BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Head Shop >

Wealth, Power and Race - is it just that the white guys want some things more?

  
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:59 / 16.05.03
So I said:

For example, how many CEOs of Fortune 500 companies are black? How many are women? Now, I'm not arguing for positive discrimination or anything whacky like that, but if there is full equality, you'd guess maybe half are women and maybe 10% black, another 10% Latino, something like that? How is that going? I mean, if we just got complete and total equality right now, I guess we'll have to wait another twenty years or so for that to come on stream, but hey, green shoots and all that....

So then Leap was like:

Unless of course the levels of greed and family-destroying workaholism that lead to such high positions are, culturally speaking, predominantly a white male thing.....?

So then I was like:

Possibly so. But it's also where all the money and power is. Are you saying that black people, latino people and white women (for example) are too wise for that shit in general, which is why institutions like the Senate are made up mainly of white men?

And Leap was like:

I am asking whether they generally have a more pro-family and anti-greed culture / sub-culture that actively discourages the attitudes needed to achieve the top-flight positions (which invariably require greed and family-sacrifice to get there). Certainly a question worth asking I think.

Nobody ever stops to ask whether being a CEO of a big corp is in any way a good thing……

So, then, Passer was totally like:

I am biting my tongue so as not reply to the discussion of culture, values, racism, and capitalism, but I feel that is it a bit off topic. Leap or Haus, perhaps this discussion could be a thread all on its own?

So what are you like? As metrics for achievement, are things like senators, CEOs, chairmen, presidents invalid because the kind of sacrifices that are involved (and possibly the sort of skills required) are the preserve of white men? If so, does that we now have full equality, because the white guys can carry on doing this unhealthy status-chasing, and the black guys, Latinos, women and so forth can get on with whatever it is that floats their boats? If so, what is that exactly?
 
 
passer
17:00 / 16.05.03
Whether or not one endorses the current means most senators, CEOs, and what have you use to gain power or the structures that support them, i.e. the modern democratic process and capitalism, empirically they wield resources and influence that affect the lives of millions. I’m ill-equipped to argue the Lorde clause about the master’s tool at this point, but I will glancingly address it by saying that I feel that there is value in capitalism as well as democracy.

I suppose my most basic quibble is that I think the examples mentioned are subcultures rather than distinct or unrelated cultures. They are intertwined with white male culture and adopt many of the same values, in particular a desire for influence, money, and power. For instance, white women are raised in the same environment as their male counterparts; their supposedly different values are indoctrinated at the same time, usually dichotomously. Men are active, women passive; men are greedy, women giving, so on and so forth. I doubt the fact that these values make women, in many aspects, subject to men is a mere coincidence. Let’s continue to be a little simplistic and elect hip hop as the mouth piece for black culture. How many rap songs fixate on working to maintain money, power, and influence? Or maybe we can examine the stereotype of immigrants who work long hours for menial pay to support their families? Stereotypes much like humor are usually built on a grain of truth.

I reject the idea that one can make a choice between alternative when one of those alternatives is effectively closed to them. I can say you have the freedom to chose between a and b, but if all you have around you is a and b is on a mountaintop surrounded by vipers how much free choice do you truly have? There are systematic hurdles that women and minorities have to overcome in order to be free to choose those positions of power. The inequities of the education system alone eliminate an unwieldy number of candidates based on class, gender, race, and sexual orientation. The cultural value argument would perhaps hold more water if the supposedly foolish white men were not actually wielding power and influence that too often directly and negatively impacts the groups that are supposedly too wise for that shit. I see less proof for cultural invalidation as I do for systematic disenfranchisement.
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
17:06 / 16.05.03
I'm fascinated by how involuted discussions of race and society become.

Thoughts:

Concepts of power and material gain as measures of success predate western white civilisation, or at least its dominance, in cultures around the world. I'm thinking about Gilgamesh. I'm also thinking that chimps will go to war over resources.

It's futile to talk about at least some of the groups you mention having seperate value-structures, because they live in a world which is governed by White Men. Where value-systems intersect, the White Male World tends to demand supremacy.

Whether or not it's 'natural' for different ehtnic and cultural groups to seek to be part of a corporate/protestant work ethic/capitalist/political culture based on values we're considering ascribing to white men, the fact is that many do, and they are less likely to get the jobs and positions they seek than they would be with the same talent and different skin, language, or genitals.

In other words, yes, the system is unfair, whichever way you slice it.

