Talk:Racism in the United States/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Neutrality

This article's tone isn't neutral at all. I have suggested some edits and marked areas that need citation in this edit[1] which was reverted by this user (for some reason).[2] The entire racism header needs at least one citation to back up the unvalidated claims. . 71.42.24.136 (talk) 00:51, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Your edits to the article request references. Generally tag-bombing articles isn't productive - it;s best to find references for the material instead, and to make sure that the references at the end of paragraphs support the content - every sentence doesn't need a reference. Please note that the lead paragraph is a summary of referenced content in the article. Your edits to the article don't address neutrality or POV - what do you see as requiring adjustment? Acroterion (talk) 01:06, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Scientific Racism

The last two sentences in the section on "Racism" that say "White European Americans involved in the slave industry tried to justify their economic exploitation of black people by creating a "scientific" theory of white superiority and black inferiority. This was the start of systematized racism in the United States." is very misleading and there are two primery problems: 1) First, the cited source from Boggs can be found here [3] and continuing here [4] and it does not say anything at all about the "scientific racism" that this sentence says so it need changes. 2) This section would lead one to believe that these theories were developed by sailors at sea who were sailing from one point of the Atlantic to the other, but they would have been busy tending to the ship daily and had no free time. Or that the ideas were developed by wharfmasters, who again would have been too busy dealing with the daily merchants and the coming/going of ships to port. These theories were actually developed by elite academics in their ivory towers. At least a generation before the Civil War, there were several prominent thinkers who promoted the "scientific racism" that was there. They were Joshia C. Nott and John H. Van Evrie and George Fitzhugh. Their ideasare prominent in Alexander H Stephens Cornerstone Speech. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.13.119.90 (talk) 01:53, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Then source what you added. I see that the reference does mention a "scientifically-cloaked theory of White superiority and Black inferiority," so I'm not sold on the notion that scientific racism isn't mentioned. Acroterion (talk) 01:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Will do. Just so it is clear, the part that you are referencing doesn't say anything about those involved in trading. It does specifically say agriculture and even more specifically, southern agriculture. Which would point to the era of Scientific Racism that I'm talking about - of Nott, Stephens, and the others. It says on page 70 right above the section titled "They all benefited":

"The more valuable the labor of Blacks to Southern Agriculture, precisely because of the relatively advanced stage of agriculture in their African homeland, the more White Americans began to insist that they had done the African savage a favor by bringing him to a land where he could be civilized by agricultural labor. Thus, step by step,......"

...they created scientific racism as a justification. I'll add this as a cite of my own. As I originally said, "it does not say anything at all about the "scientific racism" that this sentence says", specifically the part of my original talk comment that you ignored "that this sentence says". The most problematic phrase in the wiki article is probably "White European Americans involved in the slave industry", because according to the cite and what I have now actually quoted, no it is not true that those involved with the "slave industry" or at least its too generic to be useful at all. The cite does says those involved with "slave agriculture" would be what the cite actually says. This at least points the reader of the wiki article to the correct callendar era. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.13.119.90 (talk) 09:10, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

The racism section is an overview of the beginning of systematized racism in the United States (not the events of 80 years later), and incorporates prominent scientific racism thinkers notably Jefferson. The next section then takes us chronologically through the history of racism in the U.S, from the start until the present day. Vardy TN (talk) 15:13, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Racism against whites

Though often overlooked by many sources, white Americans are often subject to racism. I am sure there are sources of this subject, but I can also confirm, from personal experience, that there are certain individuals who take black rights a step too far, and will use it as a way to persecute people with white skin. For instance, I was violently attacked on my college campus last year by a black student, who claimed I had "white privilege," so therefore I was worthy of such an attack. Also, I remember seeing on the news how a college in New England area was overun by black protesters, who prevented white students from going to class, and took white staff members hostage. Since racism is the belief that a race of people is deserving of persecution, this qualifies as an example of that. There also is a culture in America of shunning people who are "proud to be white". Saying that people should be ashamed of their skin color because they are white should be perceived as racist. Interestingly, this black on white racism thing is very new to America, and has evolved to be supported by many big names in mainstream media. People who do these racist things, claim not to be racist, because some say that racism requires the persecutor to have "privlige." I recommend you go to twitter, and search for phrases such as "fuck white people", and you will see that there is indeed a huge anti-white movement in the US. I am afraid that this article is biased, which is a problem because this goes against what Wikipedia stands for. By not including a section about racism against white people, it is giving the false message that this kind of racism "doesn't exist" when it clearly does. I suggest this article is written to include sections for racism against every race. 75.177.11.11 (talk) 20:10, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

The article is, indeed, very slanted. Somebody should try and add in some content relating to anti-white racism, which seemed to have become a trend from 2015. Meganesia (talk) 23:41, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Racism is not just being mean or nasty to someone who is a different race than you. Go find a couple of respectable sources that discuss the issue and get back to us.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Carptrash (talk • contribs) 00:29, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Your claims are anecdotal and likely untrue. GonzoTribune (talk) 10:17, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Interestingly, the only instance I’ve seen from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Anti-white_racism_in_North_America relates to the 1804 Haiti massacre, in which blacks overtook Haiti in such a way that the whites, even friendly whites, were attacked to the point that whites got killed and white women were raped. Even on the grounds of what whites had previously done to blacks before that, it’s still pretty nasty, and supposedly may have even colored many white peoples’ opinions on blacks, such as blacks being “rapist savages,” and may have also colored Thomas Jefferson’s opinions on blacks as well, despite how the massacre was mostly likely carried out by blacks out of grieving vengeance for being wronged in the first place. It’s because of stuff like that which leads me to think that the event deserves to be studied more and, with the understanding that Haiti technically isn’t part of the United States, still may have played a role in United States history. --Electricmastro (talk) 15:36, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

"Negrodynamics" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Negrodynamics. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 2#Negrodynamics until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. TheAwesomeHwyh 20:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

2020-05 testimonies at nytimes.com

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/18/sports/running-while-black-ahmaud-arbery.html is terrific. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:33, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Reverse Racism - Not white Racism.

Allot of information on this article is opinion based, the layout is a joke and why is it all American based?

Racism on whites goes back thousands of years and yes included the Moors and Ottomans who invaded white places and took white slaves.

Please can it highlight modern racism against whites such as in Europe where over 20.000 white women have been racially targeted and raped, some killed?

This article needs to concentrate more on racism against whites, Asians and Arabs and should have the bare minimum to do with racism on blacks. 2A00:23C8:8580:1C00:49A4:2EF8:A4C3:763D (talk) 06:19, 29 May 2020 (UTC)JohnA

Yes, it's a great mystery why an article about "racism in the United States" is about racism the United States. If you want an article about, for example, racism in the United Kingdom, the article for that is racism in the United Kingdom. As for the rest of your comment, this talk page is not the place to spread unsupported white genocide conspiracy theory memes. Grayfell (talk) 07:58, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Derek Chauvin

I wikilinked Derek Chauvin because I think he measures up to GNG. Geo Swan (talk) 13:17, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Race, racism and racialism.

Racialism is the belief that the human species is naturally divided into races. Racialism is not the same as racism. On the other hand, racialism may exist in different degrees. Without any doubts the US is one of the most racialist societies in the world, if not the most major society. Racialim, especilly, the promotion and magnification of racialist conciousness is a cornerstone for racism. All racist societies are strongly racialised. I think this may be a good section for the article.---— Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.66.135.228 (talk • contribs)

Article talk pages are not really intended for discussion that isn't directly related to specific proposals on how to improve the article. El_C 10:41, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

I think this is a key point for the article that is overlooked. Maybe most users of this article are Americans, and in my opinion, they have been brought up in a culture that is so highly racialised that they are not even conscious of this point.--- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.66.135.228 (talk) 10:45, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss assignments and personal opinions elsewhere - talkpages are for specific, sourced suggestions concerning article improvement. They're not free webhosts for seminars. Acroterion (talk) 03:02, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

apartheid in south africa

Why does an article titled "Racism in the United States" feature a picture of a sign from the apartheid era of south Africa? Is this not off topic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.255.113.178 (talk) 20:04, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey, I believe it is just the default picture that is used for the series on "racial segregation" that it is a part of. LucasGK123 (talk) 01:57, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Police racism

I heard media in the United States spoke much about increasing racist sentiment among U.S. police force, but I'm not an expert on this issue. If this is true, then someone should have addressed this. Protests have been razing the U.S. for months about this issue, but there are literally little information to address over. ZaDoraemonzu (talk) 12:04, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Possible Edits for Education Section

I am interested in expanding the Education section. In addition to what is already there, a subsection on white supremacy in US school curriculum could also be included, which would consist of some scholarship on the way white normativity is taught in the classroom. Some highlights could be eurocentrism in science and history classes, the glossing over of slavery's legacies, particularly in Southern curricula, hostility to teaching in other languages, and teachers disproportionately punishing students of color. I have included some of the sources I am considering below.

King, LaGarrett. “When Lions Write History: Black History Textbooks, African-American Educators, & the Alternative Black Curriculum in Social Studies Education 1890-1940.” Multicultural Education, 22(1), (2014). 2-11.

Blaisdell, Benjamin. “Schools as racial spaces: understanding and resisting structural racism.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29(2) 248-272. DOI: 10.1080/09518398.2015.1023228

Beyer, Landon E., and Daniel Patrick. Liston. Curriculum in Conflict : Social Visions, Educational Agendas, and Progressive School Reform / Landon E. Beyer, Daniel P. Liston. New York: Teachers College Press, 1996.

King, Lagarrett & Simmons, Crystal. (2018). Narratives of Black History in Textbooks. 10.1002/9781119100812.ch4.

Gillborn, David. 2005. “Education Policy as an Act of White Supremacy: Whiteness, Critical Race Theory and Education Reform.” Journal of Education Policy 20 (4): 485–505. doi:10.1080/02680930500132346.

Tosolt, Brandelyn. 2020. “Dear White Teacher: This Black History Month, Take a Knee.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE) 33 (7): 773–89. doi:10.1080/09518398.2019.1706198.

