Talk:Racism in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	United States Portal This article is within the scope of the United States WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to United States-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Racism in the United States article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This is a controversial topic, which may be under dispute. Please read this talk page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure you supply full citations when adding information to highly controversial articles.

Racism in the United States was the collaboration of the week for the week starting on July 3, 2005. For details on improvements made to the article, see history of past collaborations.

Contents 1 Bibliography 2 Merging 3 Racial discrimination nowadays 4 Terminology 5 Institutional racism 6 Race (U.S. Census) 7 History of Discrimination 8 Organizing all racism in the US articles 9 Debate in the Watermelon article 10 citations, anyone? 11 anti-semitism 12 About image 13 Mexican versus Latino/Latin? 14 my reverted edits in Hate Groups 15 Islamophobia 16 Gringo as Racist Attack? 17 Article Organization 18 Native Americans 19 Weirdness 20 Canada??? 21 West Coast 22 Racism Today

[edit] Bibliography

A selected annotated bibliography (20 titles or so) would make this article much more usefull. 12/2006

[edit] Merging

I think Racism in the Southern United States should be merged with this article. Toothpaste 4 July 2005 02:21 (UTC)

• I agree, but there isn't very much worthwile there. I say merge whatever's really relevant and accurate (most of it is not really), and make Racism in the Southern United States a redirect.--Pharos 4 July 2005 02:28 (UTC)
  • Agreed, but I think that the article should also be divided into, Western U.S., Northern U.S. and Southern U.S. because the forms on how Racism were conducted were different and each more or less had its own history. Falphin 4 July 2005 19:39 (UTC)

[edit] Racial discrimination nowadays

I think the article should contain examples and problems faced by minority groups in the United States and the United Kingdom nowadays, especially those African-American and Chinese American because these two ethnic groups form the majority of ethnic groups in these two countries. For example, the article should discuss racial discrimination in US and UK communities and the lower possibility for them to enter top universities like Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard etc. Besides, can they merge themselves into white communities without being treated unfairly and unequally should be a highlighted issue in the article. I suggest dividing the ariticle "racism" into two seperate ones, one discussing racial discrimination in western history while another one concerning racial discrimation nowadays in Southeast Asian and Western countries like US, UK, Malysia and Indonesia etc. It is better to provide more information about racial discrimination against students who are studing abroad in UK, US and Australia, such as their status in high schools and colleges compares to that of White.

Um, this article is on racism in the United States, not the UK, not Australia, etc. We should stick to teh US here, and link to other country articles when appropriate. Elefuntboy 01:32, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

stelletje mierenneukers

[edit] Terminology

"thousands of African slaves served whites, alongside other whites"

The term whites seems rather colloquial, perhaps it could be replaced with something more suitable for a formal encyclopedia. Anser 5 July 2005 12:44 (UTC)

Agreed. I suggest that for identifying people who are socially marked as belonging to a specific race group the standard would be to use the race as an adjective, not an adjectative noun. Whites (and more problematically, Blacks) makes a person's racial marking essential to their personhood. Instead, let's use White person, Black mother, Asian construction worker, etc... when describing people with respect to their race and social roles.Billy P 5 July 2005 15:13 (UTC)

[edit] Institutional racism

"particularly in the case of non-native English speakers or those raised in homes that spoke broken or pidgin English. Several states are attempting to reduce these educational disadvantages by developing a more culturally aware curriculum. For example, the 2005 California 6th grade statewide examination contained the question Patio comes from the Spanish word meaning what?. Including questions such as these provide opportunities for non-native speakers of English to have greater educational access."

Are the leading efforts to curb institutional disadvantages really centered in k-12 education? I'm also not sure the example convincingly demonstrates those efforts. lots of issues | leave me a message 8 July 2005 03:36 (UTC)

• The example given isn't very good, but actually many people would argue that one of the main problems minority groups in the U.S. face is poorer access to good public education. It is still true that de facto white children and minority children tend to attend different schools, and the schools that white children attend are usually better.--Pharos 8 July 2005 03:56 (UTC)

• I consider the example to be good, but coming from the mouth (or should I say keyboard) of the writer, that statement may carry less weight. You might consider the use of all English related questions on the language section of a test to be racism. But there should be another example. Howabout1 ^{Talk to me!} July 8, 2005 04:01 (UTC)