I don't recall where it came up recently, but didn't someone suggest in the public sphere that black men are encouraged to seek 'cool' and 'laid back life' over academic and economic success because it suits the white corporate and political elite? No idea where that came from, but it stuck in my head. Think it was in the UK.

Still thinking...
 
 
pomegranate
17:18 / 16.05.03
i'm all:
i think that males, in general (GENERAL, i said! general!!!) are more interested in climbing the corporate ladder, making more money, etc., than females. a good example is that there are wayyy more women working in the non-profit sector than there are men, cos i really don't think that can be chalked up to discrimination against women or male priviledge (unlike the CEO's of fortune 500 companies, for example). (which is not to say that the CEO's example is *only* cos of male priviledge, but i think that has a lot to do w/it.)

now, having said all that, we don't know how much of this is cos of societal conditioning, and how much is inherited tendency (as i am a believer in the inherent, biological, mental/emotional differences between men and women). i do think it's both. a good example for the societal conditioning is that we *expect* men to be the bread-winners, which would make them do things like avoid working for non-profits since they could do the same (or close to) job in a corporate environment for more money.
 
 
Leap
17:33 / 16.05.03
Passer -

I suppose my most basic quibble is that I think the examples mentioned are subcultures rather than distinct or unrelated cultures. They are intertwined with white male culture and adopt many of the same values, in particular a desire for influence, money, and power.

I do not doubt this; the question is whether their sub-cultures are sufficiently in sync with the long-hours-away-from-home / back-stabbing-greed-and-ambition culture typically seen in the rise to the top of corporate culture, or whether their own values are not quite up to (!!!) that needed for CEOdome?!
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
17:47 / 16.05.03
Is "black" a subculture, or a colour, though? If there were no black people who wanted to work in business, or to be successful, or to be wealthy etc, then this would seem more credible. Likewise if there were a cultural unity that could be pointed to and identified as "black people", but as it is I'm not sure I'm buying. I can see two dangers here, the first being the objectivising romanticism of the "noble savage", the second being the idea that people who have the good fortune not to be white males are terribly *lucky* not to be a part of that whole awful rat-race, and how *clever* they are not to want that sort of ephemeral money and authority, because they understand what's *really* important...
 
 
passer
18:05 / 16.05.03
I'm trying to find some stats to further illustrate what I'm trying to say, but I'm too impatient to wait before speaking out of my ass.
Leap, the jobs you decry are typically well paying jobs with personal leave and vacation. Without embracing the "greed culture and backstabbing competition" the low paying jobs require more work hours to support the family you're supposedly slacking to spend time with. I've yet to meet the family that says hey we might be poor, hungry, and homeless, but at least we've got lots of time together.

Haus- I'm willing to make the argument that there is a black culture, at least in so far as the US in concerned. Is it monolithic? Certainly not. However, there are certain unifying themes and experiences. I did say I was simplifying. I'm going to go out on a limb and borrow from Nick and say that there is a somewhat unified black culture and culturally, like the majority of cultures and sub cultures, wealth, power, and influence are valued.
 
 
Outlaw
02:49 / 17.05.03
What is success?

I am a small business owner, we break even each month, I dont think I will ever be at a point where I have employees to lord over and dominate like a petty third world dictator. Such is the pitty, I would make such a fine dictator.

However I get to see more of my son (almost 2 and VERY much the daddy's boy) than when I worked for someone else. Sure I had fewer responcibilities, and could take vactions more often. Heck, I even had some petty power (which corrupts WAY out of proprtion...) and could put some money aside for a "rainy day".

Would I trade in my business to go back to the security and benifits of being a stoge.

Never.

Let me say that gain.

Never, No Way, No How.

I think however that I am more "successful" now than when I was a stooge. I feel better about myself, I enjoy my time more, and I get to spend that time with my family.

Now, the corporate lords who fought their way up the corporate ladder from the rank of stooge to the rank of master dont care as much about the whole family life thing. They measure their success with differant tools than I do. This whole deal of big cars, big houses, big jets and big alimony payments doesnt sound like sucess to me. But if they want it, they are welcome to it.

Now, is there a racial component to all this? I have my doubts. I dont think race or culture are neccisarily insulation agaisnt a desire to have the big cars and such. Poor minority kids may turn to drug dealing to get into that fancy cars and women lifestyle, its just a differant kind of MBA fast track. Minorities who play professional sports go right out and get the huge house and all that jazz, again a differant method but the same outcome.

