Is reverse racism a problem?
Yes
69.2% (81)
69.2% (81)
No
21.4% (25)
21.4% (25)
Undecided
9.4% (11)
9.4% (11)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Does "reverse racism" bother you?

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

It seems like lately I've been seeing people who aren't white get a little carried away when decrying racism. Now white people have done some pretty terrible things, don't get me wrong, but is stereotyping all white people as racists and "colonists" really helping anyone? If anything, that sort of attitude just drives away valuable allies.

For example, I came across this blog the other day:

http://whitepeoplehq.wordpress.com/

England is unique as one of the original centres of whiteness. Although the England was not always a colonizer and therefore filled with white people there is nothing redeeming about Englishness.

idk if this is a parody of a poe or what, but I for one felt pretty insulted by some of these essays. Is there anything wrong with being proud of "whiteness" and the many things white culture have accomplished? Is that racist? I don't think so.

Racism is racism; it doesn't matter what race the aggressor is or what race the victim is.

Reverse racism is... an odd phrase, one which need not exist for all it does is alter the perceptions of specific kinds of racism when there isn't a justification for it.

Got to agree with DevilWithaHalo, there's no such thing as reverse racism, it's just plain racism.

Racism against whites is just as serious though as other forms of racism and sadly I have heard of instances of anti-white racism in my native UK though luckily not that common and I have never experienced it personally. The article I read on the linked blog disgusted me as pure and simple racism, it seemed to unquestioningly associate whiteness with colonialism.

Whites are no better or worse than any other race, us dominating much of the world for a couple of centuries was mainly luck that our civilisation was the first to reach the necessary technology level to maintain such large empires: slavery and atrocities have been known to have occurred in every culture, no exceptions.

I am not sure if this falls into " reverse" catagory, but it was funny when a black girl called me that " lil white girl over there" when I am Hopi, not " white" That actually made me laugh. LOL!

Racism is racism. Doesn't matter what the skin color is.

Lil devils x:
I am not sure if this falls into " reverse" catagory, but it was funny when a black girl called me that " lil white girl over there" when I am Hopi, not " white" That actually made me laugh. LOL!

Probably should have called you Red... unless we're talking about the Russian communists. Or she could have called you brown... unless we're talking about Indians from the middle east. Damn... we can't even keep our colors straight!

What would have been fun if you openly described her as the bistre girl over there, or the licorice girl. Maybe walk up to her with a color wheel to determine her appropriate shade.

If we're going to color people, by god we're going to do it right!

DevilWithaHalo:

Lil devils x:
I am not sure if this falls into " reverse" catagory, but it was funny when a black girl called me that " lil white girl over there" when I am Hopi, not " white" That actually made me laugh. LOL!

Probably should have called you Red... unless we're talking about the Russian communists. Or she could have called you brown... unless we're talking about Indians from the middle east. Damn... we can't even keep our colors straight!

What would have been fun if you openly described her as the bistre girl over there, or the licorice girl. Maybe walk up to her with a color wheel to determine her appropriate shade.

If we're going to color people, by god we're going to do it right!

When I lived in the hood, I was called all kinds of things, but then again, so was everyone else, so I don't think it really was about racism more than it was just about being mean.

Even worse though, I feel bad for my brothers because of how urban lingo has skewed the way Hopi women are viewed, so when they said they were " Hopi" this is what people thought they were talking about:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hopi

The look on my brothers face was priceless though. HAHAHA!

In regards to color, most of the time we are confused with Asians, or Latinos rather than White people, so that was funny.

Hopi girl:
image
What shade of tan is that? Is it even on the color wheel? LOL

I hate positive discrimination of any kind. For example, mandating that a certain percentage of women or ethnic minorities are on the board of a company, or that intake of students has to meet a certain percentage of social class.

It's well intentioned, but completely fails to address the root cause of the issue - social inequality and fewer opportunities, and puts one group at a disadvantage based on something other than their skill.

Esotera:
I hate positive discrimination of any kind. For example, mandating that a certain percentage of women or ethnic minorities are on the board of a company, or that intake of students has to meet a certain percentage of social class.

