.  ;)

I remember the newsstand poster of a tabloid at new year's at some point (a dozen years ago) when a new EU court ruling meant it would become easier to import your liquor in your own car, or by crate sent on the road frpm Germany or France: "FREE BOOZE COME THURSDAY!"  ;D

[Vekseid]

I have American contacts who use socialist and communist randomly, without knowing there are huge differences. As a European, it always puzzles me so much.

It's used as a thought-terminating cliche. It is less of a term and more of an insult. Something that in their minds represents failure.

[HannibalBarca]

The USSR and today's PRC are not communist strictly speaking. Communism is, in simplistic terms, a post-socialist society that is classless and nationless. Those two states you mentioned are socialist, they enforce a dictatorship of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie by means of state control.

Not trying to hijack the thread but...

I consider myself pretty much a Leftist.  I've never belonged to any political party here in the U.S., mostly because I don't trust parties, and would rather vote for the best individual rather than support any organization specifically.  I supported Bernie Sanders in the election, but my lack of belonging to a party hurt me there, so, like him, I've considered joining the Democrats to help change the party.

Anyway--I was wondering about your comment on communism.  From my perspective, with the variety of individuals in any nation-state, I've found it hard to believe that communism would ever really work in the modern world.  A hunter-gatherer society of 40-100 individuals, sure.  And is there really a difference in the U.S. between the bourgeoise and proletariat?  Perhaps the nomenclature of middle-class is deceptive, but with the standard of living and the average income of the U.S., most workers are bourgeoise here...unless your definition of the bourgeoise is upper middle-class or nuveau riche.  I'm much more supportive of a socialist system within a democratic framework.

[Doomsday]

I'd rather not take this thread off course, as I've probably already done. PM me if you like.

[Vekseid]

Best to make a new thread, really. : )

[Noisekick]

I wouldn't say the entire country. I would say it depends on the state or area. In the south I can actually imagine that hostile xenophobic behavior to be more common. Went to Missouri a little bit ago and the people weren't really in your face about it and seemed to be able to at least differentiate between an illegal immigrant and a hispanic who legally immigrated to the US or did a good enough job to get citizenship. Most of my Missouri and Kentucky family actually voted for Trump, which I found a bit disappointing though.

[la dame en noir]

I wouldn't say the entire country. I would say it depends on the state or area. In the south I can actually imagine that hostile xenophobic behavior to be more common. Went to Missouri a little bit ago and the people weren't really in your face about it and seemed to be able to at least differentiate between an illegal immigrant and a hispanic who legally immigrated to the US or did a good enough job to get citizenship. Most of my Missouri and Kentucky family actually voted for Trump, which I found a bit disappointing though.

I think peeps need to stop stereotyping the South. I'm from California and everyone assumes its a melting pot Utopia - its not. Yeah, sure - Georgia still has its roots and some people are still that stupid, but people need to understand that racism spreads. I've dealt with more in Michigan and California than I have in Georgia.

[Lustful Bride]

I think peeps need to stop stereotyping the South. I'm from California and everyone assumes its a melting pot Utopia - its not. Yeah, sure - Georgia still has its roots and some people are still that stupid, but people need to understand that racism spreads. I've dealt with more in Michigan and California than I have in Georgia.

*nods* Hate and Racism (all types of intolerance really) Are more like viruses. They don't know Nationality, Race, Politics, Wealth. It infects everyone that it can and turns us into puppets to make us fight one another and spread it to more people in a cycle that never ends.

[Noisekick]

Georgia however is a less problematic state when it comes to racism. Kentucky is worse. Mississippi may be by far the worst. For many southern states it however depends on which area you are in. Rural areas are worse than urban centers.

[Vekseid]

Well here in LA County it's...

Black business owner? Hires blacks and whites.

Hispanic business owner? Hires hispanics and whites.

Asian business owner? Hires asians and whites.

White business owner? May hire anyone, but getting promoted may be difficult.

