Via SALDEF, a report on a local Fox affilate about a probable hate crime that occurred in Burtonsville, MD, on September 15. (Warning, the images below are a bit graphic. You might want to finish your breakfast first.)
This particular story caught my attention because, first of all, the area is very close to where my parents live in Maryland. It’s a very safe area, and my folks go out for walks all the time, sometimes around dusk — this could have been someone I know (though in fact, I don’t know this particular family). Secondly, the gentlemen who were attacked are in their 70s, close to my grandfather’s age — and I’m particularly disgusted at the twisted version of national pride that might lead a group of teenagers to attack the elderly in this way.
The day after the two Sikhs were attacked, a Muslim man was attacked by a group of teenagers in the same town. That incident has not been detailed in the media, and I don’t know how badly the man in the second attack was injured.
Luckily, two arrests have been made. I’m not sure yet how they found the kids responsible, or whether further arrests are in the offing; we’ll probably hear more in the coming days.
Recently, Thomas Friedman wrote a column entitled, “9/11 is over.” I wish it were true — I gather he does too — though sadly that is clearly not the case.
whites have you Manju. Can’t think of anything more privileged than that.
oh damn I feel stupid. It’s “Everyone’s a little bit racist,” not ‘everybody,’ I think.
HMF- I think it’s also particular to communities though. Of course in most communities in the U.S. white people have the power, but in a few places they’re not. It also depends on how small of community you’re talking about. e.g. in my high school, Jews were dominant and I felt very, very uncomfortable with the constant talk about being ‘the chosen people,’ or when teachers assumed we knew the Old Testament. But in most of America, Jews still aren’t ‘real’ white people (right?).
…or an ivy league MD.
if you believe that it is inappropriate to consider every south asian a terrorist or every black a criminal unless proven otherwise, i think you should consider it inappropriate to treat every white as a racist unless proven otherwise.
can you substantiate this claim. i’m actually open to it. i don’t think all cultures are equal, some are more bigoted and ethnocentric than others (with america being among the most open), though bigotry is universal to the human condition. whites have, until recently, been more powerful than others…but where is the data that they are more prejudicial?
I was going to make the same point. But, the rules change somewhat depending on whether the factual error was against someone else (not me), or towards me (e.g. slandering me). In the latter case when I am the victim, it probably wouldn’t matter much to me if it’s Fox news or an indie blog – I’m more likely to feel the same anger, and the analysis of impact is more likely to get thrown out of the window.
in the latter case when I am the victim, it probably wouldn’t matter much to me if it’s Fox news or an indie blog
I understand this, which is why I said neither should be forgiven from that POV. However, you have to understand it in the context of these larger principles.
if you believe that it is inappropriate to consider every south asian a terrorist or every black a criminal unless proven otherwise, i think you should consider it inappropriate to treat every white as a racist unless proven otherwise.
whether I think it’s appropriate or inappropriate isn’t the question. The point is, we shouldn’t (as a society, as a national consciousness) accept the former, but cry foul when the mere suggestion is made of the latter (especially when, in my view there is more data & evidence that proves the latter)
i don’t think all cultures are equal, some are more bigoted and ethnocentric than others (with america being among the most open),
I don’t think its correct to state “americans are more open” because American, as a culture, as a “people” are not very well defined in and of themselves, then they are simply “open” by definition (or lack thereof). A truly “open” culture would be constituted by a well defined culture that has exhibited “openness” to others.
If you argue that Americans are “defined” well, then it’s obvious what that definition is, given the history of this country: white, anglo saxon. And if you claimthey are the most open, then you might as well take out a 5 week reservation in Bellvue’s medical ward.
you earlier said “Why bend over backwards to make sure the poor white folk aren’t misunderstood?”. a very reasonable interpretation of this statement is that you believe that the appropriate response is to always shift burden of proof on to the “poor white folk”. this is what i was taking issue with.
By “white folk”, do you mean Iranians?
If thats the case, then by all means, please bend over backwards for me…
“you earlier said “Why bend over backwards to make sure the poor white folk aren’t misunderstood?”. a very reasonable interpretation of this statement is that you believe that the appropriate response is to always shift burden of proof on to the “poor white folk””
If you read the statement preceeding that, you’ll see I make references to the other “race issues” or hurdles that us/black folks/asian folks/etc.. must endure, and that from a practical (I guess a “racism will always exist at some level” point of view) if we as a society accept those, then why should we clamor to the top of the mountain when similar hurdles exist for whites (again, in my view, they are more justified given historical evidence) ? It’s the relative difference that I’m pointing out, that you seem to not take notice of or just don’t believe. which again, is clear evidence of WP.
we need to be careful not to appropriate the victimization and history of blacks in this country. i don’t know if being beaten up by a bunch of Latinos or blacks is any different than being beaten up by a bunch of whites, since in neither case is there really a “legacy of supremacy.” in the context of british/indian relations i can see it, but america is different.
context matters. the man who is most often called a modern-day white supremacist, charles murray, is technically a yellow supremacist. the pacific rim and china have surpassed much of europe economically by many metrics (as well as having their own legacy of ethnic supremacy) and india may be next. the stereotype of indians and asians in this country is still that of a highly-educated professional as opposed to a terrorist.
of course, it is also a bit bizaare to be talking about indian racism against blacks in the context of elderly indians getting beaten up by a group of black teenagers. but i guess that’s something else we have in common with jews.
but nobody here accepted those stereotypes. you are the only one who offered a justification for accepting stereotypes, albeit only for whites.
i think razib has it right:
and i will go further in saying those who are incapable of criticizing POC while holding whites to higher standards, are perpetuating white power as well as a patronizing form of racism.
HMF: I think you might be discounting the power dynamic of xenophobia. There is a lot of black on foreigners hating going on in the US these days. Check out some black radio shows.