Race Relations
by Ted Slater on 09/04/2008 at 3:58 PM
Racism is a real problem. The thing is, the mindset of even those most opposed to it may be interfering from their being able to bring about real solutions.
In today's featured article, "Race Relations: Rethinking Christian Identity," Boundless author Thabiti Anyabwile explains:
Multiculturalism, diversity and tolerance are the reigning solutions to problems associated with race. That is, most everywhere people assume that racial identity rooted in biology is an objective reality and conclude that the way to manage tensions, difference and strife is to develop greater appreciation for those differences. Ironically, this strategy has produced debate and strife of its own as people argue and quibble about the ideas of diversity and tolerance themselves.
What if our premise -- that race is even relevant -- is the obstacle keeping us from true reconciliation, from making peace with those who look different from us?
In his article, Thabiti argues just this: that while ethnicity is a real thing, because we are all members of the race of Adam, there is truly no racial difference between any of us. Indeed, focusing on working through "race" issues may be keeping us from addressing the lingering problems that can be resolved.
"Race Relations: Rethinking Christian Identity" is the first of a multi-part series on race. It's helped reframe my understanding of this issue. Let me know if it helps you as well.
1. Eliza said the following at 4:08 PM on Sep 4
Growing up as a white USAmerican of mixed European heritage, race was emphasized much more frequently than ethnicity. I think there is practical reason for this--because the States are such a "melting pot", ethnicities are relatively quickly forgotten or "watered down."
There is no "ethnic American". There are past ethnicities, but not anything I can really relate to. No cultural mythologies or historical identity or even ancestral lands. Perhaps this is one reason race has been so divisive in the US...just like ethnicity is so divisive in other countries like the former Yugoslavia or Rwanda.
2. Rachael said the following at 5:24 PM on Sep 4
I appreciate that Anyabwile defines "race", which seems to focus on the differences based on different physical markers. It's still confusing to me how 'race' can be an artificial construct. I guess I don't completely get it (although I do believe differences in physical or other external markers ('race') should not be dwelled on and become the basis of an 'us vs. them' mentality or for prejudice), so I hope to read more of the series. It might be good if the concept of 'ethnicity' was questioned as well. People are unique. While there are commalities within ethnicities, there is also a vast array of personality traits within a given ethnicity. People belonging to particular ethnicities or even "Western cultures" or "non-Western cultures" can be easily stereotyped. It's hard to know where to draw the line between cultural stereotypes and general observations of commonalities found in people belonging to particular ethnicities.
3. Allen Tanner said the following at 5:44 PM on Sep 4
Good article -- but be careful NOT to fall into a recent error of political correctness in trying to claim that "biological race does not exist." Even though that concept has been promoted by some big names -- and especially the media -- a far larger number of scientists have cautiously reminded us of the obvious fact that it IS possible to group people on the basis of biological features -- even if some might wish otherwise. (Yes, it is certainly true that there are many ways that one can use everything from blood factors to tissue types to show that external indicators like skin color are not the ONLY way to classify people groups. But common sense has tended to group humans by race because there ARE differences which are obvious to the naked eye.)
You are quite correct in saying that the Bible does not emphasize racial differences and all are obviously equal in worth before God. But God created humans as a diverse genetic pool and centuries of geographic groupings has created the various external differences which we see today. Indeed, the more we learn about genetic signatures (such as with Y-DNA), the more we can "flesh out" what has become a sort of family tree of the human race. (I'm an R1b1b2 and that genetic marker passed down from my paternal lineage identifies me as part of a "group" associated with Western Europe and the aboriginal peoples of Scotland and most likely the Basques who were their ancestors. And common sense says that I'm likely to be identified as "White" by those who meet me.)
I would simply urge caution in how we as believers respond to the politics of race and the efforts by some to claim that race is an "artificial construct". Saying that race SHOULDN'T MATTER is not the same thing as saying "race doesn't exist" -- even though some people have decided that the best way to fight racism is to deny that race is a valid term. Noble goal? Perhaps. Good science? No.
4. nikki said the following at 6:41 PM on Sep 4
I am not a scientist and I guess I am not "up" on late trends within popular science. I didn't realize there was a move in the direction of saying biological races don't exist. I don't understand that very well, since there are obvious races, ethnicities, tribes, nations, tongues...you know, the ones the Bible talks about. :)
I think this article gets too hung up on semantics. I disagree with the idea that "Race" is the theory...that there is an essential difference between peoples rooted in biological factors. ... "Ethnicity" is a fluid construct that includes language, nationality or citizenship, cultural patters and perhaps religion. Race as biology entrenches identity in physical appearance. Ethnicity is something that people of various physical appearances can move in and out of."
At least in my town, on my campus and on TV and everywhere I know of, that is NOT the standard definition. I don't know of any Christian who denies we are all descended from Adam and Eve. So in one sense, the article is correct. But it seems quite incorrect in its definitions. To this twentysomething, 'race' is another word for 'ethnicity,' the latter being the preferred term and the former carrying negative connotations. At least in the very mainstream culture I live in, both words refer to the same thing.
"American" is most definitely not an ethnicity...it's not even a nationality. It refers to people on two continents, nearly three dozen countries, and ten times that many languages. But going along with the argument, "United Statesian" or "Canadian" isn't an ethnicity, either. It's just where you happen to live. If I moved suddenly to Spain, I wouldn't become Spanish. "Spanish," in the ethnic sense of the word of course, is something I have to be born as.
Plus, race is definitely not always rooted in physical differences. Many people look alike and yet are of completely different ethnicities.
The issue behind racism is sin and human selfishness, pure and simple. Not the concept of race or ethnicity.
5. Nikki said the following at 6:48 PM on Sep 4
The problem is NOT the existence of race and ethnicity, therefore simply trying to deny that differences exist is useless to fighting racism, the problem is the artificial assigning of a hierarchical value to any particularly race or ethnicity (in American and European society it has historically meant "White" identity was supreme). Fighting racism even in the Christian context requires us to address the past, acknowledge it's mistakes and how it's impacted the present, see what we can do to correct those mistakes (sometimes simply speaking out when racial injustices do occur will do a world of difference) and continue to preach repentance and faith in Christ. No race is exempt from the necessity of salvation.
6. Alexander said the following at 8:04 PM on Sep 4
Ted mentioned: "What if our premise -- that race is even relevant -- is the obstacle keeping us from true reconciliation, from making peace with those who look different from us?"
I think I'm with you on that one ...maybe this is why I'm somewhat apathetic to this topic.
I'm not white, black, asian or hispanic; By the blood of Christ I'm red. It's not a black church or a white church maan we see in Scripture that it's Christ's church!!! forget the unbiblical racial division, race is insignificant IMO, especially in light of the Gospel.
7. Katie said the following at 8:24 PM on Sep 4
I remember taking a sociology professor in college telling the class that the all people have the same basic DNA, that the different DNA for races is so small as to be pretty irrelevent.
even with different races being more or less prone to certain diseases, the fact is that we divide people into distinct groups when they have more in common than they have differences, on a biological level. ethnic and cultural differences are more relevent, as well as the sociological constructs we have made up, while ignorant, are also relevent, because what really matters is how we interact with eachother.
