Englteachted:

Chinese racism is innocent how? Because they have some magical right to be? 

dongbeiren:

Chinese racism can sometimes be excused due to ignorance when people point and stare at the laowai but how about more active forms of racism and discrimination like charging higher prices, cursing, catcalling, and blaming foreigners for China's problems? How about the masses who want to invade Japan and cheer when people die in a typhoon? How about government policies that prevent people on marriage visas from working and make permanent residency nearly impossible? These behaviors and policies are not innocent.

mattsm84:

Your average Tibetian or Xinjiang ren might disagree with that statement. There are two types of racism. Personal biases based on race, which the guy you met had, and institutional ones. China has a serious, serious problem with the later because it takes a European-like attitude towards monoculturalism, here that of the Han majority, and projects it onto a country with 56 native ethnicities. Its incredibly harmful. I mean, holy shit friend, people die. Say what you want about the United States, but there isn't a large scale military occupation of the south west that exists for the sole purpose of projecting white culture onto cultural minorities. That is exactly the situation in the western provinces of China at this very instant.

Oh, and sorry you met a jerk.

DrMonkey:

My redneck uncle who never left his countryside hole is making racist comments : he is white, so it's not innocent. But my Chinese neighbor making racist comment, it's innocence ?!

jetfire9000:

This is a clear case of bias in the highest of magnitude.  I can't possibly agree with this comment. 

Eorthisio:

I have to disagree, racism is racism, no matter where it comes from and who it is aimed at. I have been called "white ghost" quite a few times in China, I answered with "yellow ghost" in Mandarin, does this makes me more racist than Chinese people who first made a racist comment? I don't think so, what should I have done? Smile and say "Thank you"? LOL you don't want me to open my butt hole for you in addition to prove that I am not racist..

ScotsAlan:

I understand what you are saying Hulk. It's the sort of joke I would make.

But.... I lack the words to get my point across

I honesty cant believe I heard what someone said. And yeah, he was American.

Is America a breeding ground for radical racists? What do you do? Make them so poor their only option is the army, Then you chuck them out because they are mad.

Come on Hulk. Stop sending these nutters over. Put them in a hospital. Give them care.

ScotsAlan:

Hulk. I heard a guy say this.  "The niggers should fuck off back to Africa. America is white"

"The Mulims should fuck off to Muslim land, And then we will nuke the fuckers.

ScotsAlan:

And this guy is an English teacher. Come on. WTF is America doing to it's people?  It seems your biggest export at the moment is raving racist maniacs.

Hulk:

America is full of idiots, sadly. Our people are very uneducated and ignorant in general. It's only going to get worse. And then we'll implode.

Quite simply, America's time is pretty much over. We've turned into a police state full of idiots, and the government spies on everything we do. Lately, cops have been shooting anyone they feel like, beating people, etc. And they're mostly getting away with it until video evidence surfaces. In some cases, the cops still get away with it, and they get a paid vacation alongside it.

jetfire9000:

Scots Alan "lacks the words" to express his point because it is hard to rationalize emotion.  His reaction to racism from certain "expats" has perhaps hit all his buttons in a way that's never been done before, which is why he can't put his feelings into words.

 This type of racism isn't unknown to China, however. So why is it that this scenario has struck him in such a different manner?  There are several possible answers:  Scots has shown a positive bias towards China throughout several of his postings - while maintaining a highly negative narrative for the West. Some of them are downright laughable - such as purporting that the CIA is behind the CFTU scam!   Like ... what?   He has stated that he considers himself a "migrant," which makes sense that he may be desperately trying to see China in is best possible light, which would conceal a lot of things (there is good, but being over positive makes you Hadley.) In terms of racism, I don't believe that Scots has made a rational judgment.

The other possibility is that perhaps Scots hasn't noticed racism here. It's a lot easier to digest an exchange in English than hear what the locals nearby are saying among themselves. So I offer the face saving plee for ignorance to make up for this atrocity in rationale which is sort of out of character for him.

Having a great disdain for one side over the other makes judgment about either side heavily susceptible to bias. The truth is that any kind of racism is contemptible. We cannot make the  ridiculous claim that any kind of racism is "innocent!" 

gouxiong:

Dear Samsara,

You describe yourself as 'culture-ist'.

Can you pls let me know what do you mean by this? Does it include your strong believe that your cultural (whatever it is), your nation or country culture, is superior to the other ones? A bit in the sense of nationalist believes his/her nations is superior to all others and racist believes his/her race is superior to all other races?

Or you mean something else?

BobC:

Oh gouxiong I do tire of your post.  Once you again it seems you use 'tu quoquo'.  Maybe not as clear as your other post usually are but pretty close.  It does hurt my brain.   So many times I have wanted to write this but I finally will.  Let me add the definition to help,

 "logical fallacy that intends to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position"

or in other words appeal to hypocrisy.

So let plays with words shall we?  

What would you say I am if I like cultures?  All kinds of cultures...?  A culturist?  What about if I only like one culture? A culturist?

Now let’s use that same line of logic but for nations.  I for some reason love nations, the idea of nation states and their division of humans into societies based on ethnicity, culture, language, etc. etc.,  is astounding.  So again would I not be a nationalist?  Which can mean the same thing as one person loving/liking their nation?

So in the sense that samsara said it here, it does sound like he is acting like a racist if we wish to switch the term racist and culturist. Liking one but not the other.   However, one is based on a physical attribute and the other on human behavior.  We can see cultures change however physical skin color cannot unless there is a mixing of a sort.  In addition, since this is China let’s use Chinese culture as an example shall we?  Has there culture been homogenous for the past 2000 years?  Doesn’t look like it based on history.  The current manifestation is quite different than other periods.  As well as those periods changing as well (e.g., Tang dynasty), and even now we see a changing of sorts.

Now if we take China’s recent rhetoric on western ideas and values, I guess my dialogue does not have much weight as I am trying to use logic and that is obviously a western construct as well as other things that have universal applications.  China must be thought of in terms of Chinese thought, wouldn’t that fit perfectly into post-modernism?  Therefore, logic is something devised to usurp Chinese thought and cannot be used in regards to internal Chinese issues and dialogues.  So the whole conversation is mute.

Samsara:

Dear Gouxiong,

I think people should be judged on their behaviour and ideas.

If someone tends to hack up phlegm in public, or spit food on the table and floor in restaurants, I will find their company embarrassing and distasteful. My assessment isn’t based on whether they are Chinese.

If someone only expresses prescribed opinions and has not developed their own ideas about anything, they are unlikely to maintain my interest as a conversation partner. Their genetic makeup is irrelevant.

If someone gets excited at the thought of great numbers of other types of people getting wiped off the face of the planet by natural disasters or nuclear weapons, fuck them.

I have certain standards of behaviour which I think are reasonable. You may disagree with the specifics, or argue that my criteria are Western-centric, or declare that the merits of all cultures are different but equal (vomit). But you’d be hard-pressed to argue that Chinese people’s standards of social behaviour or human decency are on par with Australians’.

My assessment of a culture is based on what sort of people it produces, and what behaviour and ideas are tolerated, taught or encouraged by that culture.

Chinese people are not born with retarded hatred towards Japanese people. That has to be put there. Similarly, if people from a particular Australian subculture think that “rag-heads” need to be “nuked”, I will consider the cultural environment which spawned such attitudes "inferior".

Do I think Australian culture is superior to Chinese culture? Yes. Here are a few reasons why:

Because Australians are polite to each other (except bogans). Because if my phone falls out of my pocket in a busy street, I and my phone will be reunited within a few seconds. Because if I fall off my bike, the nearest several people will come and see if I’m OK (and I won’t then feign a leg injury and ask for compensation). Because if I pass out after getting off the subway, I will wake up in hospital, not in heaven.

Because I’ve never seen domestic violence in public in Australia. Because when I see a case of child imprisonment/torture/rape on TV I don’t feel impassive.

Because – despite Australia fighting against Japan in World War II – if a primary school student says that “Japanese people are pigs” they will not get a gold star and unanimous praise and back pats. In fact, their parents will get a rather “concerned” phone call, and people will start talking about where such filthy ideas came from.

Because Australians don’t perceive the world as fundamentally consisting of “Australia” and “who cares”. Because my Australian friends read books, do research, and want to know things. Because the Australians I know can express diverse, interesting opinions on any topic. Because no Australian man I have ever met would prohibit his partner from pursuing a Master’s Degree, on the basis that it would challenge his manhood and authority.

And because Australia has Vegemite.