It's well intentioned, but completely fails to address the root cause of the issue - social inequality and fewer opportunities, and puts one group at a disadvantage based on something other than their skill.

I agree that it is not equality to be given " more" than anyone based on your race. Rather with issues of assistance needed, it should be based on " needs" rather than race. For example, my friend, who is a single white mother and has a hearing impaired child was told she had to list her son as being " latino" in order to get into the speech class he needed at the school. Those programs should be available to all who are in need, not just available to those who are new to the country, or of a different race. I do not feel that is equality in any way, shape or form. She is more in need than others I know that were in that class, and still could not get in without claiming to be another race.

I disgaree with quotas, however, I also disagree with employers discriminating against someone due to racism, regardless of color but also see where race can be an issue with the job being offered. Race and sex can actually be a job qualification depending on the position at hand. Depending on what their market is, race can affect whether or not they can market the product as effectively. For example, I would not think a white man would be able to sell cosmetics designed for Black women as effectively as a black woman can. He could not even put it on his wrist to show the shade differences as the women can to show how well it blends. He would not be able to model the makeup on himself to advertise it without making the product look strange. That would just be awkward. LOL

Lil devils x:
Hopi girl:
image
What shade of tan is that? Is it even on the color wheel? LOL

It's really tough to tell with the lighting. But my first guess would be Fulvous, which is a shade of brown (of which Tan is a shade of as well).

Is someone was actually Tan (the color), I'd suspect they were sickly or suffering from a vitamin deficiency.

This isn't racism. Firstly, the blog is satirical. Secondly, it's actually viciously, viciously anti-racist.

Racism is the belief that particular "races" have certain intrinsic characteristics beyond the definitional factors of their appearance. If the article was saying that "white people" were inherently stupid or aggressive because their brains were a different shape, that would be racism. It's not.

The article is talking about race as a cultural/historical phenomenon. It's not using "whiteness" to refer to people with white skin. It's using "whiteness" to refer to the awareness of whiteness which came about with scientific racism and has persisted as a meaningful social category ever since.

I mean seriously:

Penguin_Factory:

England is unique as one of the original centres of whiteness. Although the England was not always a colonizer and therefore filled with white people there is nothing redeeming about Englishness.

This quote actually makes it very obvious. England is not the origin of human beings with white skin, it was however one of the most aggressive proponents of the "white man's burden" in foreign policy. The point is that English culture has been specifically marked by the recent history of England as a colonial power and one of the key international proponents of scientific racism. Historically, I don't think that's particularly true, but it's a joke.

The point the article is (jokingly) making is that yes, it is bad to want to reclaim or be proud of a "white" culture, because in order to even imagine there's such a thing as a transnational "white" culture you're referencing a history in which white people violently organized the world in accordance with a racial hierarchy. You might not want to hear that, but it's not "racist", it's kind of the opposite.

I thought this was about institutionilized 'reverse-racism', like giving preference to people coming from 'minority' status.

This is racism against white people. In my country, I'm the white straight guy.

I actually really really despise things like Affirmitive Action and the like. We get it, minorities suffered in the past, but I am not at all responsible for the actions of people in the past, just because I share a skin-tone and some distant genetic relation. The true way to forget racism is to simply start ignoring race, its a non-issue. Your genetic origin and skin-tone means nothing, we are all human beings. Actually that is why I find some things like the idea of having pride in your racial group a little weird. Wooo you are distantly related to some people who did some stuff wooo! Overall I think we need to ditch reverse discrimination, and preferably ditch the concept of race asap as well.

The reverse of being racist is not being racist. Just because you're acting that way to white people instead of a minority or historically oppressed group does not mean that it's some new special things. Racism is racism.

TKretts3:
The reverse of being racist is not being racist. Just because you're acting that way to white people instead of a minority or historically oppressed group does not mean that it's some new special things. Racism is racism.

My thoughts exactly. That said, I can't say that I see much "reverse" racism.

Oh haha perfect timing with this thread. I hate institutionalized reverse racism when it's not blatantly stated, mostly because blatantly stating it would be illegal and racist.