8. Sheridan said the following at 9:02 PM on Sep 4
In Australia, skin colour GENERALLY is not an issue, we have Indians, Asians, Aboriginals, Africans etc, and I have friends in almost every ethnic nationality. None would complain of being discriminated against in terms of colour.
The biggest clashes and issues here seem to come from the cultural differences that come with each 'race'
and some of these cultures refuse to intergrate with the culture that they are now living in. Australians are constantly pushed to be 'tolerant' of other cultures but these other cultures can be quite hostile to ours which gets our backs up...
9. allison said the following at 10:12 PM on Sep 4
Here's my thing. I am a christian but what my color is isn't important to God. It's only important in the context that He will use it to bring someone closer to Christ. Moses married an ethiopian in the Bible, if race was such as issue, why is it that God didn't bring it up. The only people that were upset by it were his relative(s). So if God doesn't care why should we? We are supposed to love our neighbors, but it becomes a problem when humans want to deny someone else what belongs to all of us or hoard and be greedy. or when one believes they are better then the other because of color. These are all attitudes of the flesh.I will not even reveal my race now on applications because before I open my mouth I will be judged on that and what someone else THINKS my race might mean. As opposed to who I am as a christian or my character as a person.
10. Danielle said the following at 2:02 AM on Sep 5
I have a lot to say about this because it involves my field of study.
In response to Allen Tanner, you have to be careful when discussing race as a means of classification that you differentiate between phenotypical characteristics and genes. It is true that various “races” exhibit observable qualities like a particular skin color, hair texture, or eye shape, but these traits are influenced by separate genes and inherited by separate genes. In fact, the three gene types I just listed are inherited completely independently. Humans are 99.9% genetically identical, but 85% of the .1% of genetic variation that does occur happens within a local group or individual “race” (as opposed to between various races). All this is to say that, yes, it is true that groups of people share common phenotypical traits that we use as a means of racial classification, but those traits are not biological (something you argued in your comment). Also, contrary to what some may think, Africa is the continent with the most genetic diversity, so clearly to attribute our racial classification to biology is an error. If you want to learn more, I highly recommend you watch the PBS film “Race: The Power of an Illusion,” or at least check out their website (which you can Google). The facts that I mentioned are primarily based on their research. I will give my disclaimer that I recommend the film out of my own personal volition, and do not claim to have support from Boundless or its writers.
I think the best way to fight racism is to first acknowledge that racism exists. I am working toward getting my PhD in Ethnic Studies, and I can safely say that researchers in my field don’t want “race” to be ignored, but instead desire for people to realize that race is not inherently biological.
Today, the concept of “race” pervades the ways in which Americans see and experience the world. We are daily bombarded with images by way of television, newspapers, and magazines, yet there is little scrutinizing of the content of such media to discover their hidden agendas and intended audiences. The frequency with which particular images occur in the media causes many people to take their racial definitions and stereotypes at face value so that eventually race becomes “common sense.” And by this I mean that often the images we see over-represent White people and poorly or insufficiently represent people of color. The pervasive nature of racism coupled with the normative (and invisible) nature of Whiteness has perpetuated the idea that specific physical characteristics mark “non-White” ethnic groups as abnormal, “Other.”
I think it is extremely important that we, as Christians, address the issue of race because of the millions of Americans it affects--and by this I am primarily referring to people who are not White and must daily face discrimination, whether direct or indirect. And, I agree with Nikki that it is a result of our own human sin that racism even exists, but ultimately we need to move forward, correcting our mistakes, and preach the Gospel to and for ALL people.
Some articles I recommend (also not reflecting the support of Boundless): Omi and Winant’s “Racial Formation,” Frankenberg’s “The Mirage of an Unmarked Whiteness,” Lewis’ “The Science and Folly of Race,” Graves’ “Introduction: The Problem, Simply Stated,” and Babb’s “Toward a Philosophy of Whiteness.”
11. Kelly said the following at 6:04 AM on Sep 5
This topic fascinates me.
1) I call myself a 'global citizen' and have modified my accent to not easily identify my home country. It gets rid of a lot of pre-conceived stereotypes when travelling. That said, I am white, and therefore am treated differently simply based on that. (In Western countries, I get more courtesy, in poor countries, I'm seen as a 'cash cow' at times.) I have travelled with friends of different colours and it's amazing the difference, even though we're both western, english speakers.
These days we have a strategy as to who does the talking depending on what country we're in.
This also works with male/female: if I'm in a Muslim country travelling with a male friend, he does the talking.
2) I struggle to understand how we all came from Adam & Eve when we are SO DIVERSE. Is that the result of thousands of years of micro-evolution? One tribe went to, say, Asia, and over the centuries their features and colour changed?
But if that's the case, how did we all get from dark-skinned (my assumption based on the fact that humanity sprang from the Middle East) to white? Given that Asian genes are traditionally dominant in a mixed marriage; there is the theory that we will all eventually have an Asian look. I know several white+asian couples and the children (absolutely adorable, all of them!) rarely resemble the white parent.
I've also heard the theory that there were several 'Adam and Eve' pairs around the world, with the slight different genetic structures. Can anyone comment on this?
3) I know it doesn't matter in God's eyes. But I find it so interesting! Should I just add it to my 'Questions when I get to Heaven' list? ;)
12. Eliza said the following at 7:16 AM on Sep 5
Nikki #5 said:
Fighting racism even in the Christian context requires us to address the past, acknowledge it's mistakes and how it's impacted the present, see what we can do to correct those mistakes.
Exactly. Denying that race exists is to ignore huge injustices that have happened in the world and still are happening today. Whether or not "biological race" is a biblical concept is irrelevant. The point is, there are a lot of feelings on the issue that need to be dealt with and discussed. Saying "there's no such thing as race, so there should be no problem" will only drive hurt and hatred deeper.
13. Jeremy said the following at 8:45 AM on Sep 5
"I'm not white, black, asian or hispanic; By the blood of Christ I'm red."
We say "Native American".
14. Adam said the following at 9:05 AM on Sep 5
Ted said: "What if our premise -- that race is even relevant -- is the obstacle keeping us from true reconciliation, from making peace with those who look different from us?"
So the solution to racism is to ignore it? Isn't the first step normally to acknowledge the problem.
I'm very surprised that this question is even asked. There are few problems that I have found where "true reconciliation" takes place if we declare them irrelevant. What if we just said that the root attitude behind abortion is irrelevant? Perhaps if we did it would just slowly go away...
--------------
I suppose that most people I've met would agree that race is not or should not be relevant. The only real people that I have found that disagree tend to be fairly racist.
There have been many different ideologies that have tried to break things down to bring us to the point where we can say that race is not relevant. They have had varying degrees of success.
When I look at how far we've come in just the past 60 years, I've got some hope for the future. Take sports for instance. Jackie Robinson was the first non-white Major League Baseball player. His first game was April 15, 1947. Look at sports today. If there is an industry that has truly declared race as being irrelevant, look at sports.