Are a proportion of Australian people assholes? YES. But does Australian society encourage lying, cheating, opportunism, crass displays of wealth, ignorance, pushiness, unhygienic behaviour, or complete disregard towards others? NO.

You seem to be implying that I am nationalistic, and that I believe my nation (and its culture) is superior because it is the nation I am from.

Sorry, but I’m not nationalistic. I don’t support Australia in international disputes. I don’t get enraged when a country’s government disagrees with the Australian government. I don’t support Australia’s military involvement in the Middle East. I don’t think breaking out an Australian flag to get across a political message makes someone a patriot (it is more likely to indicate they are a racist/xenophobe/dimwit). If I heard a song with the lyrics "I love you Australia", I would vomit on the nearest person's face.

I’ve never supported genocide against Australia’s former adversaries in war. When I see an Australian battleship on TV I don’t get an erection. I am more interested in the reality of my country's history than in praising my ancestors for being noble and virtuous. If someone draws my attention to any sociological problem that I hadn’t considered, I become very interested in their opinion, rather than immediately thinking “fuck you" and telling them they don’t understand Australian culture because they are foreign.

And on top of all that, I don’t think Australia is the “greatest god damn nation on earth”. That award probably goes to New Zealand or one of the Scandinavian nations. I don’t feel like a traitor for saying so, because those countries have better national policies.

I’m very glad I was born in Australia, because it is amongst the best countries to be born in (in terms of the advantages one has as a human).

Australia (because of its policies and social climate) has higher standards of EVERYTHING than China. That’s culture-ism for you.

gouxiong:

Dear BobC,

I cannot and also do not have an ambition to stop you for being tired if a simple question is asked. 

And question is no accusation and I also never said that anybody in here is a racist (this I do not know) - however I wrote that a lot of posts (including yours) bears very strong 'superiority feeling'.

gouxiong:

Dear Samsara,

Now I understand what you mean by calling yourself  'culturist'. 

You are simply convinced that your culture is superior to many other cultures in the world with probably few exceptions you mentioned.

I do not think there are better and worse cultures however I am convinced there are better and worse people. 

In the past there were people coming to my country, believing their culture is superior to ours and they did no good. I am not accusing you from being violent or any bad intention. I just have a natural mistrust - may be aversion (?) - to the people who are voluntarily coming to the foreign country and saying they are better than the majority of the people living in that country.

But you going anywhere is luckily none of my business so I let it go with a light heart.

RiriRiri:

Comments also count for your 50 cents right?

dongbeiren:

Beautifully written reply from Samsara to gouxiong - @gouxiong I completely get where you're coming from. I would strongly recommend that people who believe in the superiority of their culture avoid living in China or anywhere outside of their home country for that matter. My guess is that Samsara, myself and many other critics of China on this forum came to China with on open mind and a genuine eagerness to experience a new culture. There are cultural situations where using terms "better" and "worse" are entirely subjective and unfair but there ARE behaviors that are objectively abhorrent. So taking your cultural relativism to the extreme justifies behavior that is unsanitary, inefficient and dishonest. Some of us who have been in China for awhile have learned first hand that the average Chinese person exhibits selfishness, dishonesty and vulgarity more than the average westerner. I get your relativism to a certain extent. Yes, Chinese culture is less direct and that can explain dishonesty in some cases but there are many others when the incessant lying destroys people's lives and fractures the fabric of the whole society, leading to widespread mistrust everywhere. It's great to keep your mind open but being open minded doesn't always mean being accepting of everything around you. 

BobC:

Dear Gouxiong,

I find many of your post to be one of cultural relativism, hence my post-modernist claim, which seems to shut down any discussion of what is brought up in regards to differences or critiques that users post.  I can understand the issue of trying to bring understanding (cultural equivalency) to the table.   However too much of reads like you try to discredit discussion because of ‘tu quoquo’.   Hence my reply. 

And superiority feelings? Care to elaborate?

Regards

Samsara:

@ Gouxiong

"I do not think there are better and worse cultures however I do think there are better and worse people."

So is a culture that encourages dishonesty, greed, selfishness, opportunism, inconsiderate behaviour and crass displays of wealth EQUAL to a culture that encourages honesty, empathy and integrity?

Is a culture that produces oodles of original art, literature, music and film EQUAL to one where curiosity and creativity are stunted in childhood and freedom of expression frowned upon?

Is a culture that endorses genital mutilation, child brides, and capital punishment for gay people equal to a culture that DOESN'T?
 

Or are you just saying words that you think sound generous, but in fact only make sense if you don't contemplate the reality that some people live in?

icnif77:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-justice-department-report-on-ferguson-police-an-indictment-of-american-capitalism/5435313

The US Justice Department released a report on Wednesday documenting systematic and wanton brutality, violence and outright criminality on the part of police in Ferguson, Missouri, carried out in violation of the legally protected constitutional rights of the city’s population.

The report found that the Ferguson police—the department responsible for the killing of unarmed teenager Michael Brown in August—engaged in “stops without reasonable suspicion and arrests without probable cause in violation of the Fourth Amendment; infringement on free expression, as well as retaliation for protected expression, in violation of the First Amendment; and excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment.”

The report documented numerous examples of egregious abuse at the hands of the police. It noted that in one incident, police sicced a dog on a fourteen-year-old boy, then “struck him while he was on the ground, one of them putting a boot on the side of his head.” The officers were “laughing about the incident afterward.”

The report also found that the city operates what one judge likened to a “debtors’ prison,” issuing vast numbers of arrest warrants and throwing the poor in jail in order to force them to pay traffic tickets. It notes that, for the city’s poor and low-income residents, “Minor offenses can generate crippling debts, result in jail time because of an inability to pay, and result in the loss of a driver’s license, employment, or housing.”

The conditions described are a devastating indictment of the American economic and political system. The actions of the police in America are much more in line with what would be expected in an economically backward dictatorship than a major industrial power, one that declares itself to be a role model of democratic rule for the whole world.

dokken:

btw scotsalan that was a joke im scottish too.

at icnif. you got on the crackpipe first thing this morning. the people in ferguson who protested were deadbeats who take little responsibility for their own lives. its difficult to say if the police officer was justified in shooting the black man or not because we werent there but the black guy was a thug. look at the video where he steals and pushes the store owner aside.

if you re going to post mindless anti american conspiracy theorist crap at least be original enough not to copy and paste it. you seem like a nice guy but i don't share your view of america

icnif77:

'You Scottish all have skirts in the drawer'. Isn't that 'fetish'?

I wasn't sure of your reply this morning. I guessed, you're 'merican.

I can't write long replies! I guess, because of the 'crack' (on my underwear), so I'm 'confined' to c&p.

Article I got out doesn't talk about Ferg. only. It's an article on U-SS-A society. It wouldn't 'survive', if posted as my reply.'add-it': 'You're sure, police must fire (at least) 6 bullets, to prevent crime/catch ONE suspect'? If 'no', what is the meaning of 'justified' in proper Englo?'

'add-it'': 'It's not my view! I can't write that nice. I'm not original, I c&p. Does that make sense? however....I agree with the article.'

dokken:

Why obsessed about somebody else's country. You got an inferiorty complex?

icnif77:

Yes, my feet are flat. China isn't 'our' country, same as USA isn't mine, buTT..I lived there most of my life. 

dokken:

Didn't think you could answer that.

dokken:

Most criminals who fight an armed police officer and win then go onto kill the officer with his own gun. So yes as a last resort it may have been justified.

icnif77:

Now, I don't understand you: 'criminal will rob& kill other persons with only two bullets in his body?'

Let's stop here, because we're going 'off-the-track': ''imagine, you're cop, who emptied his gun on a suspect, who was on the floor after 2nd bullet hit him. Let's say, he was on the floor after 4th bullet got him. How would you be justified to shot two more bullets?

Are you afraid of your own shade at night? If 'yes', why are you a cop? Shouldn't cop after he emptied his gun, start his car, and run over the suspect on the floor few times, just to 'make it sure other people are safe'?'' 

mattsm84:

There is a point to be made about Ferguson, but incif77 is certainly not the person to be making it. Do me a favor and get off my side on this one.

icnif77:

That is an outright execution! It doesn't make difference, even if you read 'Die Groot Krokodile's' Law books from 1970.

dokken:

I agree it was a lot of shots. If the policeman was in fear of his life and the suspect was a big man full of adrenaline, it might take more than two shots to put him down. Forensic report shows he wasn't shot on the ground. What are you own about. Now take your anti american copy and paste crap and put it up your turdistan ass, or whatever crappy country you originate from.

icnif77:

Anti American c&p? What about poor black kid? To whom he belongs? Can you see any racist around?! Mirror?