• There are two somewhat distinct issues: the general quality of education and the cultural appropriateness of education. I think the former is probably more generally accepted, and is a little "clearer". On the cultural appropriateness side, we have debates over AAVE, bilingual education and history as "Dead White Males".--Pharos 8 July 2005 04:23 (UTC)

Isn't the program designed to address institutional racism most well known and intensely fought in the mainstream arena - affirmative action? Shouldn't that be the subject of discussion instead of educational trends? lots of issues | leave me a message 8 July 2005 05:02 (UTC)

• That should also be discussed of course, but not "instead of" what is seen as "institutional racism" in general public education. After all, that is bascially what affirmative action is meant to counter.--Pharos 8 July 2005 05:05 (UTC)

• THe educational trend section is quite weak and rather insufficient to address institutional racism as a whole. I edited the section, but left the example as I simply lacked one to replace it with, and wanted to hopefully maintain the original author's intent. Elefuntboy 8 July 2005 22:17 (UTC)

[edit] Race (U.S. Census)

The article should include information on why the USA government classifies its citizens by race.

It also looks quite common for any speaker/writer to say/write African American, Asian American, etc. Why?

Are those expressions of an underlying cultural racism? Or not? - Nabla 2005-07-08 19:32:56 (UTC)

I'd argue that the terms African-American, Asian-American, et al are the most inclusive terminologies that people outside of those cultural-ethnic groups can use; I don't think it is an underlying cultura racism so much as an understanding of different heritages. Elefuntboy 8 July 2005 22:19 (UTC)

It is not my intention to argue about it here. I'm simply pointing that as a reader I would expect those subjects to be included in this article. Nabla 21:00:15, 2005-07-09 (UTC)

I agree with Nabla. There should be some explanation.

Lapsed Pacifist 21:31, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

Just a note on these terms. I'm not sure if the same goes for other X-American groups, but I know that inside the community there is a difference between saying "African-American" and "Black." Go to any neighborhood of Haitian immigrants in Boston or New York and you will quickly find this out. The terms should be used carefully and precisely. It's more important to be worried about historical accuracy than political correctness, and often the term "Black" is more favorable when you're talking about northern industrial racism. Conversely, in the US South in the 1920s Black Americans who spoke Spanish would sometimes pass themselves off as Cubans to gain equal treatment on rail transportation, etc... and once again the distinction between racism against Blacks and racism against African-Americans becomes very important. All African-Americans are Black, not all Black people are African-Americans.Billy P 14:50, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] History of Discrimination

Should the page include more details about the Civil Rights movement, or should it just include a link to it? --Titoxd 8 July 2005 22:32 (UTC)

• It could include more however the article needs a lot more on Western and especially Northern racist tendencies. Falphin 9 July 2005 01:12 (UTC)

[edit] Organizing all racism in the US articles

...into a table. Anyone experienced with creating tables?

This is a massive topic - perhaps several COTW tasks merged into one article. The best we can do is better organize the overall theme.

lots of issues | leave me a message 9 July 2005 02:16 (UTC)

what are you picturing for this table? Elefuntboy 08:46, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

nvm, I don't think we have enough related major articles to form a "series" table. lots of issues | leave me a message 16:32, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I really think we could do a series, either on Racism, or American Racism.Billy P 14:51, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Debate in the Watermelon article

Watermelons were strongly associated with racism, as the text in watermelon mentions, for many decades in America. But should the watermelon article include a representative caricature of a black person eating a watermelon, that some find offensive? There's a strawpoll going on at Talk:Watermelon#Straw poll on watermelon caricature image. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 11:24, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] citations, anyone?

Most of the information here is probably true, but there's a real lack of citations. This passage, for instance:

So from that time on, the wealthy landowners determined that only Africans would be used as slaves - and white colonists were promised whatever benefits would have gone to Africans had they continued to be indentured servants

Were these promises in writing somewhere, or is this just the analysis of historians later? With no citation whatsoever this should be removed. Just on the face of it these "promises " don't address the cause of Bacon's rebellion. The typical reward for indentured servitude was payment for your passage and not a whole lot more anyway.

--155.91.19.73 22:56, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

No comments so I'm removing the Bacon information. There's a lot more in here that should be removed if citations don't show up. --155.91.19.73 00:04, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] anti-semitism

This should link to [[1]]

[edit] About image

The image of the white kid punching a "minority asian" clearly looks staged and/or photoshopped. Even if it's not, it doesn't really fit with the article. I'm going to remove it if there are no objections. --BWD ^(talk) 03:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mexican versus Latino/Latin?

I have a few problems with the changing of Mexican-American to Latin-American in the Zoot Suit Riots; the riots were direct against Mexicans and Mexican-Americans, not at a generalized Latin-American target. Elefuntboy 19:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but racism in the US is as often directed towards people who look like Mexicans, so Latino (or hispanic) is more appropriate.Emmett5 02:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I disagree; it's not still a pan-Latino discrimination per se, so much as a discrimination against those people particularly because of a pserveived Mexican identity. Elefuntboy 23:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

But the way the article is written currently i think is adequate in its treatment of Mexican-Americans as the target and Latin Americans as the actual recipient, so I guess that's okay, eh? Elefuntboy 23:40, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] my reverted edits in Hate Groups

Thats a really fair NPOV. Its nice to see how i tried to show how there are other hate groups in the US and my edits were reverted to only show white hate groups in the US. Sure whites are the only people who hate others. 71.131.245.179 00:06, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I added a small cite to reflect the SPLC research. The issue, 71.131.245.179, is that most of your edits on this and the many other pages you have edited in the last two days are uncited POV that dismisses white supremacy and antisemitism. Very unencyclopedic. This is not a blog. Please read the Wiki help pages on how to write for an encyclopedia. --Cberlet 14:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

No I didnt. Black Panthers are listed as hate groups on other pages. Secondly what gives the SPLC authority to declare what groups are hate groups? The last two days I tried to establish equilibruim because most pages only say that whites are hate groups when this is clearly not the case. I am just trying to make the article more balanced. Secondly I put the world "alleged" hate groups because these groups claim that they do not hate anyone based on their race but beleive in racial identity. That is like saying Islam is a hate religion because a small percentage of extremists make it look like a hate religion. That is unfair and unencyclopedic to make a statement as a fact like that. What group would be given authority to declare to the world that Islam is a hate religion? Personally I question Islam and have my own opinions but the reader needs to make up their own minds. Wiki is supposed to present both sides and all information and that is it. Wikipedia should stop shoving opinions down peoples throat. We have to conform to NPOV policy by not picking a side.

If my edits are to stay people are still going to think the KKK is a hate group but the only difference is the reader will come to the conclusion on their own without wikipedia telling them what to think. Also I made a few changes to make the article balanced and fair but I urge you to reconsider by labeling the hate group section as "Alleged Hate Groups" and then include in the body of the article that they are hate groups according to the SPLC, ADL, etc. --Jerry Jones 19:56, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Please do not rewrite history and current reality to claim that white supremacy is not the major form taken by race hate groups in the U.S. Wiki has a focus on what the majority of scholars say about a topic--not marginal complaints and views.--Cberlet 20:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

The article says "Today" hate groups are white supremacy. Even wikipedia states that these groups have pretty much died. They have the same amount of membership as other groups such as Black Supremacists. Heck there are more hispanic pride groups then white pride groups. I am not trying to rewrite history especially considering white supremacy groups were dominant in the past but we are only focusing on white supremacy groups today and to state they are the only people who practice racial supremacy is inaccurate. Jerry Jones 20:32, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry buddy but you are wrong on a number of issues, full marks for hyperbole though. Where do you get the idea that there more hispanic pride groups than white pride groups? or that most white supremacy groups are dead today? I would love to see what kinda source you would cite for these claims. By the way you shoulkd never cite another wikipedia article as proof for your claims- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 10:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Islamophobia

I understand that Islam is a religion, but Islamophobia is often based on race--just as Jews are not a race, but antisemitism is often based on (a false notion of) race.--Cberlet 01:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gringo as Racist Attack?

The wording here seems very off. An attack? Not so much as a descriptor term, which i don't think is as loaded as other terms. Thoughts? Elefuntboy 17:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article Organization

I don't know if this article has always been this way, but it's terribly organized. I'm tagging it for attention because it needs it. I don't see why there should be a geography category (especially if there's only one article, which is also in the wrong place); if so, then respective articles on the north and the south (possibly southwest, too) should accompany the "west coast" category. Racism against specific minorities should be grouped together under one heading. A section on American Indians should be put in, and discrimination against (east) Asian-Americans should be dissociated from the West Coast section and possibly separated further into Japanese/Chinese/Korean sections. Perhaps an article on more recent developments of putatively racist origin (e.g. the Minuteman Project, new immigrant groups like Somalis, Chai Vang, etc) could also be put in, maybe in a chronological structure.

Here's a possibile restructure:

• First Section: Racism by race
  • Maybe a subsection for inter-race relationships, describing particular animosities between races (as opposed to the predominant trend of white v. minority other) that are commonly assumed / described, e.g. African-Americans and Koreans, Hispanic Americans and African Americans, others people care to add
• Second Section: Racism by region (?)
• Third Section: "Kinds" of racism (better term for "Kinds" needed)
  • this may encompass institutional racism and racist laws
  • profiling both for police and terrorism,
  • concepts such as white privilege, affirmative action, maybe educational racism as well
  • housing (white flight and gentrification)
  • immigration (Minutemen, others?)
• Fourth Section: Anti-racism--divvy up into smaller bits than just a broad "Anti-racism," poss. retitle to "Counter-racism" or create a diff. section?
  • Organizations
    • "Mainstream" (ACLU, ADL, SPLC, others)
    • "Grassroots" (ARA is all i can think of right now)
    • "Fringe" (Black Panthers, the Aztlan movement, others)
  • Policy
    • historic (14th amendment, Brown v. Topeka, etc)
    • current (anti-bias curricula, anti-racist mathematics, maybe affirmative action
• Fifth Section: Modern Hate Groups

plus any others people can think of.

alternately,

• First section: Historical racism in US
  • by race
  • by policy
• Second section: Modern racism in US
  • by race
  • by policy
• Third section: Anti-racism (see above)
• Fourth section: Modern hate groups

or some combination of.

Please post suggestions / comments! I am willing to help rewrite parts, if wanted. SReynhout 15:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I like this. This is well done. Elefuntboy 16:55, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Native Americans

I posted a very rough beginning to encourage more work on this. Have at it. --Carwil 22:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Awesome! I just glanced through it, but I will try to work on it. I just started an anthropology class last week focusing on Native North Americans, so I can probably help out there. I have a bad tendency of getting lazy and/or forgetting things though, so it may take a post on my talk page to remind/motivate me. (Favorite quote from the teacher--"This should really be Anthro 334: Guess Who Got Screwed? Or as I like to call it, Anthro 334: Don't Bend Over"). Ungovernable Force^{The Wiki Kitchen!} 00:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weirdness

In 2005, as 4,000 people in Detroit paid their final respects to civil rights hero Rosa Parks during the four hours of her funeral ceremony on November 2, FoxNews devoted 23 minutes of air time to live coverage, there was 108 minutes of coverage on CNN and 100 on MSNBC.

Alright, uh...how is this relevant to the article, the news coverage of various networks? Why is it neccesary to say FoxNews had only '23 minutes of air time'? Also, isn't 'hero' a non-neutral term? Who is a hero or not is relative, and not a set fact. Should anyone be refered to as a 'hero' on Wikipedia? Shouldn't it say, "Rosa Parks, who is considered to be a hero in the civil rights movement by many..." or something similar?

[edit] Canada???

I don't think the section on Canada should be included. If anything, that's religious persecution, and Candaians are not a racial group. If no one has any effective complaints, I'm removing it. Elefuntboy 06:38, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. It's full of misspellings and is poorly sourced. 207.178.224.50 02:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] West Coast

West coast section needs to be updated. Recently I've being hearing alot of racial tension between Hispanics and Blacks in Los Angeles.

[edit] Racism Today

Racism has certainly changed from what it once into now present day. In America it has become less racism but a extreme nationalist pride. There is less racism towards African-Americans in the south, replaced with a hatred of hispanics and other immigrant groups being protrayed shockingly by both black and white people. In fact everywhere you go you hear about racism suffered by blacks in the past but you see a hate towards those viewed as non-Americans in the prominent cities. Just the other day on a flight from Atlanta to Chicago a man refused to sit next a person of either pakistani or Indian descent and chose to sit next to a black woman. Overheard discusions of racial stereotypes where heard the whole flight. This is outrageous, its almost like Americans are joining together in their bashing of europeans, hispanics, muslims,east asians, and Africans. This is also as prevelant in children someone being foreign is labeled as being funny, weird, or socially unacceptable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.99.142.106 (talk) 01:54, 25 December 2006 (UTC).