15. Rachael said the following at 9:18 AM on Sep 5
9: "I will not even reveal my race now on applications because before I open my mouth I will be judged on that and what someone else THINKS my race might mean."
--> Sad... Yeah, I wonder if often times those ethnicity boxes are altogether unnecessary. I haven't given a ton of thought to the idea of affirmative action and giving qualified people of "minority" backgrounds preference over others, but it is interesting. Although part of me says, "Give the job to the most qualified person, no matter the 'race'", if two people are qualified in the same way, and it's just a coin-toss type of decision, I think it would be good to give the opportunity to the "minority".
There have been absolutely repulsive overt acts of hatred, injustice, and separation in the past, and affirmative action probably should especially have been done immediately in the beginning attempts of integration.
And even now it might be good if there were conscious measures of integration in some communities, but I really haven't studied the issue and I really don't know much about it.
I live in a big city that is quite diverse, but I think there are still areas of the city that are not integrated as well as others, and a lot of that probably relates to economics and people's preferences.
I don't know how much integration should be attempted or forced, though. My guess is that a lot of people may not want to be forced to be "integrated" as that would involve potentially huge life changes (if people move, etc.).
I think it would be neat if people could naturally integrate, and I suppose this will happen over time in America as it becomes increasingly ethnically enriched and diversified.
16. Jo said the following at 10:33 AM on Sep 5
I kind of agree that race is a social construct in many ways, however I think cultural differences are much more real and need to be appreciated as such.
(This may be the shortest comment I've ever posted here...)
17. Jacob said the following at 11:24 AM on Sep 5
Allen Tanner's post is correct, and Danielle's is wrong. It is understandable that modern liberal society has a vested interest in making race out to be an invalid concept, and understandable that its supposed invalidity is so deeply entrenched. I am a medical student, and the consensus view among both students and faculty at my school seems to be that of Danielle. But wishful thinking doesn't make something true. The PBS documentary "Race: The Power of an Illusion" was filled with lies and intentionally flawed arguments, like an experiment where examining 6 mitochondrial DNA markers supposedly showed that there was no relationship between genes and race. In fact, by examining 100 different SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) markers, a person's race can be determined with 99% accuracy. Instead of the willfully misleading PBS documentary, I recommend the book Race: The Reality of Human Differences by Vincent Sarich and Frank Miele, which effectively refutes each of the propositions put forth in the PBS documentary. Among other things, the authors show why the oft-stated argument, mentioned by Danielle, that "most genetic variation occurs within races, not within races" is misleading and does not invalidate race as a valid biological concept.
BTW, to claim that phenotypic variations that distinguish the races are not biological is just bizarre. Not only has it always been obvious, before the existence of genes was even known, that hair color, eye color, etc. were inherited, but in many cases the specific genes which determine these traits have now been identified. It doesn't get more biological than that.
18. Bethany D. said the following at 12:15 PM on Sep 5
In response to Kelly #11's second question:
To look for an answer to your question, you have to start with a more basic question: the difference between evolution's "ever-increasing diversity" and creation's "ever-revealed diversity". Evolution would say that humans might have started with brown skin (and no genes for white skin) then slowly evolved to have genes for other skin colors. Creation would say that they might have started with brown skin, but that Adam & Eve's DNA contained the genetic potential for all the different humans on Earth - including every skin tone!
Think about dog breeders; they started with dogs who would have a variety of puppies in each litter, then bred the most similar dogs to create "pureblood" kinds of dogs. If you bred a mutt with a mutt, you got mutts - some of which might be larger or smaller than others. Over time, if you continued breeding the largest & smallest dogs, you ended up with Great Danes & Chihuahuas - not because they evolved, but because those genes were revealed. The genes got sorted out into distinct "kinds" of dogs, but they originated in one very genetically diverse species.
That doesn't completely eliminate micro-evolution, which probably played a small role in human differences (sickle-cell anemia, for example), but hopefully this helps put it into perspective.
19. Lauren said the following at 12:43 PM on Sep 5
Comment #8 Sheridan: The movie "Rabbit Proof Fence" and the history of the "stolen generations" would disagree and that behavior took place as recently as the 1970's
20. Bertha said the following at 12:49 PM on Sep 5
I don't know about race, but as someone who works with people from a variety of different cultures, I can tell you that cultural differences are very real and ignoring them or pretending they don't exist is only going to cause more problems.
21. Danielle said the following at 1:08 PM on Sep 5
Just to clarify in response to Jacob's post: I didn't mean for my post to come off as proposing that phenotypical traits are not biological. I realize that those traits are inherited genetically, and are therefore biological. What I was trying to get at with my comment ("groups of people share common phenotypical traits that we use as a means of racial classification, but those traits are not biological") is that we have determined the markers by which we classify race. It is true that various features occur more often in different groups of people, but the concept of race as we categorize and define it has been socially constructed. We have essentially chosen the markers by which we group different peoples, and sometimes those categorizations don't make sense. God has made a very diverse world of people, but not every person defines race by our same U.S. standards. Historically, like with enslaved Africans in America, phenotypical differences were used to determine "races" that justified the social, political, and economic gain of White people. Some of the articles I already mentioned discuss how the concept of race was established in our country. I apologize if my comment stirred up any dispute because it was not my intention to start an argument.
22. BDB said the following at 2:03 PM on Sep 5
Danielle (#10) wrote:
>>yet there is little scrutinizing of the content of such media to discover their hidden agendas and intended audiences. <<
Oh, but there is, there is! Academia has been deconstructing these hidden agendas for decades! There's a hidden agenda behind every shrub!
(Can't say "bush" because that would violate the 501(c)3 rules)
Frankly, academia and the media spend vastly too much time deconstructing hidden agendas instead of attending to the truth of what was said. You really see this during politcal campaigns - where the media focuses on the political implications of what was said, instead of the veracity of the statements. Poetry and literature can be beautiful and thought-provoking without being soley an expression of the hidden identity of the author. Such deconstruction resulted in the steep decline in humanities majors - the field destroyed itself by becoming irrelevant to the human experience!
Anyway, it reminds of a class in graduate school once, where a (tenured) professor shocked us all by saying, "Anyone who thinks Americans are racist hasn't been to Japan." He then went on to describe a policy of fingerprinting all Koreans in Japan, including those with Japanese citizenship. Imagine the outcry in the U.S. if an entire race, or ethnic group, was required to be fingerprinted regardless of arrest status and/or probably cause.
But there's definitely more to racial identity than Biology. Have you ever seen someone of African descent who speaks with a flawless British accent? Do you notice how they are treated differently? I'm convinced that speech is far more important than looks when it comes to discrimination.
23. BDB said the following at 2:10 PM on Sep 5
Kelly (#11) wrote:
>>I know several white+asian couples and the children (absolutely adorable, all of them!) rarely resemble the white parent. <<
Funny story...a friend of mine in college was concerned when her boyfriend's mom referred to her as the "Japanese Girlfriend." He was from Canada.
