Racism entering Schools?

[Tungookska]

In America, It's illegal to punish someone for being racist.
Yaay for the 1st Amendment!

In America, It's illegal to punish someone for petty thought crimes.
Yaay for the 1st Amendment!

[Ryadn]

The behavior of children is far different than that of adults, surely you recognize that?

Children don't live at school. So, are you saying that their behavior at school is vastly different---and worse---than their behavior outside of school?

That being said, Berkley isn't exactly Compton...

Are you amending your statements, then, to mean that only some populations of black kids act the way you described, and only in one particular setting, at school? That cities with large populations of black people but without quite as extensive a history of poverty and gang violence are not included in your assessment?

[Tokos]

? um whut?

I hope TCT comes back and showers you all with the evidence he is famous for...

The evidence suggests that the situation varies between locations, as does who is kicking whom about.

[Old Erisia]

As usual with any NSG topic even vaguely related to race or racism, this thread is filled with copious nonsense, ignorance, and lies. The absurdity of the OP's assumption that racism in schools is a new phenomenon is exceeded only by those who deny that racism has historically been and still is a significant problem in the U.S. education system.

Beyond that I shan't be bothered at this late hour to refute the many misnomers about how whites are oppressed, blacks aren't discriminated against, quotas are common, etc., that I have proven false time and time again in these forums.

Given the dramatically varied demographics across the US I'd suspect it's not as cut-and-dried as either.

? um whut?

I hope TCT comes back and showers you all with the evidence he is famous for...

If these kids didn't act like stereotypes then they wouldn't be treated like one...

Running around knocking up bitches, robbing kids, selling drugs, listing to shitty music at high volumes in their lifted fucking candy paint job crown vics, joining gangs, failing classes, and talking in Ebonics isn't worthy of equal treatment as their peers.

Ugh. Because all black kids do this. Stop watching rap videos (those totally aren't influencing stereotypes and definitely aren't examples of institutionalized racism) and actually MEET some of these kids. If anyone else had posted this nonsense I would have thought they were joking. There is a difference between anti-PC and willful ignorance.

My mother is an educator of over a decade and I have regularly volunteered in her school. I also have a sibling currently in high school... It's you that are willfully ignorant if you do not see what is going on in our schools.

Wow. I can see that some kids act this way. I was saying that they ALL do not. Also, you don't seem to have any idea why they act this way.

Once again, you are being willfully ignorant.

The black students self-segregate, and yes, most of them do act like that. Of the class I graduated with in highschool there was only a single black student that took AP classes. This was a school with a demographic mix of around 20% black students. That one student is now studying to be architect... Now the varsity track team I was on? 80% black, 80% thugs. Working to one's potential is seen as conforming. Not being a thug is considered being weak. It's nothing more than peer pressure.

And you don't see this (bolded) as racism on the societal level? Many black students DO self segregate. But WHY. We have to identify WHY "working to one's full potential" (which is laughable if you have no faith in the school system, but use it quantify "potential". It was not you who said they had a problem with the US school system, so you may believe in its effectiveness) is seen as "conforming". Identifying "institutionalized racism" is supposed to identify why certain things are considered "white culture" and why there is a backlash against it. Perhaps there are reasons why 80% of your track team conformed to be "thugs". Your arguments seem to imply that most black people (or minorities) are worthless, except for a few "good ones". I see no way to reconcile this belief, as you will most likely just brush away anything I have to say. Maybe if I explained it this way. The US has a large black population. It would be in the nation's best interest to exploit this population into becoming beneficial units in society as a whole. It would be a waste of resources to just deem this portion of the population as worthless and throw them away. Unless you think they are inherently inferior, in which case I'm not going to bother continuing the discussion.

[Clatoxe]

Oh my god I swear.....this idea that "everyone and everything is racist" is archaic and annoying. Quit bitching, don't care about race, and be yourself. If 90% of the population did that then the other 10% would look like stupid fanatics and no one would even remember a day when racism was possible in any given situation. You aren't "racist" because you are human, you aren't forced into it, Darwin proved racism is illogical in every manner, and it's only less than 1% of your genome's difference. Why do people even care? I'm surprised (not really) that this topic has gone this far, and that there are so many topics about racism (aka bitching). If people are being aggressive, then that's another issue. "Racist violence", true racist violence that is, rarely occurs. Why? Because no one shows any figures proclaiming that it is widespread despite the assertions. As for someone bringing up the issue of "omg hE's BeiN racis @ mE!", get over it. Stop complaining about thought crimes or whatever you want to call it, and if s/he is being racist and hurting you then s/he shouldn't be hurting you. S/he can pay the price for the assault.......ahh, mass hysteria. you have to love it.

