The Official Thread of Systemic Racism

[Guest]

6 hours ago, osxmatt said:

Hmm I wonder what the drivers motivations were?

From descriptions of witnesses, it seems to be a drunk driving incident as the driver appeared to lose control of the vehicle a short ways up the street before plowing through the line of people waiting on the side of the street.

[Jason]

Oh good thank god it was just drunk driving and not intentional terrorism. 

[skillzdadirecta]

fbi is investigating.

[TUFKAK]

9 hours ago, Jason said:

Oh good thank god it was just drunk driving and not intentional terrorism. 

Woke up 

read this thread

that’s enough consciousness for today

back to bed 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

New video on CNN from the Brownsville incident shows other people beating the hell out of the diver in the immediate aftermath.  One of the witnesses claims that the driver yelled obscenities in Spanish as he was attempting to get away.

[SuperSpreader]

Old article but; 

The rise of white nationalist Hispanics

WWW.AXIOS.COM

---

Experts say the far-right extremism among some Latino residents stems from those identifying as white and anti-Black sentiment.

 

 

Republicans have gained ground with Latinos since 2018, and many believe stolen election lies, poll finds

WWW.NBCNEWS.COM

---

Nearly two of five Latinos who responded said they believe debunked claims that there was cheating and election fraud in 2020 and that Trump won.

 

 

Gaining ground with Latinos as the Dubya Bush plan

 

 

[SuperSpreader]

One thing I learned from The Accommodation is that in cities like Dallas Latinos were seen as white and some even participated in bombing black homes during the 40s and 50s. It wasn't until forced desegregation that they decided to say, "Oh, whites have to go to school with blacks? Here's these browner whites." This is more old Tejanos not so much newer immigrants from the 70s, 80s, and onward. 

[Fizzzzle]

Hispanic/Latinos were not even a separate category on the census until 1970/1980 (there was a different rollout). Hispanic people were just considered white before then.

[skillzdadirecta]

50 minutes ago, Fizzzzle said:

Hispanic people were just considered white before then.

Depends on the Hispanic and where they were from... White Cubans and Spainards... yes. Other Carribean Hispanics, Central American Hispanics and Mexicans? No.

 

Anyway, Law Enforcement just gave a briefing and said that they have not ruled out that this was intentional. Most of the victims were from Venezuela. 

[SimpleG]

2 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Maw Enforcement

Seems appropriate 

[Guest]

50 minutes ago, Fizzzzle said:

Hispanic/Latinos were not even a separate category on the census until 1970/1980 (there was a different rollout). Hispanic people were just considered white before then.

 

3 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Depends on the Hispanic and where they were from... White Cubans and Spainards... yes. Other Carribean Hispanics, Central American Hispanics and Mexicans? No.

 

Anyway, Maw Enforcement just gave a briefing and said that they have not ruled out that this was intentional. Most of the victims were from Venezuela. 

It is worth separating out census bureau reporting from how people were viewed in society, as Skillz notes here.

[Fizzzzle]

Just now, skillzdadirecta said:

Depends on the Hispanic and where they were from... White Cubans and Spainards... yes. Other Carribean Hispanics, Central American Hispanics and Mexicans? No.

 

Anyway, Maw Enforcement just gave a briefing and said that they have not ruled out that this was intentional. Most of the victims were from Venezuela. 

I was talking specifically about the census. There was no separate Hispanic category. If you were Mexican or Cuban, by the standards of the census, you were white.

 

There was actually a "Mexican" category that was added to the 1930 census, but it faced massive backlash from everyone from the Mexican government to LULAC

[Fizzzzle]

Just now, sblfilms said:

 

It is worth separating out census bureau reporting from how people were viewed in society, as Skillz notes here.

Sure, but it's not as black/white (no pun intended)

 

As I noted above, there was actually a "Mexican" category added to the 1930 census that eventually ended up getting removed because of massive backlash from Hispanic Americans who did not want to be labeled in a separate category from white people, for obvious reasons (segregation). Even the Mexican government got in on it.

 

The census designation does matter and does reflect on society if you just contextualize it for a minute.

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, Fizzzzle said:

Sure, but it's not as black/white (no pun intended)

 

As I noted above, there was actually a "Mexican" category added to the 1930 census that eventually ended up getting removed because of massive backlash from Hispanic Americans who did not want to be labeled in a separate category from white people, for obvious reasons (segregation). Even the Mexican government got in on it.

 

The census designation does matter and does reflect on society if you just contextualize it for a minute.

How many “no Mexicans allowed” signs do you want me to post to show that the census isn’t society  

[skillzdadirecta]

Zoot Suit Riots: Causes, Facts & Photos - HISTORY

WWW.HISTORY.COM

---

The Zoot Suit Riots of 1943 were violent clashes in which U.S. servicemen, police officers and civilians brutalized Latinos and other minorities in Los Angeles.

 

Quote

In the summer of 1943, tensions ran high between zoot-suiters and the large contingent of white sailors, soldiers and Marines stationed in and around Los Angeles. Mexican Americans were serving in the military in high numbers, but many servicemen viewed the zoot-suit wearers as World War II draft dodgers (though many were in fact too young to serve in the military).

 

On May 31, a clash between uniformed servicemen and Mexican American youths resulted in the beating of a U.S. sailor. Partly in retaliation, on the evening of June 3, about 50 sailors from the local U.S. Naval Reserve Armory marched through downtown Los Angeles carrying clubs and other crude weapons, attacking anyone seen wearing a zoot suit or other racially identified clothing.

In the days that followed, the racially charged atmosphere in Los Angeles exploded in a number of full-scale riots. Mobs of U.S. servicemen took to the streets and began attacking Latinos and stripping them of their suits, leaving them bloodied and half-naked on the sidewalk. Local police officers often watched from the sidelines, then arrested the victims of the beatings.

 

Thousands more servicemen, off-duty police officers and civilians joined the fray over the next several days, marching into cafes and movie theaters and beating anyone wearing zoot-suit clothing or hairstyles (duck-tail haircuts were a favorite target and were often cut off). Blacks and Filipinos—even those not clad in zoot suits—were also attacked and bloodied.

 

DEFINITELY not considered "white".

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

New video on CNN from the Brownsville incident shows other people beating the hell out of the diver in the immediate aftermath.  One of the witnesses claims that the driver yelled obscenities in Spanish as he was attempting to get away.

Just a word of caution, there are some really horrific videos from the scene in the immediate aftermath of the incident. I was at my mother-in-law’s this morning and she had on the news from a Mexican station, which does not censor any of the carnage. Apparently all of these clips are floating around social media. It was beyond disturbing.

[TyphoidHater]

4 hours ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Zoot Suit Riots: Causes, Facts & Photos - HISTORY

WWW.HISTORY.COM

---

The Zoot Suit Riots of 1943 were violent clashes in which U.S. servicemen, police officers and civilians brutalized Latinos and other minorities in Los Angeles.

 

 

DEFINITELY not considered "white".

 

https://youtu.be/JZm1krVKzBY

[Fizzzzle]

8 hours ago, sblfilms said:

How many “no Mexicans allowed” signs do you want me to post to show that the census isn’t society  

That's not the point I'm making. My point is you can glean things from it. Racism isn't a zero-sum game, there are degrees.

[silentbob]

11 minutes ago, Fizzzzle said:

That's not the point I'm making. My point is you can glean things from it. Racism isn't a zero-sum game, there are degrees.

 

 

[unogueen]

47 minutes ago, Fizzzzle said:

That's not the point I'm making. My point is you can glean things from it. Racism isn't a zero-sum game, there are degrees.

A little racist is still racist. I care about who steps on my toes.

[skillzdadirecta]

1 minute ago, unogueen said:

A little racist is still racist. I care about who steps on my toes.

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, Fizzzzle said:

That's not the point I'm making. My point is you can glean things from it. Racism isn't a zero-sum game, there are degrees.

To be completely honest, I don’t have any idea what your larger point is past ‘the census bureau didn’t always have a separate ethnic category for Hispanics’.

[Fizzzzle]

1 minute ago, sblfilms said:

To be completely honest, I don’t have any idea what your larger point is past ‘the census bureau didn’t always have a separate ethnic category for Hispanics’.

It's that there are degrees to institutional racism, I guess? Hispanic soldiers were not separated from white soldiers in WW2, for example, whereas black soldiers were, not to mention black soldiers weren't even allowed in combat roles at all until 1944 in their own segregated units. In The Great War, black units weren't even serving under the American military at all, but were basically loaned out to the French army.

 

Basically, whether Hispanic people were considered "white" largely depended on who you asked and when, who you were asking about, and what it was about. The concept of Hispanic people as an entirely separate race is much more modern than black people, for example.

 

And also someone who is half-Mexican, historically, has a much easier time assimilating into white society than someone who is half-black.

 

Daniel Plessey, of the Plessey v. Ferguson case that basically enshrined "separate but equal" into law, was like 1/8 black. If you saw him on the street, you wouldn't even think he was black, yet it was still enough to legally segregate him from white society.

 

My grandmother was half Mexican and passed as white her entire life. Her and her husband even adopted a misspelling of their name that happened one time to make it sound Irish (my grandfather's last name was Micheli, he was from Italy, at some point his name got recorded as "McKelly" and they just rolled with it, that's even the name thats on her tombstone)

 

Sorry, I'm just rambling now.

[skillzdadirecta]

20 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

It's that there are degrees to institutional racism, I guess? Hispanic soldiers were not separated from white soldiers in WW2, for example, whereas black soldiers were, not to mention black soldiers weren't even allowed in combat roles at all until 1944 in their own segregated units. In The Great War, black units weren't even serving under the American military at all, but were basically loaned out to the French army.

 

Basically, whether Hispanic people were considered "white" largely depended on who you asked and when, who you were asking about, and what it was about. The concept of Hispanic people as an entirely separate race is much more modern than black people, for example.

 

And also someone who is half-Mexican, historically, has a much easier time assimilating into white society than someone who is half-black.

 

Daniel Plessey, of the Plessey v. Ferguson case that basically enshrined "separate but equal" into law, was like 1/8 black. If you saw him on the street, you wouldn't even think he was black, yet it was still enough to legally segregate him from white society.

 

My grandmother was half Mexican and passed as white her entire life. Her and her husband even adopted a misspelling of their name that happened one time to make it sound Irish (my grandfather's last name was Micheli, he was from Italy, at some point his name got recorded as "McKelly" and they just rolled with it, that's even the name thats on her tombstone)

 

Sorry, I'm just rambling now.

All of this may be true but that still doesn't mean Hispanics were considered "white". It just means blacks were REALLY discriminated against based on the historical racism of slavery in this country. No Hispanics weren't segregated in in the armed forces like blacks were, but neither were Asians,  Native Americans,  Jews, Italians, Irish, Poles and other Eastern Europeans... none of whom were considered "White" at the time. And there are PLENTY of instances of bi-racial blacks passing for White in American history... it happened more than people realize. I get what you're saying, that there are degrees to racism, but it ALL falls under white supremacy and its history in this country goes back to the very beginning. 

[BloodyHell]

On 5/8/2023 at 6:10 PM, TyphoidHater said:

 

https://youtu.be/JZm1krVKzBY

That’s a great album.

[ort]

Republican front-runner for North Carolina governor attacked Civil Rights Movement: 'So many freedoms were lost' | CNN Politics

WWW.CNN.COM

---

North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, the state's first Black lieutenant governor and the GOP front-runner for the 2024 gubernatorial race, repeatedly lambasted the "so-called" 1960s civil rights movement, lamenting that "so many freedoms were lost during the civil rights movement."

 

 

BEHOLD, THE STUPIDEST THING YOU WILL EVER READ IN YOUR ENTIRE LIFE...

 

“You talk about the sit-in movement. We’re in a free market system. So we’ve got a place called Woolworth in Greensboro that won’t serve Blacks at the lunch counter. What do you do? You go down there and you sit at the lunch counter and you demand for these people to take your money. How crazy is that?” said Robinson in March 2018. “That’s not what you do in a free market system. What you do in a free market system is you just say, ‘Hey guys, these guys don’t treat people fair. Do not eat here.’”

 

“A place where everybody can eat and let’s see who does the best. That’s what you do in a free market system. You don’t force these guys to take your – sit there and you know, ‘You’re gonna take my money. You’re gonna take my money. I’m gonna enrich you whether you like it or not,’” he said, adopting a silly voice. “That’s a ridiculous premise. You know, and I’ve always argued that. But it goes hand-in-hand with that whole thing of, uh, communists and socialists slowly pulling the rug out from underneath capitalism and free choice and the free market.”

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, ort said:

Republican front-runner for North Carolina governor attacked Civil Rights Movement: 'So many freedoms were lost' | CNN Politics

WWW.CNN.COM

---

North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, the state's first Black lieutenant governor and the GOP front-runner for the 2024 gubernatorial race, repeatedly lambasted the "so-called" 1960s civil rights movement, lamenting that "so many freedoms were lost during the civil rights movement."

 

 

BEHOLD, THE STUPIDEST THING YOU WILL EVER READ IN YOUR ENTIRE LIFE...

 

 

 

Note: I only read what you quoted here, so if there were other dumb things said in the article, I’m not referring to those.

 

Other than the goofy last sentence, this was a pretty common view held during the CRE. Some favored boycotts of all businesses with any differential treatment of whites and Blacks, and the creation of more Black owned businesses to keep economic activity in the community and create Black wealth. Others cared more about fighting the specific injustice of the differential treatment.

 

As with most things, Black folks aren’t monolithic in their views on how was best to press forward on gaining rights. I personally would be more of the “if you don’t want my money, I’ll put it elsewhere” camp, but such things can also be really tricky depending on your context. If you live in a little town in Mississippi in the 1950s with only one grocery store, and the white owner decides “no Blacks allowed”, the ability to shift resources elsewhere is made more difficult. It is also a reason you saw so much racial migration from the Deep South in the 20th century.

[Kal-El814]

On 5/9/2023 at 6:28 PM, skillzdadirecta said:

All of this may be true but that still doesn't mean Hispanics were considered "white". It just means blacks were REALLY discriminated against based on the historical racism of slavery in this country. No Hispanics weren't segregated in in the armed forces like blacks were, but neither were Asians,  Native Americans,  Jews, Italians, Irish, Poles and other Eastern Europeans... none of whom were considered "White" at the time. And there are PLENTY of instances of bi-racial blacks passing for White in American history... it happened more than people realize. I get what you're saying, that there are degrees to racism, but it ALL falls under white supremacy and its history in this country goes back to the very beginning. 

 

Irish people were absolutely considered white at all times in America. Irish and Catholics were certainly discriminated against but that's been somewhat hyperbolically exaggerated to the modern, revisionist take that they were at some point "not white." 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/03/22/sorry-but-the-irish-were-always-white-and-so-were-the-italians-jews-and-so-on/

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

 

Irish people were absolutely considered white at all times in America. Irish and Catholics were certainly discriminated against but that's been somewhat hyperbolically exaggerated to the modern, revisionist take that they were at some point "not white." 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/03/22/sorry-but-the-irish-were-always-white-and-so-were-the-italians-jews-and-so-on/

I think what most people really mean when they bring up the idea of “becoming white” is the move from exclusion to inclusion in the dominant WASP culture of the day, when a group doesn’t fit the acronym.

 

Being white has meant more than just skin color for our entire history, including during colonial times.

[Ghost_MH]

2 hours ago, sblfilms said:

Note: I only read what you quoted here, so if there were other dumb things said in the article, I’m not referring to those.

 

Other than the goofy last sentence, this was a pretty common view held during the CRE. Some favored boycotts of all businesses with any differential treatment of whites and Blacks, and the creation of more Black owned businesses to keep economic activity in the community and create Black wealth. Others cared more about fighting the specific injustice of the differential treatment.

 

As with most things, Black folks aren’t monolithic in their views on how was best to press forward on gaining rights. I personally would be more of the “if you don’t want my money, I’ll put it elsewhere” camp, but such things can also be really tricky depending on your context. If you live in a little town in Mississippi in the 1950s with only one grocery store, and the white owner decides “no Blacks allowed”, the ability to shift resources elsewhere is made more difficult. It is also a reason you saw so much racial migration from the Deep South in the 20th century.

 

Not to say anything about what did happen to a few predominantly black towns and businesses when they began to accumulate too much wealth and/or political power.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

Not to say anything about what did happen to a few predominantly black towns and businesses when they began to accumulate too much wealth and/or political power.

Yeah, this is a big part of that debate within the community at the time. White lower structures saw Black wealth as a massive threat, and it was often dealt with swiftly and brutally.

[Kal-El814]

3 hours ago, sblfilms said:

I think what most people really mean when they bring up the idea of “becoming white” is the move from exclusion to inclusion in the dominant WASP culture of the day, when a group doesn’t fit the acronym.

 

Being white has meant more than just skin color for our entire history, including during colonial times.

 

I mean yes, but being raised Irish Catholic and also being part Sicilian and Polish, I can assure you that when many people with a similar background mean that they were not considered white, they mean it more literally.

[SimpleG]

On 5/11/2023 at 4:42 PM, sblfilms said:

Note: I only read what you quoted here, so if there were other dumb things said in the article, I’m not referring to those.

 

Other than the goofy last sentence, this was a pretty common view held during the CRE. Some favored boycotts of all businesses with any differential treatment of whites and Blacks, and the creation of more Black owned businesses to keep economic activity in the community and create Black wealth. Others cared more about fighting the specific injustice of the differential treatment.

 

As with most things, Black folks aren’t monolithic in their views on how was best to press forward on gaining rights. I personally would be more of the “if you don’t want my money, I’ll put it elsewhere” camp, but such things can also be really tricky depending on your context. If you live in a little town in Mississippi in the 1950s with only one grocery store, and the white owner decides “no Blacks allowed”, the ability to shift resources elsewhere is made more difficult. It is also a reason you saw so much racial migration from the Deep South in the 20th century.

Many Asian communities are of the same mindset, its why they tend to be more supportive and tight nit then other minority communities. White folks dont want to sell me groceries , fuck em we build our own grocery stores.  

[Air_Delivery]

On 5/11/2023 at 2:42 PM, sblfilms said:

Note: I only read what you quoted here, so if there were other dumb things said in the article, I’m not referring to those.

 

Other than the goofy last sentence, this was a pretty common view held during the CRE. Some favored boycotts of all businesses with any differential treatment of whites and Blacks, and the creation of more Black owned businesses to keep economic activity in the community and create Black wealth. Others cared more about fighting the specific injustice of the differential treatment.

 

As with most things, Black folks aren’t monolithic in their views on how was best to press forward on gaining rights. I personally would be more of the “if you don’t want my money, I’ll put it elsewhere” camp, but such things can also be really tricky depending on your context. If you live in a little town in Mississippi in the 1950s with only one grocery store, and the white owner decides “no Blacks allowed”, the ability to shift resources elsewhere is made more difficult. It is also a reason you saw so much racial migration from the Deep South in the 20th century.

Except that doesn't work at all in small communities with limited shopping options.

[Jason]

"Thank you for murdering that black guy."

 

Witness says she went back to 'thank' Daniel Penny after Jordan Neely...

NYPOST.COM

---

A straphanger who was on the subway when former Marine Daniel Penny placed Jordan Neely in a fatal chokehold said Thursday she’s “praying” for Penny after it was revealed the 24-year-old would...