As an example, last night I took 3 hours filling out information for a harvard summer research program that could send me to various schools across the country to do research. Well I got to one part of this information sheet that said include in your statement of purpose what our diversity goal is... at which point I got worried, I was at the 800 word mark of a 1000 word document detailing my interests in research and I look over at the about us page. The words under represented minorities glaring in their mission statement.

So do I finish the application with another 30 minutes and 10 dollars to send my school transcripts or just say there is no way I can get in. I have no problem with these programs there are plenty of opportunities out there that i more than qualify for but goddamn could you at least state, " our positions are usually taken up by qualified minority applicants" so I don't waste my time or money pining over the dream experience.

I despise "reverse racism" because it's racism but also fuels racism on both sides. Positive discrimination basically tells minorities that all white folks are racists and as such minorities are justified to hate us in return (so it creates racism among minorities) but on top of that it also fuels racism among them whities because they feel wronged.

As reverse racism isn't a thing, no it doesn't bother me.

Reverse racism is just racism, surely?

In my view, racism could be defined as "taking race into account when it shouldn't be a factor". In that sense you could say that there's negative racism (bigotry, racial hatred, negative prejudice and so on) and positive racism (affirmative action, quotas, well-meaning but ignorant preconceptions, and so on).

Affirmative Action and the like I can grudgingly admit play an important role in social justice. If a distinct section of a society is disadvantaged then that should be addressed - although the way this is done is often less than helpful, patronising and just plain divisive.

evilthecat:
The point the article is (jokingly) making is that yes, it is bad to want to reclaim or be proud of a "white" culture, because in order to even imagine there's such a thing as a transnational "white" culture you're referencing a history in which white people violently organized the world in accordance with a racial hierarchy. You might not want to hear that, but it's not "racist", it's kind of the opposite.

This sounds rather like self-loathing white guilt. What the Sam Hell are you talking about, and what kind of depressing tunnel-vision must you have to think that the only unifying feature of "white culture" (if it exists) is imperialism? Try making that kind of claim about any other race or culture and it'd be patently bigoted. And you think that's the opposite of racist? Is that seriously your view?

dmase:
Oh haha perfect timing with this thread. I hate institutionalized reverse racism when it's not blatantly stated, mostly because blatantly stating it would be illegal and racist.

As an example, last night I took 3 hours filling out information for a harvard summer research program that could send me to various schools across the country to do research. Well I got to one part of this information sheet that said include in your statement of purpose what our diversity goal is... at which point I got worried, I was at the 800 word mark of a 1000 word document detailing my interests in research and I look over at the about us page. The words under represented minorities glaring in their mission statement.

So do I finish the application with another 30 minutes and 10 dollars to send my school transcripts or just say there is no way I can get in. I have no problem with these programs there are plenty of opportunities out there that i more than qualify for but goddamn could you at least state, " our positions are usually taken up by qualified minority applicants" so I don't waste my time or money pining over the dream experience.

Somewhat related, after I wasn't accepted into my first grouping of doctoral programs, my academic advisor recommended that I try and gain admission to the tribe of native Americans that my great grandmother belonged to, to give myself "a leg up" in the admissions process. Coincidentally(or not), this was the moment that I realized what a fucked up Huxleyian culture academia is, and decided that I was done putting time, effort, and money into the coffers of the ivory tower.

YMMV.

As in the expression, which is dumb? Yeah.

As in racism towards white people, which is what that expression is meant to mean? Also yeah, because of that important word right at the start. The one starting with an R.

Racism is bad kiddies. The fact that this even needs explaining makes me angry.

Batou667:
What the Sam Hell are you talking about, and what kind of depressing tunnel-vision must you have to think that the only unifying feature of "white culture" (if it exists) is imperialism?

I've bolded the bit which you should probably take note of.

Think about the definition of racism again, and run that phrase through it (I'll give you a clue, the key is in the first word).

evilthecat:

I've bolded the bit which you should probably take note of.

Think about the definition of racism again, and run that phrase through it (I'll give you a clue, the key is in the first word).

And yet we have Black History Month. Is that racist?

Batou667:

evilthecat:

I've bolded the bit which you should probably take note of.

Think about the definition of racism again, and run that phrase through it (I'll give you a clue, the key is in the first word).

