October 11, 2023 at 11:52 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, anglo saxons, biological races, black inferiority, blacks, democracy, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, Human Genome, identity, language, Media and Race, minorities, race, Race in America, racism, skin color, teaching race | 3 Comments
Tags: African Americans, Angela Glover Blackwell, biogtry, biracial, black, Confronting Myths, current-events, ethnicity, European Americans, multiracial, race, Race in America, SPLC, white
An experience that, at times, causes disappointment is having to listen to someone fervently speaking on a topic of concern of which they lack the ability to show control. While the intention of the speaker is well-intended, the outcome fails to have value or is contrary. The subject of race falls into that category. What some people speaking or writing about race do not realize is that once the concept of race is accepted, everything that follows is counterproductive in fighting ethnic bigotry.
What people need to know about race is that the word represents a bias in that it signifies a sub-species. Any sub-species of a species is inferior to the species. The Homo Sapiens species has no sub-species. Europeans, Anglo-Saxons, and European Americans view themselves as representatives of the species-Homo sapiens and not a race. Based on the myth of European supremacy, all non-European people must identify as a race based on a variety of elements like race, color, religion, ethnicity, and others. The power to control the false concept of race and the myth is woven into the language. Every time the word race or any of its diversities are used, the myth of European (white) supremacy is protected, maintained, and promoted.
How does race manifest its power through language? Whenever the word race or any of its diversities are used, four things become apparent: unity, separation, manipulation, and discrimination. When individuals are identified by a color, that identity places them in a so-called minority group category and they are viewed as inferior. Also, because of the minority group identity, they lose any individuality/uniqueness; they become stereotypes associated with the characteristics of their group; they are treated by society in conjunction with the stereotypes of the group. The individual becomes less than a human being while experiencing unity with a group, separation for the family of human beings, viewed with stereotyped characteristics, and treated with less than human values.
How language and a lack of knowledge can turn good intentions into counterproductive results can be observed in the following example. An article in the SPLC magazine “Learning for Justice,” includes an interview with Angela Glover Blackwell on “Paving the Way to a Vibrant Multiracial Democracy.” In the interview Blackwell makes the statement relative to teaching and talking honestly about race: “Talking about race is in fact the only way democracy can succeed in a multiracial society.” Several concerns with her statement show the counterproductive elements.
The very first concern that appears in the statement is an acceptance of the false concept of race. Once race is introduced into the conversation the opportunity for truth and honesty is gone. For many years scientists, scholars, states people, and others have been asking the U.S. Government to stop using race in its literature because it is not a valid or acceptable word since it connotes a biological and genetic difference among human beings that does not exist. Yet, the government continues to confuse its citizens by using the word race along with the word ethnicity as though they were synonymous, which they are not. In any event, using the word race prevents the opportunity of a level playing field because a superior and inferior context has been established.
When the words multiracial and democracy are used in conjunction with each other a problem of perception is introduced. We know that any use of the word race brings with it four social conditions that do not comport with democracy. When the language uses a word like minority, the perception is usually not of European Americans, but on the contrary, of non-European people. The perception includes a superior and inferior understanding of people in the majority and those that are not. If education is as important as Blackwell states, then accurate and factual information must be the order of the day.
Another example of concern comes from the Blackwell statement that “Democracy is about shared responsibilities and processes for working together, as equals, to have a meaningful say in our lives and our community.” While her sentiments are positive and direct, we must question what is meant by the word “equal” in a society where people are viewed by their race? Who and what establishes what “equal” means? We know that equality pertains to mathematics, and not to humans because that is the only area where numbers are fixed.
One way to avoid the problems relative to race is to stop using it and its derivatives. Since we know that race means sub-species, how can we accept the concepts of biracial and multiracial without challenge? What we are saying by using those terms is that we accept the false concept of races. We do not refer to people as bi-species, or multi-species because we know that would be illogical. When two distinct species try to procreate, the result is a hybrid. A horse and a jackass, two distinct species, can produce a mule. A mule is neither a horse nor a jackass. A word used for so-called biracial people is mulatto, which comes from the word mule. Human beings belong to a species, not a race.
We can avoid the word race and its derivatives by using ethnic group or ethnicity. Rather than using racism, use bigotry or ethnic bigotry, for racist, use bigot. Americans, aside from their ethnic identity, have only two actual identities: state and national. Race and color are not included in either one, so why should we continue to use them?
If we look at the concept of race and democracy in the context of a worm being the concept of race and racism and an apple being democracy, then the worm in the apple represents the problem involved in saving democracy. Understanding the problem is necessary to save democracy. Presently, the focus has been on the worm and not the destruction it is experiencing in democracy. The article shows just how the worm of race is protected, maintained, and promoted. Once we begin to address the problem of race, we can also start to build a vibrant democracy.
August 26, 2023 at 12:14 am | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, anglo saxons, Bigotry in America, biological races, blacks, Civil Rights Ats, desegregation, discrimination, DNA, education, equality, Ethnicity in America, European American, European Americans, identity, interpretations, language, minorities, Negro, public education, Race in America, racism, skin color, skin complexion, Slavery, teaching race, white supremacy, whites | 4 Comments
Tags: African Americans, black, Confronting Myths, current-events, ethnicity, European Americans, Race in America, white
When I write and speak about how the language of race enslaves Americans and constantly present African Americans and other non-European people as inferior, the following example should suffice to make the point. In an article “Being Black Means You’re Disabled – People Are Up in Arms Over What This Ivy League School Is Teaching,” story by Emily Valadez •2h 8/25/2023, the following sentence is offered.
“Systemic racism refers to the systems in place in society that create racial inequality for people of color.”
Since we have not and do not challenge the truth and facts about the language we use, we fail to understand and appreciate the predicament in which we are placed. For example, the reference to “Systemic racism” should be challenged because race is not a valid word relating to identity since it has no biological or genetic basis. Certainly, a system of ethnic bigotry exists, and has existed since before the founding of this nation. The language should avoid using the word race and its derivative, racial because those words protect and promote European supremacy. The word race is a bigoted word in that it was developed to signify a sub-species of the Homo sapiens. Homo sapiens have no sub-species except in the word race. The objective in developing the word as a reference to sub-species was to render all peoples not European inferior to them. In essence, only Europeans represent the Homo Sapien species.