Imagine my surprise when I met his parents - his mom a very white British Columbian and his dad from...Tahiti. It seems that the guy we knew stayed out of the sun, so he generally passed as white. So, there was no problem with her being from a Japanese family, they were merely being specific.
Their daughter definitely looks Asian - and she is 75% Asian.
24. BDB said the following at 2:32 PM on Sep 5
On the subject of race as a social construct...
I think that these American researchers are confusing subculture with race. Or maybe we're all confusing the two.
Subcultures are definitely social constructs. Hip-hop is a subculture, as are Rednecks. (I'm trying to draw fire from farmer Tom.)
Westerners aren't really a race, but they do share a huge amount of culture.
What I find interesting is how many West Africans are now emigrating to the U.S. The ones I know report some mild racism, but by and large they see America as a land of limitless opportunity. It's remarkable to see American politicians talk about how the way someone looks puts them in a box, and then hear a West African say it doesn't.
Someone from Canada should chime in on the Quebecois.
25. Adam D. said the following at 7:06 PM on Sep 5
I think too often people misuse Racism, when really one person is simply intolerant of another person. Sometimes people rub me the wrong way, and whether they're black, yellow, red, brown, or white, it might provoke me into visibly and audibly disliking someone. That's usually when the racist card is played by the antagonist. This is at least how I perceive racism and its uses in the world. It seems to just be another way for someone to gain the upper hand, or a way to gain power without much effort. I have seen very few authentic cases of racism.
26. dana111 said the following at 11:58 PM on Sep 5
I understand that race has both biological and social significance. As a black woman, I cannot deny the fact that I look different from my white friends, and I also cannot deny the racial hierarchy that exists in this country... this supposed hierarchy is generally based on biological dishonesty perpetuated throughout world history. I am not a scientist by any means, so I may not fully understand the relationship between "phenotypical characteristics and genes." However, the argument should not be if the races are biologically dissimilar. The issue should be whether or not these differences are used to judge the inherent worthiness of individuals. If it is, it will ultimately lead to one group of individuals equating worth to their own specific physical characteristics. This, in my opinion, is where the evil of racism starts. When people forget Galatians 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus," they will begin to place their own opinions and prejudices above the word of God.
27. Anne said the following at 11:02 AM on Sep 7
I think Dana's comment (#26) touched on the core of the issue. I live in Thailand, where an interesting variety of reactions to "race" exist. I am of Thai heritage, but I have some European in me as well. I actually grew up in the U.S. before moving to Thailand when I was nine, so I'm an observer to much of life here; I'm not "in" on everything and a lot of Thai behaviors are a study to me.
"Racism" is not currently a much-talked-about issue in Thailand; Thai people - or even Thai Christians don't think about it as much because Thai culture doesn't emphasize debates or social justice issues a whole lot; Thai culture is generally laid-back and non-confrontational.
But much of what Americans consider racism is present here.
1) Firstly, Thailand vs. the surrounding countries. The Burmese, Cambodians, and Laotians are generally denigrated - there are many jokes about them, and they are not treated as well as Thais. I asked a friend why this is so, and she explained to me that part of it is history and part of it is the current situation. Throughout the past several hundred years, these countries often warred with Thailand and ravished our temples and cities (as we ravished theirs) and cinematic dramas about Thai history help remind today's generation of that, so that sometimes Thai children may bully a Burmese child on the playground because they belong to the country that came and hurt their country. Secondly a lot of refugees from these countries steal into Thailand and work illegally and because they work illegally sometimes they more easily get hired (because they take very low pay) and this steals jobs from Thai people. That is the first case of "racism" encountered in Thailand. Thai people may not think much of it, but as an American and as a Christian, I'm quite sensitive to this.
2) Secondly, Thais vs. Western foreigners. Western foreigners are treated very well (because they have light skin, because they have a lot of money to spend), and if a person speaks English, they are also treated very well because there is honor associated with good English. I look Thai, but I am treated like a foreigner because of my good English and the fact that I have lived in the U.S. I would say there is a bit of national pride involved here - even though I and many other foreigners would prefer to "fit in," I cannot fully because Thai people will not let me (there is a bit of national pride involved, I think) While Thai people associate English and Western countries with money and status, they do have pride in being a Thai and it takes time for them to accept someone who looks like them but has other cultural differences as being a Thai. (Note that Thailand is much influenced in trends and thinking by America - but also by Japan and Korea.)
3)Light skin vs. dark skin. Generally Thai people do not understand why Westerners like to tan. White skin and Western features are what fills the media. Product after product is guaranteed to produce light skin. A person with dark skin generally gets teased a lot about it (but teasing is also a big part of Thai culture - although I don't agree with it, Thai people are very used to it...teasing even here is often (but not always) an expression of love (although maybe a different, cultural, definition of love - belonging, fitting in, being so close you can basically tease each other about anything). On the other hand, a person with light skin gets praised a lot. In Thailand, we have a lot of people of Chinese descent but also people who have a lot of Indian in their heritage. They are all Thai, but the former have light skin, and the latter have darker skin. In fashion and pop culture there is a big discrimination about skin color. But other features are also heralded, such as big eyes or a pointy nose, being thin - the fact being, Thai people will admire these features no matter who has them...regardless of "race," to them beauty (as they have defined it) is beauty.
I think observing this has helped me a bit to understand - "racism" can stem from past feuds, different culture, or different appearance. But I think that it has so much to do with what we are conditioned to think, and what has been associated with "value" - Westerners with wealth, light skin (or big eyes or a pointy nose) with beauty. This is what causes discrimination. I think discrimination has much to do with the mental constructs about what is valuable. I think that it takes mental trouble to discriminate...i.e., though energy spent on this. Generally we don't spend energy on something we don't think is worth it, so I think that if a person thinks (or, basically, goes out of there way to think) in a racist sense, they have subconsciously been conditioned (by a variety of factors) to think that they is some value to be gained out of thinking/behaving that way (i.e. material wealth - like Thais pandering to foreigners, gaining of status - hanging out with foreigners may better your English, to personal pride about beauty - skin lightening creams). Thus the question of value.
If I may quote Dana, "[...] the argument should not be if the races are biologically dissimilar. The issue should be whether or not these differences are used to judge the inherent worthiness of individuals. If it is, it will ultimately lead to one group of individuals equating worth to their own specific physical characteristics." (Or what their background may gain them in their environment.) And I completely agree with the verse she quoted - Galatians 3:28 - "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
Personal pride or personal gain very much affect us subconsciously, regardless of race or ethnicity...namely because we are of the human race. (I have to admit that I have never wanted or intended to be racist, but I have certainly fallen prey to racist thinking because my personal pride falls prey to what my environment has conditioned me to think - i.e. being proud of the fact that I speak English - perhaps even thinking that I am "better" for it, becoming proud after being praised for having light skin.)
