Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Date: Thu,  8 Oct 1992 22:30:40 -0400 
From: Dean Calloway <dc4l+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Pessimism
Distribution: usa

Excerpts from netnews.soc.culture.african.american: 8-Oct-92 Re:
Pessimism by David A. Johns@elm.circa 
> Other races in America have been as reviled as blacks for a generation
> or two at a time, and sometimes only in certain areas -- the Irish,
> the Chinese in the West, Mexicans in the Southwest, etc., etc., but
> the idea that these people were *essentially different* never
> permeated society.  Eventually they all became part of the society
> that had earlier rejected them.

Not really... there are many accounts detailing the assimilation of
European immigrants into "mainstream" America which would refute this
assertion.  To state that other "races" have been "reviled as blacks" is
highly erroneous.  Europen immigrants, while undoubtedly discriminated
against, faced pressures different than that of Blacks, particularly in
the industrial North. 

>  
> But our society, including blacks, still maintains that blacks *are*
> essentially different.  It is only of blacks that we (blacks included)
> say "if you're part black, you're black".

There are two problems with this:

1. Skin color is so obviously apparent that it is impossible to ignore. 
Blacks are classified as Black because the distinguishing attribute
(skin color) is readily evident.

European immigrants are harder to pick out (ESPECIALLY after the first
generation).  Without an accent or a distinctive last name (name
changing was a widespread practice during the 19th and early 20th
century) it is pretty difficult to distinguish between white American
born and white European born

2. To imply that Blacks defend this in order to be different ignores the
last thousand years of history and the last four hundred here in America.

  Blacks are the only group
> of long standing in the US that does not marry outsiders with any
> frequency.

FAR from true.  Marriages outside group are extremely commonplace.

  Only blacks feel a need for a separate pantheon of
> cultural heroes and historical figures.

This again ignores history.  Blacks arrived via the slave trade.  All
others came here of their own accord.  Others were allowed to bring
their traditions and customs.  Ours were systematically eliminated.

BTW your argument COMPLETELY ignores Native Americans.

  And it is basically only
> blacks (joined by feminists in some cases, who are probably basing
> their rhetoric on black models) who take seriously such concepts as
> racial consciousness and racial guilt.

Far from true.

>  
> I suspect that fear of the unknown and different is a human instinct,
> but that this fear is fairly easy to break down if not reinforced in
> some way.  In our society I believe that the rhetoric of separation is
> maintaing the fear of "the other".  In other words, "It's a black
> thang, you wouldn't understand" -- a creation of white racist
> intellectuals of two centuries ago, but now accepted as fervently
> among blacks as it ever was among whites -- is both the product of the
> past and the guarantee that the future will be more of the same.

We arrived here differently, we've been treated differently, we have
different opportunities, and you say this is all negligible?

DCAL
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american