[Old Erisia]

Oh my god I swear.....this idea that "everyone and everything is racist" is archaic and annoying. Quit bitching, don't care about race, and be yourself. If 90% of the population did that then the other 10% would look like stupid fanatics and no one would even remember a day when racism was possible in any given situation. You aren't "racist" because you are human, you aren't forced into it, Darwin proved racism is illogical in every manner, and it's only less than 1% of your genome's difference. Why do people even care? I'm surprised (not really) that this topic has gone this far, and that there are so many topics about racism (aka bitching). If people are being aggressive, then that's another issue. "Racist violence", true racist violence that is, rarely occurs. Why? Because no one shows any figures proclaiming that it is widespread despite the assertions. As for someone bringing up the issue of "omg hE's BeiN racis @ mE!", get over it. Stop complaining about thought crimes or whatever you want to call it, and if s/he is being racist and hurting you then s/he shouldn't be hurting you. S/he can pay the price for the assault.......ahh, mass hysteria. you have to love it.

No one has said that "everyone and everything is racist". And I'm glad that you seem to equate racism with physical violence. I'm going to assume that you are from the States and white.

Pretending racism doesn't exist doesn't help anyone and ignoring it seems more like "mass hysteria" to me. "Racist violence" maybe doesn't occur as often as once because the state no longer endorses racist violence.

Also who brought up "the issue of 'omg hE's BeiN racis @ mE!'"? The talk about "thought crimes" was that they shouldn't be punished, as in the US your right to free speech is protected. As in racists can't be jailed for being racist. I'll be back later with the figures, which have been posted in countless threads before this one.

[Old Erisia]

Oh, luckily for me, TCT has compiled a nice little bit of info. The was in response to a certain poster who has an absolutely ironic quote in his sig.

You've posted several repetitive posts in mulitple threads making it clear that you don't really care for minorities, may well dislike or are hostile to minorities, have no clue about how anti-discrimination laws and affirmative action programs (what you call "special privileges") work, etc.

Let's be fucking clear: for example, African-Americans WERE and ARE oppressed and/or disadvantaged in America.
1. Minorities and women have a steep hill to climb just to catch up with centuries of general¹ white male advantage. For example, as historian Roger Wilkins pointed out in 1995, African-Americans had (at that time) a 375-year history on this continent: 245 involving slavery, 100 involving legalized discrimination, and only 30 involving anything else. Add 15 more years of progress to that now. Thus, as President Lyndon Johnson explained:

In far too many ways American Negroes have been another nation: deprived of freedom, crippled by hatred, the doors of opportunity closed to hope...

[T]his victory--as Winston Churchill said of another triumph for freedom--"is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

That beginning is freedom; and the barriers to that freedom are tumbling down. Freedom is the right to share, share fully and equally, in American society--to vote, to hold a job, to enter a public place, to go to school. It is the right to be treated in every part of our national life as a person equal in dignity and promise to all others.

But freedom is not enough. You do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: Now you are free to go where you want, and do as you desire, and choose the leaders you please.

You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, "you are free to compete with all the others," and still justly believe that you have been completely fair.

Thus it is not enough just to open the gates of opportunity. All our citizens must have the ability to walk through those gates.

This is the next and the more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity. We seek not just legal equity but human ability, not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result.

For the task is to give 20 million Negroes the same chance as every other American to learn and grow, to work and share in society, to develop their abilities--physical, mental and spiritual, and to pursue their individual happiness.

2. Even if the legacy of past racism and sexism were erased, discrimination against minorities remains a major, ubiquituous problem in the U.S. For example, African-Americans are hugely disadvantaged due to racism in the United States. See, e.g., The State of Black America 2010: Executive Summary (6p, pdf); Race at Work (8p pdf) (a study showing that othewise identical black job applicants were less than half as likely to be successful as white applicants AND otherwise identical black job seekers fair no better than white felons just released from prison).