This morning in church I heard a sermon (in Thai) on Colossians 1:15-23. The guy sharing - after fleshing out all the verses and going into detail about all that Jesus is, and all that He has done for us, concluded with verses 19-20 - "For God was pleased to have all His fullness dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile to Himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through His blood, shed on the cross." And he asked, "Are we going to accept the work that Jesus has done for us, to live it in our lives? If we do not, then it is tantamount to making what He has done for us ineffective." Racism goes on all over the world, but as Christians we *must* be different...our human hearts have a dire need to be reconciled to humility so that we can relate humbly to others, and this is our Savior's work!
28. The Editrix said the following at 4:19 PM on Sep 7
This is a tricky issue. Recently my dad was talking to this man - he looked pretty wild, but he was a believer, and he makes contact with a lot of aborigines in our community (we live in Aus.). He said that there are actually a lot of Christians amongst the aboriginal community, but we don't really see any of them in our (or any other) church, the reason being that they feel uncomfortable and out of place in a white fellas church.
This isn't right! There shouldn't be separation between races in the Church! But how do you reach out to these people? how do we make them feel welcome and at home in our church? Like a said before, it's a difficult issue to have to work through.
29. Janeile said the following at 5:30 PM on Sep 7
Wow! What a great topic! There are responses that are waaay above my head here, so I'll just break it down where I am.
I am a black female. While I was born in the U.S. my family was originally from Trinidad in the Caribbean. I don't have an accent, but - how do I say this without sounding like I'm stereotyping? - neither do I sound like most black folks. And they know it. Somehow, black people knew I was different. I was teased as a freshman in high school by the other black girls. In college I was shunned. The only black friends I had were from different countries.
I, too, think that the harping on "race relations" has done more to strengthen political correctness and affirmative action than it has done anything to actually improve the situation. I think it has heightened the "us against them" mentality and the victimization that demands entitlements. Frankly, I see affirmative action as reverse racism now.
I read Sheridan's (#8) post with interest. I think the same trend is happening in the U.S. Just look at the passing Jeremiah Wright debacle. I think his terrible comments were shrugged off by a lot of black folks because secretly they harbor some of the same feelings as him - and are deciding a whole election on them. And this is despite the years of "racial reconciliation" that some groups have been working on.
Making demands on one group of people without requesting the same from the other groups will only cause bitterness, not reconciliation and harmony. All people must be required to treat all people equally. I think this is only truly possible in Christ when we live in the freedom that comes with Gal 3:28.
Btw, Jeremy (#13) - I had to laugh when I read your comment. I think what Alexander (#6) meant was that he was red because of the red blood of Jesus, not because he was Native American.
30. Kelly said the following at 5:49 AM on Sep 8
Bethany D. - thank you! That makes a lot of sense. :)
31. Kate said the following at 10:02 AM on Sep 8
I second dana111 of comment #26!
This is certainly a fascinating discussion - and I hope that it has not ended on Sept 5 (right now that is the most recent comment visible).
I think what Ted was trying to say here might have been more clearly expressed, but this is hard to express because of the complexity of the subject. Ability to be clear is further compromised because this subject evokes strong emotions from anyone who cares about it at all (which can also make it harder to think clearly to discern meaning and understand complex concepts).
Note that he did not say "race" does not exist, and he does not deny that the "categories" we "see" are based on observable characteristics. He is not promoting a "colorblind" view of people in which we would pretend that observable differences were not there at all. This is an absurd denial of reality that can be very offensive to those who are aware of the hurtful consequences due to the meanings people have given to these differences. It is easy to see how it seemed like this is what Ted was saying, especially after having experiences with people who promote this view.
Instead of questioning whether or not "race" is "relevant," I think it would have been clearer to question the inherent meaning of the categories we "see" as "race." In other words, are the differences we see meaningful somehow on their own, or are these meanings created by social context?
Think about a set of children's blocks in many shapes, sizes and colors. Think about all of the different ways one could sort the blocks. The possibilities for logical and accurate categorization may be endless, but how meaningful would these categories be on their own? Surely we could interpret meaning or create meaning for these categories that could be important or functional, or somehow bad... but inherently, aren't they all just pieces of a particular type of plastic? Or are they more "inherently" just children's blocks? Even the "truest" "identity" of blocks is subject to interpretation... it all depends on our past experience with such objects and their use that would be most practical for us at a given time. This should be different than how we see people (obviously, since people do have a determinable basic identity as sinners and children of God), but how often do we actually "objectify" people in a very similar way and forget about their basic identity? (I think this is the main point of the article, that we need to focus on this similar identity, rather than on differences, which makes sense psychologically).
It may be true that there are some genetically based differences between people of different "races" (I do not pretend to know much about the subject) but what is the meaning of these differences? Is there any meaning beyond understanding genetics and the potential health-related outcomes of certain genetic characteristics (in order to help those who would suffer, not deem them as "less healthy")?
BTW, we need to approach "scientific" research about the differences between "races" with EXTREME caution because western history is FULL of seemingly objective scientific efforts to understand the "inherent" differences between people of different "races," when in hindsight we can see that these studies were actually nothing but objective. Not only was it bad science with inaccurate data, but conclusions and meanings were made from this "data" that led to bad or sometimes horrific outcomes for people who were deemed to be of "inferior quality." In these cases the categorizations were not even accurate, and people used them to interject the "meaning" of seeing different categories as "superior" or "inferior."
The passage dana111's mentions in comment #26 is so fundamental to what I am trying to explain. It describes some "categories" that are typically visible to humans... but truly mean nothing important at all in the face of our true identity in Christ.
32. Kate said the following at 10:08 AM on Sep 8
p.s. This is my favorite line from the cited article:
Race as biology entrenches identity in physical appearance.
33. Christina (in green) said the following at 10:48 AM on Sep 8
This is an annoying topic.
Race should definitly be ignored. Not racism, but RACE. People may have different inclinations, different perogatives based on their culture and ethnicity and genetic disposition, but ultimately, the color of your hair, skin, and eyes has little to do with it.
I can generally look past the color of the people around me, only using the color of their skin as a means of describing what he or she looks like to someone else to help put face to name. However, I have a HUGE problem with people of a different "race" making their "race" a big deal. Take for instance a black young man from the heart of Florida who responds disrespectfully and rudely, often beligerently, to a white woman who is in charge of teaching him how to do his job (because that is her job description and has been for 6 months). That same man had a major issue with two white people, 3 hispanics and 2 italians telling jokes to eachother that involved all of their "races" and found them offensive because they were "racist".
It bothers me when someone is willing to look past racial differences has race thrown in their face by the minority that they are treating as respectfully as they'd treat any human being.
It bothers me when I walk into a room of black men and women singing gospel and they stop and stare at me with my pale white skin and blonde hair and ask rudely "what do you want?" As if the scared little freshman girl who has no idea what she's doing is going to make racial slurs against the entire room.
I find it hilarious that I have been discriminated against based on my "race" more than I have discriminated against others based on their "race" and we sit here talking about "racism" and trying not to offend minorities.