I think some minority groups do not value the education that it takes to get to the top in the corporate world. This oddity has been shown by writers such as Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams (both minorities if that matters). Other minorities seem to prize education, but as a path to self fullfilment. They seem to avoid the MBA in favor of the PhD or MS. They have the level of education, but not the right feild. They wind up as well educated stooges, but perhaps much happier.

I think the answer to why corporate masterhood is populated by the pale has much more to do with the lack of minorities who have the education and experience to take the positions rather than a cultural bias agaisnt seeking the massive wealth.

Outlaw
 
 
No star here laces
10:08 / 19.05.03
Thank you Outlaw - someone with a bit of sense.

There are two problems with this thread. Firstly it conflates race with gender and the two issues are not comparable in any way other than the facile. Yes, both are under-represented, but for utterly different reasons.

Secondly it assumes that the issue is values when economics and biology are far more significant factors.

wrt race - the small number of minority CEOs is purely an economic issue. The majority of any given minority are far poorer than the majority of whites. They therefore grow up with a worse education than the majority of whites and in an environment more conducive to crime.

Given that CEOs are a small percentage of society and a lot of people would like to become CEOs, competition is intense. Even slight differences in education will therefore become significant in the process off competition. So even if there is no discrimination on the basis of race, blacks will be less likely to succeed owing to educational issues.

wrt women, the issue is more complex. However a major factor which is likely to prevent there ever being complete parity between women and men is childbirth. However much medical science and employment law develop, many women who are competing for CEO type jobs will have children. And to have those children they will need to take time off work. In a tightly contested competition this will make a significant difference as those individuals will have less experience and therefore (all other things being equal) be less good at the job.
 
 
wembley can change in 28 days
13:30 / 19.05.03
Nick thusly:

Concepts of power and material gain as measures of success predate western white civilisation, or at least its dominance, in cultures around the world. I'm thinking about Gilgamesh. I'm also thinking that chimps will go to war over resources.

I think you'll find arguments to the contrary as well. I'm in the middle of Peter Singer's How are we to live? - ethics in an age of self-interest, and he gives examples of chimps and other social mammals sharing resources - apparently they use a booming call to attract other chimps up to a km away when they've found a good fruit tree.

He's also made a case for the historical basis of the modern measure of success/happiness being material wealth. Given that this has been a major characteristic of Western society since Calvin attested that worldly success was a sign of grace, and also given that this same society has been largely dominated by white males for most of the time since then, is there an argument for greed as simply being more entrenched in the white man's culture?

What is difficult for most people to imagine (myself included) is that there ever was a time when material wealth was not an end in itself and a measure of one's success. I always think that if I had more money, I would be happier - and I think I've been trained to believe in that, erroneous as it has already proven in my personal experience. But charging interest was once grounds for excommunication, and when Socrates speculates on the cause of happiness in human beings, money doesn't enter into it. Perhaps aspiration for money and other markers of capitalism are not genetically programmed into anyone, but are (leftover?) traces of a long cultural history - long enough that it's going to take many generations for other "subcultures" to get on the same level. If that is so, should we expect other cultures/power minorities to adapt and fall in line relatively quickly? Or would their influence help restructure capitalism (or, in my personal hopes, melt it to the ground)?
 
 
Quantum
13:37 / 19.05.03
So I was like "What's the craic comparing gender and race?" and my girlfriend was like "Whatever."
There's an overrepresentation of old white men in power, they are nepotistic so they promote other white men like them, the trend continues. If there were more minority CEOs there would be less discrimination, but the trailblazers have the hardest time so it takes real dedication. People will take the easiest option (not through laziness but pragmatism, cf. the viper infested mountaintop) so it takes time for the equality to be implemented.
Remember the current CEOs were young in the 50s, when racial/sexual equality was kind of new. We're experiencing culture lag, and because we're young we are outraged these old dudes can't see how *wrong* they are. In thirty years our generation will be the CEOs and there will be equality for women, racial equality, gay/lesbian equality, and our grandchildren will be like "What about equality for A.I.s?!" and we'll be like "Whatever, I'm not promoting a robot" and they'll be like "You old dudes can't see how *wrong* you are"....

For what it's worth I don't think there's any validity to the idea that minorities don't want to be CEOs, they don't have that choice. So I was stating the bleedin' obvious and Barbelith was like "whatever".
 
 
Quantum
13:42 / 19.05.03
Or would their influence help restructure capitalism (or, in my personal hopes, melt it to the ground)?

