Saying Jews are good with money isn't racist is it? However, if you are implying that Jews are cheap - it is racist, because that implies moral superiority. Get it?
Yes it is racist to say Jews are good with money. Some are and some aren't. Go up to a jewish person you don't know, and say to him, I bet you are real good with money, can you give me some tax advice, and I would be willling to bet they would be offended or at least think you just plain ignorant. It is broad generalization that removes the individuality from them. From there it went into Jews control banking, and Jews horder money, and Jews are controlling business. Having control of something certainly doesn't show superiority of someone else, but it is still a racist point of view, and it did help make the holocaust possible.
I agree more with what NewYoker said. i think just saying that jews are good with money is more of a stereotype, not racism. But if i think you are saying they are cheap, or something to the nature of that, that could be considered racism
thinking a person is good at something because of what race they are is just a stereotype thinking a person is bad because of what race they are is racism stereotype != racism IMHO of course I respect your sensitivity towards others feelings Blade....but throwing around the racist term when it doesnt necessarily apply kinda cheapens the impact of the term. I mean that with the utmost respect...I hope I was able to get across waht I mean.
It is fundamentally in our human nature to stereotype. We would literally need to rewire our brains to overcome stereotyping. So knowing that, we should have the ability to recognize when it is occuring in a non-productive manor within ourselves.
I understand. I usually try and not call the people themselves racist, unless they make it obvious. But I do label actions as racist. I also am normally against overusing words because of the very thing that you mentioned. I don't like cheapening the word. But in this one area I am different. I think the term needs to be cheapened to an extent. Because we run into the problem that people will stereotype others and it affects them, dehumanizes the individuals, and all of that, but the folks who are stereotyping don't believe they are doing anything wrong. In their minds they don't mean any offense, and they certainly aren't trying to say to that one race is inferior. But it reduces what a person is. Again, I can't imagine going up to someone who is Jewish, and saying "Hey! You're jewish can you help me haggle for a car, or look after my money." Those things aren't negative stereotypes, but certainly are ignorant, and limits, and takes the emphasis off of individuals. Once people look at a group as a group and not seperate individuals then the damage has been done. I agree some amount of stereotyping goes on because it is human nature, but with rational thought we can recognize it and focus to again look at people as individuals. I don't mind comedy or movies that use un-PC terms, or anything like that. So I'm not trying to make everyone play nice. But in general interaction with the public I think it is wrong.
like i said - most stereotypes are based on cultural values, not race. "Muslims don't drink alcohol" is a stereotype - but a rather accurate one since there is a religious basis for it that ends up affecting a large number of Muslims. Stereotypes are useful. A person in a hoodie with jeans walking down a dark street is more of a threat then a person in a suit and tie. That's a rational assessment. But at the same time, stereotypes are wrong a lot too - so one must be aware of their stereotyping. Now revealing your stereotypes can be INSENSITIVE and CRUDE....but it doesn't make you a racist. Being a racist goes a step further. Racism is about dominance and putting down another race. If you extend the definition of racism to stereotyping - then everyone is a racist and the word becomes meaningless. The halocaust was created in part because Germans were suffering and they needed a scapegoat - some group that was doing well despite the economic turmoil post war world two. Jews have just been an easy target since the beginning of history. But it was moral superiority that occured first. In order to commit genocide, you must first dehumanize that race to justify their killing.
The first statement is holding certain Jews to a standard they can't or don't wish to live up to, like when people assume I can dunk a basketball, still listen to rap music, play for the 'Huskers (I live in Omaha, and every time I'm on a flight back home to Houston, people ask me that).....or that I don't eat mayonnaise. Sorry, I can't stop thinking about that comment.
I'm black, and I can probably tolerate the black law students group for complaining about it, but where the hell did these white kids learn this imagery? From black writers, actors, directors and musicians who made hundreds of millions of dollars presenting these personae to mainstream America for the last thirty years (Superfly, anyone?). Am I to assume none of the black law students have ever willingly watched movies, tv shows, music videos or listened to music or bought clothes that reinforced these ideas? Ever? "Chickens coming home to roost."
That is only partly true. Jews weren't actually doing well despite economic turmoil. Some Jews were. You are correct about the duhumanizing which is exactly what stereotypes can do. That is what was happening even prior to WWI.(I think you meant WWI instead of WWII since the holocaust occurred just prior and during WWII.) The conditions that made the holocaust possible started before WWI. It also wasn't just Germany but all of Europe, and the U.S. to an extent. Henry Ford gave away his book that he wrote explaining why Jews were bad with every single Ford automobile sold. The holocaust even had an exhibit detailing the exact phenomenon of people stereotyping in order to show that the problem did not start with Nazis coming in and saying the Jews are doing well while we are doing poorly they are at fault lets blame them, they are inferior etc. It just isn't an in depth look at the holocaust unless we examine how the spreading of seemingly harmless stereotypes played into it. The people who were the victims of the holocaust testify it today.
I don't know blade, I mean, most people take pride in a lot of the harmless stereotypes used to describe thier cultures which often boil down to race. What happened in the halocaust may have roots in prior racist attitudes about Jews, I agree with that, but I don't think those attitudes were born out of harmless stereotypes. How does a harmless stereotype get converted into a harmful one? Or rather - how does a non-racist stereotype get converted into a racist one? That's really what you are saying. That non-racist stereotypes are wrong because the get converted to harmful ones. But I don't see that. I need more concrete evidence to be persuaded. And even if you can persuade me, I'm not sure that justifies categorizing non-racist stereotypes as racist because some people my take them to another level illogically.