By all means, I'm up for treating everyone of any race as equal and getting to know people based on something OTHER than their skin color. Yeah, maybe black people are better with rhythm and jumping than white and yellow people - but that's got nothing to do with skin color. Hispanics are better at soccer. Middle Eastern and Asian people are better with numbers (go figure, we're using THEIR number system).
Genetic pre-disposition given from a segment of the HUMAN race living together and propagating together and creating their own culture and passing on a certain genetic trait only to their group of people is not racism. Its something entirely different.
34. Kate said the following at 1:10 PM on Sep 8
To Christina (in green) #33:
If the experiences you describe (and others left undescribed) happened to you and are not hypothetical examples, it's pretty understandable why you'd feel so frustrated about discussions of racism.
It is not nice for anyone to be put on the spot, disrespected, stereotyped or rejected simply because of how he/she looks (especially at a time of insecurity anyway). I agree that discussions on these subjects can overlook the difficult experiences people from "majority" groups have had with "reverse discrimination" or attempts at inclusiveness that have gone wrong. This is unfair, and it's also impractical because it's very disengaging.
It is often assumed that if you are "white" you are good to go and you have not experienced discrimination or being stereotyped, unless maybe you fall into a "minority" group in some other way. Without going down a slippery slope of calling one form of oppression as worse than another... it's impossible to say whether your experiences were really that bad or not in comparison to what other people experience. It's irrelevant anyway because what matters is how those experiences affected you. If your negative experiences are not accepted or understood as a problem, you will never feel much like engaging in a dialogue on this subject! You won't get involved in it unless you deliberately make yourself do it (I suggest this).
So you might have been commenting out of frustration or to say your piece, but if you are interested in figuring out how to handle what you have described, here are some things to start with:
Just because people talk about how they want to stop racism and discrimination does not mean they know how to do it, or are consistently acting in a way to support their views. Sometimes with the intensity of their claims you'd think they ought to be living up to them in a picture-perfect way. However, this is not realistic for it would require an immense capacity for self-awareness on their part. Reality is so much messier. They may be trying to offend and push buttons, or acting without awareness because they are unable to understand every subtlty or know what a certain thing means to you.
You may also be unintentionally acting in ways that others would see as discriminatory or hateful. Nobody wants to admit or think they may be doing this, but it's a very important step to challenge your comfort about yourself and how un-discriminatory you are. If you do care about this process, it's important to be open to hearing what you may be doing to contribute to the friction.
It's all a process of gaining awareness about yourself, your own background and tendencies, as well as about how to discern and accommodate those of other people. It requires experience and honesty. Anyone who looks down on you or treats you badly because you are in a majority or he/she believes you should be better at something like "race relations" is wrong. Such a person has not come to understand and accept that this acceptance is a process for everyone that should go both ways for all groups of people. Don't let this interfere with your own process!
It's also important to remember that not every person who identifies with some kind of minority group is going to be equally aware of or invested in the goal of trying to change the ways people think and act about race. So that can also explain behavior.
As much as you wish your experiences were acknowledged and seen as a problem, so might the people who are more often acknowledged in this way in these kinds of discussions long for such acknowledgment. It might seem "typical" to you, but for each person, this kind of validation may be a new experience... something he/she might not have gotten at all in a whole lifetime. It is very important not to discount it.
35. Leah said the following at 7:31 PM on Sep 8
nikki- race and ethnicity are definitely different. However, people of a particular ethnicity are *usually* of the same race. However, often you'll get people of one race who belong to different *ethnicities*.
Eg. I'm sure many different African tribes are of the same race (a biological issue), but are of different ethnicities (ie. they have different cultures, languages, etc).
Adam D said I think too often people misuse Racism, when really one person is simply intolerant of another person. Sometimes people rub me the wrong way, and whether they're black, yellow, red, brown, or white, it might provoke me into visibly and audibly disliking someone. That's usually when the racist card is played by the antagonist.
Oh, SO TRUE.
Sheridan said In Australia, skin colour GENERALLY is not an issue, we have Indians, Asians, Aboriginals, Africans etc, and I have friends in almost every ethnic nationality. None would complain of being discriminated against in terms of colour.
Ohhhh no no no. What I'm about to say is NOT racist, I swear, simply observation. Most Australians have heard of Palm Island. It is an Aboriginal Reserve. It is the most violent place per capita on earth outside of a war zone. (Well, the title goes back and forth between it and Halls Creek in Western Australia). And its inhabitants love harping on about how they're being discriminated against because of their colour. Our city has a lot of drunkard, homeless Aboriginals, and when someone suggests doing something about them, there's suddenly an uproar over how we mistreat the aboriginals (when if it was white people doing the same thing, they'd get the same treatment).
There are multitudes of Aboriginal activitists who love carrying on about how white Australians are so racist and deny Aboriginals equality. It's absurd.
Kelly asks questions about how the world ended up so diverse from two people, asking But if that's the case, how did we all get from dark-skinned (my assumption based on the fact that humanity sprang from the Middle East) to white?
Dark skin is a dominant gene. That means a dark person can carry a "white" gene without showing it. So if two dark-skinned people, each carrying a white gene, had a child, and the child inherited both white genes, he would be white. So if Adam and Eve both had the genes for dark skin and white skin, it's easy to see how the combination of both came about :)
NB: These genes, unlike many, can also "blend", to make dark skin mid-brown.
BDB said But there's definitely more to racial identity than Biology. Have you ever seen someone of African descent who speaks with a flawless British accent? Do you notice how they are treated differently? I'm convinced that speech is far more important than looks when it comes to discrimination.
I'd agree, but I think it depends what country you're in.
36. Allen Tanner said the following at 11:15 PM on Sep 8
Danielle presumed to "correct" my post by saying: "All this is to say that, yes, it is true that groups of people share common phenotypical traits that we use as a means of racial classification, but those traits are not biological (something you argued in your comment)"
OF COURSE they are biological!
They ONLY become "not biological" when you give in to political correctness and strain the definition of "biological" until it fits a contrived agenda. Secondly, while I congratulate you for choosing genetics as your field of study, I'm not going to play the inferred credentials game and list my degrees and faculty appointments. Why? (Besides the obvious fact that my winning in that comparison would be irrelevant, pompous, and very boring.) Common sense tells us that the differences in appearance comes from our genes -- and pick any dictionary you wish but that is still BIOLOGY. Your argument (which sounds alarmingly similar to my most enthusiastic undergrads who uncritically parrot their favorite professor's position) and the sources you endorse go farther to prove my point about political correctness than I could ever wish. But you also missed the main message of my post: Racism is bad because it is sin -- but not because it is a lie that claims that race exists when it really doesn't. Race is real and it certainly has biological components. (Only we over-educated people seem to struggle with that. And every point Danielle made in trying to prove that race is not biological was amazingly biological!) However, for those who misunderstood my message, I certainly agree with you that MANY people have little understanding (and believe a great many ridiculous and bigoted fallacies) about what biological race entails. And I deliberately gave an appropriate and prophetic nod to the same organ donation/tissue matching issues you raised, because I knew someone was bound to raise them. But don't let the intellectual superiority we may feel (because of our understanding of genetics) fool us into accepting the recent propaganda that race is an artificial or contrived concept. God created such diversity and "it is good"! (And I've chosen to use the word "diversity" here despite the way it has been so overplayed and redefined for political purposes that I must grit my teeth and force myself.) I'm not going to ignore or "disown" the concept of race just because it has been an excuse for slavery and discrimination. To do so comes uncomfortably close to assuming that God made some kind of mistake in how he designed the human race (pun intended). Why can't we acknowledge race while deploring racism?
