Very true, Ken......"people are people" and all races commit crimes. I think one of the problems of today is some shows that are on tv. One show is called Cops. It seems like a lot of this show is centered around Black crime in highly populated Black areas of the U.S.. Another show takes the public into a prison. A lot of folks can quickly form an opinion on people they see and how they look.
CNN is full of it and doesn't do research. Just reminiscing a little history and sharing.The year 1972 was the Summer Olympics in Munich Germany. This was also the Munich Massacre where 11 Israelis were killed by the Black September Arab Terrorists. Our own Olympian for swimming was Mark Sprint (American Jew) who won seven gold medals. He was quickly put on a plane for home. They were afraid for his life. Golda Meir, Prime Minister of Israel at the time ordered Mossad, to hunt and kill the assassins. Steven Spilberg came out with the movie 2005, "Munich" based on the events that took place. I loved your comments on this thread. Back then the athletes didn't have time for the kind of nonsense like today. When our African-American Olympian swimmer had the time to call attention to herself and criticize our country, was equivalent to 20 push-ups she should have done instead of jaw flapping.
Well in every nationality there are the same words, we just say it in our own language. Food is tabemono is Japanese, it's the same word just said in our own language sounds so different. In life every nationality has the same things too. Not one nationality got it any easier or better. God loves us all, why some are hateful I don't know. Guess in history we had little villages of the same nationality so we were more accustomed to our own nationality, but now we live pretty much anywhere we can afford. We all know in every nationality there is good and bad too, so it's not the nationality. But why then is there racism?
My other thought is...... There are certain areas of some cities/towns that some races don't want to live in because the race of that area is primarily, if not all, one race. There are some States that are the same way. Example: East L.A. (Calif) is primarily, if not all, Hispanic/Mexican. Compton, Watts, South Central in L.A. Is the same way with Blacks. Some cities have their own small-to-large Asian population. Garden Grove, Calif. has an area call Little Saigon, wich is all South Vietnamese. There is an area called China Town in Calif. Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho and a few other States have a very low population of either Blacks and or Asians. Oklahoma, Wyoming, Montana, North and South Dakota can have high population of Native American's. Doesn't means these areas, cities, towns or States are "racist", it's just that some races don't want to live in a highly populated area that doesn't match their race.
When I downsized, to where I live now I expected to live in a mixed race neighborhood. We have mostly Hispanics, a Jamaican, few Whites, and a Russian family. We all respect each other, have our own agenda and live on the same street. All my boys can speak and read Spanish fluently. When my son worked at the casino in New Mexico, there was a problem for the Mexicans who were working the concession stands at the horse racing.They'd see the word hot dog or hamburger and didn't know what it met. He put in a bilingual menu that took an hour to install. One Hispanic bought Pip's car shortly after he arrived from New Mexico, he also bought a car he liked from a Cuban. When our country is brought down by ones that their own personal agenda and flaunts it to the media. That ticks me off.
Our county's race population (Mohave County, AZ). Predominantly white, but why, I dunno. Our nearest town: http://pics.city-data.com/craces2/1113.jpg Our next-closest town, Lake Havasu City (skipping Needles, California, which is actually closer, but only 4900 pop.) Laughlin, Nevada
It's like I said, Frank, certain races, for whatever reasons, don't want to nessarily live where one predominate race lives. In a town we lived in in Colorado, the demographics was 95% White. That leaves 5% for any other race....not much. Why was this town so "White", have no ideas, but didn't bother us. We, like some other people, don't like highly diverse areas that much. Then, there are those that grew up around a lot of diversity and that's one thing they look for when choosing a new area to live in.
@Cody Fousnaugh My OP just now only showed one chart, did all of them appear on your computer? I have edited them back in, they show up now, but then they did after I first posted the OP, then disappeared. Frank
I don't get it. They disappeared after I logged off, again. Oh, well. Suffice to say they are all pretty similar, except for Laughlin, which has higher Latino %.
A part of what passes as racism is simply based on limited experiences. There are neighborhoods that are dominated by people of one race who hate white people. These might be largely hispanic or black neighborhoods where the people really haven't had a lot of good experiences with white people, and in many cases they are fed hatred by political factions who see an advantage in racial divisions. A white person growing up as a minority in such neighborhoods might have had bad experiences as well, which may fuel their attitudes about people who look like the ones who had such hatred for them. Certainly, that's not always the case, but I think it's fair to assume that this is the case in some areas and among some people. Our grandchildren are black by appearance, although they are part caucasian as well. They live with their father in Baltimore, and we have visited them there. They live in a neighborhood that is primarily black but, although Baltimore is known for race problems, and was included among the cities where there have been BLM riots, the neighborhood they live in is pretty docile. We can go to a restaurant, to a store, or to a concert at the the grandkid's school, without even a hint that anyone around us hates us because we're white. I have been in some rough areas that were supposed to be dangerous but I haven't yet experienced any significant problems. In the Rio Grande Valley of Texas, I would sometimes come across rude people but I think the problem had more to do with my limited command of the Spanish language than with my skin tone or race. Although the Valley is part of Texas, and in the United States, English has never been the primary language there, so there's really no reason why they should have to learn a second language in order to accommodate me. Pretty much everyone I knew who grew up there could speak Spanish, regardless of ancestry. I was actually a pretty good paramedic though, and I mostly lived in smaller towns so they'd get over any initial resentment they might have had soon enough. Plus, I wasn't asking them to change who they were in order to accommodate me. I mentioned at another time, perhaps in this thread, that my father didn't like Japanese and, because he couldn't tell Japanese apart from Chinese, he hated them too. Was that racism? Yeah, I guess it was. His concept of who the Japanese people were was based entirely on his experiences as a soldier and as a prisoner of the Japanese during World War II. Had he grown up or lived among someone who was Japanese, I am sure he'd have recognized that this was situational, and not who they were as a people. Two of his brothers were killed by the Germans in Europe, yet he didn't hate Germans. Why? There were a few German people living near us, and one had even married his sister, so he knew that all Germans weren't Nazis. He even mentioned once that he had heard from others who had been prisoners of the Germans that they treated their POWs humanely, unlike the Japanese. There is also the fact that when we are at war, it helps if we can dehumanize the enemy. This is why we come up with derogatory names to use in reference to our enemies: gooks, nips, krauts, towel heads, etc. In time of war, this is a part of the propaganda campaign promoted by the government. For example, from World War II: Our government perpetuated a hatred for the Japanese for the purpose of waging the war. Then after the war, our soldiers are brought home. Is it reasonable to expect this hatred to simply go away because our governments have arrived at an agreement? This is probably less the case now than it was in the past, as far as the government fostering hatred. Still, the soldiers who fight may find it easier to do so if they can dehumanize the enemy. I have several friends who fought in Vietnam, and not all of them hate the Vietnamese, but some of them hate them very much. We were with one of our Vietnam vet friends in Washington D.C. one time, and we had to leave a restaurant because a group of Vietnamese came in, and he became so tensed up that he couldn't bear it. He's not an angry or hateful guy, otherwise. With him, it probably has more to do with PTSD than racism. Many years ago, Jesse Jackson said that if a group of people were following him on a dark street, he would be relieved to find that they were white rather than black. He was making a point about violence within the black community, and recognizing the fact that someone is more likely to be violently accosted by a group of black people than by a group of white people, at least in his experience at that time. Was that racism? Does he hate black people? If I were to say that, would I be a racist?
@Ken Anderson I believe the analysis of the paragraph above must necessarily be replete with unanswered, and impossible to answer, insinuations. First, the reasoning behind Jackson's remark is not clear as to intent. Second, as a known hob-nob of the white elite of Chicago, Jackson used cunning diversive tactic to encircle and capture the white elements' perception of him. Then, third, he spoke within his own element using his personal didactics, that is, his knowledge of Chicago's Black Community having been taught it extensively, in winning ways subverting his constituentcies' suspicions of his playing "both sides". His activities throughout the traumatic late '60s and beyond, likely were aimed at giving him the opportunity to become the country's first Black President. Such hope was dashed by the now difficult to ferret-out facts concerning his activities in support of the Chicago Seven, the infamous racially divisive group, which ensnarled the City of Chicago with it's hatred-furthering mongering. "The Chicago Seven (originally Chicago Eight, also Conspiracy Eight/Conspiracy Seven) were seven defendants—Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, David Dellinger, Tom Hayden, Rennie Davis, John Froines, and Lee Weiner—charged by the federal government with conspiracy, inciting to riot, and other charges related to anti-Vietnam War and countercultural protests that took place in Chicago, Illinois, on the occasion of the 1968 Democratic National Convention. Bobby Seale, the eighth man charged, had his trial severed during the proceedings, lowering the number of defendants from eight to seven. Seale was eventually sentenced to four years in prison for contempt of court." Jesse Jackson became ineligible by Constitutional Default, to become President, as a result of his support for, and activities within, the above, and the courts' rulings against him. Frank
@Frank Sanoica, you do know that it's possible to cite one thing that someone said without that being a validation of his entire life, don't you? By the way, I was arrested in Chicago during the 1968 Democratic National Convention, so I am familiar with that, although I'm not sure how it pertains to racism, unless you're referring to the treatment of Bobby Seale. The others I didn't know, but I came across Abbie Hoffman a few times. He was an egotistical jerk. When he was around, he wanted everything to be all about him.