The next part of the sentence, the word inequality has no fixed or specific meaning except in mathematics. Equal cannot apply to human beings, just fixed entities like numbers. The word is used to suggest “fairness” which sounds pleasing but is also a relative word with no fixed meaning. When the word is challenged, confusion sets in because no definite parameters are established from which to judge and make a balanced decision.
The last part of the sentence refers to “people of color” and continues to add confusion to be objective of the sentence in a reasonable manner. Who and what are people of color? The reference to any person or group of people using color is a form of bigotry. What makes it bigotry is the implied reference to race that is associated with people and a color. Since black and white are colors, what distinguishes the people of color from people without color, if they exist?
The title of the article states that “Being Black means you are disabled,” suggests that something is inherently wrong with blacks that render them disabled. The problems visited on the African American population is a direct result of actions taken against them by European Americans. The situations in which African Americans find themselves can be directed attributed to their treatment in America. The language is misleading and confusing.
What happens when we fail to challenge the language of race was explained by John H. Stanfield II, “Race as a myth is a distorting variable that convolutes and in other ways distracts attention from the variables that really matter in understanding how and why human beings think, act, and develop as they do. The extent to which race does exist, it is an experience, it is not phenotype real or imagined.” (Montagu, Man’s Most Dangerous Myth, the fallacy of race.) The myth of European supremacy continues because we are complacent relative to the language and fail to realize the damage it contributes to our society.
What is disheartening about the article is the fact that Princton University, one of the prime institutions of American Education, did not recognize what the language they employed was doing. Rather than using the opportunity as a teachable opportunity, they instead, whether knowingly or not, protected and promoted European supremacy. When color is used to identify a person or a group of people that is a form of bigotry and discrimination. The history, culture, language, religion, food, and all the things that pertain to an ethnic group’s uniqueness are lost when the group is turned into a monolith by being referred to as a color. The very word “black” is used as an adjective preceding the noun race. Any time race is used, it protects and promotes the myth of European supremacy. Of course, many African Americans and non-European Americans do not question the use of the word black, but that does not make it acceptable and not historically demeaning. Maya Angelou once stated that “when we (people) know better, we do better.”
What Princton could have done in providing information about the course was to make the point that no one comes to America using color as an identity. When the Africans that were enslaved were brought to America, one of the first things to happen was the taking away of any identity and replacing it with words like negro, black, colored, slave, and others. The language used in identifying the enslaved changed over the years until present day usage includes black, African American, non-European American. African Americans did not choose to be identified as blacks but were socialized to accept and use it without challenge until the 1970’s civil rights era. Rather than recognizing the permanent stigma associated with its usage, many decided to retain it. Even today, many will try to defend it, not realizing that each usage protects and promotes European (white) supremacy.
Since the foundation of America numerous voices have attempted to inform society relative to the use of the word race. A few scientists and scholars have challenged the governments and society’s continued use of the word race. Many anthropologists have noted regarding the concept of race: “(1) it was artificial, (2) it did not correspond to the facts, (3) it led to confusion and the perpetuation of error, and finally, (4) for all these reasons it was scientifically unsound, or rather, more accurately, that is was false and misleading.” They also concluded that “based as it was om unexamined facts and unjustifiable generalizations, it were better that the term ‘race,’ corrupted as it is with so many deceptive and dangerous meanings, be dropped altogether from the vocabulary.” (Montagu, p.107.)
A common belief is that everything we know, we acquired from our socialization in society. From day one, we began the socialization process, and it continues throughout our lives. However, just because we learned something that proved to be incorrect does not mean we cannot correct it. Educational institutions like Princeton must help to educate society out of its ignorance and theirs.
June 27, 2023 at 1:41 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, anglo saxons, Bigotry in America, biological races, black inferiority, discrimination, Disrespect, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European American, identity, justice, language, Prejudice, public education, racism, Slavery, social conditioning, U. S. Census, white supremacy | 6 Comments
Tags: ACLU, African Americans, Ashley Montagu, black, Confronting Myths, current-events, ethnicity, European Americans, John H. Standfield, NAACP, Prejudice, race, SPLC, white
One of the challenging questions that has long plagued people working to overcome ethic bigotry in America is how long will the organizations like the NAACP, ACLU, SPLC and others that are in the forefront of fighting for justice will come to the realization that what they have been doing for all these years is not fighting the cause of what is called racism, but the effects of it. Every day we can see, read, and hear about some non-European ethnic citizen being discriminated against or abused in America and often we hear about some civil rights organization taking the case to court and winning a judgment on that case. We might say that the win is a small victory, but the battle has not been touched because nothing has been done to eliminate the so-called racism.
Organizations like those mentioned above have been fighting what they consider a battle against racism. Yet, what do they have to show for their efforts? Yes, some small battles have been won, but those victories did not interrupt the continuance of racism because the battles were focused on the effects of racism, not racism itself. Also, racism cannot be eliminated using the language of the enslavers.
One of the primary reasons for the continued existence of racism is our acceptance of the language of race without challenge or question. Our language was developed to insure the protection and promotion of the myth of European (white) supremacy. Because we have been conditioned to accept the language without question, we continue to enslave ourselves to the deliberate confusion caused by it. The cause of the confusion began with the invention of the word race to represent a subspecies of Homo sapiens. No subspecies of Homo sapiens exist and the word race has no fixed definition, so why are we still using it in our everyday language along with all its derivatives when we have no idea of its meaning? We know what its intended interpretations are, yet we do not question them.
Concerning the removal of the word race, John H. Stanfield II, noted that “…adjectives such as black and white would no longer be used. Race as a myth is a distorting variable that convolutes and in other ways distracts attention from the variables that really matter in understanding how and why human beings think, act, and develop as they do.” Unfortunately, the words black and white have become so acceptable and common that no one seems to realize that they are pejorative and demeaning to both groups. When colors are used to identify ethnic groups, a disservice is done to the integrity and character of the groups. Yet, we hear them employed daily with no regard to the negative implications contained in the usage.
Our language allows us to use race and its derivatives as though no harm is being done to our sense of identity as part of the human family. Every time the words black and white are used, they establish a sense of unity, and separation, discrimination, and manipulation of one group towards the other. Society has been conditioned to view white as superior to black, so whenever either word is used to identify a people, the social conditioning automatically surfaces. The language will not permit race and the myth of European supremacy to lose its prevalence because society does not realize that the language is the glue that keeps the citizens in the dark.
For example, many African Americans love the word black because of the meaning and significance it has to them and their experience in America. However, what they do not realize is that the use of the word black reinforces the myth of European supremacy. Black is an adjective that proceeds race, as in black race, and therefore, supports the concept of white superiority which protects and promotes European supremacy. Proponents of European supremacy enjoy using and observing African Americans use and clinging to the word black because they know that the system of mentally enslaving the non-European ethnic groups is working. They also view the use of black as a social game in which they demean the proposed African American value of the word by interjecting colors of white, and blue to counter phrases like “Black Lives Matter,” with “White Lives Matter,” and “Blue Lives Matter.”
The fact that the government and society persist in using race as a legitimate word even through they know it is bogus is underscored by Ashley Montagu when he stated that “The idea of race was, in fact, the deliberate creation of an exploiting class seeking to maintain and defend its privileges against what was profitably regarded as an inferior social caste.” He added that “Ever since the commencement of the slave trade there had been those who had attempted to justify their conduct in it [race] by denying the slave the status of humanity.” What we know is that the word race and all its derivatives are biased terms that view the people belonging to a so-called race as inferior and even less than human for the purpose of exploiting them.
If the organizations and individuals fighting the battle of ethnic bigotry want to have a positive effect in eliminating the element of race, they can begin by avoiding the use of the language of race. How does one go about avoiding the language of race? Julian Huxley in 1941, offered the suggestion that “it would be highly desirable if we could banish the question-begging term ‘race’ from all discussions of human affairs and substitute the noncommittal phrase ‘ethnic group.’” The term ‘ethnic group’ retains the culturally diverse uniqueness of the variety of Homo sapiens while dismissing any concept of biological and genetic differences. When the term “race” is eliminated from the language all its derivatives will force a change in how we think, talk, and act about ourselves and others. For example, we will recognize the challenge in biased phrases like “mixed races,” as well as the popular, but erroneous, phrase “human race.”
Once we realize the positive effects of these small changes in the language, we will also begin to understand how the language is used to keep us enslaved, and how we are able to free ourselves from the devastating effects it has had on us and our society. Who knows, we might even get the government to release its hold on stupidity regarding “race.”
Note: If you enjoy my blogs, please check out my latest book: It’s About Time: Losing Control of European Supremacy (amazon.com)
June 16, 2023 at 3:52 am | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, ashley Montagu, C. Loring Brace,, biological races, black inferiority, discrimination, Disrespect, DNA, education, equality, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, Human Genome, identity, interpretations, language, minorities, minority, Race in America, racism, respect, skin color, U. S. Census, whites | 3 Comments
Tags: African Americans, black, Confronting Myths, current-events, ethnicity, European Americans, race, Race in America, white
Many of us sometimes experience remembering placing our keys down somewhere, but when we try to retrieve them, they are nowhere in sight. After we have looked in all the places, we think they could be, low and behold we spot them in front of us right in plain sight. They were not hidden from us; we just did not see them at first. That experience can serve as an example of what happens daily in America and the Western World relative to ethnic bigotry. Ethnic bigotry is present, but just not seen because we have become conditioned to not questioning its presence, but it is present in the language. One reason we do not challenge the language is because we have been conditioned to accept it on face value. That acceptance, however, represents the problem of our not seeing the ethnic bigotry.
We have been told for several hundred years that that the word “race” is socially constructed to represent a particular meaning and as C. Loring Brace has noted that…” despite almost universal belief to the contrary, the concept of ‘race’ as applied to the picture of human biological diversity had absolutely no scientific justification.” The word “race” was developed to represent a subspecies, inferior to the species Homo sapiens, and to promote, to protect, and to preserve the myth of European supremacy and domination. So, how does a society go about making the myth a reality? Stephen Ullmann stated that “Words [language] certainly are the vehicles of our thoughts, but they may be far more than that: they may acquire an influence of their own, shaping and pre-determining our processes of thinking and our whole outlook.” America and the Western World wanted to ensure that the myth remains current, so they ignored the facts regarding race.
In 1997, Ashley Montagu, stated in an introduction to the 6th edition of his book Man’s Most Dangerous Myth, the fallacy of Race, that the purpose of his book was…:
to make use of the scientifically established facts to show that the term “race” is a socially constructed artifact—that there is no such thing in reality as “race,” that the very word is racist: that the idea of “race,” implying the existence of significant biologically determined mental differences rendering some populations inferior to others, is wholly false; and that the space between as idea and reality can be very great and misleading.
Regardless of the many appeals made by many Americans of note, the government and society continue to use the word race as acceptable when we know that its purpose is to support ethnic bigotry. The fact that the word “race” and many of its diversities are used daily and that they are meant to denigrate their target, fails to register on the sender and the receiver. For example, like the word “race,” the words of color black, red, brown, and yellow are not used as compliments to the groups, but as a sign of their inferiority. The obvious exception of color in this group is the color white because it is usually used as a compliment. When only an ethnic group’s color is used rather than the phrase that is intended: black race, red race, brown race, and yellow race, it is a form of bigotry. If race is included in any form, the message shows disrespect because it signifies inferiority. Unfortunately, when an explanation is offered to some individuals and groups that use a color as an ethnic group identity in their business or organizations, they are quick to show their innocence by defending their use of the color. The fact that they do not recognize the disrespect of the group is due to the power of the language and the failure to question it.
Color is not a part of any human being’s identity regardless of their ethnicity and nationality. How is it that the government, and especially the U.S. Census Bureau continue to use the term “race” considering all the facts and evidence to its being bogus? Could that be a sign of ethnic bigotry? The word “race” is just a small part of the language used by the government and society to protect the myth of European supremacy.
