Hacker News Reader

Comment by TimTheTinker | Hacker News Reader

If you're in physical danger, then flee. I'm not talking about that. There's a bigger reality than your street - pay attention and be wise.

But at the same time, it is true than many white kids had racist parents but chose not to be racist themselves, largely because they rubbed shoulders with black kids and learned they had a lot in common with them. Don't underestimate the power of patience, kindness, generosity, and general personability to win, eventually. It took a generation of integration before racism disappeared from most US neighborhoods.

View on HN

> It took a generation of integration before racism disappeared from most US neighborhoods.

I'm still waiting

Do you have racist neighbors? If so, I'm curious which county you live in.

Two of my grandparents were racist, but I haven't talked personally with a racist in probably 25-30 years.

> I haven't talked personally with a racist in probably 25-30 years.

Let me guess, you mostly mingle with white people? It's a different story among Latinos, Asians (toward blacks and other Asians), but especially among African-Americans.

> Let me guess, you mostly mingle with white people? It's a different story among Latinos, Asians (toward blacks and other Asians), but especially among African-Americans.

Fascinating. I've found the perfect example of "white victimhood." Thank you for sharing your truth that "minorities are the real racists."

What utter nonsense.

Oh, you must be one of those anti-White racists...

> White Democrats showed the effect: they imposed a somewhat weaker norm against offensive statements targeting Whites than against statements targeting other racial groups.

> So there is genuine evidence of something reasonably described as selective tolerance of anti-White prejudice among White Democrats.

> The present study demonstrates that Whites (in comparison to other Americans) are also more likely to perceive a social norm governing anti-White prejudice. Interestingly, the strength of this norm follows a political ‘gradient’ and is most pronounced among White Republicans.

> Within this context, an interesting question is whether this norm can be expected to spread outside the core of White Republicans? For instance, it is possible that racial minorities within the Republican party will come to adopt the same position as White Republicans on the social inappropriateness of anti-White prejudice (in much the same way that White Democrats have come to adopt norms around anti-minority prejudice). At the same time, the social norm appears strongly linked to the Republican party. And given current levels of affective polarization in American society, efforts at norm propagation will likely make little headway among Democrats of any race. These considerations therefore suggest that the norm against anti-White prejudice is likely to remain a ‘particularistic norm’ for some time to come.

> I haven't talked personally with a racist in probably 25-30 years.

How do you know that you haven't talked with a racist? Are you in the habit of asking new acquaintances if they are racist, and then believing their answer? Or do you just assume that all racists wear the same uniform?

Real racists in your orbit of regular acquaintances are pretty straightforward to pick out.

You did not answer my question.

To be clear: if you think you haven't met a racist in decades, you're probably wrong. I call into question your ability to accurately diagnose racism.

A racist is known by their speech or actions. Like making prejudicial comments about people of one or more other races, or demonstrating through actions that they do not view other races as equals. If someone does neither, then they're not racist.

The last people I heard do that were my grandparents - like "Did you hear? She married a black man." with raised eyebrows.

You didn't answer my question - do you have racist neighbors?

If your friends are not making unprompted bigoted statements, all it means is that they are tactful. I hope you can understand that bigotry is more subtle, in comparison with your grandparents' generation when it was more socially acceptable.

Please read up on "implicit bias."

Do you know the definition of the word "prejudice"? It means "preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience."

You say you think a lot of my acquaintances are racist, without even knowing who I am, let alone who they are, let alone what they act like or say. That's pretty extreme prejudice.

Don't judge people before you've at least learned who they are.

> You say you think a lot of my acquaintances are racist, without even knowing who I am, l

Nothing personal. The fact is that a lot of people are racist: that's the basis of "implicit bias" which I gather you did not bother to read about, despite my encouragement. Given that, it's statistically likely that everyone knows a racist. I know plenty of racists, and I wish I didn't. I'm not judging people, I'm just playing the odds.

Before continuing this conversation, please complete the required reading: https://www.nationalequityproject.org/articles/dont-talk-abo...

I reject the notion of "structural racism". That's not about civil rights, it's critical theory masquerading. It's a destructive ideology.

It teaches us to suspect everyone around us, which promotes division and hatred, not love and unity.

Racism is an individual sin that arises from the heart, and it can be repented of and turned away from like any other sin.

> I reject the notion of "structural racism".

As I understand it, structural racism is less of a notion and more of a series of facts; eg: post WWII white servicemen largely got easy bank loans and a greased entry into generational family owned housing, black servicemen didn't, real estate agents and HOAs redlined (?) rental and purchase applications to separate out black American families, infrastructure tended to destroy and break up black communities over white communities, etc.

Are these past events that you reject?

Those happened and they were evil. I'm not arguing with that.

Fair enough then, you don't reject past structural racism existing as a fact, and likely acknowledge that has cast a shadow that continues into today's US society.

You might want to be clear to the other commentator (I'm just a drive by) what the "notion" is that you reject.

> I reject the notion of "structural racism". That's not about civil rights, it's critical theory masquerading. It's a destructive ideology.

It's clear that you didn't read past the headline of the article that I linked, since the article makes it clear that structural racism is not the same as implicit bias.

You are welcome to disagree with the extent that structural racism is present in American society today, but it makes no sense to dismiss the idea of structural racism. Slavery, as practiced in the US before the civil war, is a clear example of structural racism. Or do you think that race did not play a part in slavery?

> It teaches us to suspect everyone around us, which promotes division and hatred, not love and unity.

Perhaps, but that's an argument from outcomes, not from principles. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I read the first few paragraphs. It's all critical race theory and intersectionality. A worldview I reject. It leads to odd conclusions like saying it's impossible to be racist against white people, or that a black person can't be racist.

That's absurd. It's possible for anyone to judge another person by the color of their skin instead of the content of their character or their actual traits. No race is morally superior or inferior (and to say otherwise is very racist).

> It's possible for anyone to judge another person by the color of their skin instead of the content of their character or their actual traits.

It might be helpful if you understood the definition of "racism" as used in this article before you reject it. Racism is not the same as discrimination. I agree that anyone can judge another person by the color of their skin: that's racial discrimination. Racism (again, as used in this article, not necessarily as used in everybody life) is defined as a particularly hierarchical view of the races based on social order. Thus, by that thinking, black people can't be racist because they aren't in a position to oppress white people.

But all of that is a digression from the original point of this conversation, which is implicit bias, according to which everyone is somewhat racist because they judge people at an automatic, unconscious level. You might find this article less challenging: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_stereotype

Reply on news.ycombinator.com