Additionally, I just read the following in a law review article and it will probably piss people off (largely because it is true):

Excerpts from Girardeau A. Spann, "Disparate Impact," [url]The Georgetown Law Journal[/url] Vol. 98:1133-1163 (2010):

Even though we know better, we cannot seem to control our behavior. That is what it means to be addicted.

Likewise, the United States is addicted to racial discrimination. Even though we know that treating racial minorities as inferior to whites is inconsistent with the moral, ethical, and legal theories of equality to which we have long subscribed, the benefits to the white majority of continued discrimination against racial minorities are apparently too compelling for the culture to resist. From the seizure of Indian lands, to slavery, to official segregation, to wartime hysteria, to de facto segregation, to the invalidation of affirmative action,⁹¹ and most recently to the resegregation of public schools,⁹² white majoritarian United States culture has been committed to the subordination of racial minority interests in pervasive and persistent ways. That is a form of white supremacy. And our addiction to it is an addiction from which we appear no more able to wean ourselves than we have been able to wean ourselves from our addiction to foreign oil.

The belief that white interests are more important than racial minority interests is simply a constitutive element of United States culture. One of the things that it means to be an American is to have internalized, at some very fundamental level, the realization that it is permissible to sacrifice minority interests for the benefit of whites. And that realization is often both deep and unconscious in nature.⁹³ That is why we tolerate the dramatic discrepancies in the allocation of societal resources that continue to exist between whites and racial minorities. Justice Ginsburg has emphasized that conscious and unconscious biases have caused large racial disparities to continue to exist in unemployment, poverty, access to health care, and access to education.⁹⁴ Moreover, minorities continue to suffer discrimination in employment, real estate markets, and consumer transactions.⁹⁵ Minorities are also statistically discriminated against in matters as diverse as retail car negotiations, kidney transplants, and bail setting.⁹⁶ Recent social cognition research using the Implicit Association Test to measure unconscious racial prejudice has demonstrated that most of us remain influenced by vast amounts of unconscious prejudice.⁹⁷ And other recent research has indicated that our culture transmits subtle racial stratification messages so successfully that even young children quickly learn to internalize the culture’s commitment to minority inferiority, despite the efforts of their parents to instill in them values of colorblind race neutrality.⁹⁸

Subtle forms of voting discrimination against racial minorities remain serious enough that Congress recently, and overwhelmingly, authorized the Voting Rights Act of 1965—even though the Roberts Court has now threatened to hold the Act unconstitutional.⁹⁹ And, of course, residential housing segregation continues to exist in the United States at such an alarming rate that it has been referred to as “American Apartheid.”¹⁰⁰ The advantages and sense of natural entitlement entailed in being white in the United States remain so strong that Cheryl Harris has characterized whiteness as a property right.¹⁰¹ Commentators have even suggested that the surprising vitriol that has accompanied conservative assaults on President Obama’s undeniably moderate health care and other economic programs—as well as the personal attacks on President Obama himself—are motivated at least in part by lingering racial animosity emanating from the intolerable idea of having a black person serve as President of the United States.¹⁰² Even racial minorities themselves have at times kept a low profile in the health care debate for fear that popular recognition of the degree to which health care reform would benefit minorities might increase the chance that reform proposals would be defeated.¹⁰³

If you are white, and you have any lingering doubts about the existence of embedded racial inequalities in the culture, simply ask yourself whether you would mind waking up tomorrow morning as a member of a racial minority group. If the culture has truly freed itself from the influence of embedded racial inequalities, you should be largely indifferent about the race that you will become overnight. But I suspect that most whites are not indifferent. Indeed, one informal survey showed that white college students thought that they would be entitled to $1 million in damages per year if they were suddenly transformed from white into black.¹⁰⁴

...Race is so deeply embedded in the fabric of the United States that racial discrimination is simply a constitutive aspect of the culture. Nevertheless, the United States did recently elect Barack Obama as its first black President. Despite contrary suggestions, however, that does not mean that the United States has now evolved to a post-racial stage of development in which the problems of racial discrimination have largely been relegated to the past. Rather, it means that the United States has now evolved to a new stage of development in the sophistication of its techniques for practicing racial discrimination.

Racial discrimination used to be both blatant and explicitly rooted in the doctrine of white supremacy. But post-racial discrimination is now more subtly rooted in the very doctrine of racial equality itself. The discriminatory allocation of benefits and burdens, to which United States culture has always been committed, has now simply been folded into the baseline allocation of resources that we treat as the neutral starting point for assessing the racial legitimacy of any reallocation regime. And redistributive efforts to upset that baseline by diverting resources from whites to racial minorities can now be viewed as entailing reverse discrimination against whites. This form of post-racial discrimination has been developing over the last few decades, but the election of President Obama seems to have given the technique more widespread appeal than it has previously been able to command. That makes post-racial discrimination particularly dangerous because both the perpetrators and victims may come to view the practice as morally and legally legitimate.

Post-racial discrimination permits the ways in which the culture generates and perpetuates racial differences among its members to be subsumed by the core concept of racial legitimacy. Historically, the things that we have done to each other in the name of race always seemed legitimate to the white majority at the time that they were being done. Seizing Indian lands was legitimate because conquerors are permitted to keep the spoils of their successful conquests. Slavery was legitimate because white supremacy made slaves subhuman. De jure segregation was legitimate because God and nature established intrinsic differences between the races. Persistent de facto segregation was legitimate, even after the invalidation of de jure desegregation, because the value we place on liberal autonomy precluded compelled association. More recently, the invalidation of affirmative action and antidiscrimination laws has been deemed legitimate because our efforts to prevent discrimination against racial minorities has ended up producing the more serious problem of discrimination against members of the white majority.

As the culture matures, prior justifications for racial discrimination inevitably lose their luster and eventually fall out of favor. New justifications must then be found to take their place. The claim that redistributive efforts to aid racial minorities actually constitute reverse discrimination against whites appears to have considerable present appeal. But the plausibility of that claim does depend upon the belief that there is no longer any significant discrimination against racial minorities to be remedied. It is this belief that has given rise to the claim that we now live in a post-racial culture. And it is this pursuit of racial “equality” for whites that has elevated post- racialism into our presently preferred form of discrimination against racial minorities.

Our collective predisposition to sacrifice the interests of racial minorities for the interests of whites seems to be firmly embedded in our cultural attitudes and values. Accordingly, it is difficult to imagine how our inclination to engage in racial discrimination can ever be overcome without adopting some sort of precommitment strategy that forces us to engage in the behavior that would be produced by racial equality even if we do not yet have the capacity to assimilate the values of racial equality. Recognizing the moral and legal legitimacy of disparate impact discrimination might well serve as such a precommitment strategy. By forcing ourselves to allocate societal resources in a way that approximates the resource allocation that would exist in a race-neutral culture, we might be able to escape the gravitational pull of our embedded racial attitudes.

Footnotes:

92. See Parents Involved in Cmty. Sch. v. Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1, 551 U.S. 701, 746–48 (2007)(plurality opinion) (citing Brown II as authorizing resegregation of public schools).
93. See Charles R. Lawrence III, The Id, the Ego, and Equal Protection: Reckoning with Unconscious Racism, 39 STAN. L. REV. 317, 322–23 (1987) (arguing that much contemporary racial discrimination is unconscious).
94. See Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244, 299 (2003) (Ginsburg, J., dissenting).
95. See id. at 299–302 (discussing striking racial disparities that continue to exist in distribution of societal resources).
96. See Ian Ayres, [url]PERVASIVE PREJUDICE?: UNCONVENTIONAL EVIDENCE OF RACE AND GENDER DISCRIMINATION[/url] 19–44, 165–232, 233–311 (2001) (documenting statistical discrimination).
97. See Jerry Kang, Trojan Horses of Race, 118 HARV. L. REV. 1489, 1509–14 (2005) (discussing unconscious racial bias revealed by Implicit Association Test).
98. See Po Bronson & Amy Merryman, See Baby Discriminate: Kids as Young as 6 Months Judge Others Based on Skin Color. What’s a Parent To Do?, NEWSWEEK, Sept. 14, 2009, at 53 (describing racial attitudes in young children).
99. See Nw. Austin Mun. Util. Dist. No. One v. Holder, 129 S. Ct. 2504, 2508–11, 2513–17 (2009) (discussing facts and holding); id. at 2511–13 (suggesting that section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would now be unconstitutional). Justice Thomas expressed similar sentiments, stating that “[t]he Court quite properly alerts Congress that § 5 tests the outer boundaries of its Fifteenth Amendment enforcement authority and may not be constitutional.” See id. at 2519 (Thomas, J., concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part).
100. See generally LOEWEN, supra note 26, passim (documenting history of intentional residential segregation in United States); MASSEY & DENTON, supra note 26, passim (discussing concept of urban residential “hypersegregation” in United States).
101. See Cheryl I. Harris, Whiteness as Property, 106 HARV. L. REV. 1707, 1714–15 (1993) (discussing sense of white entitlement).
102. See, e.g., Yamiche Alcindor, Seeking Healing, Seeing Hostility: Some at Black Family Reunion Criticize Protests Against Obama, WASH. POST, Sept. 14, 2009, at B1 (discussing racially motivated opposition to Obama); Maureen Dowd, Boy, Oh, Boy, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 13, 2009, at WK.17 (same); Colbert I. King, A Dangerous Kind of Hate, WASH. POST, Sept. 12, 2009, at A17 (same); Anne E. Kornblut & Krissah Thompson, Race Issue Deflected, Now as in Campaign: Obama Maintains Criticism Is About Policy Differences, WASH. POST, Sept. 17, 2009, at A1 (discussing comments of former President Carter that some opposition to President Obama is racially motivated); cf. Hendrik Hertzberg, Comment: Lies, NEW YORKER, Sept. 21, 2009, at 33 (including race among factors motivating paranoia generated by Obama and his programs).
103. See Krissah Thompson, Minority Groups Raise Voices on Reform: Advocates Still Wary of Making Race a Central Issue in Health Care Debate, WASH. POST, Oct. 8, 2009, at A9 (discussing participation of minorities in health care debate).
104. See ANDREW HACKER, TWO NATIONS: BLACK AND WHITE SEPARATE, HOSTILE, UNEQUAL 43–44 (2003) (describing survey). See generally id. passim (describing many ways in which blacks and whites continue to live in two different worlds, where blacks are treated as inferior to whites).

Similarly, gender inequity remains a substantial problem in the United States:

General inequality:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/articl ... tml?cat=47
http://www.buffalo.edu/news/9175

Political underrepresentation:
http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/ ... ective.pdf
http://www.iwpr.org/pdf/i910.pdf
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/ ... 0s0402.pdf

Domestic violence statistics:
viewtopic.php?p=2017692#p2017692

Economic underrepresentation (e.g., the glass ceiling):
http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/statistics/rep ... ssceiling/
http://www.house.gov/dingell/documents/ ... report.pdf
http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/histo ... iling1.pdf

Economic disadvantage (e.g., pay inequity)
http://www.iwpr.org/pdf/C350a.pdf
http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/censr-15.pdf
http://www.aauw.org/learn/research/behindPayGap.cfm
http://www.aauw.org/learn/research/statedata/index.cfm
http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL31867_20050511.pdf

3. This has fuck-all to do with the utterly unsupported (and unsupportable) assertion (and damn near lie) that most members of minority groups "are immigrants or children of recent immigrants."

¹ I use the term "in general" with purpose. This is a gross generalization. Obviously, although being white in America is an advantage, not every white male is going to be better off than every minority member.

BOTTOM LINE: This is reality. Minorities ARE generally disadvantaged -- despite a few anomalies like rich athletes or entertainers. Get a grip on it and deal with it already.

[Knowlandia]

Racism depends on region. Anyway, racism has always been and always will be in schools. You are probably seeing it more now that you're getting older.

[Ryadn]

Oh, luckily for me, TCT has compiled a nice little bit of info. The was in response to a certain poster who has an absolutely ironic quote in his sig.

I'm glad I'm not the only one LOLing/sighing over the total disconnect between that sign and that poster's nonsense.

[Old Erisia]

Racism depends on region. Anyway, racism has always been and always will be in schools. You are probably seeing it more now that you're getting older.

I don't think it has to be accepted in the school system and think that it shouldn't be more accepted in certain regions. You can believe what you want, but the government should protect the rights of minorities.

[Tungookska]

Racism depends on region. Anyway, racism has always been and always will be in schools. You are probably seeing it more now that you're getting older.

I don't think it has to be accepted in the school system and think that it shouldn't be more accepted in certain regions. You can believe what you want, but the government should protect the rights of minorities.

he never said it should be accepted into schools or that it is accepted more in certian regions, nor did he say the government shouldnt protect the rights of minorities

[Old Erisia]

Racism depends on region. Anyway, racism has always been and always will be in schools. You are probably seeing it more now that you're getting older.

I don't think it has to be accepted in the school system and think that it shouldn't be more accepted in certain regions. You can believe what you want, but the government should protect the rights of minorities.

he never said it should be accepted into schools or that it is accepted more in certian regions, nor did he say the government shouldnt protect the rights of minorities

The thought that it "always will be" implies that we should just accept that it will be there. How does "Racism depends on region" not mean it is more accepted in certain regions?
If there is racism in schools, then the rights of minorities are not being protected to the fullest. Unless he is strictly speaking that some students will be racist, which is unavoidable. Thanks for contributing though...

[Tungookska]

Racism depends on region. Anyway, racism has always been and always will be in schools. You are probably seeing it more now that you're getting older.

I don't think it has to be accepted in the school system and think that it shouldn't be more accepted in certain regions. You can believe what you want, but the government should protect the rights of minorities.

he never said it should be accepted into schools or that it is accepted more in certian regions, nor did he say the government shouldnt protect the rights of minorities

The thought that it "always will be" implies that we should just accept that it will be there. How does "Racism depends on region" not mean it is more accepted in certain regions?
If there is racism in schools, then the rights of minorities are not being protected to the fullest. Unless he is strictly speaking that some students will be racist, which is unavoidable. Thanks for contributing though...

racism being present in schools in no way equals it being acceptable

acceptance =/= prevalence

if racism is in schools it means we allow people to practice ebil thought crimes

[Old Erisia]

Racism depends on region. Anyway, racism has always been and always will be in schools. You are probably seeing it more now that you're getting older.

I don't think it has to be accepted in the school system and think that it shouldn't be more accepted in certain regions. You can believe what you want, but the government should protect the rights of minorities.

he never said it should be accepted into schools or that it is accepted more in certian regions, nor did he say the government shouldnt protect the rights of minorities

The thought that it "always will be" implies that we should just accept that it will be there. How does "Racism depends on region" not mean it is more accepted in certain regions?
If there is racism in schools, then the rights of minorities are not being protected to the fullest. Unless he is strictly speaking that some students will be racist, which is unavoidable. Thanks for contributing though...

racism being present in schools in no way equals it being acceptable

acceptance =/= prevalence

if racism is in schools it means we allow people to practice ebil thought crimes

Maybe he should clarify if he means that the racism is inherent in the school system or perpetrated by the student body/teachers.

Also I would say that that prevalence gives evidence to acceptance to some degree.

[Knowlandia]

Racism depends on region. Anyway, racism has always been and always will be in schools. You are probably seeing it more now that you're getting older.

I don't think it has to be accepted in the school system and think that it shouldn't be more accepted in certain regions. You can believe what you want, but the government should protect the rights of minorities.

he never said it should be accepted into schools or that it is accepted more in certian regions, nor did he say the government shouldnt protect the rights of minorities

The thought that it "always will be" implies that we should just accept that it will be there. How does "Racism depends on region" not mean it is more accepted in certain regions?
If there is racism in schools, then the rights of minorities are not being protected to the fullest. Unless he is strictly speaking that some students will be racist, which is unavoidable. Thanks for contributing though...

How can the government regulate how things are in every region? You can't eliminate bigotry, that's unrelaistic. You can establish a smiling Totalitariand regime, whose motto is "Love everyone", and you still won't be able to eliminate bigotry. Sure, educate people and promote equality, but you seem to have pipe dreams.

[Old Erisia]

Racism depends on region. Anyway, racism has always been and always will be in schools. You are probably seeing it more now that you're getting older.

I don't think it has to be accepted in the school system and think that it shouldn't be more accepted in certain regions. You can believe what you want, but the government should protect the rights of minorities.

he never said it should be accepted into schools or that it is accepted more in certian regions, nor did he say the government shouldnt protect the rights of minorities

The thought that it "always will be" implies that we should just accept that it will be there. How does "Racism depends on region" not mean it is more accepted in certain regions?
If there is racism in schools, then the rights of minorities are not being protected to the fullest. Unless he is strictly speaking that some students will be racist, which is unavoidable. Thanks for contributing though...