It's not always this stark but it is definitely noticeable.

This holds true even if whites have effectively zero political power in the community. Compton, 1% white, ~20% of the employees.

[Mathim]

I think peeps need to stop stereotyping the South. I'm from California and everyone assumes its a melting pot Utopia - its not. Yeah, sure - Georgia still has its roots and some people are still that stupid, but people need to understand that racism spreads. I've dealt with more in Michigan and California than I have in Georgia.

Seriously. That incident I was talking about, where my friend's son got stabbed for protecting his minority friend, was here in California. There is no real safe haven from human stupidity.

[HannibalBarca]

I live in the 3rd poorest California country, and also one of the most conservative counties.  My Congressman is Kevin McCarthy, unfortunately.  There's more than enough racism here, though I tend to see less of it from the lower income whites, who seem to identify more with poor minorities.  It's the middle class whites who show most of the racism here.  I spend a lot of time around middle class whites partly because I am one, and I see and hear it a lot.  Most I know went for Trump in the election, though not all.  What surprised me were the significant numbers of Latinos who told me they voted for Trump.

[Lustful Bride]

I live in the 3rd poorest California country, and also one of the most conservative counties.  My Congressman is Kevin McCarthy, unfortunately.  There's more than enough racism here, though I tend to see less of it from the lower income whites, who seem to identify more with poor minorities.

Doesn't Matter what color you are, being poor is being poor :(. Its absolute shit and its constantly worrying about whether to have food or pay the bills at the end of the month. This month my family might not be able to make all our payments and I haven't been able to find a job despite going out and looking for almost 4 months now. I say this not to throw a pity party for myself, but to say that I've only gotten a tiny taste of what its like for some people. And its really made me realize how easy I had life before.

If more people who spoke ill of those in bad situations could get a taste of it as well they would likely soften on their ideals.

What surprised me were the significant numbers of Latinos who told me they voted for Trump.

Well that is their choice. For whatever reason they felt like he would be the better candidate for the country. Its not as if by being Latino they automatically had to vote for Hillary. :/

[Oniya]

Most I know went for Trump in the election, though not all.  What surprised me were the significant numbers of Latinos who told me they voted for Trump.

I have a teeny bit of insight on this.  My mother-in-law has a lady ('M.') who comes by and 'does for her'.  (She's in a building of elderly people, fixed income and all that, and M. will do things like small errands, light cleaning, and the like.)  M. is naturalized and went through all the necessary hoops to come into the country legally.  M. personally knows other people that have come into the country illegally, and proceeded to do illegal things here - and got kicked back out (possibly because they couldn't get legal jobs, but I digress...)

So - people like M. have a two-pronged rationale for being 'harsh on immigration':  1) I did it the right way - they should have to do it the right way; and 2) The people that do it the wrong way don't care about doing things the right way.

I firmly believe that this kind of rationale is based on limited information and a good deal of propaganda, so if you wanted to talk some of these people around, that would be a starting point.

[Cassandra LeMay]

What surprised me were the significant numbers of Latinos who told me they voted for Trump.

I don't think it's like the Latino vote for Trump was all that extreme. It may have been where you are, but from what I recall, the nationwide vote of Latinos for Romney in 2012 was about 27%, for Trump in 2016 29%. The difference could be explained as a turnout difference and it's not all that large. The question is did those people vote for Trump the person, or Trump the Republican candidate. Given the partisanship in American politics these days I wouldn't be surprised if it was the latter.

That aside, here are two possible reasons I can think of for Latin-Americans to vote for the GOP:
1) Religion. I am not sure if this is just a cliche or not, but religious conservatism may play a role. My impression is that many Latin countries have a strong religious tradition that may influence their vote.
2) Economic anxiety. Many people who voted for Trump are not so much in economic dire straits, but afraid they will be there in the future. Again, this is just a personal theory not based on hard data. But perhaps some Latinos feel they are somewhere in the middle of society, not on par with whites, not as bad off as some blacks. I know from some studies I read about discrimination in the job and housing markets that Latinos are discriminated against, but not as much as blacks. They are somewhere in the middle, neither here nor there, not fish or fowl. That's a difficult position that can make people look for someone who will make certain they don't fall down that slope, promises certainty.