And yet we have Black History Month. Is that racist?

Absolutely.

All racism is racism. There is no reverse racism unless you take the definition of racism to mean 'discrimination against black people' which is just factually wrong.

Not nearly as much as I hate reverse homophobia. Think about that for a second. Yeah, that's how ridiculous it sounds.

Edit: Haha, that link was hilarious. You got offended by some actually clever satire? What a sad state we're in.

Batou667:
And yet we have Black History Month. Is that racist?

Sometimes.

However, "black history month" is, at its best at least, exactly what it claims to be. It's the social history of a concept called blackness, a concept which originated in European scientific racism as a justification for colonial politics. Yeah, there's a degree of identity politics about "Black History", but really, in a world where "history" almost always means the history about or from the perspective of people of European ancestry, I think you probably need to get some perspective on this.

Racism was born in Europe and enforced, both intellectually and politically, on the rest of the world. These categories of "white people", "black people", "yellow people" and so forth as distinct classes of human beings with distinct traits was invented by white Europeans and politically imposed on other newly created "races", often in deeply inhumane ways. "Black history" has reason to be critical of the racist origins of its "blackness", and thus, to its credit "black history" is (generally) not simply a regurgitation of weird claims about "what black people are like" or the "value" of being black or otherwise.

When it is, and I'm sure it sometimes is, it's racist. But I don't think it is very often.

If you want to talk about a thing called "white history" or "white culture", then you need to accept that you're talking about "whiteness" as a racial concept. That in itself is not a problem. Talking about race is not a problem for anyone. The belief in the existence of a thing called "race" isn't a big lie which we have to hush up in case it gives people the wrong idea. Race exists now. It exists in the sense that it's been a hugely important concept to our social interaction for hundreds of years and it still has a huge effect on our world. That's worth talking about. What's not worth talking about is how "proud" we all are of a term which was created to express a belief in inherent superiority and really has no other meaning outside of that context.

It is rather frustrating that white people are the only people on the planet who aren't allowed to be proud because of their race, at least without immediately having the Nazi card played at them. The fact is, Western European culture has been the closest thing to a hegemonic culture for 5 centuries, and the West has accomplished much. Very much.

^^^^ Whites are allowed to be proud of their NATIONALITY. Not their race, but to the best of my knowledge blacks are really the only race that gets to be proud of their race. Remember Mexican is not a race, it's a nationality and if you don't believe me find a place where Mexicans and Cubans both live, they tend to get quite offended if you can't tell the difference. The same goes for most of Asia. Try calling a Pakistani person Indian or a Japanese person Korean or Chinese (or vice versa). Blacks (in the US) don't have the benefit for the most part of knowing what country or tribe we came from. Nobody complains about St. Patrick's day because there is nothing offensive about being proud of being Irish or Scottish, or French or German or Italian so on and so forth.

Europeans are barely sixty years into this whole "we're all on the same team" koom bye ya thing so when you say "I'm proud of being white" as opposed to I'm a proud Spainard, Russian, Dutchman it's pretty difficult to buy that you mean anything other than your happy your not one of the other races.

Also I hate the Escapist Quote Function. I cannot say that enough.

generals3:
I despise "reverse racism" because it's racism but also fuels racism on both sides. Positive discrimination basically tells minorities that all white folks are racists and as such minorities are justified to hate us in return (so it creates racism among minorities) but on top of that it also fuels racism among them whities because they feel wronged.

It doesn't tell minorities that white folks are racists or that any hatred needs be involved. It does foster some hatred from whites who feel slighted but it seems that most of the people who are offended are going to be offended regardless so there is only so much to be done for it.

As for another poster saying it doesn't help the root cause, it does. It's probably the fastest route even if it's not really something anybody wants to do. The reality is that minorities don't have the same opportunities in the US as whites. It's nothing so insidious as The Man holding them down, it doesn't need to be. It's a simple matter of people are more likely to help out those closest to them and work outward from there. It is changing bit by bit and day by day but there isn't a black/hispanic/asian equivalent to the Trumps or the Hiltons. There aren't even a lot of minorities who have the means to just send their kids to college regardless of grades or hand off a successful company to them. We can either wait until minorities work their way up which will happen. It's just a matter of how long it takes or we can create opportunities to get them ahead so they can start building up their neighborhoods and communities.

evilthecat:

Racism was born in Europe and enforced, both intellectually and politically, on the rest of the world. These categories of "white people", "black people", "yellow people" and so forth as distinct classes of human beings with distinct traits was invented by white Europeans and politically imposed on other newly created "races", often in deeply inhumane ways.