Hopefully (melt it! Yes!) but I doubt it- to succeed in capitalism you mostly have to conform to it's ideals. By joining the man you *become* the man, man.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
13:52 / 19.05.03
So, Laces, if we remove the number of women at senior management level who have children as a percentage, the remaining percentage will equate to the numbers of female CEOs? I'm not sure that makes perfect maths...then again, I'm also slightly surprised that Quantum sees our generation as representing an age of complete sexuality, gender and racial equality. Actually, surprised is probably not quite the right word, since he has already stated that he believes these equalities to have been achieved, more slightly confused...
 
 
Outlaw
15:02 / 19.05.03
Crying racism is getting a bit old.

Fewer minorities in CEO level positions? So what, there are fewer white guys in basketball. Does that mean that basketball teams are dominated by racist blacks?

Could it be that the lack of minorities in top corporate positions has more to do with a combination of how many are in corporate positions, the desire to rise to the top and the skills required for the job?

Could thelack of women in those top postions be a combination of those same factors plus the whole pregnancy thing?

Are there racists in big corporate america? Most likley, there are racists in small business, local, state and federal government, small towns and big cities too. But does that mean every corportate CEO is a racist? No. To say otherwise is silly.

People cry racism whenever there is not a 100% fair disribution of resources. Well, life sucks, get a helmet. There will never be a fair distribution of resources, some will have more, others less. Just like there is an unfair distribution of the atributes required to play basketball professionaly. I am a 6 foot 220 lb white guy without the hand eye coordination and reflexes to play professional basketball. Are the owners of basketball teams racist because they wont hire me to play? Of course not. They want the best, just like every corporation wants what they see as the "best" and if your BS in accounting from Podunk State Colege doesnt fit the bill, you dont get the job.

Equality of opportunity does not mean equality of outcome.

Outlaw
 
 
No star here laces
15:16 / 19.05.03
Haus, you are right, it isn't perfect maths - a percentage is not the same as a number, so I'm not quite sure what you are getting at. But I think you are probably misreading my post. My point is simply that there are many more significant factors at play here than some notional monolithic 'values' held by the corporate world - e.g. poverty and childbirth.

I certainly wouldn't seek to suggest that these are the only factors of any importance. Given that we are talking about a heterogeneous population with many dependent variables the situation is always going to be complicated.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:38 / 19.05.03
Outlaw: So, you mean that black men are by nature unable to helm large corporations? And thus any black people who do end up running corporations are freaks, just like white men who can play basketball? Or do you mean that black men by nature lack the "desire to rise to the top". In business, that is, obviously, rather than basketball.
 
 
pomegranate
17:07 / 19.05.03
before i was talking about gender, now i want to say something about race (makes 'eeek!' face).
i would never claim to speak for an entire race of people, much less one not my own. and i'm not saying this applies to all african-americans. all i want to say is that my sister used to work in, for lack of a more simplistic term, the ghetto. (she was teaching 8th graders their alphabet. i don't think a single one of her kids had a father at home, most didn't know who/where their fathers were. many of them had female relatives that were prostitutes and brought their tricks home. most had older sibs/cousins that dealt drugs. they all ate 2 or 3 meals a day at the school in a subsidized plan. i say all this just to give you an idea of the situation.) all her students were african-american, and almost all her kids had no interest in going to school any longer than they had to; they were just waiting around until they were old enough to deal drugs. which makes sense in that context, sadly. worse yet, they decried achievment of other sorts, i.e. academic, as "white." which of course was one of the most derogatory insults they could throw at each other.

now of course i'm not saying that all african-americans feel this way. but i'm saying that it probably is a significant problem in low-income areas, cos i doubt the area my sis worked in is some crazy abberation. what she tried to get her students to understand is that as much as they blamed the white man for keeping them down, they were keeping themselves down. the only acceptable ways to make a lot of money (as we are sort of defining "success" right here, as that's basically how the western world *does* define it), to them, were: professional athlete or musician (and we know how many job openings there are in those areas), or drug dealer. and possibly pimp.

i'm also not trying to downplay the effects of the "old boy's club" and racism and etc. i'm NOT trying to blame the victim here. i'm just saying that this could possibly have something to do w/this idea that we're exploring, that certain races value certain things differently.
 
 
passer
18:51 / 19.05.03
I don’t think anyone is arguing that CEOs are all racist. If that were the problem, I think racism and sexism would have been ended a while back by education and exposure. We are, despite everyone’s fervent wish to talk around it, discussing institutional discrimination. The great and sneaky thing about institutional racism is that it’s all around, you don’t have to do anything at all, and it keeps working to sort people out by race gender, sexuality, and socio-economic class by myriad subtle experiences without anyone needing to lynch or beat anyone. This means that it’s not about one person hiring the white, male candidate over the best candidate. It means that 95% of the time, as though by magic, the best candidate will appear to be the white, male, more specifically, the white upper middle class and wealthier white male. Quelle surprise.