[Trigon]

What surprised me were the significant numbers of Latinos who told me they voted for Trump.

Being Latino myself, I will say that... honestly I don't get it either. Most likely they did it for much the same reasons the white people who supported Trump did. Though in their case, they did it with the additional belief that, somehow, they weren't going to be adversely affected by his policies (so either they didn't think he would actually do any of the things he said he would do, or they think their status as citizens would protect them...)

So - people like M. have a two-pronged rationale for being 'harsh on immigration':  1) I did it the right way - they should have to do it the right way; and 2) The people that do it the wrong way don't care about doing things the right way.

I firmly believe that this kind of rationale is based on limited information and a good deal of propaganda, so if you wanted to talk some of these people around, that would be a starting point.

Well, partially. I'm going to bet that racism played a huge role in their decision, and not immigration status per se. One of the little known things about this diverse group, that many will find surprising, is that racism between other fellow Latinos is actually quite common, especially if they happen to be US citizens. They'll deny it of course, but it's noticeable.

[Oniya]

Out of curiosity, do the division lines tend to be regionally derived or is there some other factor?  My mother-in-law (who is admittedly 'advanced in years' and sometimes not the sharpest of tacks on some subjects) had gotten the impression that M. was talking about shifty relatives.  This doesn't eliminate the possibility of racism, by any means, of course.  There's almost a trope of such divisions inside a family resulting from someone marrying 'the wrong sort'.

[Lustful Bride]

I have a small caviat myself to toss in on this since I do remember it happening once long ago when I was in Puerto Rico. I don't remember it in specific detail since I was too young and I honestly didn't care when my parents talked with their adult friends.

I remember in Puerto Rico a few family friends* would just swear and talk rudely about 'los dominicanos' and call them assholes, liars or thieves. But I don't remember or know why they did so. So it makes me think perhaps its more of a national thing since Dominicanos= Dominicans, as in from the Dominican Republic. *Shrug* :/

Similar to how a Caucasian American and a Caucasian Russian may hate one another and its not really race based, more nationalism.

*Should probably make the point to note that our friends were local/born Puerto Ricans.

[Valerian]

My sister-in-law is Peruvian, and there is a definite divide in that country based heavily on looks.  There is a geographic component, mainly an urban vs. rural divide, but there's also a strong influence from appearance.  If an individual looks more European, that person is generally assumed to be part of the upper-class city folk.  If they look more like the indigenous Peruvian groups (who tend to have darker skin and be shorter / stockier), they're usually labeled working-class, more likely to live in small towns or rural areas.

[Trigon]

Out of curiosity, do the division lines tend to be regionally derived or is there some other factor?  My mother-in-law (who is admittedly 'advanced in years' and sometimes not the sharpest of tacks on some subjects) had gotten the impression that M. was talking about shifty relatives.  This doesn't eliminate the possibility of racism, by any means, of course.  There's almost a trope of such divisions inside a family resulting from someone marrying 'the wrong sort'.

In my experience the division tends to be more economic rather than regional. In particular, the racists tend to be economically better off. That being said, they are still clearly in the minority (we should remember that, overall, Trump won less than a third of the Latino vote).

But really, its the same phenomenon that you see with, say, Milo Yiannopoulos, a member of the LGBTQ community who is nonetheless homophobic and anti-LGBTQ. Or those African Americans who supported slavery (for instance William Ellison: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Ellison).

In my mind, perhaps the most outrageous example is Bobby Fischer, a Jewish person who was nonetheless virulently antisemitic.

[Oniya]

Thanks for the responses!  Knowing these sorts of things really does help.