I think this is an amazing post overall but I disagree with this portion. You are right about most forms of racism we see in the west, but there are certain groups that are racist or xenophobic whose bigotry does not have an origin in the west. For example the xenophobia you see in Korea was not created or even altered by the west.

harmonic:
It is rather frustrating that white people are the only people on the planet who aren't allowed to be proud because of their race, at least without immediately having the Nazi card played at them. The fact is, Western European culture has been the closest thing to a hegemonic culture for 5 centuries, and the West has accomplished much. Very much.

The idea that you should be proud to be "white" is silly. I'm not proud to be white, but I am damn proud I'm Irish. Why should I be proud of some German's accomplishments? They can't drink worth a damn!

While I can understand black pride in America because for the most part all "black people" have a common origin.

ETA: Darnit! Someone beat me to it!

There's a saying "Racism is prejudice plus power". Now, I don't entirely agree with those sentiments, but it's a useful soundbite to keep in mind.

A while ago, I came across a blog by someone talking about the racism faced by African-Americans. Initially it had some insightful stuff, but then the author started ranting about how homosexuality is part of the white agenda to destroy black people, feminism part of the zionist agenda likewise, and it went downhill from there.

But, the author's claims that secret government organisations are keeping tabs on them, that person doesn't matter. They've got a dozen or so like minded friends, and that's about it.

Now, the Western world is clearly dominated by white people. The government, inudstry, military, religion, police and any other institution of real power throughtout most/all Western nations are run by white people. That means racism by white people can be big enough to be a serious problem. Minorities are, well, in the minority, they don't have the power to abuse.

You can't really be (say) a racist Japanese person in a white nation the same way that white supremacy is unlikely to take off in Japan. Now, certainly minorities can harbour prejudice and do any number of terrible things on the micro scale, but unless the power in held by that minority group (very unusual, but not unprecedented), they can't do much large scale.

...

In regards to Affirmative Action, it's generally a hamfisted solution, but in lieu of a real fix for serious problems, that's not, IMHO, enough to condemn it. Any individual policy might be ill-advised, and some more open to abuse than others, but the simple idea is little different than having more fire crews in places that have lots of fires.

Sean Renaud:
Horse Shit

So your assertion is that "black" is the only Race that can be proud to be a race? *cracks knuckles*

Look at a map of Africa. Huge continent. Lots of countries. Are you so ignorant and racist that you aren't aware of how many different cultures there are in Africa? Do you know how huge of a difference there is between the major sub-regions? Do you know anything about the history of African empires and the migration of peoples? So because they came here due to the slave trade, they're the only ones ALLOWED to be proud of their race? Sorry, I guess I didn't get memo of what I'm allowed and not allowed to do.

Yes, I heard your argument. I find it ridiculous. My European ancestry goes back like 300 years to a mix of Northern European countries. Mostly German. So I'm only allowed to be proud of what the Germans have done? Fine, so I'm not French, English, or any other ancestry associated with whiteness. If Black people have your permission to be proud - why? Do they need a reason or an excuse? No, they don't, apparently. Just because they're Black. Most may not know their African country of origin from hundreds of years ago, so they probably won't know what accomplishments their country FROM SO LONG AGO has done. But... why do White people have that burden and Black people don't? Why can't White people simply not need an excuse to be proud to be White? Why does it even matter what the Germans or the Irish or the French have done when determining if we're allowed to be proud of our heritage? Because you, Sean Renaud, said so.

Nobody said "Mexican was a race." Only you said that. Trust me, I have an entire gaggle of Peruvian in-laws with whom I have had extended conversations about the distinction between the definitions of race, ethnicity, and nationality in what's known as Latin America. Yes, I and most people know Mexicans and Cubans are different. Do you also know the European/Native mix of every single country in Latin America? What they think of each other? Because I do. Don't even try that angle.

All this depends on definitions. Apparently you think "white" is in a different category as "black." Okay then, what category is "white" in? What category is "black" in? People often equate white with Caucasian, but Caucasian includes an enormous amount of people, including Arabs, Hispanics, Persians, etc, that are typically known to have brown skin. What about Americans? Why are we not allowed to say that our ethnicity is American? Why do I have to say German/etc when my family hasn't been there since the 17th century? Also, aren't we all part of the same, human race? These are all rhetorical questions to illustrate the absurdity of using your own narrowly defined terms to frame your entire argument, which is basically, a big, racist double standard. You have a paternalistic view toward black people.

I assume by reverse racism you mean racism against white people. I'm white and I know that it's not really a "problem" per se, though, and I can't stress this enough, it's still bad to be racist. It's going to be a while before racism against whites becomes an actual "problem" still.

Sean Renaud:
^^^^ Whites are allowed to be proud of their NATIONALITY. Not their race, but to the best of my knowledge blacks are really the only race that gets to be proud of their race.
Remember Mexican is not a race, it's a nationality and if you don't believe me find a place where Mexicans and Cubans both live, they tend to get quite offended if you can't tell the difference. The same goes for most of Asia. Try calling a Pakistani person Indian or a Japanese person Korean or Chinese (or vice versa). Blacks (in the US) don't have the benefit for the most part of knowing what country or tribe we came from. Nobody complains about St. Patrick's day because there is nothing offensive about being proud of being Irish or Scottish, or French or German or Italian so on and so forth.
Europeans are barely sixty years into this whole "we're all on the same team" koom bye ya thing so when you say "I'm proud of being white" as opposed to I'm a proud Spainard, Russian, Dutchman it's pretty difficult to buy that you mean anything other than your happy your not one of the other races.

That's a ridiculous and very racist way of presenting things. You pick and choose, and single out 'Europeans' (since when have those been a race?) and apply different standards to them than you apply to other races. Because guess what? Racism and prejudice, nor us vs them mentality, is tied to a specific race.

Also, white is not a race, neither is black. Negroid or caucasian is. Also the nationality is Dutch, that's what it says on passports: "Nationaliteit: Nederlandse"


You know what's ridiculous? Being 'proud of being black', lamenting you don't know to which tribe you belong while you don't since you're an American and your family has been for generations, just because your race gives you reason to suspect some remote ancestor back in ancient history was a victim of the African slavetrade.

If you thought of white people after reading that last word, you'd be in the wrong yet again. The African slavetrade was exactly that: An African affair. Europeans only purchased slaves because they had a need for them because they had colonies that lacked a workforce. There were also effectively white slaves: indentured labourers. Also, African slavery continued well after all European countries had abolished it. Heck, England long had the largest single fleet in the planet hunting slave transports. Mauretania for instance re-introduced slavery after their independance from France, which had banned it. In theory it was banned in 1985, but it continues to this day. In many cases, ethnic arabs hold people of the negroid race as slaves in such countries in western Africa. In addition, many of the middle eastern countries such as Dubai still allow a legal status for non-arabic foreigners that's pretty much the same as slavery. People like labourers, maids, au pairs etc have almost no rights, and are even subject to violence and sexual abuse. If they ever resign or demand rights they can be punished, imprisoned, murdered or at the very least deported.

To name a recent example: A Sri Lankan housemaid who lived in such a slave-like status recently was beheaded because her owner blamed her for the death of his child:
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/10/world/meast/saudi-arabia-sri-lankan-maid/index.html

Anything that condemns/discriminates individuals based on ethically irrelevant traits is a problem.

It doesn't matter which way racism/affirmative action goes, it's inherently discriminatory towards certain individuals, and hence inherently despicable. As are the people promoting/benefiting from it.

If you don't like PoC/women/disabled people being given slight advantages in one or two stages of life (University applications and some jobs), the thing to do isn't to complain about it but to help get rid of the discrimination that PoC, women/disabled people face at every single other stage of their life which make these steps necessary.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked