Yesh Gvul
Courage To Refuse
Shministim
Pilots
Free The Five
New Profile
Refuser Solidarity Network


Name: Antony Loewenstein
Home: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Comment Rules
About Me:
See my complete profile



Google
Web antonyloewenstein.blogspot.com
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions



Blogs

Sites




Previous Posts



Powered by Blogger

 


Sunday, January 29, 2006

About race

Tim Wise, Znet, January 27:

"If you're looking to understand why discussions between blacks and whites about racism are often so difficult in this country, you need only know this: when the subject is race and racism, whites and blacks are often not talking about the same thing. To white folks, racism is seen mostly as individual and interpersonal - as with the uttering of a prejudicial remark or bigoted slur. For blacks, it is that too, but typically more: namely, it is the pattern and practice of policies and social institutions, which have the effect of perpetuating deeply embedded structural inequalities between people on the basis of race. To blacks, and most folks of colour, racism is systemic. To whites, it is purely personal.

"These differences in perception make sense, of course. After all, whites have not been the targets of systemic racism in this country, so it is much easier for us to view the matter in personal terms. If we have ever been targeted for our race, it has been only on that individual, albeit regrettable, level."

3 Comments:

Blogger psydoc said...

Explain that to white welfare recipients who live next door to black welfare recipients. It will be the whites who will point to the instiutional rather than personal imbalance in what is available.

But of course middle class white apologists rever really dig too deep for these painful details.

Monday, January 30, 2006 6:54:00 am  
Blogger Ros said...

"If you're looking to understand why discussions between women and men about sexism are often so difficult in this country, you need only know this: when the subject is sex and sexism, men and women are often not talking about the same thing. To men, sexism is seen mostly as individual and interpersonal - as with the uttering of a sexist remark or derogatory slur. For women, it is that too, but typically more: namely, it is the pattern and practice of policies and social institutions, which have the effect of perpetuating deeply embedded structural inequalities between people on the basis of sex. To women sexism is systemic. To men, it is purely personal.

"These differences in perception make sense, of course. After all, men have not been the targets of systemic sexism in this country, so it is much easier for us to view the matter in personal terms. If we have ever been targeted for our sex, it has been only on that individual, albeit regrettable, level."

There are laws that attempt to change this just as there are laws that attempt to change the evil of racism. But the difference is that racism is the “evil” of the modern era, whereas sexism is a lesser matter to the bleeding heart liberals. Thus Israelis are racist hence the bad guys and therefore is provided the excuse to rage and hate by so many, and so many nations and institutions. Some of us might think that the racists are those who declare that it is Zionism that they loathe while naming individual persons whose religion is known to be Jewish as part of the Zionist conspiracy. Many times at this site.

In the meantime the suffering of the Palestinians I would dare to suggest pales into insignificance against the sufferings of women in the Middle East. Where are the annual UN motions of condemnation. We have the constant seeking of proof of the iniquity of the wicked jews of Israel by the worthy bodies of the UN and our so called public intellectuals, but virtual silence about the pain and deaths of women in these cultures, including Palestine. Palestine is one of the leaders in Honour Killings both in the world and the Middle East. And now we have Hamas. I have tried to see the possibility of hope here, but their announcements leave little to feel confident about.

For this reason alone Israel is a more decent place than their neighbours, and deserves our support.

And for all those who make it Bush’s fault, shame, if you can’t grasp that the behaviour of the whining carping hating anti-Jewish left (you know, Jews to capitalism to US) is also a big player in this game and therefore responsible also for outcomes you will never be anything other than instruments of harm. And even the most recalcitrant can't make him responsible for Honour Killings?

Sister Aziza Abdel-Halim (only female member of the Prime Minister’s Muslim Advisory Council, not good enough Prime Minister) expresses her concern about the total exclusion of women from the immans meeting, and gently raises the issue of male violence towards women by Muslims and concerns that the immans were “indifferent”. Well Aziza the rest of Australian men and in particular those who constantly put themselves forward as moral arbiters for us all don’t give a .. about Muslim violence against women, as they didn’t for decades about Aboriginal violence towards women. Any who brought it up were called, well goodness me.

They were RACISTS of course.

Monday, January 30, 2006 8:14:00 am  
Blogger Stev said...

A similar tone and angle to many comments that have been made on this blog before.

But Ros, I must ask, if ignoring the plight of women in the Middle East to focus on the plight of Palestinians is a terrible wrong, how is it any different to ignore the plight of Palestinians to focus on the plight of women in the Middle East?

I agree that that treatment of women in Islamic states is terrible, but it is a function of the nature of Islam. The Israeli treatment of Palestinians is political and in no way a function of Judaism. International pressure can, and has, changed political approaches in the past. Inter-religional (for lack of a better, or even real, word) pressure has never, as far as I'm aware, succeeded in changing religious dogma.

As I have said before, personally I disagree with the very concept of a theocracy, but what is your suggested course of action? If the people choose a religious rule, that is their right to do so. Would you impose a secular liberal government in these countries at the barrel of a gun?

Monday, January 30, 2006 11:41:00 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home