(Feel free to skip the following rant, I feel that it adds nothing to the debate, but it did make me feel better.)

We can call it biology or “culture”, but it still seems like discrimination based on gender or race to me. Brown v. the board of education laid the frame work for the harm inflicted on children when they are segregated and values that are indoctrinated. Despite the end of “legal” segregation the same thing is still going on. Why do black men feel that the only acceptable way out the ghetto is music, sports, or crime? Go look at a magazine rack. How often do you see black people on the cover of Fortune 500 or in the news as successful figures? Then go the “ghetto” who do you see driving the nice car and eating three solid meals a day. Try to find someone who went to college and succeeded. It’s not in their world view. Instead, they’re sent to schools hungry and ill prepared and because they live in poor neighborhoods in poor conditions they schools are incapable of preparing them to go on to higher education.

And what about Latinos? Notice how little discussion there on that issue? See the same list of questions for black men, accept add the charming details that people assume that you don’t speak English and that you’re there to clean something. Which in America is particularly fun because people just start talking to you very loudly and very slowly, because everyone knows that it’s how you get those foreigners to understand English.

Look at the messages young girls are bombarded with. The only successful famous women are eye candy. Women are supposed to be docile and submissive in order to get a man to have babies. They’re given toy babies to practice rearing. Then they’re told that in order to succeed you can’t have children you and you can’t have a relationship because men won’t want you if you make more money. Then if they’re foolish enough to continue, they’re told that well, Jane, I know that you’ve been following the same track as Bob, but those three months you took to pop out little Suzy fifteen years ago disqualify you for the job.

And now that we’re whipping out the personal experience, I’m off to go work with ghetto children, for whom the politically correct term is poor, urban youth.
 
 
pomegranate
20:37 / 19.05.03
passer: fuckin' a.
 
 
Outlaw
01:32 / 20.05.03
Haus, That is not what I meant, and I have no idea how you took that from what I said.

I was using the basketball player point as a way of demonstrating that there are professions that are minority dominated. Those players also make money comparable to the CEO positions.

As a side point there are probably as many top CEO positions as there are equaly high paying profesional sports positions in this country. However it seems the disribution of races is reversed.

Also "capability" is not as much at issue as desireability. I would argue that it takes the same dedication to be an NBA star as it takes to be a CEO. However it seems that more minorities see basketball, or other sports, as the ladder to the top.

Now, we guilty white folks might wring our hands at this, and decry what must be a racist agenda behind all this, but in fact the number of minorites going for MBA's is simply lower than that of whites. Without the MBA you aint gettin' to be da man.

The number of minorities in colege on sports scholarships is higher than that of whites. What do you think the sports schoarship kids are directed by the coaches into taking for classes? Something tough like Business or Engineering or something that will not interfear with their athletics like Pys Ed or Basket Weaving?

Exception will exist, but they will not bring about a perfect apportionment of minorities in the CEO positions.

Dont try to blame the problem on conspiracy what can be credited to a lack of planning.

Passer, I agree that minorities and women get screwey messages on what success is and how they can acheive it. However why do those messages exist in the media? The media sells what people want to see. If minorities dont buy busienss magazines, why cater to them? If they buy magazines about Rap and gangster culture, then thats what the publishers will provide them. Again, no conspiracy, just marketing.

Outlaw
 
 
passer
03:33 / 20.05.03
Outlaw- I’ve got some questions and points to make and I’ll warn you now that I’m feeling a little feisty.

Let’s discuss the conjecture that there “are probably as many top CEO positions as there are equaly [sic] high paying profesional [sic] sports positions” To be generous, we’ll include the MLB, NBA, NFL, and the NHL (for shits and giggles) in our calculations. The combined total number of teams for all of these professional sports leagues is 121. Now let’s continue to be extra generous and say that each team can afford three superstar players and a superstar coach who all make “CEO” salaries. How many does that leave us with? 484. Then, I remind you that it’s called the Fortune 500. And let’s not forget that the corporate world the CEOs, the CFOs, and the boards of directors are all raking in the big bucks. I also point out that not just the Fortune 500 companies who pay ridiculous salaries. (If you have some spare time on your hands and want to feel slightly sick to you stomach, head over to the SEC’s website and spend some time looking through your favorite publicly traded company’s filings to see the reported salaries of the officers of their companies.) So no there are not as many top CEO positions as equally high paying sport positions.

To further clarify, you believe that blacks on sports scholarships are urged by their coaches to take useless classes, but you don’t want to cry racist agenda or conspiracy? (For the record, I think that both sides of that statement are incorrect, see my earlier post that institutional racism does not need anyone to make those nasty racist decisions if you’re lost.)

And since I’m on a numbers kick, do you know how many times guilt has been mentioned thus far in this thread? Once. Having some issues?

So in closing I guess my greater point is that it is not “just marketing,” “lack of planning” or really “just” anything. As I said earlier, institutional racism means that myriad factors reinforce a racist society without anyone being forced to go out and actively oppress anyone.
 
 
Outlaw
14:56 / 20.05.03
Being I dont give a shit about proefessional sports or corporate america I will accept your argument they mine was full of crap. Enjoy your victory.

"Institutional Racism" is right up there with "Vast (fill in the blank) Conspiracy" on the bullshit-o-meter. It's a way of saying that the people in a situation are not racist, but the situation as a whole is racist. If you buy that I've got a bridge to sell you.

As for guilt, in order to have guilt I would have to give a shit. Since I dont care who succedes and who fails in life, why would I feel guilty about certain people who screw up thier own lives?

However, we have been beating around something without saying it. Do minority groups "fail" in western civilization because wester civ is against them or because they dont try to succede?

Warning: The following will be called racist. If you are a person who tends to throw that word around without thinking, stop reading now and just call me a racist. To see my sources, read the writings of Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell.

Humans of oriental extration can never be concidered failures. They own businesses, get good educations, provide for their families and are upstanding members of their communities. The number of oriental people on welfare or other government aid programs is drasticly lower per capita than whites. However there was a time when they were treated worse than blacks in this country. Killin' a chinaman or an indian didnt count when killin a black man did. However today the oriental people are doing better than their former opressors. Still you dont find them as CEO's. I dont think the white mans conspiracy is doing enough to stop thse folks. Perhaps I will bring it up at the next meeting...

Now the hispanic people are an odd duck. They dont get as many degrees per capita but they tend to own service oriented busiensses, they stay off welfare and are well respected by their communities. They work their butts off to take care of their families. Again, we evil white guys just arn't doing enough to stop them. Better get on the ball.

Humans of african extraction are all but the opposite. Fewer business are owned, fewer degrees are gotten, they have more per capita on welfare. But we have quotas on how many must be hired, be given scholarships and such. They get every "advantage" a government can dole out and yet they statisticly are far worse off than the orientals and hispanics. I guess the conspiracy is doing all it can here, perhaps that why the other minority groups aren't failing enough.

Now, I think the one diffearance between these groups is work ethic. Orientals and Hispanics are hard working people. This may be an oversimplification, but it seems they have one hell of a work ethic. In general given the choice between hiring a hispanic man and a white guy I would hire the hispanic man. He will bust his hump to take care of his family, the white guy will keep telling me how I need to run my business. Is that racist of me?

Another differance is the family ethic. Single motherhood is at epidemic levels in the african-american community. Where as the problem is all but non existant in the oriental community and a small problem in the hispanic community. I guess us white folks are in the middle on this one.

So, perhaps the problem with sucess is work ethic and family values. Not "institutional racism" or some other such phantom conspiracy. Until we address these problems and stop crying about racism whenever we see a problem the problem will never be solved.

As for how many minorites are represented in corporate masterhood, why should that be a measure of anything? Why must we say to be a success you have to rise up the ladder of corporate america (or corporate england, blah blah blah)? Success should be measured by the happiness and safety of ones family, not ones portfolio.

Outlaw
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:01 / 20.05.03
Ah. So, rather than addressing the institutional situation, we should be training black people to work harder?

Well, that makes sense.
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
19:13 / 20.05.03
Just reading John Gray's 'Al Qaeda and what it means to be Modern', and there's a relevant bit. He's talking about nations, but it applies all the same.

In resisting western power, however, they cannot avoid becoming in some ways like the European prototypes of the modern state. No country can escape the prototypes of the modern world that Europe created.

In our discussion, then, since White Man's Values are imprinted on the social fabric, even dialectics of resistance are drawn from White Man's cultural shapes and notions of success.

Strikes me this is an impossible fight - we're all meshed in layer upon layer of imposed identity. Even us White Men. So what to do? Don't insist on applying general rules to specific individuals, be smart, and give people what they need to make their own choices.

(Haus... you're doing your own special version of reductio ad absurdum again - the one where you absolutely eviscerate your interlocutor by superextending their argument. You'll win, but you won't convince them of anything, 'cos they're too angry.)
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
20:05 / 20.05.03
Well, no, I'm not. I'm just representing it. As far as I can tell, Outlaw believes that, whereas Orientals and Latinos are in their own ways industrious, Black people are constitutionally indolent, which may be connected to their paucity of parents. Therefore, the system is not to blame. Black people are. Except for Walter Williams and Thomas Sorrel.

As it happens, I very much doubt that there is any chance of changing Outlaw's mind; should he find himself outmatched, he has the option simply of not giving a shit, which has served to send two lines of argument screaming in flames to the German trenches below. I'm more interested in the ideas that have emerged from it.
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
01:03 / 21.05.03
Hm. Looking again at Outlaw's postings I'm inclined to agree. All the same, I can't help but feel you're not going to get through this way.

In which case, why are we here? To hammer the unrighteous?

I'm threadrotting, so I'll stop.

Outlaw, you need to look at both the roots of the phenomena you suggest exist - such as a legacy of slavery which still has massive economic and social effects - and the sources and accuracy of the positions you're using. Or you can get into a shouting match with Haus, which I can almost guarantee will leave you looking like chiseled spam.
 
 
Outlaw
01:16 / 21.05.03
Well, let me put some words in my own mouth for a bit.

I dont beileve there is a biological problem here. It is cultural. For some reason african americans have cultural issues that make suceess a harder thing to acheive. Other minorities dont seem to share this problem. They have comparable levels of education and business sucess as their white counterparts. (In some cases I would say they do better than the white folks) When we discuss "failure of minorities" lets not lie to ourselves. We are discussing the problems in the african american community.

To succede in western civ you need to have an education. That is not always schooling. Skills can be aquired in many ways. I have a HS diploma (barely) but I own my business and take care of my family. I have a deeply ingrained work ethic I got from my father. Not geneticly, simply by how I was raised. This is something that all successful people share, they work their butts off. Be that success in basketball, business or education. Hard work is the constant. We must instil a work ethic in EVERYONE as there are plenty of white folks who dont have a good work ethic.

Now, the problem I see with crying racism every time an african american fails causes damage in two ways. First off, it stops the person who failed from trying to figure out why they failed and come up with solutions so they dont fail again. Secondly it diminishes the concept of what racism is. I believe racism exists, but I do not beleive it is why every minority fails.

One of the biggest things that the concept of "institutional racism" pisses me off about is the idea that when a minority fails, its the system, when I fail (even tohough I have all the advantages) its my own damn fault. Of course, that makes my mistakes my own, the one thing you can truely call your own.

BTW: Reducing to the absurd is not a tactic that works very well on me. I know the technique, and see it for what it is. Generaly the step one takes when it fails is to ask me if I stopped beating off with a cheese grater.

Outlaw
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
02:06 / 21.05.03
OK. I think that we're going to come up against a common problem here. One cannot perform a reductio ad absurdum when the absurdum is right here. reductio meaning "leading" rather than "reduction", for future reference.

I think we have established, Outlaw, that you don't think black people (and we are not *just* talking about African Americans, since a) we're not just talking about America and b) see below in just a moment) have a work ethic, and that this absence of work ethic is culturally ingrained. It might, as Nick suggested above, be worthwhile asking why, since if one simply says "it is cultural" then one may as well say "it is genetic" for all the clarity it imparts. What is it in the culture? An expectation of failure? A lack of priority on hard work in school? A general belief that scholastic excellence is ultimately not going to get them where they want to be? We've moved on slightly from the basketball contention, but not far.

Then again, if we look at our hypothetical Latin American immigrant, we find him or her working away like a busy little bee, and yet again that does not seem to be reflected in the way that Central and Southern America has conquered the world, either in geopolitical terms or in the success of Latin Americans in the upper echelons of American politics and business. Why is this, we wonder, given that Latinos are such wonderful workers? A shortage of decent MBA programs? Or are we going to get a whole bunch of second-generation Latinos being put through college and grad school by their hard-working parents and claiming the Earth as their own? If so, when?
 
 
the Fool
03:10 / 21.05.03
To succede in western civ you need to have an education. That is not always schooling. Skills can be aquired in many ways. I have a HS diploma (barely) but I own my business and take care of my family. I have a deeply ingrained work ethic I got from my father. Not geneticly, simply by how I was raised. This is something that all successful people share, they work their butts off. Be that success in basketball, business or education. Hard work is the constant. We must instil a work ethic in EVERYONE as there are plenty of white folks who dont have a good work ethic.