I'm happy, I'm not 'merican, and I've never really wanted to be.

My ass has a 'crack', buTT...it's 'one-way only' (for your ref.).

Now, don't ask me which one!

'A census taker once tried to test me. I ate his liver with some fava beans, and nice Chianti....'

mattsm84:

Yea, this is why you shouldn't advocate for things that real people actually believe. Your reputation as a troll on the forum precedes you and so when you bring something up that might be valid people just assume that you're doing it to score points, and be a troll. And lets be honest, Dokken isn't wrong in assuming that you're just in it to bash the United States. I have a really hard time believing that you're that invested in American municipal politics, or are overly concerned with any segment of the American population. As I said, get off my side on this one and get back to your usual fantasies. The outright collapse of the Russian economy doesn't mean that you can't make a lot of stupid noise about the rise of a BRICS alternative to the dollar. I know you can do it, you're the most ridiculous troll I've ever met, and if you dig deep inside yourself I'm sure you have just tons of blinding stupid copy/pasta spam left in you.

Now Dokken, as I wrote earlier, this is actually a serious issue in the United States. After the civil war, we had period of time called reconstruction where in the federal government, and really the US military, occupied and administrated the American south. As this period progressed the former Confederate states were slowly allowed to reenter the Union as States rather than occupied territories, and that meant they were allowed to have elections again, although they had to be tightly monitored by the Federal government and the military which former Confederates were barred from participating in. These former slave states then started to elect slave born governors, judges, senators, congressmen, police department heads, mayors, prosecutors, city councilmen ect. As reconstruction came to an end the former Confederates looked to reassert their control over state and civil politics. To do this they created the Klan and embarked upon a very successful terror campaigned designed to put these offices back into white hands and keep them there. And its kind of stayed that way since, even though the Klan is nowhere near as powerful as it once was, and we've had a civil rights movement that has been chipping away at it for half a century. So we need to keep that in mind when looking at the Ferguson, which is 2/3 black but policed by a department which is 90% white and has an arrest rate which is 93% black. It's much more credible to me then that the protestors and rioters are incredibly upset that they have no civil or state organization that can properly investigate instances of police brutality. So they riot because they feel no reason to place faith in the system. And the way that McCoulloch handled the indictment and the newly released federal report on the Ferguson PD validates those concerns.

icnif77:

We're switching subject, are we? I shouldn't black-end last part of the Global Research post!

'....devastating indictment of the American economic and political system...'

I'm thinking, could J. Leno make something of eChina posts on this thread.

dokken:

the police department will be white because they are not able to get enough black candidates for the police force. to join the poilce force you need to have no criminal record, have no more than one relative that has committed an offense and have a fair IQ.the residents of ferguson wont meet these requirements. not racist just truth.

many migrants have gone to americica with nothing and ended up doing well. victim card just dosent work anymore

icnif77:

Somebody's (not mine!!) fantasy - USA from EU perspective:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-08/europe-morally-bankrupt-union

Submitted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer of the Automatic Earth

Europe, The Morally Bankrupt Union

The European Union is busy accomplishing something truly extraordinary: it is fast becoming such a spectacular failure that people don’t even recognize it as one. People have no idea, they just think: this can’t possibly be true, and they continue with their day. They should think again. Because the Grand European Failure is bound to lead to real life consequences soon, and they’ll be devastating. The union that was supposed to put an end to all fighting across the continent, is about to be the fuse that sets off a range of battles.

To its east, the EU is involved in a braindead attempt at further expansion – it has only one idea when it comes to size: bigger is always better -, an attempt that is proving to be such a disaster that heads will roll in the Brussels corridors no matter what. Europe has joined the US and NATO very enthusiastically in creating not just a failed state, but a veritable imitation of Hiroshima, in Ukraine, right on its own borders. The consequences of this will haunt the EU (or if it doesn’t last, which is highly plausible, its former members) not just for weeks or months or years, but for many decades.

The carefully re-crafted relationship with Russia, which took 25 years to build, was destroyed again in hardly over a year, something for which Angela Merkel deserves so much blame it may well end up being her main political legacy. Vladimir Putin, and Russia as a nation, will not easily forget the humiliation the west has thrown at them, the accusations, the innuendo, the attempts to draw them into a war they never wanted and in which they see no advantage for any party involved.

That US warmongers would try and set this up, is something Moscow has long known and expected; that Merkel would stand side by side with the likes of John McCain and Victoria Nuland is seen as a deep if not ultimate betrayal between neighbors and friends. Russia will present Germany with the bill when it feels the time is right. Obviously, all other EU countries that have behaved in the insane ways they have over the past year will receive that same bill, or worse.

To be sure, this week we’ve seen the first protest voices from Germany regarding NATO’s vacuous attempts to draw Russia into the battlefields of Ukraine. But those voices are years too late. They can’t undo the damage already done. They may keep American weapons from reaching Kiev – and even that’s a big maybe -, but they can’t bring back either the lives of the victims, the Ukrainian economy or the trust lost between east and west.

To its south, the EU faces perhaps its most shameful -or should that be ‘shameless’? – problem, because it doesn’t do anything about it: the thousands of migrants who try to cross the Mediterranean to get to Europe but far too often perish in the process.

The Italians spend themselves poor, trying to save as many migrants as they can (170,000 last year!), and there are private citizens – Americans even – pouring in millions of dollars, but the EU itself has zero comprehensive policy as people keep dying on its doorstep all the time. The official line out of Brussels is that the EU polices only the European coastline, but the drownings mostly take place off the Lybian coast. At least Italy and others do sail there to alleviate the human misery.

And now the problem threatens to expand into a whole new and additional dimension, with Muslim extremists like ISIS set to travel alongside the migrants to gain entry into Europe with the aim of launching terror attacks. Having turned a blind eye to the issue for years, Europe will now find itself woefully unprepared for this new development. Still, expect more bluster and brute force where there was never any reason or need for it. That the EU’s MO today.

It’s not just in the south either that migrant problems are rampant: the Ukraine is a hotbed migrant route that Europe has lost control over for obvious reasons, and there have for example been thousands of African refugees camping out in the French port of Calais for what feels like forever, desperate to make it to Britain (I know, God knows why..).

To its west, the EU has Britain, which by the time it gets to vote on Europe may well have its belly so full of Brussels that no scare campaign helps anymore. Then Britain will make a sharp turn right, as many other countries will. Which is exclusively due to the EU, and to all the domestic politicians across the entire spectrum who are so blind to the failings of the Union that the only option voters have if they want out is to choose right extremism.

To its north, the EU doesn’t seem to have much to worry about right now, but don’t you worry: they’ll think of something. Count for instance on Brussels to join Denmark in its Arctic land claims, and offend Moscow some more while they’re at it.

But the biggest failure is not even in politics outside of its own territory. The union rots from within. Which starts with its moral bankruptcy, obviously. If you allow yourself to be an active accomplice in the death of over 6000 East Ukrainians, and you simply look away as thousands of migrants die in the seas off your shores, it should not be surprising that you just as easily allow for a humanitarian crisis, like the one in Greece, to develop within your own borders. It comes with the territory, so to speak.

And make no mistake: this absence of moral values is something Europe in its present form will never be able to claim back. Never. The EU has shown itself to be a gross moral failure, and that’s it: the experiment is over. They can’t come back in 10 or 20 years and say: now we want it back, we’re different now. You’d need to have a whole new union, new rules and principles, and new leadership.

It’s like the US, which once (post WW) had an enormous moral high ground in the world to walk on, and it’s completely gone. Nobody trusts anything America says anymore. America has lost its place in the world as guardian of freedom and democracy, and so has Europe. All they can do now to exert influence is to engage in political scheming and military sabre rattling. Everything else is gone.

What will undo Europe from within is its economic policies. Which are strongly linked to the same moral values issue: inside a union, you cannot let thousands of people go without food and health care while others, a few hundred miles away, drive new Mercs and Beamers over a brand new Autobahn. That’s not a union. That’s a feudal society. And those don’t hold.

In practical terms: Mario Draghi will launch ECB Q€ this month, and it will be as dismal a failure as the entire eurozone project. Because the ECB will need to drop interest rates into very negative territory to keep the ship afloat a little longer, and because Draghi won’t find the sovereign bonds he wants to buy, available in the market.

If Draghi acted in the interest of the entire eurozone and all its citizens, he’d be busy restructuring bank debt in Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, all over the eurozone, instead of playing these monopoly money games. But Draghi’s only pumping more ‘wealth’ into the broke banking system, €1.1 trillion more, to be specific.

Eventually, this refusal to restructure a a bankrupt system will bring bail-ins like the one playing out in Austria right now, closer, across the currency zone (though mostly not before 2016). And by the time that process spreads to ever more banks, which is inevitable, it will have consequences Draghi cannot oversee. And they’ll be of his own making. If he just did his work today, and forced banks to get healthy or close down, it wouldn’t end nearly as messy and chaotic.

Europe’s leaders across all of its institutions are completely lost, whether it comes to intelligence, morals or simple decency. They’re all too willing to trample upon their own people in order to have access to power. And that can only lead to more misery.

Stick a fork in their ass and turn them over. They’re done.

'add-it':

The crimes of NATO are legion but usually ignored by the free and fair press of the West. Here is but one example. And let's not forget the complete destruction of Libya for humane purposes:

Heroin production in Afghanistan increased 40 times since NATO began its ‘War on Terror’ in 2001, the head of Russia’s Federal Drug Control Service stated, adding that more than 1 million people have died from Afghan heroin since then.

“Afghan heroin has killed more than 1 million people worldwide since the ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’ began and over a trillion dollars has been invested into transnational organized crime from drug sales,”Viktor Ivanov said at the conference on the drug situation in Afghanistan.

http://rt.com/news/afghanistan-heroin-production-increased-266/

Heroin Deaths in the U.S. Have Doubled in 2 Years Oct 3, 2014

http://time.com/3460809/heroin-death-overdose/

NATO War Crimes in Libya

Although the rationale of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) for entry into Libyan conflict invoked humanitarian principles, the results have proven far from humane. In July 2011, NATO aircraft bombed Libya’s main water supply facility, which provided water to approximately 70 percent of the nation’s population. And, in a failed attempt to appear unbiased and objective, the BBC has revealed, almost a year after the information was relayed by independent media, that British Special Forces played a key role in steering and supervising Libya’s “freedom fighters” to victory.

http://www.projectcensored.org/8-nato-war-crimes-in-libya/

mattsm84:

So the people that live in Ferguson are stupid, criminal, and black. And that's not racist at all. Riiiiiight...

Black people don't join police departments because they don't feel the police represent their interests. Here are some examples of why from the government report on the Ferguson PD. From http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/04/politics/ferguson-justice-report-shocking/

"One woman has paid $550 on what was original a $151 fine for two parking tickets -- and, more than seven years later, she still owes $541."

"The police also let dogs loose on residents, sometimes without warning...One 14-year-old African-American boy said he was waiting for his friends at a house, unarmed, when police released a dog that bit his ankle, thigh and arm"

"An African-American man was cooling off in his car after playing basketball in a public park in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2012 when a police officer approached him and accused him of being a pedophile."

And when the man refused to let officers search his car...

"The officer arrested the man at gunpoint, slapped him with eight charges, including for not wearing a seat belt, despite the fact that he was sitting in a parked car. The officer also cited him for "making a false declaration" because he gave his name as 'Mike' instead of 'Michael.'"

"Part of that bias came across in emails shared around by police and court officials:

•  
• A November 2008 email read in part that President Barack Obama wouldn't likely be president for long because "what black man holds a steady job for four years." And then in April 2011, another email depicted Obama as a chimpanzee.
• Another email joked that African-American women should use abortion to control crime.
•  
• May 2011 email: "An African-American woman in New Orleans was admitted into the hospital for a pregnancy termination. Two weeks later she received a check for $3,000. She phoned the hospital to ask who it was from. The hospital said: 'Crimestoppers.'"
•  
• A March 2010 email mockingly read: "I be so glad that dis be my last child support payment!" Month after month, year after year, all dose payments!"
•  
• October 2011: An email included a photo of a group of topless, dancing black women, seemingly in Africa, with the caption: "Michelle Obama's High School Reunion."
•  
• A December 2011 email included jokes playing on offensive Muslim stereotypes"

No wonder there is no public trust.

"victim card just dosent work anymore"

No trivializing the real issues people have with the police with dismissals of false victimization and casual racism doesn't work anymore. The truth has been documented by the DOJ report.

mattsm84:

Attaboy! Hop back up on that sheep, call it a horse, and ride'em, you mentally unhinged cowboy!

mattsm84:

Oh, and interesting side note. You can be barred from joining police departments for scoring too well on their intelligence diagnostic.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/09/nyregion/metro-news-briefs-connecticut-judge-rules-that-police-can-bar-high-iq-scores.html

BobC:

First icniff77 please stop quoting globalresearch.ca that is a horrible website.  I use to be all over it back in 07-09 but after a while it is just the same stuff, none of the big conspiracies come true.  You get the same writers writing about the same issues of a global elite controlling the world through covert means! UH-OH better get Sherlock Holmes in here to bust up the illuminati.  The whites and the JEWS are at it a AGAIN! A better website for world news I found about the US is watchingamerica.com.  Also they are always looking for volunteers to do translation work.  It is newspapers from around the world and what they write about the US.  It is kind of a nice litmus test of what is coming out of those countries.  You can see which ones are supportive or not and for what reasons.  Usually papers have slants and you can see their slant.

For mattsm84 and dokken I think you both bring up valid points.  For Mattsm84 it sounds like you have be reading some Howard Zinn.  The societal issues in the US are pretty bad and as dokken points out there are standards which are required to get hired, hence affirmative action and then subsequent backlash.  However that doesn’t fix what is a socio-economic problem.  Yes, right after the civil war you saw lots of political participation up until 1870 and 1880 but all pretty much disappeared by the turn of the century.  In the US we like to use the rhetoric that we want the best for the job no matter their skin color (you know because of money and capitalism, efficiency and all that) but does that happen? I say no but that’s another story, and what about police who become desensitized because of the crime they keep seeing happening in poor (insert color) neighborhoods.  Also interesting stuff to read is teachers working in impoverished areas.  The culture they write has become self-defeating.  The teachers describe how certain ethnic groups see academic success as acting “white”. Look at the Boondock cartoon with the MLK Jr’s speech episode “Return of the King” as well to see issues that I think are prevalent.  So are policemen of the same socio-economic background going to help their precincts better then more “qualified” (based on some standard) policemen who may not be the same ethnic group?  Well when whitey shoots blacky it doesn’t seem that way, but when it is people of the same ‘color’ then it is ok, or is it?  Met quite a few Uncle Tom’s here in China.  But it would be nice to look at this through a none race lense and see what we could see.  Like what are the economic issues, what is going on in that area politically?  Who is the mayor or state/federal congress representative?  There are many poor areas in the US and usually lower socio-economic areas have higher crime, or should say blue-collar crime which requires police and hence what the media focuses on. 

It is interesting that police brutality is getting more of a spotlight and not just based on race but on their actions!  Maybe police and their function/role in society needs to be re-evaluated.  Also would be nice to see harsher penalties for white-collar crimes.

icnif77:

So the people that live in Ferguson are stupid, criminal, and black. And that's not racist at all. Riiiiiight..

Point of article is 'society made them stupid, poor, criminal....'.

I see that from your replies also. Cop is there to protect! But, because 'I'm dealing with poor, black, criminal and what not, I'll empty my gun chamber justifiable.

Acquittal of cop is PR, but is wrong for minorities. US society is in '1970 S. Africa's' world.

mattsm84:

Oh eat a fucking big bag of dicks. That last line was ridiculous hyperbolic bullshit. Get off my side you bomb throwing moron.

icnif77:

Brave you are on anon board from your office in Chicago. Don't tell me, it's attached to McD?

You must always follow prescriptions. I told you that many times. Please, comply.

mattsm84:

Brave you are to anonymously what you do on here. People here hate you. That's not an exaggeration.

icnif77:

Did you know, 'hate' makes you look older? It causes (variations of) stomach acid, too! I never hate!

BuTT...why do you think, they (if) hate me? What did I do? I can't write in proper Englo. You (all) behave like I wrote everything. I just c&p.

OK, I should include 'author of c&p'. Point taken!

icnif77:

You got an inferiorty complex?

This sentence was written by Yank! 'Scottish' Yank! How's my English?

dokken:

it sucks

icnif77:

Woow, you're losing it. You sure are a Yank-man!

Brave man on anon Internet board. Now, take a chewing gum out of your mouth.

mattsm84:

Incif77, you are an idiot.