How can the government regulate how things are in every region? You can't eliminate bigotry, that's unrelaistic. You can establish a smiling Totalitariand regime, whose motto is "Love everyone", and you still won't be able to eliminate bigotry. Sure, educate people and promote equality, but you seem to have pipe dreams.

"Unless he is strictly speaking that some students will be racist, which is unavoidable."

You can't force people to believe what you want, but you can make sure that the body governing the land doesn't infringe the rights of minorities. I recognize that there will be racists but I don't think that that line of thinking should be given logical acceptance. How is trying to limit or eliminate institutionalized racism a pipe dream?

[Geniasis]

Racism depends on region. Anyway, racism has always been and always will be in schools. You are probably seeing it more now that you're getting older.

I don't think it has to be accepted in the school system and think that it shouldn't be more accepted in certain regions. You can believe what you want, but the government should protect the rights of minorities.

he never said it should be accepted into schools or that it is accepted more in certian regions, nor did he say the government shouldnt protect the rights of minorities

The thought that it "always will be" implies that we should just accept that it will be there. How does "Racism depends on region" not mean it is more accepted in certain regions?
If there is racism in schools, then the rights of minorities are not being protected to the fullest. Unless he is strictly speaking that some students will be racist, which is unavoidable. Thanks for contributing though...

How can the government regulate how things are in every region? You can't eliminate bigotry, that's unrelaistic. You can establish a smiling Totalitariand regime, whose motto is "Love everyone", and you still won't be able to eliminate bigotry. Sure, educate people and promote equality, but you seem to have pipe dreams.

Does that make it pointless to fight bigotry? It ended segregation in the south, and I'd say that was a pretty heavy victory.

[Pirate Queen Kolulu]

There's also the issue of racism in terms of hate toward the LGBT crowd. It always amazes me how human beings seem to have an infinite capacity to hate. I've never understood it.

[Vetalia]

Does that make it pointless to fight bigotry? It ended segregation in the south, and I'd say that was a pretty heavy victory.

No, but ultimately you have to change the culture in order to eliminate bigotry and government can't do that. Segregation was abolished by law but it was by no means eliminated in practice...it took a lot longer for that to happen, and even now I'd say it's still prevalent in more than a few places, even if it's not official or obvious.

[Old Erisia]

Does that make it pointless to fight bigotry? It ended segregation in the south, and I'd say that was a pretty heavy victory.

No, but ultimately you have to change the culture in order to eliminate bigotry and government can't do that. Segregation was abolished by law but it was by no means eliminated in practice...it took a lot longer for that to happen, and even now I'd say it's still prevalent in more than a few places, even if it's not official or obvious.

But fixing it in government at least makes it easier for the culture to change and avoids many miscarriages of justice...

[Vetalia]

But fixing it in government at least makes it easier for the culture to change and avoids many miscarriages of justice...

True, but at the same time it has to be the kind of change that eliminates discrimination, not imposing tolerance. That was the mistake the USSR made.

[Herskerstad]

I remember when I was young. There was one African American in a class full of whites. Seeing how we where young and the school did not care/was not aware that standing out usually pokes some curiosity it did not go as well as it could, but all credit to the guy who always stood tall. Good friend these days.

But yeah, racism in schools is nothing new. Not in my world at least. I took a year in the UK and probably the first thing I got was Hitler salutes seeing how I came from a nation close to Germany, but responding with the funny walk made most people laugh.

[Geniasis]

Does that make it pointless to fight bigotry? It ended segregation in the south, and I'd say that was a pretty heavy victory.

No, but ultimately you have to change the culture in order to eliminate bigotry and government can't do that. Segregation was abolished by law but it was by no means eliminated in practice...it took a lot longer for that to happen, and even now I'd say it's still prevalent in more than a few places, even if it's not official or obvious.

Would the culture have changed if the law hadn't abolished it?

[Zephie]

Does that make it pointless to fight bigotry? It ended segregation in the south, and I'd say that was a pretty heavy victory.

No, but ultimately you have to change the culture in order to eliminate bigotry and government can't do that. Segregation was abolished by law but it was by no means eliminated in practice...it took a lot longer for that to happen, and even now I'd say it's still prevalent in more than a few places, even if it's not official or obvious.

Would the culture have changed if the law hadn't abolished it?

Possibly.

[Great Nepal]

Something cant enter if it never left.