But how do you instill a work ethic into a culture that has been sytematically brought down by a 'dominant' culture. Does the 'system' bear any responsiblity for a situation it helped create? And perpetuates through poor funding of education, health and welfare.
 
 
Outlaw
13:36 / 21.05.03
I will now admit my part in the grand conspiracy. The white devils are responcible for all the problems suffered by minorities. I am personaly responcible for the fact that african american males abandon their families at drasticly higher rates than any other ethnic or racial group. I know the agent who is responcible for the abysimal literacy rates in the african american community. I plotted the program to use the orbital mind control laser (actualy a maser, but thats a detail) to destroy the will of african americans to succede.

I feel so much better after getting that off my chest.

Outlaw
Secret Master of the Bavarian Illuminati
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
14:05 / 21.05.03
Sorry, wasn't it you, Outlaw, that just objected to reductio ad absurdum arguments?

I think some kind of Moderator advice might be called for...
 
 
pomegranate
14:45 / 21.05.03
aaaaaaaaaa fellas, it's "asian," not "oriental." oriental applies to *things*, like rugs. asian applies to people.

outlaw, i do hear some of what yr saying. but don't get all white male defensive, that sucks. you sure are writing a lot for someone who doesn't care who succeeds. yes, there is institutional racism. that is a big problem. as seriously disgusting and scary as, for example, the ku klux klan are, they probably don't hurt minorities anywhere near as much as people who don't even realize that they're racist do. what happens is not some fat old white guy in a suit smoking a twenty dollar cigar rubbing his hands together and laughing about how he'll never hire anyone w/dark skin. it's just that in interviews, those white people will somehow *seem* so much...better...smarter...harder workers...so much more like...him.

i believe it was nick who pointed out that you have to take into account how an entire race/subculture has been treated for ages. i'd like to share something i read: it's long been noticed that african-americans, on average, get lower IQ scores than whites. different people have blamed different things, like less access to good schools, the tests are biased, blacks are inherently inferior, lots of reasons. but they gave a bunch of kids IQ tests and told them that they were just testing the pencils. they said, do your best, but really we just want to make sure these pencils work right. (i'm thinking it was like the scan-tron type tests where you need a #2 pencil, hopefully everyone remembers these.) anyways the black kids scored the same as the white kids. granted, this is only one study and more should be done but i wouldn't be surprised to see the same results. when you have been told, in subtle ways, your whole life, that you are less, inferior, not as good or smart, you believe it. when you've been told that all yr good for is sports and entertainment, you believe it. and that'll make you more likely to pursue those avenues, if any.
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
14:51 / 21.05.03
For some reason african americans have cultural issues that make suceess a harder thing to acheive.

Those reasons are not hard to find, and though they may not be 'racist' per se, they are fairly obviously a legacy of racism, slavery, and subjugation. For all I know, there may be an African American sub-culture of slacking, failure, even criminality - certainly a disproportionate number of young black men are executed for serious crimes in the US; I leave it to you to decide whether there's a possibility of racism, institutional or otherwise, evident there - the thing is that if these things are the case it seems extremely likely that they are the consequence of brutal dehumanisation and a continuing inequality. The 'culture' you're talking about is an artifact of monstrous injustice - which in many ways continues to this day.

(Flyboy - I was the one who raised the spectre of 'reductio' - I scanned Outlaw's post without really engaging and thought Haus was taking a swing... Can we ignore that from now on? It's embarrassing enough that I had to change sides at high speed without having to examine it too closely. There are skidmarks on my rhetoric.)
 
 
Outlaw
19:07 / 21.05.03
I simply said the absurd didnt work, not that I was opposed to its use or wouldnt use it myself.

I, and white folks in general, are being accused of being passively racist. Isn't that accusation in and of itself racist? Or cant racism be used against white folks?

This is what makes membership in the KKK seem so atractive to many folks...

Besides, I am now painted as the racist because I dont fall for the politicaly correct explinations for why bad things are happening to certain people. Might as well play it up. Wheres my white hood and burning cross...

Outlaw
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:24 / 21.05.03
Moderator hat - Outlaw, you appear intent on turning this thread into a thread about you. Although you are no doubt eminently suited to expand upon this subject, I'm afraid the thread isn't. Further attempts at threadrot, abuse and general idiocy may be treated accordingly.

PM - quite so. I was being a little specific in my citation. Said on Orientalism is quite interesting - will dig the link up in a bit.
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply