Re: Is white racism nec. all bad?

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Hadrian: "Re: Is white racism nec. all bad?"
• Previous message: Stephen Wray: "Re: Carlos Casteneda"

In <mbowen-0204950148010001@mbowen.dialup.access.net> mbowen@panix.com
(mellow mike) writes:

> Do race-based laws = institutional racism?
>
>no. the difference between racial and racist is crucial. it's the
>significant difference between being 'color aware' and 'color struck'.
>your 'race-based laws' are unclear. underlying purposes are important.
>

So you are saying (correct me if I'm mistaken): Pro-minority race-based
laws are good because the intentions are good. Pro-majority race-based
laws are bad because the intentions are bad.
I would argue that the effects (good and bad) these laws have on
society are more important than any politicians hopes for them.
Remember what the road to Hell is paved with?

>
>Does the presence
>: of a few race-based laws make the whole system racist?
>
>too broad.
>
>: My personal definition of institutional racism is the ability for
>:minorities who honestly believe they have been wronged to perceive
>: and label an evil even when no tangible evidence is present.
>:
>
>that's foolish.familiarize yourself with case law & thurgood marshall's
>testimony before the supreme court.consider regulation in the banking &
>insurance industries against redlining. (now under radical republican
>attack).
>
Thurgood Marshall?
Isn't he the enlightened fellow who when questioned by
Justice Douglas about affirmative action being against whites and
therefore as unconstitutional as discrimination against blacks responded
with the greatest of legal and logical thinking, "You guys have been
practicing discrimination for years. Now it is our turn."
(the answer is yes)

• Next message: Hadrian: "Re: Is white racism nec. all bad?"
• Previous message: Stephen Wray: "Re: Carlos Casteneda"