Another word that is frequently used by government and society relative to population is “minority.” Like the word race, minority is a biased term. Most dictionaries offer at least two different usages of the word, but both involve numbers. The first states that minority is “the smaller number or part, especially a number that is less than half the whole number.” The second states that minority is “a relatively small group of people, especially one commonly discriminated against in a community, society, or nation, differing from others in race, religion, language, or political persuasion.” If we notice carefully in the second example, we find the evidence to support the disrespect and bigotry associated in referring to a group of people as a minority. Yet, we hear it daily.
The word “minority” while used in America to describe non-European people shows its selective use. If we applied the word minority to the world population, the people of non-European heritage would represent the majority. We know that eighty percent of the world’s population is brown. That fact is seldom referenced in topics focusing on minorities. Although the word is biased, hardly anyone underscores that fact. What lies inside the use of the word is the suggestion that different races are included and therefore they are inferior to the majority. The use of the word minority as an indicator of race is a form of bigotry, but we find it being used at every level of society without regard to the negative implications it carries.
The use of language as a vehicle for promoting the concept of race and the myth of European supremacy has always been dangerous. Again, Montagu pointed out, …” the very word “race is itself a racist [bigoted] term not simply because it represents a congeries of errors, or that it is a spurious ‘reality’ with no objective existence, but in addition, and most importantly, because its baleful influence constitutes a threat to the very existence of humanity.” When we are ignorant of the power of language and never think to question its use, we become complicit in the damage it causes and the negative impact on the lives it affects. Yet, if we look close enough, we will find it in plain sight.
September 14, 2022 at 12:26 am | Posted in African American, American Racism, Bigotry in America, blacks, DNA, education, European Americans, identity, justice, Race in America, racism, skin complexion, social conditioning, whites | 2 Comments
Tags: African Americans, black, Confronting Myths, current-events, ethnicity, European Americans, Race in America, white
What is the difference between the questions: What size shoe does the Tooth Fairy wear? And how do we fight racism? Regardless of the various arguments that can be made concerning the two questions one fact stands out above all others—the questions are both based on myths. The primary difference between the two questions is that the Tooth Fairy myth is accepted as a myth and treated in like manner, but the concepts of race and racism is recognized being based on a myth but treated as reality. Common knowledge concerning race and racism is that they are the results of social constructions—made up to serve a purpose. The primary purpose that race serves is to represent the concept of a subspecies of Homo sapiens. Science and history have told us from the invention of taxonomy and the development of DNA that no such subspecies exists. Yet, America and the Western World continue to promote and foster the false concept of race. If the only concern of the race myth is its acceptance, no major problem would exist, but the fact that it is viewed as reality and instructs behavior represents a huge challenge.
What has taken place in the Western World for over two-hundred and fifty years is a behavior and belief in the myth of race that views Europeans and European Americans as superior to all other peoples in the world. What is even more disheartening is the fact that despite over-whelming facts and evidence to the contrary, the belief and behavior continues. The term race does four things besides supporting European supremacy: unite, separate, discriminate, and manipulate all other people. Regardless of how the term is used relative to identity, these four characteristics exist. No serious attempt has been made to rectify this situation, so ethnic bigotry has been alive and well in America for over two-hundred-and fifty years and it will continue until the people realize that race and racism is not the problem, nor can they be destroyed.
The plethora of people that write on or about race and racism all make the same mistake that causes their efforts to go for naught. If one starts off with a flawed concept, regardless of the developments and inventions attributed to that concept, the results will be flawed. Various writers of books and articles attempt to make clear at the beginning of their work that race is considered a social construction—a statement that should disqualify its use. However, the works proceeds in employing the term race and many of its derivatives as if they were legitimate and acceptable. For example, when writers use the terms black and white for human groups identities, they commit two major errors: one, they associate a person’s ethic identity with a color complexion and two, they invent so-called racial groups as monoliths. Both errors should automatically be seen as disqualifiers because they have no scientific basis in fact.
The most important part of any work is the clear understanding of what is being addressed and that should begin with a definition of terms. Any confusion relative to the subject or topic will result in even more confusion. An interesting situation currently in America is the efforts of a number of states to outlaw the teaching of race and related subjects that might cause the children hurtful feelings. The problem with these laws is that they never define race. The word race is used as though the reader already knows the meaning, but that is a false assumption. If these laws were to be challenged in courts that required a clear definition of terms, the laws would be thrown out or Western History could not be taught.
Another problem that arises from the law preventing the teaching of race is the obvious one of identity. If race is not to be taught or used how will children that have been conditioned to view themselves as black or white, be identified? The terms black and white when used singly refers to a color, but if the intent is for the use as identity, then they represent adjectives that proceed race. In other words, black race, and white race. Some European American and African American families do not inform their children of their ethnic identities, so as society has conditioned then, they say black and white. Since this term refer to so-called races, how is the teacher supposed to manage this situation without getting into trouble with the law? When a term is not defined or meaning fixed, it invents unforeseen problems when made the principal focus of a law. An uncomplicated way to resolve the problem of race is to discontinue use of the word. However, that would cause even more problems because that would eliminate the privileges and power associated with the phrase “white race.”
What is disturbing relative to works that attempt to offer something of value concerning race and racism is that they do not realize that while they are trying to make an argument against race and racism, they are promoting the concepts as legitimate. What is missing from many works on race and racism is the understanding that before one can proceed to address the issues involving race, it must first be debunked. Once race has been debunked then one can proceed to show the inaccuracies and misinformation associated with it. Unfortunately, many writers continue to use the language of race and the references that support the myth as part of their research and studies. For example, notice the language in the following quote that continues to promote as factual research material:
Twenty years after Bonilla-Silva developed the analytic components of a structural race perspective and called for “comparative work on racialization in various societies,” U.S.-centric race theory continues to be mostly rooted in a U.S. focus. What is missing is a framework that explores race and racism as a modern global project that takes shape differently in diverse structural and ideological forms across all geographies but is based in global white supremacy.” (A Global Critical Race and Racism Framework: Racial Entanglements and Deep and Malleable Whiteness,” Michelle Christian, 2018, Sociology of Race and Ethnicity)
Why not forgo all the analysis and inventions relative to race when we know that it is a myth. Whatever came out of this study was flawed because what went into it was flawed. The problem is not race or racism; it is the belief in the myth.
