[Peace-discuss] Anti-racism

[C. G. Estabrook]

Could you spell out the distinction?  What would an example of "the current 
effect of past discrimination" be, and what would be the proper remedy?


Robert Naiman wrote:
> I think it's worthwhile to distinguish between claims based on the
> fact that one's ancestor experienced discrimination and claims based
> on the current effects of past discrimination. While I have nothing
> against the former, it's the latter that I was addressing.
> 
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 5:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu> wrote:
>> I get something because my Irish great-grandfather was an exploited laborer
>> in
>> 19c. Pennsylvania?
>>
>> There is (practically) no legal discrimination or popular prejudice against
>> Irish-Americans today (altho' I could tell you stories from New England...).
>>
>>
>> Robert Naiman wrote:
>>> I have no problem with making a distinction between legal structures and
>>> popular attitudes. I was making a different point: that the categories of
>>> "legal structures" and "popular attitudes" don't cover "racism," unless one
>>> expands the categories of "legal structures" and "popular attitudes" to
>>> include the absence of redress, since there are tendencies for disparities
>>> created in the past to be self-perpetuating, even in the absence of legal
>>> discrimination and popular prejudice.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 2:53 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>> It's worthwhile to distinguish between legal structures and popular
>>>> attitudes, even if there are areas where they shade into one another (e.g.,
>>>>  the non-enforcement of anti-discrimination laws, or prejudicial police
>>>> practice). The same is true of night and day.
>>>>
>>>> The civil rights movement ended legal segregation and contributed to
>>>> conscientization of some regarding racial prejudice. For others, it
>>>> increased racial prejudice (e.g., whites who concluded "the government does
>>>>  everything for black people!").
>>>>
>>>> The latter reaction was encouraged by the long-standing elite strategy of
>>>> playing upon divisions in the working class -- and race was always a potent
>>>>  division, as limited success of 20th-century union organizing in the
>>>> South
>>>>  shows.
>>>>
>>>> Jay Gould, American financier at the turn of the last century, remarked,
>>>> "I
>>>>  can always hire one-nalf of the American working class to kill the other
>>>> half."  He was not referring specifically to race, but it helped. --CGE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Robert Naiman wrote:
>>>>> "legal" seems too narrow. economic discrimination can persist in the
>>>>> absence of laws enforcing discrimination. in fact, discrimination can
>>>>> persist without being strongly reinforced by censorious attitudes, through
>>>>> customs and practices that may seem nominally neutral but have the effect of
>>>>> reproducing existing disparities.
>>>>>
>>>>> for example: a legacy of British colonial policies in Northern Ireland
>>>>> was that Protestant workers disproportionately held factory jobs. a foreman
>>>>> comes before the workers and says,"we have a few openings." workers tell
>>>>> friends, neighbors, cousins. as a result, the applicant pool
>>>>>  is all Protestants, and only Protestants get the jobs. no law said only
>>>>> Protestants would get the jobs. and censorious attitudes didn't have to be
>>>>> particularly strong for people to spread the news to their social circles
>>>>> which happened to be overwhelmingly Protestant. in such a situation, you
>>>>> would need affirmative action for redress. it isn't sufficient to say, there
>>>>> are no discriminatory laws, and the censorious attitudes aren't so bad.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 8:23 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> [Racism refers to legal structures that penalize groups defined by
>>>>>> descent. Racial prejudice refers to censorious attitudes towards groups
>>>>>>  defined by descent.  Both are present in Israel. Racism, but not
>>>>>> racial prejudice, is now largely absent in the US (altho' some, like
>>>>>> native Americans, may justly not think so).  --CGE]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> March 4, 2009 SEGREGATION IN ISRAEL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Israeli Association for Civil Rights
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some 55 percent of Jewish Israelis say that the state should encourage
>>>>>>  Arab emigration;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 78 percent of Jewish Israelis oppose including Arab parties in the
>>>>>> government;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 56 percent agree with the statement that 'Arabs cannot attain the
>>>>>> Jewish level of cultural development'
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 75 percent agree that Arabs are inclined to be violent. Among
>>>>>> Arab-Israelis, 54 percent feel the same way about Jews.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 75 percent of Israeli Jews say they would not live in the same building
>>>>>>  as Arabs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://prorev.com/2009/03/segregation-in-israel.html
>>>>>> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>>>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
>