Englteachted:

Yeah I wonder why African countries aren't thriving? I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with the past. I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with the past and present meddling from European countries, America and Russia. 

ambivalentmace:

 i spent 8 years on the continent, bauxite in guinea to supply aluminum for 500 years, wild cashews growing everywhere not exported, pineapple that tasted better than hawaii never exported, the leaders like the power and dont want a middle class and rob the populations, the bribes i saw paid to conte, taylor, mabutu, its a sad story, the natural gas propane in africa could supply fuel for every person in africa for 400 years, the dont even bother to bring it out of the ground.

i hope one days africa gets the benefit of karma and is the richest continent on earth, we can only hope.

Eorthisio:

Haiti, the First Black Republic has been independent for more than 200 years, there is no excuse involving the past colonial era. It's not in Africa but it's a valid case to talk about Black countries.

Under French rule Haiti was known as the Pearl of the Caribbean, it was the most prosperous colony in the entire world, it was one of the largest food producer in the world, the country was self sufficient on cereals, vegetables and poultry. At this time it was actually an independent economy, the country could have survived with or without France, unlike other colonies there were no supplies sent from France.

From the very moment the French left (and only the Africans remained) the country went straight into chaos and never really got out of it.

Their first move after independence (after, not during the fight) was to destroy the infrastructures and burn the farms left behind by the French, with it they could have become a major food exporter, without it they became nothing.

Every 50 years or so it took a military intervention from the US to stabilize the country, after rebuilding the infrastructure and establishing a sustainable food supply system whenever the US army left Haiti went back into chaos almost instantly.

Haitians never forgot their African roots, voodoos and other sects that enjoy sacrificing children or women to some obscure deity are free to prosper in Haiti even today.

The truth hurts, this is not racism, only facts.

Hakupatasa:

i love and hate equally. So, I am mostly neutral or I am cold on these issues

Eorthisio:

Really? From my experience Chinese believe that they handled the "Japanese problem" alone while in fact both the KMT and the CCP got their bottoms kicked by the Imperial Army, they even have a day to celebrate when Japan "surrendered to China" which never happened, they surrendered to the US.

dongbeiren:

Fair enough on most points but a lot of Chinese behavior is objectively awful - this isn't to say that all Chinese are awful or any other ridiculous generalization but the amount of uncivilized behavior is troubling. I don't believe in nationalistic superiority or anything but I have no qualms blowing off steam about people spitting, pooing and treating others like crap. 

gouxiong:

dongbeiren, you describe yourself as non racists. I do not know you and I have no reason not to believe you. You also describe yourself as kind of hating a typical guy on the street of mainland China. And you also mentioned that find Asian-Americans to be usually very well behaved.

Could not the later be caused by the fact that you may have same background and same behavioral patterns forged onto you when growing up? 

Apparently that does not apply for China and also therefore the differences. 

Many people consider a lot of things in China as not good. Some of them can be on the account of just partly understanding of the background and motivation and part is probably a real problem to be solved.

Nevertheless I still do not believe it should be the immigrants holding foreign passports to solve them for China unless clearly invited to do so.

In that sense I find a group of immigrants complaining among themselves how bad, uncivilized and improper is their environment in China at best strange, especially when some of the comments would in majority of EU countries bring these contributors to the jail (now I am not referring to your comment above - with that I just disagree).

gouxiong:

Dear sorrel, 

I guess it's misunderstanding. 

I am usually not disturbed by the other people words (unless special cases occur but then I could so far handle it to my satisfaction) - therefore unlike many contributors to this site I totally do not mind if strangers on the street shout on me 'Hello' or if parents encourage their children to greet me in English - usually I reply and they feel happy and I feel no harm.

But I cannot stop wondering what kind of people travel through out half of this world apparently just to suffer from the environment they voluntarily entered into - and what worse - even are voluntarily staying in such apparently unbearable environment ...

If I hate hot and steamy weather so going to Singapore is apparently not a good idea. But once I voluntarily decide to go and stay in Singapore so starting to complain about the weather is at best a sign of certain 'mental problem'.

Same for people coming to China and continuously complaining about how bad Chinese and China are - apparently hoping to get a support from they 'expat website friends' circle - mutually thus assuring themselves they are right and all others around them then must be wrong.

And I do not share your opinion that's a natural human behavior - may be natural behavior of, to certain extent, immature individuals - this I do not know - but certainly not a normal behavior of adult, educated person.

Cannot comment on your point about treatment of Western women in here being male myself - none of my female friends living in China ever complained about this but that does not mean they are not experiencing that and just do not want to talk about that.

sorrel:

 dear gouxiong

you have probably never been in a class of university students.

During winter and summer months they constantly complain about the cold or the heat, all the time - and they are Chinese

more so than most of the foreigners I have me.

ScotsAlan:

You can ask the same question next year Royce, and put your perfect answer down

mattsm84:

And so is money. Concerns about both are valid.

BobC:

So I can discriminate against money?

sorry for being flippant.

TLDR race, race, race, logic, logic, logic, end rant.

I think in many ways racism is being pushed to the forefront in some incidents more so as a way to not look at more systemic issues. And I mainly mean in regards to the US. You have poor people killing and destroying other poor people's lives. Now it is usually drawn on socio-economic lines but I think when people start to dig deeper into race issues you see that race does not truly exist so then what are you fighting? Man's inequities, a lack of self-worth, lack of self-love, self-hatred, ignorance, political power/control? It is easy to hate that which someone doesn't know but in homogeneous societies racism can be replaced with classicism. Hell the Irish are still seen....oops sorry I mean were seen as primitive. By the English they wanted all Irish west of the Shannon river so they could have their land. Don't have with me but there is a great article on the thousands of Irish who were sent to the west Indies who died working on plantations. If we look at socio-economic factors we can see that humans tend to behave in certain ways that are similar. Which then raises the question does man make history or does history make man. I was a person that was really adamant about a brotherhood of Man, but it seems like I see too much of people trying to separate each other instead of coming together. So I try to live my life. I don't protest anymore, or sign petitions, my resolve is gone.

Money is something that you can have or not have, and a physical construct used as an intermediary in trade for services and goods. To relate the two I think is short-sided. People can have 'problems' with both,

Race is a thought that humans are based differently because of the physical bodies which is not true. You have psychical adaption to the environment based on light exposure even most females around the world are lighter skin than the male counterparts (sexual dimorphism). That doesn't change brain size (though at one point we did use to say women's brains were smaller therefore they are not as smart). At one point the Middle Kingdom was the pinnacle of human civilization and even the middle east over Europe, and then vice versa, and now US post 1945 (and I am talking technological, cultural, military, and economic ways). Current definition of super power is based on culture, economy, and military. Many countries have two but not all three. Almost all areas of the planet had advance civilizations for their time. Race seems to be used to keep one group above another but it is the easiest to say hey you treat me bad because I'm a different color. You don't really here people playing the victim card for being poor. "you treat me like s*** because I'm poor." versus you treat me like s*** because I'm (insert color). Usually if you're poor you can do something about it but not if you are different color you can feel stuck or powerless. It's easy to be a victim when you feel powerless.

I see it as social, economical, and political control of humans by humans. You can fall on race lines that we construct but I think we reinforce it when we play the game.

mattsm84:

"So I can discriminate against money?"

You can in that its a commodity that you could buy or sell shares of. If you thought a specific economy was week, you could have a bias against that currency because a currencies value is ultimately something we precieve and not something intrinsic to itself.

Here was the point, saying something is a social construct doesn't make it any less real. If it were, you'd have no problem paying my rent with your money, which is just as much of a social construct.

"I think in many ways racism is being pushed to the forefront in some incidents more so as a way to not look at more systemic issues."

So we talk about race...to avoid talking about systemic racism?

"Money is something that you can have or not have, and a physical construct used as an intermediary in trade for services and goods. To relate the two I think is short-sided."

Okay...but the value associated with that money is as much of a construct as anything else.

BobC:

Staying up late too?  Surprised you replied so fast to my comment and actually read it!

TLDR Both are fruit but different types. Skip to bottom for conclusion

For your first example that sounds more like a currency trader which doesn’t sound like the intent would be the same with racism.  Can someone have a job around the construct of racism?  My point of ‘discrimination between’ was one of the difference between discriminating against versus between.  Discrimination itself is a function of the mind and without we would not be able to tell the difference between two things (e.g., like hot and cold).  In discriminating against I see a malicious intent whereas discriminating between is done with judicious thought.   

I can see harm being caused in your example like with Japan in the 80s with their currency and the trading that was going on and the subsequent crash and also how this happened with other countries I believe Mexico and Russia.  Don’t recall accurately.  But certain currencies became worthless almost overnight, Argentina doesn’t count as an example.  However I see this part of the game of capitalism and world markets.  Is there a global game of racism afoot?  Do we have systemic racism in currency trading?   In a sense I believe you are comparing apples and oranges, yes they are both fruit but different types.  A theme I will address later.

In this I think you are making the term money too abstract, and thus its ability to connect it to race/racism.  When I say social construct I mean something that stays a construct in our heads, you can’t make race a physical thing like you can money.  Money is something that can be held and used, with that comes a myriad ways it can be used, even good or bad.  Is there such a thing as good racism?  You can’t hold racism, you can’t trade it.  Again I pay you rent with something I earned through work, how would that relate to race, or an abstract construct?  That setup we have renter/rentee can be a very neutral thing.   I might never meet you in person! However if I am visible ethnic minority and you dislike my ‘people’ then you may charge me more rent.  However in that sense you are using money as tool to act on your racist tendency.  Can you use racism as a tool against someone else? I guess you can but that is painfully obvious.  That is also playing the victim card.  Within that society which has built up that racist paradigm.  Can you use race as a tool for money?  I guess there is, there are government programs and they do follow the idea of race as a real thing; look at census report.  Can you play the victim card with money, yeah you can.  Though would you not hire someone because they are poor?  I would think someone is more likely going to be discriminated against based on race then on financial fortitude (sorry for the lack of better term).  Can someone be money-ist?  I mean like viewing people by their money?  The closest thing I can think of is classist but I think China’s version of it is more adequate (i.e., the introduction of face to the equation mixed with capitalism).  Sometimes classism can also be seen as something you are born into.  Like I mentioned above I think these are separate things under the same umbrella, that being power and control over others.

Systemic racism?  Is this the 60s?  I would say that is on the local government level.  State and federal gov’t in the US have moved past that.  Look at all the statesmen/women, lawyers, doctors, governors, etc that are of non-Caucasian background.  A better inequality is to look at the lack of female participation in political organization.  Even in the South they elected a man that is Southern Asian.   Even my hometown now is all East-Asian on the city council.  People can be racist, and racist in groups, but systemic racism makes it sound like it is a global conspiracy to keep the ‘coloured’ guy out.  Some areas may do that and you can have systemic racism at an Arby’s or McDonalds but how high is really going?  This problem can be real in an individual’s life but I would say that the times now are a lot better then what they use to be.  I do have a point I want to add this that I will continue at the end of this.  An individual in my above example can still protest, petition, have means by which to bring awareness on such things.  They can essentially organize and mobilize which before was not possible (this I believe is a key point). 

I would say, of course, the value we associate to money is a construct however legal tender is usually backed by a physical thing (e.g., like/usually gold).  What is racism backed by?  Watermelons and fried chicken?  (Peoples ignorance’s, hate) I didn’t know I was genetically predisposed to like rice and beans, FU**!!  Guess there goes Taco Tuesdays.  Money will never go away (unless Star Trek universe happens),  Mao actually wanted to get rid of money for his communist utopia, but for racism that is something that we see dying out.  It’s like the more educated people become the less they see a difference between people based on race.  A lot of racism at the lower levels is poor people treating each like sh**.  More educated people does not mean we see a post-moneyless society.  It seem like you will always have people try to take advantage of other or abuse their power and race is something that is easy to use as a force of consolidating power and for scapegoating.   I don’t see race or money as the root cause leading people to do corrupt things, because we still see it happen when we remove race or economic variables.   We still see people doing terrible things to each within the same ideological race or economic group so we can realize that it is something deeper.

And this ties in with where the aforementioned systemic race thing.  I see it comes down to a few factors why people are racist.  I know I am going to answer the big question of all, why y’ll are racist and ignit.  In part I see it as a lack of education (I know a very Chinese answer) and coupled with economic factors.  Not saying Marx is right and there will be a class struggle and the rising of the proletariats but the oppressed are done so through socio-politico-economic means.  Social in the sense of education (or lack thereof) and demographic distribution (centralization) which itself is tied into economics and thus a lack of political representation.  Maybe they have a socio-political identity in their area but no organization or mobility factor.  It’s like Frantz Fanon’s wretched of the Earth.   Like I mentioned in another post about teachers, the racism by which certain ethnic groups fight against is always used by themselves on themselves to keep them oppressed.  They become roles that are self-reinforcing and self-fulfilling.  (e.g., victim mentality)  They see themselves as oppressed and thus actions by a member not of their ethnic group can be construed as acting from racism, or worse yet systemic racism that the non-member individual doesn’t know they are doing because they have white privilege and thus haven’t experienced racism.  Because all non-majority racial groups experience racism, and all majority power holding members of an ethnic/racial group have special privileges of that ethnic/racial group automatically deferred to them.  So obviously we have victims that get to be bigger victims than other victims.  There are countless tales of individuals rising out of the ghetto, how many of them played the victim card?  Frederick Douglass didn’t sound like a victim in his autobiography. 

That aside the philosophical undertones which I am trying to get at are the ones that are based on self-awareness/identification of issues that are based on societal constructions where roles are predefined and give an individual a way to look at life in a specific way, but more importantly these views reinforce ‘the other’.  Meaning you have the self and the other and that the narrative becomes constructed and codified through language and behavior and this fight against the other essentially reinforces the other.  By fighting the other they give legitimacy and power to the other.   They setup the narrative of possibilities and framework.  And in this way racism will never die.

I hope an example will help.  So for racism, we say racism is a problem.  Therefore we have created that A) racism exist B) it is problem.  Now we seek who causes it, and why.  Usually the who is described simply as the majority race and the why because they view themselves superior and/or that others have genetically predisposed behaviors.  Well now that we are acting from the basis that racism exist we have to look at how people of different races that live together treat each other.  So whenever a person/group of Race A interacts with Race B, racism might be involved especially if one is abusing their power/position in society, and most importantly when one of the groups happens to have the most political/social/economic power in that society.  (key point-> So it changes the argument of human abuse to racial abuse.  And so whenever there is an observable incident where the equation of one group being of a different group we can label it racism and show how racism is still alive and the fight must go on.  Let’s not look at other factors but the racist ones because that is the scourge of human society.  Not slave-wages, not unfair labor laws or practices, but RACISM.  He shot him because he’s (insert color).  Obviously not because it is a poor socio-economic area with high crime where police are trying to keep the peace feel like it is a losing battle, and, for a lack of better term, the indigenous population is hostile (openly) towards law enforcement.   Should say they are oppressed and feel struggle against and hence don’t like their plight/chains.  It is easy for police to represent the government and hence keeping them down and the fact that they tend to be of the majority race only reinforces the concept of racism, and better yet systemic racism as it is the police.  Race is an easy scapegoat.  Let’s not look at people keeping people down.

The only way I can see they relate is through abuse/discrimination against, hence my aforementioned fruit analogy.  To say it is a construct like racism puts it on the same level as something like sexual identity, love, or any other social construct.   You can say it is as real as we make but race is not something necessary for life.  To be honest I never felt an identification with my race.  I never thought hey I’m this color therefore that means I’m such and such. Or that because I’m this color that means I can/can’t do x,y,z.  I know this is anecdotal but I know I can’t be the only one to think this, and in addition money to everyone is a very real thing that you get to see and use.  Some people don’t have to worry about it but it is something that is driving factors for whole governments.  I don’t think governments are relying on how much racism they got.

There are certain things people will have like money whether a little or a lot or like sexual identity.  They will choose and create it but racism is something that has been destructive and going away.  To me it is another class of its own. 

The thing is money is real, has been, and will be.  How people view money is different. However race is not real and it is only as real as we make it, people can become racist and learn not to be racist.  You cannot make money not real.  So I cannot say “There is no such thing as money, because it is a social concept.”   It is something is socially created for economic reasons but can’t be undone.  Race was created for political reasons to make people different but it is not real, it is based on fallacies.   Race has no basis, money does.

So in the end we may just disagree

P.S. I tried hard to proofread this, honestly. Sorry for the grammar.

mattsm84:

Oh. I see. You just don't understand how things work and need to have them explained to you. Welp, its the middle of the afternoon here in Chicago so I have time to do just that. Lucky you. To wit.

"I would say, of course, the value we associate to money is a construct however legal tender is usually backed by a physical thing (e.g., like/usually gold). "

No. Put flatly, all money is fiat money. The concept of legal tender can, and does exist without being backed by a physical thing. The US dollar, for instance, is certainly legal tender not only in the US but in other countries as well and even functions as the medium for international trade as the reserve currency, but is only backed by the perception of its own worth, there is no commodity backing it. Even if a currency is backed by a commodity, the value of that commodity floats because its value isn't tied to its utility. You only really need to look at the limited industrial uses for gold against the price it commands as a commodity to understand that

So too with racism. The value or stereotypes associated with race may only be perceptions, but those perceptions are real, and influence us still. Stating that race is simply a construction may technically be true, but its a short step from there to stating that since racism is only a construct, that specific complaints about race are invalid--which is what you do later when you claim that systemic racism no longer exists. We don't live in a post-racial society, and you make the mistake of thinking that because some discrimination doesn't happen deliberately that simply means that it doesn't happen, which isn't the case.

BobC:

Well it doesn’t really seem like you address what I brought up but focused on two points.  From what you said it would seem to be a straw man as I brought up many things and even highlighted what I thought to be important.  No rebuttals to the other things I said? You seem to disregard most of my points to come back to resting your case on two things.  One that you repeat and another one that you misrepresent on what I said. 

For the first one.  You explain a little more by discrediting what I say.  You discredit my definition of currency based on what?   In a cursory glance at currency it seems you are taking a very liberal approach with the definition of fiat currency.  My example of gold was one of commodity money and there is also one of representative money.  Fiat money has a specific definition.  So is your statement of all money is fiat money is one of your own construct or one that is back by economic theorist?  Not to discredit you but if it is your own then I think some more explanation is needed as it does seem to be particular/non-mainstream definition.  Many prominent economic theorist talk about the different types of currency and even why one is better or not better than the other.  It does sound more new-age in that you are throwing out other definitions of currency and labeling all fiat currency as human construct.  (Should I presuppose that you believe all racism is systemic?  That would be a whole other kettle of fish) All action is human action?  All of life is perception?  Do everything by simple deduction?  Are you going the postmodernist route here going to say that anything can mean anything to the observer?  All is one?  I would say you are collapsing the polarities (sorry if that esoteric).  Did you read an article on Forbes recently?  If all money is fiat why do certain currencies struggle and others don’t?  Why don’t they stay to the gold standard?   You seem to brush over a very complex thing but simplifying it. 

Also limited industrial value?  Really?  Now it seems you grasping for straws here.  Even that one is an easy one to see.  I can think of many industrial values for gold.  Have you heard of electronics?  Does gold corrode?  What do you think NASA likes to use on it’s space equipment.  I am not well versed in this field, here’s a link!

http://geology.com/minerals/gold/uses-of-gold.shtml

Maybe I am talking from a background more on race and you one of economics.  Is your background in economic theory?

And on the second one of systemic racism.  Did you really read what I wrote?  I know there is a lot and I can be long winded, however I am trying to be clear. 

I never said complaints are invalid.  Did I?  Maybe it seems that way when I don’t reinforce people’s racial views, tendencies, or ways of life.  Does it seem that because I don’t legitimize their struggles I make them invalid?  I’m not here to support people in their weakness.  It can be very insulting.  Like I am putting my head in the sand.  Acting superior or whatever one can think of.  However I do go into a philosophical discussion where I believe the construct of racism does not help, especially in today’s age.  So then focusing on race who are you supporting?  They have complaints but what are the complaints about?  You can have a discussion about gun control but is the discussion really about gun control or something more systemic.  It’s funny how many issues will be about guns themselves versus society on a larger scale.  God forbid we do that.  Big picture, NO! Let’s look at the small picture because that obviously fixes everything.  I reiterate multiple times what I believe the issue to be.  So maybe does that mean,

“You just don't understand how things work and need to have them explained to you” 

Yes, having a simple view of the world does make life simple.  Just using Occam’s razor on teleological arguments?

Maybe like you I like to listen or read current people in the field of race relations and rights, and some of them talk about exactly what I am saying.  Some of my personal heroes are Jesus, MLK Jr, Socrates, and Frederick Douglass,  I don’t believe our world is a post-racial one but I do believe that the one in the US is a lot better for reasons I explained above (in regards to previous post), and that it’s current stagnation in regards to racism or it’s inability to eradicate is one that I try to address.  I never said racism is not prevalent.  If anything it still is, and I give reasons for that too.  So let’s look at victimhood.  I will use I because maybe that will help, I believe people are victims because they like to be, in some ways I say that is all they know (a factor of education/environment).  I’ve met many people carry a cross based on “racial” identity or gender identity (i.e., sexism they exp).   I believe that society in general views victimhood as bad or not something ideal/desirable but then why do people do it?  It is because they get something out of it, it reinforces their view of the world.  People have behaviors for a reason and those behaviors serve a purpose.  A lot of time people don’t want to let go of their behaviors because they don’t see it as what they are reinforcing.  It’s easier to project onto others than to see the mirror in front of oneself.  To me behaviors are as unique as people so I don’t like to lump everyone in categories of types of behaviors plus I still behaviors as personal challenges people work through to make themselves better.

So I’ll put it into simple language, I believe in systemic abuse.  One that is swept under the rug when we use the narrative of racism.  Racism is a manifestation of it but do you treat the symptoms or the disease?  Treating symptoms may make things better on the surface but how many more shootings do we need before we address the real issues?  What do we really want to focus on and change? 

In the last part you say, “those perceptions are real”.  Those perceptions are only real in the mind, they can’t exist out of it like money does.  The influence they have is determined by the parties involved.  Did racism prevent MLK Jr from doing what he did, did it prevent Frederick Douglass from doing what he did?  Racism is just as debilitating as any other social construct that people use to keep themselves and others down.  (I’ll drop the bomb) Did racism make Ferguson the way it was?  Why would people want to move to a racist town, or is it not the town but the people.  Is it human behavior we are witnessing?  I believe there are many other sociological factors at play which people choose to ignore because looking at race is so easy! 

Do I make the mistake of thinking discrimination is not deliberate?  Again did you read what I wrote?  I even highlight my definition of discrimination.  That places it centrally in it being deliberate (having intent).  Or are you of the mind that all discrimination is bad?  (It’s a bad word) Or do you see the word as more ‘discrimi-hatin’.  That it divides man? Are you cherry picking from post?  I type because I love to explain but in doing so do I make it more confusing for you?   Would bullet points help?  I can put this into an essay format if that helps and site my sources.  Don’t worry not all my sources are “BobC’s Mind pg 42 or rabbit hole 3”.

Another way to put it is on purpose, which is something I have been hinting at.  What is the purpose of the two?  We can see they have very different purposes.  If we want to say everything is a concept then we are having the wrong conversation.  We should just start quoting some Tao Te Ching.   Man with race is man without, man without race is man with, ho ho ho ho, I so clever

So should we sum all this all up to help you?

You don’t seem to adequately define or defend your position.  Examples you do use are easily rebutted (e.g., saying it is fiat, limited industrial value).  Your whole foundation is on it being a concept just like race but that seems to be stretching it quite a lot.  If you are taking the angle of all human concepts are equal then say so.  Should we start talking about different types of concepts, or they are all the same to you? You don’t really give any examples until the third post.  In that case I can say automobiles are concepts.  It is a socially created concept.  No society/humans, no cars.  What is their value?  We have perception of them, they can influence us.  Only as real as we make them.  So are we going to talk about automobiles and racism in the same sentence?  In addition, you provide no rebuttals to mine.  You seem to fit your limited views onto a few of my positions repeatedly.  Look at what I say, is this stuff going over your head?  Is it too much to grasp/understand?   I am not trying to change your mind.  I’m trying to explain my point but it seems that you already made up your mind on who is saying what on what.  I’m not saying you have to write as much as I do but to be coherent and explain your position.  You do so from angle of negating mine.   

Here I will even add a reading list for further understanding.

·        Works by Carl Jung (Early work from the 20s is really good)

·        Michel Foucault

·        Frantz Fanon (Wretched of the Earth)

·        Jean Baudrillard

·        MLK Jr

·        Frederick Douglass (ex-slave, wrote a lot and prominent in the abolitionist movement and women suffragist movement)

·        Don’t have it with me but writings by current police and correction officers in the US (a nice psychological/sociological view of law enforcement and the penal system.  They really seem to reinforce the us vs them and behaviors based on control).

·        B.F. Skinner (On behaviorism, I don’t believe everything, not to the logical extreme that he goes to but it is interesting, notably book Beyond Freedom and Dignity, I think it raises interesting questions)

·        Meeting the Shadow, The Hidden Power of the Dark Side of Human Nature (awesome book) (collection of essays by prominent psychologist)

·        Thich Nhat Hanh

·        Joseph Campbell

·        Plato (mainly his early stuff)

·        Saul Williams, his writings and interviews are really good

·        There’s others but mostly all my books, and papers are in the US

P.S. if my grammar fails please let me know where to rectify/clarify

mattsm84:

"Well it doesn’t really seem like you address what I brought up but focused on two points.  From what you said it would seem to be a straw man as I brought up many things and even highlighted what I thought to be important.  No rebuttals to the other things I said? You seem to disregard most of my points to come back to resting your case on two things.  One that you repeat and another one that you misrepresent on what I said. "

It's a polemic. I get to pick where I lob criticism, what I engage with, and what I dismiss out of hand.

For instance when you wrote...

"And on the second one of systemic racism.  Did you really read what I wrote?  I know there is a lot and I can be long winded, however I am trying to be clear."

Yes, I read it. It was a series of increasing irrelevant obfuscations designed to distance yourself from bad actors. That's fine, I get it, but I felt no reason to engage with it. If racism is something deliberate and malicious then its something that you can stand apart from because you do not do it knowingly or with ill intent. But if its a series of mostly benign personal biases that collectively amount to something harmful you might have to engage with it a little bit more, and engage in a way that you aren't comfortable doing. And who wants to think of themselves that way? 

"Examples you do use are easily rebutted"

I think you think you did, but you didn't. This is monetary theory, but only in the same way that evolution and climate change are theories. There is no more a correct opinion on this then there is on the temp. that water boils. Gold is the example that we are going to stick here. Your contention is that as some point a thing's value is derived from its utility. Gold, in other words, derives its value because it can be used in circuitry, its single industrial purpose according to the link you provide(and BTW, having a single industrial purpose is the definition of limited). Fair enough. But circuitry has only been around for a relatively short period of time. Prior to that, its purpose was primarily decorative, and its value derived from its limited supply. That last thing there. That bit where it says that its value is derived from its limited supply. That makes it fiat. We might as well use specific rare vintages of wine. As for why currencies "struggle." Similarly, its an over abundance or lack of currency in the market relative to the size of its economy. Gold is finite. but its value more or less floats up or down. And both currency, and commodity, independent of their precieved value are both objects.

But then this is only a metaphor for how something that is wholly a construct (and again, devoid of the value we ascribe to it, money is just paper, metal, or numbers on a spread sheet) can be incredibly real when those perceptions are applied, which is something that gets undermined by saying that race is only a construct.

BobC:

Well two things first, one I like this reply much better than your other ones as it makes much more sense.   I believe the ideas are more fleshed out.

The second is on you saying polemic, and if that is the case then what is the point of even having the discussion.  We’ll just be talking past each other?  Essentially there is no point in the conversation.  We can just be sophist.

I do not try to be obfuscate the issue here but to elucidate. 

Your distinction in racism I do not believe is mutually exclusive to the manifestation of racism nor is it so in what I am saying.   We could probably say that the examples we use with Chinese is one that they perceive as benign personal biases, like they see as something not as right or wrong but natural.  Maybe they do sometimes act with malicious intent as when a foreign student was attacked Beijing last December.  So is racism real?  Well as real as we make it, but what is it based on?  We will call it racism but will they?  Who is they?  The Chinese, people in Europe, North America, Africa?   Do we tell them that they wrong, and that is not right?  That will fit perfectly into a cultural supremacist paradigm.  Maybe the ‘racist’ things we see are the individuals who themselves identify with race and nationality.  So what then do we do?

 I don’t like being referred to by my race and/or nationality here in China (mainly because it is not how I see myself) but if I think about it, I can see where they are coming from.  I see that it is an ethnocentric society and one that has been very closed to outside influence.  So with that I realize they think and act differently than I.  In their world things are as they should be.  Will I tell them they are wrong? Most of the time no, I didn’t come here to run over people’s dogma.  As long as it is not harming me, I’m ok.  I can go on walks and smile and chat with the neighbors and try to create meaningful relationship.  They might only ever know me as the American but at least I am putting myself out there.   This just brought back a memory.  I went to a school that was very mixed and I was referred to by my skin color growing up for about 6 years, like 6-12, I guess it led me to have a thick skin but also to outgrow it too and not to take it personal.  I would be made fun of but looking back now can see why, afterwards I did with work with children in the US and Canada for 7 years.  Experience and training helped me to see what was going on but how to correct and redirect the behavior. 

What definition are you using for fiat?  I say it because if it is something that is made up (arbitrary), if so it sounds like you are getting into circular logic.  To say that it is based on a limited supply, I thought, would make it a commodity currency (based on a good) and not a fiat currency.  Where are you going with this?  Money is a concept because it is fiat?  So I bring up other terms within monetary theory and they get dismissed?  I don’t reject the idea that money is a human construct.  Like I said early I don’t believe it can be related in the same way as we think of racism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money

I think the “incredibly real” applied perceptions are based on constructs which we know not to be true and thus when confronted with them we can see past the issue in front of us versus getting emotionally vested in reinforcing a false paradigm/narrative (e.g., internalizing it).  I think by realizing it is a construct we can rise above racism and look at bigger issues that bring about racism. 

mattsm84:

A fiat currency isn't one where the government "makes up the value arbitrarily." Rather one where the government says that a particular object is fit to be legal tender. The value of this must remain relative to the supply.  

A commodity backed currency is one where each bit of currency represents a set portion of a mineral species. The species that backs it, theoretically, holds value that is intrinsic to itself as a utility, in the same way that a commodity currency, essentially the barter system, would. Gold or silver then would have value because of the uses. However we've established that the actual uses for these things are negligible. By the way, this is a point in their favor. If their value were based on their utility, then using them would exhausts its value. This is how gold and silver became stores of value in the first place, they could be made into something that people had a use for, like jewelry or decorations, but could easily be converted back to currency much more easily than say a chicken, which could only be reasonable converted into compost after its use had be exhausted. And that's fine for the bonze age, but humanity had more or less left it behind once humanity started to mint coinage in large numbers. Once minted the coins were then pronounced legal tender, thus they became fiat currency as their ability to be accepted as currency was no longer based around their utility but a government edict. Although gold, silver and a select other minerals retained there status as currency long after they had functionally become a fiat currency. Hence all currencies are fiat currencies. That being said, it took humanity a great deal of time to wise up to this. We didn't even get off the gold standard until be moved on from Breton Woods during the Nixon administration. During the crisis of the fourth century, Diocelsain mistakenly believed that the secretly alloyed gold coins he and his predecessors had been minting to create cash to fill the imperial coffers were the cause of a rapid increase in prices. They were but only because they had minted so much that they caused rapid inflation. To correct this he and his advisors printed tons of coins that were pure gold and fixed prices. Of course this was a disaster, but the theory that brought them there was that goods, services, and currencies all had values relative to their utility, when of course they don't. Values floats because the idea of stored value, the sole purpose of money, is a construct. With out that, its just paper.

The analogy remains valid because in both cases a construct isn't true or not. It is as real as we make it. Since we cannot make it unreal by identifying it as a construct, in much the same way that identifying money as a construct doesn't strip it of its value, it can only remain real, and we can only engage with it on its own terms. It and its effects must be considered and dealt with as being real.

BobC:

I would like to say thank you.  That was very informative.  I did download Principles of Economics by Mankiw and start reading the chapter on monetary system.  However, your insight definitely gives more points to which to research and reflect.  I’ve notice that economic and monetary system/policy tends to be a very hot topic, or in other words polarizing topic, and love hearing about it.  I have heard and read from a few people on both side of the fence about the gold standard, the Federal Reserve, etc.  Like some who think what we did was a good idea and others that hate it.  So again I thank you for your contribution.  To be honest I feel this conversation has run its course.  I believe we have both stated our sides and there isn’t much more to gain in it except to reiterate our points into different manifestations of what we have already written.

Good day 

royceH:

If anybody, other than these two people without anything else in the world to do, has read this thread to the end I'll give you a ticket to the fair.

Lord_hanson:

Agreed, Doctor Who should go back to his own planet!

mattsm84:

Doctors 1 through 5 can be permitted to stay provided Unit validates their work visas. But the rest are right out. Nine and War doctor can apply again, but none of that "This time everyone lives" bull shit.

sorrel:

Do i have to fit being a racist into all of my free time, or is it something i can do at the weekends ? 

laowaigentleman:

I mightn't have time to devote myself to the old racism. What's the official line the church is taking?

sorrel:

royceH:

The kids at a neighbouring school told me they'd seen a new teacher and that he was black and I had to explain to them that they were wrong.  He was, in fact, very very very very very dark blue.  They didn't get it.

laowaigentleman:

Maybe when they had their eyes tested the chart was faulty? The optometrist should have used the latest one put out by Feckarse Industries.