Okay, the Tooth Fairy does not wear shoes, but the fight against race continues. Why?
December 26, 2020 at 3:38 pm | Posted in Affirmative Action, African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, Bigotry in America, biological races, blacks, Constitutional rights, democracy, discrimination, Disrespect, DNA, entitlements, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, Human Genome, identity, integregation, justice, language, law, Media and Race, public education, race, Race in America, racism, representation, respect, social conditioning, socioeconomics | 2 Comments
Tags: African Americans, American Education, Anglo-Saxon, cultural bias, diversity, diversity programs, DNA, ethnic bigotry, ethnic diversity, European Americans, Greater Good Magazine, Lisa Leslie
The primary reason diversity programs are unsuccessful is because the element of race is not debunked, but accepted and used as criteria to separate one ethnic group from another. The objective of any diversity program should be to underscore the similarities among all human beings regardless of their ethnic differences. Many diversity program focus primarily on the differences and stereotypical ethnic characteristics which readily separate the group’s one from another rather than characteristics than unify them. The programs attempt to justify the ethnic differences while not exposing the falseness and myth of the concept of race. Thereby maintaining and promoting the Anglo-Saxon myth of superiority. Let us take a closer look at how the concept works its magic using diversity.
Diversity programs, training, workshops, institutes, and other initiatives, from the beginning to the present day have one thing in common—they fail to debunk the false concept of race and by doing so maintain, support, and promote the Anglo-Saxon /European American system of supremacy. The very word diversity when used relative to human beings implies that some human beings represent a standard that other groups do not meet and so they are different and less than the standard group. For whom and to what objective are diversity programs instituted? Bigotry comes to the front the moment so-called target groups are identified. The group that decides who represents the target groups apparently, maintain a position of dominance over all the target groups. Since the nature of the group differences is not stated, according to the race myth, only the Anglo-Saxon can represent the normal human being. Any diversity program that begins with an Us versus Them perspective implies that some biological component accompanies the difference. That being the case, regardless of the format that diversity takes the results will naturally involve a feeling of inferiority by the target group.
Lisa Leslie in a Greater Good Magazine article, “What Makes a Workplace Diversity Program Successful?” (01/21/2020) underscores the fact that many of these programs do not succeed: “…research suggests that these initiatives often don’t work like they’re supposed to.” She added that “For example, studies have found that a variety of diversity initiatives—including evaluating managers based on diversity and inclusion metrics, and diversity networking and affinity groups—can lead to either more or less representation of target groups.”Again, the primary reason many of these programs do not succeed is bigotry is not addressed: the initiatives never debunk race or the false concept of sub-species. If everyone involved in a diversity program is not seen and accepted as belonging to the same species, the program cannot succeed. Leslie offered three reasons why some initiatives do not succeed.
She listed the 1st as Backfiring: “This is when a diversity initiative has an undesirable effect on the intended outcome, like when the program decreases representation or increases discrimination. A likely cause of backfiring is the implicit signal that target groups need help to succeed.”She added: “Because diversity initiatives are supposed to help target group members, some people infer that target group members might not be able to succeed on their own. And this is problematic because it can lead to stereotyping and discrimination.”
Next, she listed Negative spillover: “This is when diversity initiatives have an undesirable effect on something other than the intended outcome. For example, diversity initiatives may result in negative attitudes among non-target group members. The root cause of this reaction may be the signal that targets are likely to succeed in the organization.”
Finally, she listed false progress: “This is when a diversity initiative has the desired effect on the intended outcome—when the diversity numbers improve, so it looks like things are getting better—but that improvement is not accompanied by true underlying change.”
To address these problems, Leslie’s study suggested that the diversity initiative leaders use language and specific messages to influence the attitudes of the initiative participants. Three messages were given: Diversity is good, Diversity is bad, and Diversity is good but also really hard. After employing these messages the participants were surveyed, and the outcome generally mirrored the messages. When the message was positive, some improvement occurred. When it was negative, no improvement occurred. The results of the last message were mixed as expected. So, what is the problem?
When diversity initiatives are introduced regardless of the targeted groups the primary implication is that this group is inferior to the majority group and needs special attention. If and when that special attention is given it can be viewed as an effort to level the playing field. Since Anglo-Saxons and European Americans are conditioned to view themselves as superior to other groups, leveling the playing field would mean destroying their superiority.
Diversity programs for people with obvious physical and mental challenges are generally accepted because they do not represent a threat to the status quo. However, when people that are not identified with the majority are the focus of the program, their success can and often is viewed as a threat to the superiority of the majority. In other words, they are viewed as receiving advantages that come at the expense of the majority. If the disparity between the Us versus Them attitude is not resolved at the start of an initiative, then failure is assured.
Diversity came with the species of Homo sapiens and was not considered a problem until the invention of false sub-species, first called nations and later called races. The myth of Anglo-Saxon/European American supremacy is dependant on that myth. Without the myth, all human beings naturally belong to the same species which our DNA indicates is 99.9%. If any diversity initiative is to be conducted, it should not focus on the ethnic differences that are not biological but the similarities all humans possess. In essence, the biases against targeted people are a matter of choice, not genetics and that should be the first concern addressed or the initiative will fail. Most people prefer to be seen as a part of the group rather than being seen as apart from the group which diversity presently underscores. ������99�S�w
November 24, 2020 at 1:09 am | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, anglo saxons, Bigotry in America, blacks, Brown v Topeka, Constitutional rights, democracy, desegregation, discrimination, education, entitlements, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, identity, integregation, justice, language, Media and Race, Prejudice, protest, public education, Race in America, racism, segregation, skin color, skin complexion, social conditioning, white supremacy, whites | 1 Comment
Tags: Army Alpha & Beta tests, demographics, educators, Homo sapiens, intelligence, John Lewis, politics, social conditioning, technology
By the time school desegregation was instituted the concept of race was well-established in the minds of Americans with African Americans viewed as inferior members of society. For most African American children attending predominantly European American schools, the knowledge of African American history was not available because European American teachers either did not know it, thought it to be of little or no value to their students or avoided teaching it for a variety of other reasons. Prior to the actual start of school desegregation (1954) studies had been conducted to show the differences between the intelligence of African Americans and European Americans with the focus on showing that biological differences accounted for the superiority of the European Americans. One instrument employed to deliver the desired results was the Army’s Alpha and Beta tests which were introduced around 1917. The early results showed that European Americans were the more intelligent group with African Americans the least intelligent, and it was all nature’s doing.
Over the years studies by educators focusing on differences in students based on their ethnicity (race) usually resulted in the findings that coincided with the preconceived notion of European American superiority. Education became a feeding ground for educators as they developed thesis and theories that helped to explain the intellectual superiority of the European Americans. The problem with these studies then and now is that they were conducted with the acceptance of the concept of race as legitimate and valid. Consequently, they were and are flawed. Rather than doing the necessary research relative to the myth of race, many educators never questioned its legitimacy and proceeded to view ethnic groups (blacks and whites) as monoliths.
Today in America many educators still write about the “racial groups” and the differences they represent in a variety of areas. En essence, many educators are perpetuating the myth of race and social superiority and inferiority and passing it along to the future educators. We see this process taking place when we read articles and books dealing with racial issue like diversity, colorblind ideology, social inequalities and racial justice, to mention a few. What is missing from these works and, in deed, the concept of race, is the truth.
Many educators, teachers and scholars alike, are quick to acknowledge that the concept of race is a social invention. However, rather than stating that race should no longer be considered as acceptable, the conversation simply continues as though the fact that the word is an invention means little or nothing. Consequently, we are still seeing the use of the race concept today in studies and other research. Any work that employs the concept of race or any of its derivatives as legitimate is flawed. The concept of race was invented to do primarily two things: the first thing the concept does is to promote the idea of sub-species for Homo sapiens; the second thing is to justify the myth of Anglo-Saxon superiority. These two ideas are interdependent in that they both have to be viewed as legitimate for either one to be acceptable. Both ideas are simply ideas promoted without any facts or evidence scientific or historical. The use of the concept of race as it pertains to skin color or other elements of diversity relative to ethnic groups simply helps to put distance between the primary purposes and the truth.
If educators want to teach their students about race and racism, they must first learn the truth, then acknowledge the truth and then begin the challenge to debunk the concept as myth. Unfortunately, this process is one that few educators are willing to undertake because it means coming to crossroads in their perceptions of themselves, their society and their country. In the past, the challenge has been too great for many educators to undertake because of the pain and suffering associated with loosing one’s old self, the comfort and protection it provided. Whether one wants to admit it, the truth is coming, and it is coming in the forms demographics, technology, and politics.
In years past, if one were to see a mixed-ethnic couple in public, usually a double-take would be in order because that sight would not seem natural, common, or ordinary. Today, in every form of media we witness mix-ethnic couples, families, and groups experiencing life in normal ordinary settings. The double-take is no longer a part of viewing such sights because we are being socially conditioned to accept these occurrences as natural and normal. In addition, we are slowly beginning to see the browning effect of society associated with the changing demographics.
Our concept of time is changing because of the technological developments instituted in not only our society but also the world. We can witness things in real time today, thanks to technology. Many of these developments while providing a variety of social benefits can also provide substance that call for social change. We witnessed what can happen when technology have us witness an injustice taking place in real time and the subsequent reactions to what was witnessed. Technology will continue to improve our awareness of what is going on in society and the world.
Politically, society is changing and the changes are due in a large part to the demographics and technology. The late politician and civil rights leader, John Lewis, reminded us that when we see something that is not right, we must say and do something: “Democracy is not a state. It is an act, and each generation must do its part to help build what we called the Beloved Community, a nation and world society at peace with itself.” If we are to heed his words, then educators must work towards making that community a reality.
For educators today, the onus is on them to realize and recognize that the truth is coming into the light and trying to avoid it or sugar-coat it will no longer be an option. The truth of the myth of race has science and history on its side, the other side has lies, hypocrisy, and deceit. >W�E
October 24, 2020 at 7:08 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, anglo saxons, Bigotry in America, biological races, black inferiority, blacks, democracy, discrimination, DNA, education, entitlements, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, fairness, Human Genome, identity, language, Medical Aparteid, medical profession, Negro, Non-Hispanic white, Prejudice, race, Race in America, racism, skin color, skin complexion, white supremacy, whites | 1 Comment
Tags: black and white, C.C. Moore, Dr. J. M. Sims, Gene Autry, Jewish, Race in America, racial medical myths, racism, Reader's Digest, Sickle cell, Tay-sacks
The story involved two people both experiencing upper respiratory problems when they arrived at the hospital. After examinations of both individuals, one was admitted to the hospital, the other was given a prescription and sent home. Two days later the individual that was sent home returned to the hospital suffering severe breathing problems. The individual was then admitted to the hospital for treatment but died two days later from covid 19; the other individual recovered and was released. For some people the fact that one individual during the initial visit to the hospital was admitted and the other sent home was based on medical findings. The fact is that the individual admitted to the hospital was European American and the individual sent home was African American. Why were they treated differently?
The fact that race is a myth allows it to expand and develop features that never need to be fact-checked because they are part of the myth. For example, the character of Santa Claus did not appear in America until 1823 when the poem , “A Visit from St. Nicholas,” by Clement Clarke Moore, was published in a New York newspaper. Today the poem is known as “Twas the Night Before Christmas.” In this poem Santa has eight reindeer that pulled his sleigh. Then, in 1949, another reindeer , named Rudolph, was introduced to the listening public in a song by Gene Autry. The point is that with myths have no boundaries are necessary because the myths are invented using magic, mystic, and the creative imagination. Belief in some myths and conducting one’s life based on myths can be dangerous for the believer as well as those that interact with the believer.
The myth of race provided many opportunities for some biased people to cause other people to be viewed as non-human being and so justified treating them in inhumane ways. In medicine, for example, Africans and African Americans as well as other people of color are viewed as a monolith and so one individual of color can represent the entire group. For many years Sickle Cell and Tay-sacks diseases were thought to be restricted to African Americans and the Jewish populations respectively. Today we know that information was misleading. These diseases are not restricted to certain ethnic groups. However, some people in the medical still want to hold on to those beliefs which could prove dangerous to some patients when they are treated as a member of an ethnic group rather than as an individual human being.
Far too frequently we read or learn of medical studies that lump subjects into group like blacks and whites. Since the definitions of these groups are not fixed or defined one has to question the findings of these studies relative to their legitimacy. Nonetheless, many of these studies often serve as major influences on how some doctors treat their patients and how the patients respond to the treatment.
The November 2020 issue of Reader’s Digest published a brief article entitled, “Racial Bias In Medical Decision Making,” that underscored some of the problems that can occur with individual is viewed as a representative of an ethnic group and the group is viewed as a monolith. The article began by pointing out that doctors generally rely on medical information developed by the government and other medical organizations in deciding on the type of care their patient should receive. The article noted that “Recent studies show that many of these statistically based analyses are racially biased and can result in Black and Hispanic patients receiving inferior care.”
The article indicated that the New England Journal of Medicine did a study of “13 algorithms used in cardiology, obstetrics, and other specialties. One uses levels of creatinine, a waste product made by muscles, to estimate kidney function.” The study noted that because kidneys remove waste from the body, individuals with less creatinine levels are thought to have better kidney functions than individuals with higher levels. The importance of the false concept of race and the monolithic grouping of people as blacks and whites is underscored: “Because studies have shown that Black (African American) people on average have higher creatinine levels than white (European Americans)people do (perhaps because, as studies have also found, Blacks have higher muscle mass on average), the algorithm “race-corrects” by lowering their level.”
The use of the term “race-correct” is a clear indication of the acceptance of the myth as valid when science itself has proven it is an invented concept. The danger involved in the acceptance and use of the concept is noted in the comment that “Thus, Black people appear to be healthier and are less likely to be referred to a specialist for further care.”Too often medical studies rather than viewing people as individuals, use the concept of race and unscientifically lump people into racial groups that in reality do not exist. The article noted a serious consequence of using that type of data: “The rationale for such adjustments [race-corrected] is based on studies showing correlations between race and certain medical outcomes. But is some cases, other factors that might be the true drivers of the correction, such as socio-economic status, were discounted. In others, the studies have since been proved to be incorrect.”
The conclusion drawn from this article is that all people should become aware of the dangers to your health and well-being when medical authorities employ data based on the concept of race, in other words, blacks and whites. The article noted that caution should be taken when race is used in medical diagnostics because “many commonly used algorithms need to be revised to remove these statistical biases.
American history shows that African Americans and people of color who were not viewed as humans were used as guinea pigs by medical science( See Tuskegee Syphilis study and Dr. J. Marion Sims) to study human medical problems. The concept of race and its many medical myths were used as justification for their use. Until the false concepts of race (subspecies) are debunked, we need to stay on guard for the ways we are placed in harms way.
October 22, 2020 at 2:02 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, Bigotry in America, biological races, black inferiority, blacks, Constitutional rights, democracy, Disrespect, DNA, education, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, fairness, Human Genome, identity, justice, language, Prejudice, public education, race, racism, respect, skin color, skin complexion, social conditioning, teaching race, The U.S. Constitution, tolerance, U. S. Census, white supremacy, whites | Leave a comment
For too many years the concerns of discussing race in a predominately European American setting has been a challenging as well as a vexing problem. The primary reason for educators not becoming involved in such discussions is ignorance of race. Educators or anyone else not familiar with the subject of race should not try to wing through a discussion of it. Lately, the question of how should race be talked about with children, has been of frequent interest. One answer to that question is that race should be introduced as the myth it is, and that it has no basis in science and factual history. Unfortunately, many Americans, especially European Americans (whites) have been condition to accept the myth of race as factual and valid. So, the emotional price to be paid by identifying race as a myth would be great. Rather than talk about race, educators can discuss ethnic groups and the diversity we share as Americans without any reference to biology. First, let us be clear on the myth of race.
The most important thing that the concept of race does is to protect, maintain, and promote the myth of Anglo-Saxon supremacy and dominance over all other peoples. How does that work? The species Homo sapiens includes all human beings on the planet. Science has stated that we humans are all 99.9% alike and because of that fact the possibility of races in the species does not exist. The Anglo-Saxons, however, discovered a way to try and justify their claim of supremacy by inventing the concept of a subspecies of Homo sapiens; these subspecies were called nations and subsequently, races, and were presented as having biological differences from other groups. The Anglo-Saxons viewed themselves as the model group of Homo sapiens, so they set the standards and the concept of normalcy for everyone else.
In addition to inventing the concept of subspecies, each group of humans were said to manifest certain characteristics, such as intelligence, honest, bravery etc…, so that simply by looking at an individual one could apply all elements that matched the individual’s group. Of course, such a belief is illogical, irrational, unreasonable, and unsubstantiated. Two skin colors were introduced to help determine the superior groups from the inferior ones; those colors were black and white. The white skin color represented the superior groups and the darker skin colors represented the inferior groups. Again, this concept lacked any scientific or factual basis; it was all a myth. In spite of the concept’s preposterousness, America accepted and instituted it as valid.
Although the word race became a part of the everyday language, many people were against it use because of its falseness. Rather than use the word race to refer to other people, they suggested the word ethnicity or the phrase, ethnic group, since these terms carried no biological component. Instead of accepting the language change, America decided to confuse the meaning of the word ethnicity and began to use it and race as though they were synonymous. So, how can we introduce ethnicity and diversity without using or referring to race?
When Linnaeus invented the taxonomy system, for the species Homo sapiens he mentioned that there were five varieties of mankind based on geographic and cultural elements. The varieties were not biologically different; they were part of the species. For example, if we were to take a cherry pie and pretend it was a species, like Homo sapiens, we could then cut the pie into many pieces. Each piece would be different, but all pieces would be cherry pie. Scientists would later refer to the varieties of human groups as ethnic groups.
The Anglo-Saxon, however, not did want to let go of their myth and continued to ignore calls to discard the word race. American history records the treatment and experiences African Americans and people of color continue to encounter still today because of society’s acceptance and belief in the myth of race. Educators today can make a difference in replacing the myth of race with the truth. They can explain the origin of the word then move past it by not using it again. The word bias rather than race does a better job of describing the attitudes associated with the treatment and perception of the people of color by the Anglo-Saxons. The word bigotry also clearly attributes the bias of the individuals rather than an anonymous group. Both these words do not carry the implication of biological differences among human beings.
