From: jj@alice.att.com (jj, clueless old white boy)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Re: Degrees of racism (was Re: Caucasians don't understand)
Date: 2 Sep 92 21:05:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.23618
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (jj, clueless old white boy)
Distribution: na
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals

In article <1992Sep2.122226.7211@nynexst.com> clare@nynexst.com (Clare Chu) writes:
>In article <1992Sep2.001915.28684@news.acns.nwu.edu> dowdy@tochtli.biochem.nwu.edu (Dowdy Jackson) writes:
>  JJ, for a scientist with such a brilliant mind, your lack of reading
>  comprehension amazes me.  First of all, I never saw Dowdy or
>  anyone else in this newsgroup say that whites are evil and sub-human.
As I have pointed out repeatedly, he's said that there is no
point in dealing with whites, period.  That, directly, without
any more discussion, shows that he considers whites sub-human,
at the very least.
>  Even IF the first sentence of "not trying to cultivate whites"
>  is correct, it does not follow logically that "whites are evil".
It surely does, directly, and without any stretch of logic.

>  "Not trying to cultivate" means not going out of your way to
>  flatter and cajole a white person into liking you. 
Of course, that's not the meaning of "cultivate" being used in
context.  He hasn't been asked to "be nice to bigots", at least
not by me (although I wouldn't put it past some people), he's being
asked to treat each person as an individual.  He has repeatedly
said that he deos not do that, and does not need to do that,
because he knows what whites think, SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE WHITE.
Why can't you get this.  At some level, one must cultivate everyone,
in the sense of treating them as equals, using polite words and actions,
and so on. THAT IS CULTIVATION, and that is also what keeps society
patched together.  Denying that to whites is exactly equal to
telling them "you are not human".

>It doesn't
>  mean not having white friends, it just means not begging them
>  to be your friends. 
As you are well aware, that's not what either he or you are being
asked to do, IN THE CONTEXT of this discussion. Your suggestion
otherwise is deceptive at best.

>  And it certainly doesn't follow that
>  it "implies outright that whites are both evil and sub-human."
As discussed above, refusing white people the courtsey you
expect from them (i.e. to be treated as a self-defined
individual) directy equates to the statement "whites
do not deserve the treatment due any human being". That
directly says they're sub-human (well, I could assume
super-human, what a laugh!).  The fact that he knows what
whites think, and they ALL think bad things, is where the
evil comes in.  He can't concieve of a white person thinking
anything good, and he's made that perfectly clear.

>>>>You got that right. The problem is that we aren't going to take abuse by
>>>>whites just so that we can be accepted by you...PERIOD.
>>>
>>>Pardon me?  How's asked you to take abuse?  

The "You" in this context clearly applies to the individual
he is addressing. When I'm reading it, that's me.  I.e. your
nonsensical blathering below is flat out wrong.

>  Again, reading comprehension.  Dowdy states that he isn't going to take
>  abuse by whites just to be accepted by them.  The 'you' refers to
>  the whites who won't accept him.  The 'you' does not refer to almighty JJ.
So stop with the abuse, already.  I will not accept your nonsensical
abusing of me, using prejudical adjectives and adverbs, just because
you are hell-bent on reinterpreting everything so that you can continue
to slander and defame me.

>>>I've asked you not to abuse
>>>me.  That's different.  Every time you say "whites this, whites
>>>that", you abuse me. 

>  Great.  So now we have to say, "whites except for JJ this, whites
>  except for JJ that."  

No, you don't say "whites this, whites that" any more than you'd
say "blacks this, blacks that", or "green martians this, green
martians that".  It's SO simple.  Quantify who and where you talk
about.  Discuss INDIVIDUALS, not races.  This is SO simple.
(Note, I don't mean names: I mean that you
MUST show some understanding of the fact that all racism is due
to individual actions, and the only way you can address it is by
addressing the actions of INDIVIDUALS, not of races, classes, groups,
etc.)

You are well aware that no-one is willing to accept generalities
put forth about blacks or asians, why then do you take this
phenominally racist attitude when you talk about whites?  You
insist that I accept generalities about whites that are no better
or worse than what some idiots seem to propigate about
asian females, yet you object strenuously to those
offensive stereotypes.  You, yourself, by the actions in your
article, have just said that whites are sub-human because
you would deny them the same courtesies and rights that you
insist on (rightly so) for yourself.  Hypocrite!

Why should I accept your abuse and dehumanization?  Your only answer
appears to be 'because you're white, JJ'.
-- 
Extremism *Copyright alice!jj 1992, all rights reserved, except transmission
   in the    *by USENET and like facilities granted.      Said permission is
  defense of     *granted only for complete copies that include this notice.
 liberty is no vice.  *Use on pay-for-read services specifically disallowed.