I don't know man...a lot of Jews say they are good with money. It's something they take pride in culturally. There are even expressions in Yiddish that celebrate things around money - such as on a big new purchase. I'm six five, and people always ask me if I play basketball. And I do....but people also ask me all the time if I work with computers because I'm Indian. And I always just say jokingly - yeah, doesn't everyone work with computers nowadays? But the point is they assume that I must be in technology and are suprised when I say that I work in marketing. Does it annoy me? Not at all. Now if someone asked me if I worked at a 7-11 would that annoy me? Hell yeah. do you see the difference? Do you eat mayo?
You are saying they are non-racist. I am not saying that. So it would be hard for me to argue how something I believe is racist gets changed. There may be various levels of animosity in the stereotypes though. Let's start with the current one we are discussing. "Jews are good with money." -----> "Jews are running the banks" -----> Jews are trying to take over the businesses" -----> "Jews are in a conspiracy to run the nation." -----> etc. It isn't even so much how one saying gets transformed. It is that once the stereotype is accepted individuals who may or may not fit that stereotype have been stripped of their individuality and are lumped together. Once they are lumped together it is easier to apply other stereotypes. They aren't thought of as individuals, they become a group of people with others labeling their characteristics. Once the vast majority accepts that they are good with money, then it isn't that difficult to seed rumors about controlling banks. "How else did Jews become so good with money?" "They are so tricky with money they can end up running the banks behind the scenes and we don't even know it yet." "Think about it. Why wouldn't they? If they have that kind of talent with money why wouldn't they act in their own self interest and build that into power?" Now if people reject the initial stereotype and say some are good with money and some aren't. And it is stupid to assume that every Jewish person acts with unity in their actions when we know that there are numerous disagreements within Jewish communities about Judaism, the role Israel should play etc. But once the stereotype becomes accepted many people stop looking at the individual. It isn't even a concience descision born of ill will. It is just how stereotypes work. The same is true of the portrayal of blacks in mainstream television and movies for many decades. They were almost always criminals, poor, uneducated etc. That stereotype fed itself so that when casting that role it was normal to search for African Americans to fill it. Afterall that was how the general public visualized the bad guy. The two fed each other.
As most of you know, I'm a law student at UT and know some of the people invovled in the party (not that this gives my opinion any more weight). The sad part about this story is that it has reflected poorly on the law school. I think we've become an overly sensitive country. As a minority, I don't feel that the pictures are insensitive, just dumb. The students have run the risk of ruining their careers over something as trivial as a party. You can argue that as someone studying the law, you have a duty to be a little more careful when dealing with making fun of other cultures and I can buy that argument. Here's something to consider: The society responsible for leaking this story to the Dean never confronted the students about the pictures or requested that they be taken down from the internet. They also sent an email to their organization telling everyone in the organization to keep quiet about the whole party situation until "we can formally act as a unified group." It seems that if these students were really concerned about any insensitivity, they should have first asked that the pictures be taken down which they did not. It seems as though the society was more interested in playing the victim than in playing the defender of the economically challenged. As I said, I know a few of the people that attended the party and can say that they don't harbor any racist feelings.
but you have your own definition of racism. you define saying anything about any race as racist. but that's not the definition - the real definition has to include some sort of implication of superiority. your line of logic makes no sense. how do you go from jews are good with money to jews control the banking system? that's an irrational line of thinking. You can take anything an corrupt it that way. You can say that because Jews don't eat cheese on their meat then that must be a stereotype because one could then conclude that Jews are against dairy farmers! At best, you've shown that stereotypes are dangerous....but not racist. Some people may perverse stereotypes, but that means those people are racists, not the observations. Some people are looking to oppress - they will use whatever they need to. Stereotypes don't do that....people do that. Racism is born out of an uncomfortability of those around us who are different. That's where the negative stereotypes get created from. Not from other stereotypes.
Jewish friends - some like to say "hey, i'm good with money - I'm Jewish!". Of course, some don't....
It often does include superiority but it doesn't have to. The definition says usually. It doesn't have to include superiority which is the point I am trying to make. It is an irrational line of thinking, and it is something that actually happened. Stereotypes are as a rule irrational. The idea that an individual has certain characterististics because othes of that race do, is irrational. But don't pretend like it could never happen, because that very leap did happen. IT happened and it was widespred. As long as people stop thinking that stereotyping others is harmless simply because it doesn't fit their version of racism, then that is what needs to happen. They don't need stereotypes to oppress, but they do need stereotypes for other people to buy into that oppression. If they can't dehumanize a group and get people to stop looking at members of that group as individuals their message of oppression won't fly. Sometimes they certainly do get created from other stereotypes.
Personal friends making jokes of the stereotypes in personal interaction is different than a culture supposedly taking pride in something as a characteristic representative of that culture.
So you found a definition of racism that uses the word "usually" to fit your argument. Great...but we're just repeating the same things now back and forth without any progress. You're going to stick to your position no matter what, so what's the point of this debate now? Racism: 1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others There's no "usually" there. BUt hey, define it whatever you wish. Stereotypes are racism according to you - even though no one else backs that up. Maybe you might want to consider that? In any case, I disagree about stereotypes being the root of racism. I think it's the idea that one's group is better then another. It has nothing to do with innocent stereotypes. But there's no proof - you can't prove it, I can't - so this discussion can go no where. We should just agree to disagree and let it go.