Race and racism is important only if one accepts and believes it. Although America conditioned society to accept and believe that the myth of race was real, common sense and factual evidence readily serves to debunk it. Using the language of race, people do not have to act socially incorrect with indifference to people of color to be a racist, they have only to accept race as valid. If that acceptance leads to them living their lives as racist, then their belief becomes racism, which is a form of superstition. In effect, race is a myth and acceptance and belief in that myth as part of one’s life makes it a superstition. We live with myths and superstitions everyday and know that they can be replaced. How many adults still believe in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy?
Children as well as adults can be taught about ethnic groups and the diversity they bring to society. Just imagine what would have happened in England had not the explorers introduced the white potato from South America or what Italy would be like had the explorers not introduced to them the tomato, also from South America. We know that diversity adds strength and variety to any society, so teachers focusing on the positive values of ethnic differences while underscoring the fact that we are all 99.9% alike should help to explain our minor differences.
The word race is a linguistic trap that simply moves in a circle and invites other illogical, irrational, and non-sense words into existence , words like racial, bi-racial or multi-racial, racism and many others that simply build on the myth. �����w�
September 24, 2020 at 12:44 am | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American Dream, American history, Bible, blacks, Constitutional rights, criminal activity, criminal justice, discrimination, equality, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, fairness, incarceration, justice, justice system, language, law, law enforcement agencies, mass incarceration, Oklahoma, police education & training, police force, police unions, race, racism, respect, social conditioning, social justice system, Tulsa, whites | 1 Comment
Tags: African American, American Justice System, Betty Jo Shelby, Breonna Taylor, current-events, discrimination, equal, equal justice under the law, ethnicity, European Americans, justice, Kentucky, law, law enforcement agencies, Louisville, race, Terence Crutcher, U.S.Courts, white
In 1969, Edwin Starr recorded a popular song that still resonates with us today. The song asked and answered an important question: “War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.” The significant phrase in the question is what is war “good for,” and forces us to place a value on the loss of life and justifying its loss. The answer “absolutely nothing,” can also be the appropriate response to the question what is “equal justice under the law” good for? The phrase is a very popular and often used one when it pertains to the law enforcement establishment. More often than not the phrase is used to protect someone in law enforcement that has been accused of a crime and the system wants to justify the results of the finding by the court, judge, jury or grand jury. Under close examination we discover that the phrase “equal justice under law” is an oxymoron and simply sounds appropriate to a purpose.
The first word in the phrase is “equal” and a mathematics or arithmetic term that deals with fixed elements like numbers. When the word is used relative to human beings, it loses its fitness because no two individuals are or can be equal. Using the term equal suggests that somehow a fixed assessment can be associated with human beings. Unfortunate, that is not the case. For example, in a family of four, the mother, father, and one girl and one boy. The parents can in no way treat them equally simply because one is a male the other female. Their individual needs and wants are different. To treat the equally would mean that every time the girl get a new dress, her brother would receive the same dress or whenever the boy got a new suit, his sister would also receive a new suit. The best human being can hope for is fairness, because equality is impossible. Too often we hear that the law treats everybody equally, but all one has to do is look at the facts of people incarcerated to disprove that statement. We know for a fact that the state of Oklahoma incarcerates more females than any other state in America. Would the females incarcerated in Oklahoma be treated equally in other states? We cannot answer that question because equal has no fixed definition.
The term “justice” is as elusive as equal when one attempts to associate a fixed definition to its applications. Justice in one state is not the same justice in all the other states. Take, for example, the use of marijuana and the fact that in some states it is legal while in other states people go to prison for mere possession. The word justice is often used as an excuse or justification for a questionable action that challenges common sense and logic. For example, many juries and grand juries find that police officers are justified in shooting and killing unarmed individuals, especially people of color when videos and eyewitnesses reveal the contrary. The local criminal justice authorities in Louisville, Kentucky determined that only one of the officers that fired more than twenty rounds into Breonna Taylor’s apartment where she was struck numerous times and died was found to have committed a crime, and that crime had nothing to do with Breonna. So, one wonders just what does justice means when it defies logic and common knowledge?
The last phrase, “under the law,” is closely associated with the word justice in that too many questions are left unanswered relative to the law. In my childhood days when an argument presented a challenge to any one of use we could always win the argument by using the phrase “it’s in the Bible.” In other words, because it was in the Bible, it was the law and the final word. Unfortunately, throughout the history of America the law has been used to control, discriminate, punish, abuse and kill its citizens, especially those of color. More often than not, we are conditioned to accept the laws with the understanding that they will be administered fairly. One has to ask the question how can equal justice under the law be available when the people who have the responsibility to uphold the law also use their own judgment to determine what laws to apply? The attorney general in Louisville commented that the officers who fired the more than twenty shots at Taylor could not be charged with murder because there was no law that applied to their actions. So, does that mean that somehow no one can be held accountable for the death of Breonna? The actions of the officers firing their weapons were said to be justified because Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, fired the first shot, so the officers had a right to protect themselves. The fact remains that Breonna is dead and her death was the result of bullets shot into her body. The criminal justice agency of Louisville has yet to mention the death or cause of Breonna’s death as though it did not happen.
Facts and the truth are usually the elements that form the basis of most legal decisions, but sometime they seem to get in the way of the law. The police officer, Betty Shelby, who shot Terence Crutcher in the back while he was unarmed with both hands held above his head some ten feet or more in front of her was acquitted of a crime under the law. She later was allowed by Tulsa officials to teach a class in how officers can avoid charges when they shoot someone and what to do when they are bothered by anti-police groups. When the family of Crutcher complained to the law enforcement agency about Shelby teaching the class, they were ignored.
The case of Breonna Taylor seems to underscore the lack of meaning for the phrase “equal protection under the law” except when it involves a member of law enforcement. Then, it appears that the phrase is used to protect only those whose job it is to serve and protect others. So, when it comes to citizens of color, the phrase is good for absolutely nothing.
Next Page »
americasraceproblem
America's Race Problem 