And by the way, as was already pointed out, PBS documentaries are all too often prone to confusing political correctness and junk science with the real thing. (And I'm not alone among my colleagues in refusing to be interviewed for any project in which I can't have a say about how my comments are edited and contextualized.) Some of their programs related to these issues are among the worst examples of contorting science for sermonic and political purposes. (Hey, what can one expect of a nonprofit organization that uses a quackery infommercial for its local affiliates' fund-raising drives?)
37. Sheridan said the following at 4:54 AM on Sep 9
Lauren:
Are you Australian? I hope you are not just making a judgment about the stolen generation situation because you watched a movie. I agree some things that went on were horrible, but if you do some serious research into the situation, you may get a better idea.
38. Christine said the following at 5:34 AM on Sep 10
I would be interested in Leah's (No. 35) credential in human geography and or her knowledge of the Australian and or Aboriginal history. I'm an Aboriginal, a born again believer, from Halls Creek, Western Australia. Her comments about the inhabitants (Aboriginal people of Halls Creek and Palm Island) love harping on about how they're being discriminated against because of their colour. How very wrong, you don't know me, nor do you know what comes out of my mouth. I praise God that he see's beyond the colour of my skin and or race. There is one thing I do know, I have an affinity with the likes of Joseph, Gideon, Esther and the many others in the bible. I thank God that I have a destiny in him and not defined by the perception of man. I know I serve a great and mighty God that lifted me up from the miry clay and set my feet upon the rock to stay. He is my strength, He is my deliverer, He is there when I begin to fall, He will never leave me nor forsake me. GLORY BE TO GOD!
39. Steve said the following at 9:19 AM on Sep 10
I am a white male who has been around long enough to begin qualifying for senior discounts at coffee shops. The main thing I have learned about race is that I am of a group that is most likely to know the least. This knowledge keeps me humble, which tends to keep me listening more than talking.
40. Danielle said the following at 7:13 PM on Sep 10
In response to Allen Tanner, #36:
I realized that the initial statement I made in comment #10 was not clear, and so I tried to re-explain what I was proposing in the first place in a second comment (#21). I realize that phenotypical characteristics are the result of biology, but I meant that those traits together do not come in a "Black gene" or a "White gene," but that we have chosen the traits by which to classify groups of people, as well as the names.
Also, I apologize for mentioning that I will be getting my PhD in the field. I was not trying to boast my accomplishments or credentials, but instead meant to give an explanation for why I am qualified to defend the people you mentioned in your first post ("people [that] have decided that the best way to fight racism is to deny that race is a valid term")--I was trying to explain that I am one of the people you were referring to, but I don't think that race should ignored.
To be honest, it seems as though many people commenting agree on the same points, but are getting caught up in definitions or semantics. Even if this is not the case, I realize that my opinions will differ from others', and I meant to share my opinion in love and not hostility (so if I came off as hostile, forgive me).
For the record, since it seems as though my comments may have been misunderstood, I want to say that I support everything that Anyabwile has written in his articles (particularly in his definitions of race and ethnicity). I realize that we have strayed from commentary about the article.
I agree that God made people in all shapes, colors, and sizes, and that His creation is good. I simply think that our concept of race has come to determine how we view and judge other people, and oftentimes those beliefs work to the advantage of one group and to the disadvantage of others. We are not defined by outer appearances or the way the world categorizes us, but instead by our Creator, God, as His sons and daughters.
41. mad said the following at 10:16 PM on Sep 10
Before moving recently I attended a church for several years whose vision was for racial reconciliation, to be a church where people of different races can be a church together. The separation of churches by races is very real. My time at this church taught me a lot about the issues of race and how I as a Christ follower should act on them.
In short, I completely disagree with the argument that there are no true racial differences and that focus on these differences may keep us from other problems. Yes, we are all of the race of Adam and that commonality should be the center of our identity as Christ followers.
However, God also created us, by whatever complicated scientific mapping, to be whatever race we are. Part of our identity is our race, and many times the culture of a certain race. I do not think that is something that should be ignored. To overlook that I am the race that I am is to ignore part of my God-given identity, and though my identity in Him is foremost, part of understanding others is understanding their unique background and self identity.
42. Allen Tanner said the following at 6:34 PM on Sep 11
Danielle presumed to "correct" my post by saying: "All this is to say that, yes, it is true that groups of people share common phenotypical traits that we use as a means of racial classification, but those traits are not biological (something you argued in your comment)"
OF COURSE they are biological!
They ONLY become "not biological" when you give in to political correctness and strain the definition of "biological" until it fits a contrived agenda. Secondly, while I congratulate you for choosing genetics as your field of study, I'm not going to play the inferred credentials game and list my degrees and faculty appointments. Why? (Besides the obvious fact that my winning in that comparison would be irrelevant, pompous, and very boring.) Common sense tells us that the differences in appearance comes from our genes -- and pick any dictionary you wish but that is still BIOLOGY. Your argument (which sounds alarmingly similar to my most enthusiastic undergrads who uncritically parrot their favorite professor's position) and the sources you endorse go farther to prove my point about political correctness than I could ever wish. But you also missed the main message of my post: Racism is bad because it is sin -- but not because it is a lie that claims that race exists when it really doesn't. Race is real and it certainly has biological components. (Only we over-educated people seem to struggle with that. And every point Danielle made in trying to prove that race is not biological was amazingly biological!) However, for those who misunderstood my message, I certainly agree with you that MANY people have little understanding (and believe a great many ridiculous and bigoted fallacies) about what biological race entails. And I deliberately gave an appropriate and prophetic nod to the same organ donation/tissue matching issues you raised, because I knew someone was bound to raise them. But don't let the intellectual superiority we may feel (because of our understanding of genetics) fool us into accepting the recent propaganda that race is an artificial or contrived concept. God created such diversity and "it is good"! (And I've chosen to use the word "diversity" here despite the way it has been so overplayed and redefined for political purposes that I must grit my teeth and force myself.) I'm not going to ignore or "disown" the concept of race just because it has been an excuse for slavery and discrimination. To do so comes uncomfortably close to assuming that God made some kind of mistake in how he designed the human race (pun intended). Why can't we acknowledge race while deploring racism?
And by the way, as was already pointed out, PBS documentaries are all too often prone to confusing political correctness and junk science with the real thing. (And I'm not alone among my colleagues in refusing to be interviewed for any project in which I can't have a say about how my comments are edited and contextualized.) Some of their programs related to these issues are among the worst examples of contorting science for sermonic and political purposes. (Hey, what can one expect of a nonprofit organization that uses a quackery infommercial for its local affiliates' fund-raising drives?)
