President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[frank ryan]

Can you please quote exactly the definition I provided that you found unacceptable? I reject the first definition outright in case you were wondering. FR mentioned that "Irish is a culture, Danish is a culture, etc." Is it racist to advocate for the preservation of those cultures?

If preservation relies on exlusion of others that's xenophobic and nativist. If you think "white culture" is under threat by brown people moving in and joining our society, you're racist. Those who view multiculturalism as a secret globalist and cultura marxist (ie Jewish) scheme for white genocide are kooks.
Missourians thought Mormons were a threat to their culture and way of life.

I appreciate your sincerity and willingness to engage in discourse. I'd challenge you to shift some of that nuance to situations when you talk broadly about activists and leftists.

[beefytee]

Ok. Here is a conversation between a black man and a Jewish man about the pros and cons of marrying-in. Is this a racist conversation? Are some of the ideas expressed racist?

There are obviously different levels of racism and hate and the level of harm that they cause. The examples you provide are definitely racism even if they are very mild.

[swampfrog]

If preservation relies on exlusion of others that's xenophobic and nativist. If you think "white culture" is under threat by brown people moving in and joining our society, you're racist. Those who view multiculturalism as a secret globalist and cultura marxist (ie Jewish) scheme for white genocide are kooks.
Missourians thought Mormons were a threat to their culture and way of life.

I appreciate your sincerity and willingness to engage in discourse. I'd challenge you to shift some of that nuance to situations when you talk broadly about activists and leftists.

Accepted, I will try to be more precise. I return the challenge, try to use more nuance when talking about Trump supporters when you talk broadly about them.

There are obviously different levels of racism and hate and the level of harm that they cause. The examples you provide are definitely racism even if they are very mild.

If "white" were substituted in any those quotes for "black" or "Jewish", would your description still be "they are very mild"? I wouldn't recommend getting online and accusing Ta-Nehisi Coates of racism. If you do for some reason decide to do just that, please link back here.

--

Much of my reason for engaging this topic is not in regards to my own thoughts and beliefs (which are in a constant state of adaptation--my engagement with this topic is actually very minimal here relative to the reading/listening online outside of this forum). I'm trying to learn and explore where these thoughts and ideas come from. Are racism and xenophobia learned traits? Are we born with some part of them?

From what I've read, I believe the preservation of your tribe is a very, very deep psychological and physiological imperative. We have adapted to move between some tribes, but not all. The same language I used was repeated by Jewish people and brown people in the conversation I linked. It is not unique to white people. If you search the world over, you will find the same language and patterns of behavior. The outsider is distrusted almost automatically without thought or reservation. See Realistic Conflict Theory It was nice of fusnik to drop in here and prove the point. SF is saying unacceptable things, he's not of our tribe, why try to reason with him? Label the outsider as such and exclude him. (Did I misread this?)

It's not just a racial problem, the same psychological subsystems are activated between fans of sports teams. Why do athletes engage in bench clearing brawls? Living peacefully with many tribes is not normal human behavior. Yet in the US, while not nearly perfect, we don't kill each other in genocidal tribal warfare. Why is that? And once it is identified how do we go about not losing it?

[swampfrog]

The race issue in the US is complicated.

Article in The Economist

Some have used these data to assert that racists have been emboldened by Mr Trump’s victory and are perpetrating hate crimes against their neighbours at higher rates than before, a picture that seems to be confirmed by attacks on synagogues, or by marching white supremacists. This is misleading, however. Over the past ten years, racial biases have become less pronounced in America. It is possible that its citizens are more tolerant today than they have ever been before.

Tessa Charlesworth and Mahzarin Banaji, psychologists at Harvard University, recently published an analysis of 4.4m results from an online test of Americans’ biases. The test, called an implicit-association test (iat), scores biases based on how quickly a person associates black and white faces with nouns like “good” and “bad” or “joyful” and “evil”. If someone is quicker to categorise one race positively or the other negatively, they are said to be biased. The authors found that implicit biases based on race have decreased by approximately 17% in a decade. They also found that explicit biases have declined by an even-larger 37%.

Yet while all this progress has been going on, American politics has become more polarised on racial lines, rather than less.

A good predictor of support for Donald Trump in 2016 was whether or not a voter agreed with whether it was extremely or very important “for whites to work together to change laws that are unfair to whites,” a sentiment shared by 33% of Trump voters, according to the ANES.

This does not mean that support for the president is motivated by simple racism, as his opponents frequently imply. Those who say they identify more with whites do not always prefer white to black Americans. In her recent book, “White Identity Politics”, Ashley Jardina, a political scientist, finds that 9% of white Americans are unabashed racists. A much larger group of whites, 30-40% of the total, feel a strong attachment to their whiteness and yet do not express racial bias.

[Eddie]

The race issue in the US is complicated.

Article in The Economist

This does not mean that support for the president is motivated by simple racism, as his opponents frequently imply. Those who say they identify more with whites do not always prefer white to black Americans. In her recent book, “White Identity Politics”, Ashley Jardina, a political scientist, finds that 9% of white Americans are unabashed racists. A much larger group of whites, 30-40% of the total, feel a strong attachment to their whiteness and yet do not express racial bias.

I think there is a very VERY fine line between recognizing those who have experienced marginalization in the past and attempting to give them the support to lift them up to a higher plane (speaking primarily of socioeconomic issues) versus shaming someone for being a part of the group who has not been marginalized - and the group which even played some role in that marginalization in the past.

More and more research coming out suggests that resilience, happiness, and emotional health is tied to family narrative - who you are, where you come from, your family's story. And I fear not allowing someone to have a connection or some pride in their story - because they are white and are part of a privileged class - puts long-term mental health at risk. Now - to be sure, it's about more than just race or culture. It includes all of the elements of who a person and their family are. But being "white" is part of the story. And if kids begin to hear that they should be ashamed of being white due to the actions of their ancestors, we're putting them at risk.

This article touches on what I'm talking about; I'm not sure how well I'm describing it, and this doesn't take it all in. But it gives you a sense.

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/f...this-life.html

FYI - I'm not in any way suggesting that white nationalism is OK. What I am suggesting is that it's OK for people to be OK with who they are and where they come from. And if we make it not OK for them to be who they are and where they come from, that is a bad thing.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Wrong! I oppose all walls. America does not stand for walls. Walls are un-American. Worse! Walls don’t work. They just don’t. America, tear down your walls! All walls must come down. Walls, a pillar of barbarism.

[swampfrog]

I think there is a very VERY fine line between recognizing those who have experienced marginalization in the past and attempting to give them the support to lift them up to a higher plane (speaking primarily of socioeconomic issues) versus shaming someone for being a part of the group who has not been marginalized - and the group which even played some role in that marginalization in the past.

More and more research coming out suggests that resilience, happiness, and emotional health is tied to family narrative - who you are, where you come from, your family's story. And I fear not allowing someone to have a connection or some pride in their story - because they are white and are part of a privileged class - puts long-term mental health at risk. Now - to be sure, it's about more than just race or culture. It includes all of the elements of who a person and their family are. But being "white" is part of the story. And if kids begin to hear that they should be ashamed of being white due to the actions of their ancestors, we're putting them at risk.

This article touches on what I'm talking about; I'm not sure how well I'm describing it, and this doesn't take it all in. But it gives you a sense.

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/f...this-life.html

FYI - I'm not in any way suggesting that white nationalism is OK. What I am suggesting is that it's OK for people to be OK with who they are and where they come from. And if we make it not OK for them to be who they are and where they come from, that is a bad thing.

Thanks for the article. It further extends my understanding of family, but also extending to community.

Leaders in other fields have found similar results. Many groups use what sociologists call sense-making, the building of a narrative that explains what the group is about.

Jim Collins, a management expert and author of “Good to Great,” told me that successful human enterprises of any kind, from companies to countries, go out of their way to capture their core identity. In Mr. Collins’s terms, they “preserve core, while stimulating progress.”

The focus on capturing an identity and preserving the core. It reminds me of the first Cars movie as it takes a nostalgic look at pre-multilane highway life in America's small towns. Community and tradition are important to people, and they naturally fear losing it, lose connection to the past and losing the opportunity to propagate it to their children.

Are there any references to why nostalgia may have developed in humans? I think I'll google to see what I can find, but if anyone knows of good source material on the evolutionary purpose of nostalgia that would be helpful.

[frank ryan]

I think there is a very VERY fine line between recognizing those who have experienced marginalization in the past and attempting to give them the support to lift them up to a higher plane (speaking primarily of socioeconomic issues) versus shaming someone for being a part of the group who has not been marginalized - and the group which even played some role in that marginalization in the past.

More and more research coming out suggests that resilience, happiness, and emotional health is tied to family narrative - who you are, where you come from, your family's story. And I fear not allowing someone to have a connection or some pride in their story - because they are white and are part of a privileged class - puts long-term mental health at risk. Now - to be sure, it's about more than just race or culture. It includes all of the elements of who a person and their family are. But being "white" is part of the story. And if kids begin to hear that they should be ashamed of being white due to the actions of their ancestors, we're putting them at risk.