I have listed out more potential subtopics on my User page. Does this sound like a sensible edit? Would this make sense to eventually turn into an independent article?--MBJAnderson (talk) 03:25, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Reference 323

I believe the Princeton paper quoted in reference 323 to not be a neutral source, as they openly admitted to racism. It should be replaced by another source. --Con^spiration 08:51, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

New Child Article: White Supremacy in United States School Curriculum

I am posting again to amend my previous Talk section about expanding the Education section. As of now, I am planning on creating a new article on white supremacy in US curriculum in particular. I would still like to expand Education, but include a link to this new article for now. A lot of my previous post still stands, but I would like to concentrate on the history of racist narratives in school curriculum, as well as modern examples and reform movements. Does this sound like a good direction? --MBJAnderson (talk) 04:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

European section needs more serious attention

Whoever wrote this section had at best only a casual familiarity with the serious scholarly literature that's been published on this subject. References to Rebecca Fried (an elementary schoolgirl with no standing in academic history), Patrick Young (a lawyer-activist) and The Guardian, of all publications, are a testament to this fact. This statement in particular:

"There was widespread anti-Irish job discrimination in the United States and "No Irish need apply" signs were common."

needs a better reference than Rebecca Fried. The fact is, scholars of Irish-American social history are split on this question. On the one hand, there are distinguished historians such as Kerby Miller who would seem to agree with this statement, while other scholars have challenged Miller's methodologies and even motivations for advancing this view. Reginald Byron, for example, was a cultural anthropologist who published a large study on "Irish America" (called "Irish America") which contests Miller theses, such as the exile view of Irish emigration, the assimilability of Irish immigrants in America, and, yes, the argument that anti-Irish job discrimination was "widespread" in the US and representative of some sort of common experience for Irish immigrants. Byron's methods were also much more scientifically rigorous than Miller's.

Even if Miller's work is accurate, he focuses almost entirely on Northeastern cities and has very little to say about the rest of the US. Was anti-Irish job discrimination "widespread" in California? In the Montana territory? What about the Southeast? New Orleans? St. Louis? New York, Philadelphia and Boston are not the entire United States.

In addition, despite the bulk of anti-Irish NINA ads that targeted women in the domestics sector, 19th Century Irish immigrant women still dominated this job market to the extent that the Irish maid became a popular cliché. I would think that this alone would raise some serious concerns about the practice of extrapolating historical narratives by looking at newspaper ads, which Rebecca Fried seems to think is a novel approach.

And finally, I reject that we are even giving any space to European-Americans in an article about racism in the US. The word "race", as it is commonly understood today, would not apply to "white" ethnic groups in the 1800s. In addition, most sociologists agree that "racism" is an institutional phenomenon (involving not just prejudice, but the political, economic and social power to enforce prejudice legally or with impunity), while none of the white groups mentioned in this article were ever discriminated against in such a systemic manner or as required by law. In the 19th Century US, during both the antebellum and post-antebellum periods, white males from all corners of Europe, Catholic or Protestant, had voting rights, property rights, citizenship rights, marriage rights (could marry any white woman), political rights (could hold positions in government), and were never segregated in the military or civilian society. The experiences of non-European groups in the US were quite different, and should not be treated as part of the same phenomenon.Jonathan f1 (talk) 07:59, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

"The word "race", as it is commonly understood today, would not apply to "white" ethnic groups in the 1800s." The main article on racism states )(with sources): "It may also mean prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against other people because they are of a different race or ethnicity." Dimadick (talk) 07:27, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

The entire section should be removed due to racism being a political action that whites are both uniquely capable of and incapable of being the victims of, and the article actually describes any potential discrimination as "religious discrimination" for irish, italians, polish and finish. While it's described as anti-Nazi for german. Nothing to do with race, even if it were systemic and whites were actual victims. 88.106.238.93 (talk) 13:00, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments on new edits

Hi MBJAnderson, thank you for the great and timely contributions. I wanted to point out that there are no images in the education section; I think the article would benefit from some photos which highlight how alive racism is in American schools today. I would also add a few sentences in the section on denial of racism in education. Best, 19jshi (talk) 04:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Length of the article

I think that the length of this article may be detrimental to people trying to find a specific piece of information as it covers a very long time period and many races. I think it could be more helpful to either split it up into a history by race or split it up into multiple time periods for the ease of the reader. --WildeViolets (talk) 00:23, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Peer Review

You did a great job maintaining neutrality. My only piece of advice really is to maybe add some images to break up the text. I think some more visuals would help engage your audience, maybe even younger readers. AHall08 (talk) 00:37, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Remove European Section

The European section has nothing to do with racism and instead focuses purely on religion and country of origin. It does not belong on an article about racism as there is no example of racism, only prejudice.88.106.233.198 (talk) 12:38, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

I've restored it, see Racism. Doug Weller talk 15:20, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Again, this article is about racism, not religious prejudice. Institutional racism doesn't victimise whites, it harms them by allowing them to call themselves human while preventing them from recognising that POC are the real people. Your opinions do not change what reliable sources have to say on toxic whiteness. 88.106.233.198 (talk) 21:48, 3 November 2020 (UTC)