43. Ray D said the following at 7:57 PM on Sep 11
You know when race is a problem? When it keeps you from loving your neighbors and removes your focus from Christ.
What value is it to us to harp on it?
I can honestly say, I've never had a positive experience in my life where race was the focal point. It's been the times where it could have mattered, but didn't, that have pleasantly surprised me.
44. Leah said the following at 7:13 PM on Sep 14
Christine,
You said (about me) Her comments about the inhabitants (Aboriginal people of Halls Creek and Palm Island) love harping on about how they're being discriminated against because of their colour. How very wrong, you don't know me, nor do you know what comes out of my mouth.
I never made any claims about the inhabitants of Halls Creek. I was talking about the inhabitants of Palm Island. I only mentioned Halls Creek when I said (Palm Island) is the most violent place per capita on earth outside of a war zone. (Well, the title goes back and forth between it and Halls Creek in Western Australia).
That is all I know about Halls Creek, so I would never make a call about its inhabitants' attitudes in this regard. Living just kilometres from Palm Island though, I know a lot about what goes on there.
45. Christine said the following at 8:56 PM on Sep 15
Hi Leah (No. 35 & 44)
Thanks for your response and clarification in relation to your comments about my hometown of Halls Creek, Western Australia.
I take your point that your comments was about Palm Island and not Halls Creek. Furthermore you confirmed your position by stating that you live just kilometres from Palm Island, as a result you know a lot about what goes on there.
This does not, however, validate your previous comments in my mind. I would still be interested in your credential in human geography and your knowledge of the Australian and or Aboriginal history.
Do you really know a lot about Palm Island and its history?
Do you personally know anyone and or a christian person from Palm Island?
By answering 'yes' to these question will validate whether or not your comment presents a balanced perspective and or whose perspective you represent.
One of my prayers for Australia is 2 Chronicles 7 v 14. It has been the prayers of other christians working with Indigenous people.
The Australian Prime Minister's apologies to the Indigenous stolen generation this year, is one important step towards this healing.
The main concern I had about your (Leah) comments is the 'attack on a particular race' and the fact that I am a part of that race. When these types of comments are presented in a public domain, there needs to some form of accountablity. Which is why I asked about your credentials. These types of comments just widens the gap between the 'us' and 'them'. Leave the judging up to God. Unless of course, there is valid reason and you are qualified to make such a comment.
Nikki (No. 5) sums up my position.
I often wonder whether God created the different race to truly prove John 8 v 34 & 35 A new commanment I give unto you, that ye love one another ... By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.
46. Leah said the following at 7:46 PM on Sep 16
Christine,
I was making no such "attack on a particular race" as you put it. I was criticising some of the Aboriginals on Palm Island. The Aboriginals on Palm Island are not their own race, last I checked. I said nothing against the Aboriginal race, just the inhabitants of Palm Island.
And yes, I do know the history of Palm Island. It was a mission where Aboriginals were removed to from various parts of North Queensland (a long time ago!). Up until the 60s inhabitants had to work X numbers of hours per week and were not paid for it. People who striked in 57 were banished from the Island. I'm definitely not supporting the concept behind Palm Island's beginnings. The people were treated terribly.
Does that excuse the awful drunkeness and domestic violence that occurs on the island? There was a little 9 year old girl living in a house with 12 adults who continually raped her. (I heard that story from another indigenous woman who works for Centrelink, working in liaison with Indigenous people). Most of the violence stems from alcohol abuse, and when the government tries to make it an alcohol-free zone, Palm's citizens get in an upcry about racism, saying we're taking their alcohol away because they're Aboriginal. Excuse me? If there was a white community acting like that, they'd get treated exactly the same way. Are we supposed to just sit by and let little children get raped, women get beaten, teenagers hang themselves? I don't care if you're black or white, but that's just not on.
There are people doing good things on that Island. Pastor Solomon is making good connections with the kids. But my original point remains- there are many people on that Island only too happy to play the race card whenever the government tries to do something about the appalling violence happening.
If I was putting any gap between people groups, it was not between black and white, it was between decent people, black AND white, who look after their children and take responsibility for their actions, and the people (who happen to be Aboriginal, I'm sorry but it's true) on Palm Island who abuse each other and then play the race card when someone tries to intervene.
(And btw, I don't personally know anybody who lives on Palm Island, but I know people- white and black- who have worked there).
47. Christine (No. 38 & 45) said the following at 8:17 PM on Sep 19
Hi Leah (35,44 & 46)
Thank you for your response to my comments in 38 & 45.
It is very interesting to note the way you have responded. Its the type of response that I thought I would get.
I never ever asked to excuse my race for the drunkeness, domestic violence and or the rape of children.
I never said that we supposed to just sit by and let children get raped, women get beaten, teenagers hang themselves.
I remind you that I am an indigenous person. I see, I hear, I have experienced.
There was suicide in my family only in the last month, and have lost count of the people that I personally know that have tragically passed on in that way.
It is through God grace that he has given me the strength to take one day at a time.
It is through God grace that when I am feeling down, that I can look to God and know that despite of everything, I have a destiny in him.
One of the most difficult things I find to deal with is when, my christian brothers and sisters jump on the band wagon and add another layer of curse, by their words that come from their mouth.
Oh what an ointment poured forth would it have been if I could only read .... I am praying for our nation... I am praying for the people of Palm Island, I am praying for the govenment in their decision making etc.
Yes, I find it very interesting in the way people respond to indigenous issues. There is no difficulties in identifying problems, unfortunately the 'good news story' is often found at the bottom of the pile.
I also bring to your attention that your comments was not only about the Palm Island people. In your (Leah) comment in No. 35 you stated that it was absurd that there are multitudes of Aboriginal activists who love carrying on about how white Australians are so racist and deny Aboriginal equality.
I remind you that as indigenous people, we see, we hear, we experience.
It is why I look to God and pray 2 Chronicles 7 v 14.
What an amazing God we serve!!!
There is one thing that we can agree on, that is agree to disagree. On that note this will be the last time you will hear from me.
In closing, I pray God richest blessing upon every area of your life.
48. Leah said the following at 7:24 PM on Sep 22
Christine, yes I did say "it was absurd that there are multitudes of Aboriginal activists who love carrying on about how white Australians are so racist and deny Aboriginal equality". But that's not a criticism of race, it's an observation. I didn't say that ALL Aboriginals harp on about race inequality, did I?
How did I lay "another layer of curse", when I was simply stating facts of what has happened on Palm Island?
I'm not blaming you or your race. But you seemed to take issue with the fact I was criticising Palm Islanders for their behaviour, so clearly I had to explain what's wrong with their behaviour.
I remind you that I am an indigenous person. I see, I hear, I have experienced. ..yes? What does that have to do with what I said?
I said facts about what is happening within a particular community. If another Aboriginal on the other side of the country is going to take offence to that- when I never criticised them or their race- that's not my fault. I made no criticism of the Aboriginal race.