This article touches on what I'm talking about; I'm not sure how well I'm describing it, and this doesn't take it all in. But it gives you a sense.

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/f...this-life.html

FYI - I'm not in any way suggesting that white nationalism is OK. What I am suggesting is that it's OK for people to be OK with who they are and where they come from. And if we make it not OK for them to be who they are and where they come from, that is a bad thing.

The importance ones family background and community background and story isn’t new to our field, but it has been validated.
I agree with your last paragraph. I don’t think encouraging someone to be aware of their privilege is the same thing as making them ashamed of who they are. I can how it might feel that way for others, but’s it not.
I’m proud of my Mormon heritage, even my Irish and Danish roots and most of the time I’m proud to be an American but I’ve never felt an attachment to a community based on race/

[Eddie]

The importance ones family background and community background and story isn’t new to our field, but it has been validated.
I agree with your last article. I don’t think encouraging someone to be aware of their privilege is the same thing as making them ashamed of who they are. I can how it might feel that way for others, but’s it not.
I’m proud of my Mormon heritage, even my Irish and Danish roots and most of the time I’m proud to be an American but I’ve never felt an attachment to a community based on race/

Couple of comments.

First - I agree that making someone aware of their privilege isn't always shaming. But there is a ton of nuance to it, and I'm not sure kids always get the nuance. And - I think that some take to that recognition more easily than others. And sometimes the efforts to get those who don't get it to get it result in overly hammering home the point to those who DO get it - which can lead to a degree of shaming, whether that is intended or not.

Second - there are some who would say that being proud of your Irish and Danish roots and potentially celebrating that Irish and Danish heritage is also a celebration and an attachment to your white race. You can't always separate those things. Not a lot of people of color historically who were Irish or Danish.

[frank ryan]

Couple of comments.

First - I agree that making someone aware of their privilege isn't always shaming. But there is a ton of nuance to it, and I'm not sure kids always get the nuance. And - I think that some take to that recognition more easily than others. And sometimes the efforts to get those who don't get it to get it result in overly hammering home the point to those who DO get it - which can lead to a degree of shaming, whether that is intended or not.

Second - there are some who would say that being proud of your Irish and Danish roots and potentially celebrating that Irish and Danish heritage is also a celebration and an attachment to your white race. You can't always separate those things. Not a lot of people of color historically who were Irish or Danish.

Well, those people be misguided. There are folk songs celebrating whiteness. There aren’t oral stories about the importance of whiteness as part of the Irish tradition. In fact, I’d say if you went to Ireland and visited as Irish-Nationalist bar and inferred there pride was even in part based on their racial identity, you would get the shit kicked out of you. For Irish nationalist opposing colonialism is a part of their story and identify. The British used to design the Irish as a being a different race. The Irish nationalist partitions in both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland are very pro-immigrant.
Also, there are black Irish individuals. An important and revered modern Irish culture figure, Phil Lynnott was black.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Lynott

Almost all of the Mormon pioneers who white, a far greater majority than white Irish or Danish people. We know there were also some people of color, even a few slaves. Jane Manning and Elijah were pioneers. When Pioneer Day is celebrated there are no racial overtones.

Sure you’ll find people who say race matters, but you’ll find people who say race matters when it comes to being an American. Those people are pricks. There really is no glory is xenophobia and nativism.

[creekster]

Well, those people be misguided. There are folk songs celebrating whiteness. There aren’t oral stories about the importance of whiteness as part of the Irish tradition. In fact, I’d say if you went to Ireland and visited as Irish-Nationalist bar and inferred there pride was even in part based on their racial identity, you would get the shit kicked out of you. For Irish nationalist opposing colonialism is a part of their story and identify. The British used to design the Irish as a being a different race. The Irish nationalist partitions in both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland are very pro-immigrant.
Also, there are black Irish individuals. An important and revered modern Irish culture figure, Phil Lynnott was black.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Lynott

Almost all of the Mormon pioneers who white, a far greater majority than white Irish or Danish people. We know there were also some people of color, even a few slaves. Jane Manning and Elijah were pioneers. When Pioneer Day is celebrating there are no racial overtones.

Sure you’ll find people who say race matters, but you’ll find people who say race matters when it comes to being an American. Those people are pricks. There really is no glory is xenophobia and nativism.

Wait, so you're really saying that because the Irish are the "blacks of Europe" that they dont suffer from white privilege?

[swampfrog]

Another article of a young man trying to make his way in his community. Trying to understand the morality and pressures of his community and figure out where the lines are and where they should be.

The opening lines:

O.K., let me just get to it. I think I broke up with my last girlfriend because she’s white. Actually, no, I definitely broke up with her because she’s white.

And the sum-up:

So here I stand, trying to be woke, and not dating white women, and feeling kind of bad about that. Because I’m definitely dating, and thinking that the decision to no longer date white women might not be my own, that any decision to choose a side doesn’t help the whole hashtag-woke thing because how do we solve anything if we just separate and isolate?...

...Anyway, this is me yearning, praying, journaling, writing, dialoguing, putting up a one-man show, wishing, trying to pick a side, wondering how to choose myself and trying to wrap my head around this, hoping that I’m doing woke right, because something just doesn’t feel right.

[Uncle Ted]

Another article of a young man trying to make his way in his community. Trying to understand the morality and pressures of his community and figure out where the lines are and where they should be.

The opening lines:



And the sum-up:

Here's another meaningless tweet for just Frank...

Embedded Tweet

[falafel]

Here's another meaningless tweet for just Frank...

Embedded Tweet

What was the tweet she was referencing? It has been removed.

[swampfrog]

I'm going to make one more attempt at this. I've been reading a lot of perspectives from various sources over the last couple of days, and I think I previously used some trigger phrases and wording that undermined my attempted communication.

There are some ideas that I think are sacrosanct to facilitating multiculturalism. These are encoded in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, constitutional amendments, the engraving at the Statue of Liberty, etc. I'm assuming this isn't controversial, but if it is, then please point me at a source of further education.

It's these values that I referred to as Judeo-Christian values. I am not making a case that these ideas belong to or originated in Judeo-Christian cultures. Both Jewish and Christian cultures have adapted and incorporated many good ideas from other cultures over time (as well as some bad ones). Nor do I believe their maintenance requires that Christianity and Judaism survive for these ideas to survive. Many of these ideas have been implemented across races and ethnicities. They are echoed in texts and traditions across cultures. They are also found in secular humanism and many distinct religious traditions. Some of those ideas deal specifically with how one treats strangers and enemies. "I was a stranger and you welcomed me...", "love thy enemy", the good Samaritan, etc. I do believe however that these values and ideas do need some vehicle that facilitates their generational transmittal, which is often best accomplished via narrative. Somehow sacredness fits into the puzzle.

The open question that I struggle with is what percentage of any given population must hold these principles to prevent their erosion, and with that erosion cause a society such as the US to collapse into tribalism and its accompanying conflict. Not all cultures, traditions, individuals, etc. "hold these truths to be self-evident". Those tempted to seek power (and we all do to some extent have a desire to increase our own status) will undermine them at the earliest opportunity.

The Book of Mormon highlights a few of the methodologies by which "free" cultures can be destroyed. Again, these same ideas are in other texts. King Noah versus King Benjamin. The kingmen of Moroni's time. The Gadianton robbers. All highlighting the corruption that sometimes manifests from within. The various threats from Lamanites, especially when the Lamanites have allies within that use them as vehicle to power (Amalickiah). Are these threats real? Or just traditional indoctrination that I have been subjected to? What do I make of Moroni's title of liberty and the reasoning laid out there? I see that similar ideas are also present currently in social psychology, in evolutionary theory, in examination of the brain through neuroscience, etc. (See Haidt's, "The Righteous Mind"). Non-religious people from these varied disciplines are also raising a voice of warning.

It is purely happenstance that the United States was founded by primarily "white" "Christian" people from Europe. It also happened at a time when Western European society had not fully adapted these ideas into their own culture. Most people still lived under difficult circumstances, appalling living conditions (by modern standards), and were confronting the tyrannical behaviors of the powerful within their cultures. Once the immediate oppression of absolute tyranny and relentless nature had been reduced, slowly the promise of these ideas have been extended to others (which still continues today--and for which there is still work to do).

The Book of Mormon, The Bible (and other writings, including evolution theory) all warn of the dangers of following the tradition of your fathers. While also extolling the possible virtues of the tradition of your fathers. Tradition is a two-edged sword. I'm struggling to make sense of it. While I would be dishonest to say I'm not frustrated, the feedback has been useful for my ongoing effort to better understand myself and the many communities in which I participate.

It may simply be that the nature of internet forums can't provide the necessary communication feedback mechanisms by which such things can be effectively explored. In order to explore them, I have to imperfectly express what I'm thinking which will at least be poorly articulated, and at other times simply misinformed. I'm well aware that I have biases, many of which are unknown to me. I'll probably leave this topic alone for now, it appears to complex for asynchronous communication.