Race and Ethnicity in Journalism

Natural racism

2011-12-11T17:12:00.002+01:00

Initially, I would not call myself a racist. I had the chance to meet many people from many cultures, nations, and races. During my stay in London, I was surprised how citizens from different races can live together without visible conflicts. I think black people are definitely on the right track of becoming an acceptable part of societies. I think asians managed to assimilate fully.

I am racist, if we take the fact into consideration that I make differences between them and treat them in a different way. However, it does not necessarily mean that I treat them in a negative way. I am just simply glad to get to people from different cultures and races.

In Hungary, however, the situation is quite different. Gypsies are not acceptable by the society in general, and I think it is indeed alright if we take their actual efforts into consideration. What I see is that Hungary is getting nowhere, and the way out of this cesspool is quite rugged. Gypsies have been rejected by many countries saying they cannot assimilate; if people say the same thing about them, then there must be some thruth about it, right?
Everytime I see gypsies in the street, I just become more cautious... and I have never been robbed, and I have never had my wallet or cellphone stolen.
I think I do not show racism against black or asian people, but gypsies.

Reply to the Question of the Week

2011-12-11T16:23:00.001+01:00

To be honest I am racist, just as any of us. However I refuse to be decsribed by the common interpretation of the word racist. As I have expressed many times throughout the course, I believe that racism is a natural human behaviour in every one of us by default. Just as we like to be proud of a certain community of ours, it is natural to be dismissive towards communities that we don't belong to. Skin color is just an excuse for people who are disadvantaged because of this dismissive behaviour. Don't tell me that black people don't favor other blacks over the white community and we can go on to any ethnic minority in the box. It may not even be because they don't like white people but unconsciously they like their kind better, and this is how we all are.
Real racism is when people are ignorant towards their natural "racism" and do nothing to silence it or even act up on it. In this sense I am not racist at all. It is in my nature to give every person a chance, and treat everyone just as I'd like to be treated.
I may say things about certain communities based on their stereotype, but I never mean to apply that stereotype to the individual. I never let prejudices control me when I meet new people. I have never avoided meeting a person because of a prejudice.
I think racism is very much blown out of proportion these days, and most people who talk about it don't even know what it means. It is like a universal winning card.

2011-12-11T11:44:00.003+01:00

I think I can safely say that I'm not a racist in general (at least according to my criteria), but as everyone, I have some prejudices. I have no prejudices whatsoever with people from ethnic groups that I haven't had any close contact with while growing up, Asian or Black people for example. However, growing up at a place (or rather near a place) with a strong gypsy presence, I have been exposed to the dark side of the story, when prejudices or stereotypes do come true. I tend to be more careful around them, however, it is not limited to the gypsy minority; when you grow up near an area like this, you develop some kind of a streetsmarts, you have a gut feeling about the possible dangers, regardless of one's ethnic background. Other than this "fight for survival" aspect, I don't have any negative prejudices against them, when I'm face to face with somebody, I see the person, not the ethnicity; a gypsy boy can be my friend or my enemy just as a white or an Asian guy. I guess, in conclusion, the most important element in a person's racism, prejudices, or stereotypes is the place, culture, or environment he grows up in.

Confession

2011-12-11T10:15:00.001+01:00

Until this course, I have not considered myself racist. Moreover, I felt a certain pride/pleasure/peace, that I am an antiracist. Now, I’m not so sure…

I never had any racist thoughts about African-Americans or Asians. Here, in Budapest, I very rarely saw black people and I never had any connection with them. In both my primary and high school I had Asian school mates but never in my class, so again, I had no connection with Asians. Last year, I was in the same class with a half Japanese girl and we became fast friends. I’ve always been interested to learn about her heritage. I would love to meet and befriend people from different races and backgrounds because I love diversity.

On the other hand, I am somewhat prejudiced against gypsies. It is kind of inevitable in this country, though, I don’t want to make excuses. I see the problem with them as a group, I agree that they don’t want to/cannot fit in. But I do judge them individually when I meet them one on one.

Now I know that I haven’t been as antiracist as I thought, since I never stood up with my opinions. I listened to the racist jokes and comments in silence, even though I often felt disgusted. From now on, I’ll try to make a difference. While I cannot change the world, I can definitely change my attitude. The thought really counts.

RE: Final blog entry

2011-12-09T01:34:00.001+01:00

I don’t consider myself racist at all.Although I have prejudice towards gypsies, due to bad experiences, I try not tomake any harsh judgments. I had only one gypsy friend in secondary school. Thewhole class trusted him. He was a good person. We even defended him once on aclass excursion.

I heard conversations with gypsies who madesomething out of their life by honest work. They said it was hard to achievedue to prejudice. They also claimed that they don’t blame the white majority.In fact, they are ashamed that the actions of “their” people harmed their ownreputation.

I don’t care about the color, sexuality orreligion of a person. It’s the character I’m interested in. You can be my twinbrother, if I find your character uncomfortable you are not worth my attention.

Last Question of the Week

2011-12-06T21:32:00.003+01:00

To sum up this semester, write me about your own racism. How racist you are in your opinion? According to the books, since we all are whites we have to be racist. There is no such thing as a nonracist white. I'm not interested in how it is true or not, I want to know how racist you think you are.

To be honest, here it is is my confession:

I think I am racist but not because I am white. In my life, I met Asians, Blacks, Gypsies and had bad experiences with some of them. The only race I am not racist with are Blacks because I have my best memories with this group. I do not hate any of them but I have prejudices (remember, we talked about this) agains them. I admit this, I do not make serious and vital judgments based on my prejudices but if I have a reasonable "other" choice, I go with the "other" option. It is sometimes that I avoid working/interacting with minorities. In my everyday life I have better things to do. In my professional life I had to make a report on the manner our government is dealing with the gypsy question. Since I don't hate them, I actually love the traditional gypsy culture, I stayed completely neutral. I think I'm far from the real racist image but I cannot say I am not racist at all.

Confess, please.

Food for thought: A friend of mine once told me that since he never met any of the minorities or he has no memories with any of them he cannot be racist. Knowing him, it is true.

Minority Vs. Majority

2011-12-04T22:27:00.003+01:00

Authorities should indoctrinate individuals about how to percieve other groups in a very strict manner. Every race and subgroup should have a defining profile which contains all the opinions of the mojor culture on it. Political correctness leads to apologism and violance on the other hand and both of these extremes is uncalled for.

Racism leads to more racism

2011-12-04T18:44:00.002+01:00

Every society or culture (if we consider it a general entity) has some racist elements, no matter which continent you are in, no matter what your religion is. Some might argue that it is biologically explainable (it is, to a certain extent), but the we can all agree that explicitly harmful racist behavior comes from ignorance. The western world is dominated by the Dead White European Male view, therefore the "stock" human is a white male. I believe that minorities are also racist against the majority or other minorities, but mainly because of their low numbers, it goes unnoticed. And the other way round; the white majority's racism is a lot stronger because of its quantity and the "strength in numbers" attitude. We should definitely view both sides to get the whole picture.

RE: Question of the Week

2011-12-04T17:54:00.002+01:00

I think everybody is racist. The importance should be given to the way we speak to each other about racial issues, not to the fact that we make the difference between black and white, black and yellow etc.

"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."

Just to quote a cliché (Article 1, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights). Everybody should know this and act towards its goal.

While there are terrible things going on in this world, we should educate everybody with these common values.

I can't say that a gypsy guy being racist does not cause harm to me; but when I'm being racist I cause a lot of harm to a black person jut because I'm the majority.

Racism, for no reason?

2011-12-04T17:50:00.002+01:00

I think racism itself doesn't cause social disadvantages. Racism has a strong foundation on which it's based. It's not accidental that white people aren't fond of for eg. gypsies. They are not in a bad situation because of racism, but because of the fact that they don't do anything to achieve a higher social status.

If they were equal, then there would be no racism, because those properties would compensate it all.

I Racist, You Racist...

2011-12-04T00:01:00.002+01:00

I naively assumed that one can exist without being a racist. Sadly, the memoires, the texts, the articles, and the world as a whole do not quite agree with me. Racism seems like a blood fever nurtured and cultivated by each and every society, regardless of the skin color which said blood runs under. It can take the form of hatred which lashes out in aggressive and dangerous ways, as it can be a silent presence which fuels one’s laughter on hearing racist jokes. If there was such a verb one could say: I racist, you racist… we racist.

However, in this sadly ignorant world, it is natural that the minorities are in the worst position. I would not make the assumption that their racism against the majority is less prominent; however, their distrust and dislike seems more reasonably founded if one considers history. As they are fewer in numbers (hence the word minority), their racist behavior cannot cause as much harm. They do not make the laws, they abide by it to be tolerated. They do not change the extant society, they adapt to it. Anything else is unacceptable and fuels more hatred.

I racist, you racist… we racist; everyone does as it seems. However, one does have a choice to lessen one’s own ignorance and take a step towards change.

Question of the Week

2011-12-03T15:22:00.001+01:00

Doyou think white people’s racism is blamed so much because it causes social disadvantagesfor minorities, whereas minorities most probably have the same level of racism but that doesnot cause harm to that many people?

RE:Question of the week

2011-11-27T18:32:00.001+01:00

I am not familiar with misconceptions that media promotes about the Asian minorities. What comes to my mind is that Asians are portrayed as hard working, but meanwhile cheap work force as well as fastest growing population in the world. Which I do not believe is very offensive. In the movies they are not shown as mafia or drug dealers, unlike let's say Russians or Afro Americans. The only association that i can come up with in regarding Hollywood movies is martial arts. I have not seen deceptions in mass media, that is why probably can not be objective about who should be responsible for changing them.

Reply to the Question of the Week

2011-11-27T17:22:00.001+01:00

To tell the truth I am not very familiar with how Asians are portayed in the media. Should I think about Jackie Chan or Bruce Lee movies, or the Memoirs of a Geisha? I can't see any consistent Asian portrayal throughout the mediums. If they are depicted as smart, hard working, reserved people then what is the matter with this portrayal? Is it worse than american teenagers portrayed on screen as spoiled posh brats doing drugs, bullying others, and having children at 13?
Media rarely can portray people as individuals. The lack of resources to show all characters' personality is the cause of this. Therefore, in my view, in the media stereotypes are necessary evil.
Asians still have it better than blacks and people of the Balkans.
However, if there is a need to change Asian portrayal in the media, there will surely be a farfetched campaign to change the stereotypes, but these campaigns are known to achieve the exact opposite they wanted to.
As I said, I am not familiar with the well known Asian portrayal so I'll leave the discussion on what should be changed to those who actually know something about the topic.

Change

2011-11-27T16:54:00.001+01:00

First of all, the Western attitude towards Asians should change. Asians are not geeks with fanny martial art movements, gadgets, and weird trends by nature. That’s a stereotype only. What we view as foreign is perfectly normal for them. To change this typical portrayal, writers, scriptwriters, directors, and of course, Asians would have to work closely together.

The most widespread stereotypes come from the movies. If the film creators started to care about authenticity, then the actors would have a chance to portray in character Asians.

Question of the Week

2011-11-25T23:05:00.002+01:00

Do you think that the depiction of the Asian minority in mass media and pop culture should be changed? If yes, who should be responsible for the first step?

Re: Question of the Week Nov. 23

2011-11-24T12:15:00.001+01:00

It is respectable that Asian Americans makean effort for assimilation. In contrast, in German speaking countries Turkishimmigrants are considered dead weight exactly because of their lack of effort.Most of them do not learn the language of their hosts; hence they are not ableto contribute to social expectations.

However, I believe that it is not entirelytrue that Asian immigrants in America abandon their heritage. In some occasionsthis might be the case, but I believe the majority is quite sensitive in thismatter. The younger generations of Asians, even though becoming more Americanin their social life, remain faithful to their heritage. They learn the tongueof their parents; they embrace the culture of their ancestors.

On Asian Stereotyping

2011-11-23T22:25:00.006+01:00

There is a bit of truth in each stereotype, and in the case of stereotypes attached to Asians in the United States, there is a lot of truth in it. Asians, like all other races in the United States, change as a group from one generation to another. Generations that follow the first one are no longer belonging to the initial environment of the parents. A new culture is developed that has nothing to do with the origin. The hardships of assimilation would make this assumption of being close to the origin, but that is totally not true. This assumption is a form of escapism that immigrants practice subconsciously. Traits defining new groups in a country are related to the professions they excel, the physical differences of their individuals, and the socio-economic status of the group. In the case of first Asian immigrants, they were the most different looking group from the white majority group. Unlike Mediterranean, Hispanic, and even Indian immigrants, Asians look more different and act more differently from the white dominant majority. The attitudes of such a group were spotted by the majority, and even if the group is no longer Asian and strange, it would still be defined by its original arrival shape to the country.

Re: Question of the week

2011-11-21T22:28:00.001+01:00

Chinatowns for me are not representitives of isolation, but a colorful spot in a community's life. It is a city in a city, that is a misterious place to visit. It is something like traveling to the far east but in a much more digestible form as it is a mixture of the two worlds. For the inhabitants it is obviously a different feeling, but I believe it makes them more comfortable and confident to feel the support of their own ethnic group and cultural life. These places are good to get a break from our own culture and once in a while experince different mentalities.

At Your Own Risk

2011-11-20T18:31:00.001+01:00

Cultural isolation is a scary, scary thing because I see nothing wrong with it in and of itself. It's not discriminatory, because the minority groups in question don't even want integration. And that's fine, integration should be a personal choice--compulsory happy-fun-ethnically-diverse group therapy sessions on a national scale aren't just impossible for practical reasons, they are a violation of human rights and a creepy creepy thought anyway.

However, the phenomenon of cultural isolation does retroactively justify all the otherwise existing discriminatory practices. "They don't want to be part of our culture, but that's fine, we didn't want them anyway!" People rarely grow emotionally past their high school selves, and they're bad at dealing with cognitive dissonance like this, so cultural isolation just fuels the fire.

So yes, while it shouldn't be actively fought against, it should be discouraged if we ever want to get rid of every hint of racism.

Isolation

2011-11-20T17:58:00.001+01:00

The word isolation definitely creates a wrong impression. As for me, China towns are a way bigger communities are trying to keep their traditions, foods and citizens together. When it comes to the point when immigrant diasporas grow bigger and bigger they create a place where all of them get come together, buy foods and drinks they used to buy back in their home countries, share news and gossips. I do not see it as isolation, because every other person that does not belong to the group, is more than welcome to visit these China towns. Here in Hungary, it is also a huge business. As you can buy a lot of things produced in China much cheaper then at any other stores.

Bitter Taste

2011-11-20T17:12:00.003+01:00

For me, the word isolation leaves a bad taste in my mouth. In my mind I picture it in a way that Defoe depicted Robinson Crusoe’s island; surrounded with the cold, vast ocean, no sentient creature anywhere in sight to keep you company; in other words: it is desolation in its most devastating form.

Of course, this is not the case with cultural isolation. They isolate themselves, as a group, where they live and lead their lives as their culture’s traditions dictates it. It is familiar, comforting, and safe. Still, the bitter taste lingers. While the context has changed, the meaning of the word did not.

The aforementioned reasons seem good enough to remain enclosed in self-created isolation. But is it really self-created? How much the outside, the real world can be held accountable for these cultural islands? How much were they created from fear of not being accepted, of being labeled as outcasts?

It is hard to say, but I strongly believe that cultural preservation, fear, comfort, laziness, intolerance of others, and many other reasons can be blamed or, for some, praised for these isolated islands. They are there for all the good and bad reasons, seemingly standing still in their obvious difference and deference to no one.

2011-11-20T17:03:00.002+01:00

Cultural isolation is a symbol of both the unwillingness of immigrants to assimilate and the prejudices of the majority. Places like Chinatowns are harmless in my opinion, however, both sides should try to break down the wall between the two cultures, these places should be jewels of a city, not ghettos. All in all, if these areas are not tools for segregation, then I don't think there are any problems with them.

Question of the Week

2011-11-20T16:40:00.002+01:00

What does cultural isolation, such as Chinatowns, mean to you?

If you don't know anything about Chinatowns, you can reflect on other issues such as the Danish border control situation, the French burka law or anything that is cultural isolation for you. Tell me about it.

Facial Recognition

2011-11-15T09:52:00.001+01:00

As part of Zsofia's discussion leading today, we discussed facial recognition with races other than our own. I had taken a more involved test than this one, below and failed miserably, but this will give you a taste of what it is like.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sleep/tmt/instructions_1.shtml

This is not in lieu of Zsofia's discussion question, but in addition to it.

2011-11-13T18:22:00.002+01:00

The cliche answer would be that it'd completely change my life, I'd go on a trip of self-discovery, then I'd sign up to be a monk or something. But the reality is quite different. In my opininion, if someone spent (or in this case, I spent) 18+ years without any research about my ancestry, then probably an interview wouldn't change anything. I'd rather be thinking about being embarrassed than having a revelation. Our anscestry is only important if you feel that it is important, it's not something that is obligatory to learn about.

Missing nothing

2011-11-13T17:06:00.002+01:00

No, I wouldn't bother. If you were born in the States, then it's obvious that you're supposed to know much more about the USA than China. It's natural that you wouldn't know too much about your ancestors' history, culture, and language.

An interview like this would never be able to change one's life, that's it.

I'm personally half Lebanese, but I'm more familiar with Hungarian language, history, language, and habits. I guess there's no point in thinking about that, since it depends on the person.

RE: Question of the Week

2011-11-13T16:35:00.002+01:00

I'd go home and think about my roots. Also about the reason, why my parent didn't raised me to be more Chinese. But I don't think that I could change it anyway. I can study about China, its culture, its language. However, I am not going to be more Chinese.

Learning the language from a teacher is not like speaking it as a native speaker. Moving there is also not a possibility since I won't be able to assimilate. I was raised as an American, a Chinese American. As Orsi wrote, not even the food is going to taste the same way.

I'd try to accept my situation, maybe I'd do some research on my own history but this is everything I could do within reasonable limits. I wouldn't go crazy about it. There's nothing that connects me to the mainland China.

Home is where the Heart is

2011-11-13T16:18:00.001+01:00

I think it depends on whether you were born in America or just moved there as a child. If you decide to move to another country at a certain point of your life, you have to adopt, learn the foreign culture, language. In this case, it is natural that you bring certain knowledge of your own country’s cultural background too.

If I was born in America to Hungarian parents, I would say I’m American. But I know myself and how I never liked to be Hungarian, so if it was the other way round, if I was born in Hungary to American parents, I probably wouldn’t say I’m Hungarian. It all depends on the person and each situation. It depends on what country you love.

I don’t think we have to change our whole life if we find out we’re half Asian, Chinese, American or whatever, it doesn’t really matter. You preserve the culture and the values you bring with you, wherever you come from. If it’s important to you to study Chinese culture, do it. If you feel like you have some kind of connection with it, learn about it, experience it. Otherwise, it’s completely useless, because knowledge won’t make you more Chinese or less American, it will only make you educated.

Re: question of the week

2011-11-13T16:16:00.001+01:00

If I have to imagine myself, I would definitely pay a lot of attention to the history and traditions of my country, the country of my origins. I can not possibly imagine, how I would not be interested in my family tree, in customs and background of my country. I am not saying I would know everything, but I would definitely study current political and historical events, important dates, cultural figures and would absolutely learn the language. To be ready to contribute to any discussion about the country where I am coming from. On the other hand it does not mean that one has to be fanatic, but rather just educate himself about basic things.

RE: Question of the week

2011-11-13T15:59:00.001+01:00

As an American I would probably settle forignorance and continue living the dream. On the other hand, I support the ideaof integration. If I move to a foreign country I feel obligated to embrace theculture, adapt to its customs and, most importantly, learn the language. But Icannot understand why this, in most cases, concludes in turning one’s back ontheir roots. It is the responsibility of the parents to teach their childrenwhere they came from and who they are.

America™ the brand

2011-11-12T14:09:00.001+01:00

This would be a very interesting situation as it can cause a majoridentity crisis, in my opinion, in those who are susceptible to it. Though Idon't agree with what this situation implies that if one looks to be someonewith a certain ethnic background then they should be interested in the cultureas well. Especially as nowadays being American means that you belong to thismelting pot with lots and lots of different ethnic backgrounds but you're allAmericans.

As I see it, being American for the modern world is much moredifferent than being for example Chinese. When you say "American" youmean what this term stands for: "the land of freedom and opportunities,the place where dreams come true". As the USA is a relatively youngcountry and it does not have the "burden" of having a long history,it is much easier for people to feel that they belong. They don't have to adaptto too many things that are dictated by the thousands of years of history as infor example China. That is why I believe that being American is much more of away of life, and there are just a few people who really feel as American as aChinese person feels Chinese.

In a way whenimmigrants and ethnic groups say that they are American they mean that "weare free, we are in the best place imaginable, we were brave enough to breakfree from our home country's disadvantages".

Question for the Week: Imagine...

2011-11-12T00:47:00.006+01:00

Imagine a scenario where you are the child of a Chinese immigrant couple in America. You are the same age as you are now. You were taught some Chinese, but you forgot most of it. You are now more used to the Chinese food served in America than the original cuisine. You know the history of America, but not the Chinese. In essence, you barely know anything about your parents' origins - your origins.

In the university, one of your fellow students goes up to you and asks you to take part in an interview for her research. You agree. You are sitting in the cafeteria, eating hotdog and drinking Coca-Cola, when she suddenly starts talking about China: its culture, its fascinating linguistics, and its long history. You are Chinese, whereas she is not; yet, she knows far more about China than you have ever bothered to learn. The interview, of course, concludes in embarrassment since you cannot really contribute anything to your classmate's research.

It is over. But is it? What would you do in a situation like this? Would you realize that you are missing out on something big? Would you be interested to learn? Or would you just go back to your life thinking: I might look Chinese, but I'm American.

Perseverance and Love

2011-10-30T18:51:00.002+01:00

The two outstanding traits that Dee exhibited are perseverance and love. They are closely related, I don't think that Dee would have been able to pull through without her unconditional love for her children, her mother, and her community. She had the power to fight against the false charges, then the man behind these accusations; she was able to finish it in spite of all the hardships she had to endure. Also, she had the mental strength not to accept the plea bargain, she could resist giving up her beliefs just to see her children.

Re:Question of the weeek

2011-10-30T18:09:00.000+01:00

I could see a strong woman that even in the moments of desperation did not give up, did not loose the will to fight for justice. The person that has courage to stand up for herself, for her family's future. Dee was shown as fearless and inspiring young lady that had a goal to help others. With her case she was able to bring to an end years of discrimination and abuse of black population in her hometown. In the moments of confusion and frustration, when others would simply follow their own interests just to make a living, she did not turn back.

RE: Question of the week

2011-10-30T17:27:00.002+01:00

Dee was a decent and strong woman, who not only managed to care for four children without their father's help, but got through this whole struggle without doing any harm to her family. She never even considered choosing the easier way by pleading guilty. She fought as hard as she could to maintain a good life for her children. She did not cry over the fact that she almost lost everything, but went out immediately to find a new job. Dee tried everywhere until she succeeded.

She was an excellent parent and a good daughter to her own mother. I think the most valuable features of Dee were bravery and endurance.

A Woman's Fight

2011-10-30T17:03:00.001+01:00

Dee was given a way out twice: plead guilty and be released from prison; then when the charges were dropped, she was free to go on with her life. She chose the easy way in neither case. She remained strong in her belief of justice.

She not only fought for herself and for her family, but for the whole black community as well. Dee supported the others, encouraged them to choose her path, and did not turn away from them when they eventually bowed to the system.

Her courage and stamina were truly inspiring and her determination was brought to fruition. With the help of the two activist attorneys, Dee managed to not only overcome her obstacles, but she played a fundamental part in bringing justice to the community.

Perseverance

2011-10-30T16:02:00.006+01:00

I think the most visible trait Dee exhibited was perseverance. She got "doomed" by the society when she

was accused of being a drug dealer. Dee was a real believer,

she believed that the truth will be revealed. Pleading guilty

was not a viable choice for her to choose, because she

wanted to be clear. She insisted, and I guess she did it

only for her family, not for herself. She was stubborn in this

sense and very determined.

American Violet's Dee

2011-10-30T15:47:00.001+01:00

What struck me during watching American Violet was that Dee wasvery brave. She was not selfish for one moment. She did not think twice, even when she wastold that the DA will fiercely fight her if she sues him, as she knew that itwas the only chance they got. She served her community this way, as it was saidin the film, if they'd let this chance go, everything would stay the same; nomatter that the charges against her were dropped, the raids would continue, andthe people from the project would be back in jail in a few weeks’ time.

This exceptionalbravery was the one thing that really got my attention. She managed to holdherself together, even though the events were very hard on her. Not only didshe have to find the court, the DA, and make a living, she even had to keep her children safe fromher ex and his alleged child molester girlfriend.

RE: Question for October 25

2011-10-30T14:16:00.001+01:00

The most prominent trait was endurance.Even though she was aware that there was little hope to restore her dignity andlife. She had faith. She was determined that with the help of the lawyers,Conroy and Cohen, truth will prevail. I believe these are traits that takecourage, or stubbornness, to hold on to. Especially when the safety of yourfamily is on the line and everybody else around you already gave up.

Question for October 25

2011-10-25T09:55:00.002+02:00

Cover of American VioletIn the movie American Violet, what positive character traits did Dee exhibit that one would not think possible under the circumstances. How do you explain them. Do NOT attribute to Hollywood.

Sorry, but if you missed the class today, you will not be allowed to blog this week.

Globalization is Good

2011-10-23T18:50:00.001+02:00

I think we should accept that, like the prophet Dylan said, the times are changing. The construct of nation was designed in an era when mobility was severely limited; people didn't have the option to move to the opposite hemisphere of the Earth on a whim, even if they had the immense resources to organize a multiple year journey across land and sea, even if they had the good fortune of avoiding major public safety issues on the way, like I don't know, wars and such. Nowadays it's the matter of a few hours' airplane travel to move to Australia. The whole Earth is ours; people are citizens of the world much more than of any one nation. We have no reason to institute restrictions on migration other than to uphold outdated concepts of national identity. Instead, we should dispose of such silly notions and embrace diversity.

Celebrating Diversity

2011-10-23T17:44:00.001+02:00

We should feel lucky that in our big beautiful planet there are so many cultures. With visiting other countries we can see glimpses of them. However, with this amount of migration, we can even live with them. To control it would be a crime against freedom and knowledge. People should have the right to live wherever they wish to and everybody should accept the newcomers as their friendly neighbors.

My views might be far too idyllic, maybe even utopian, but I am just stating how it should be, not how it is. I am aware that it is not always easy to accept the differences, but instead of watching out for all the disadvantages, we should concentrate on the positive aspects of migration.

Without getting to know other cultures, the growth and development would be much slower. We would close ourselves off from the good influences, not just from the bad ones. Everything, including technology, trend, and food would become boring without taking a look at how others are doing it.

Migration is a great part of the learning process of other cultures and it should never be controlled or forbidden. When complaining about the hardships of living together, one should consider the best aspects of all the foreign countries have been offering us: Chinese food, Japanese gadgets, French trend, etc. Living together might not be always easy, but the alternative is just unthinkable.

Migration

2011-10-23T17:09:00.000+02:00

As many others, I moved to Europe couple of years ago, seeking for better, stable life. Whoever moves to another country, in most cases, does it not to share his or her cultural traditions with the world, but tries to get to a better place.
I do believe that migration has a lot of positive aspects. However, I would rather mention that migration sometimes creates tension between local population and immigrants, the second migrated diaspora tries to change the flow of live in the new country according to their traditions, like it has happened in France, Switzerland and Italy. Unfortunately, a lot of migrated population tend to behave in completely different way once they move to another country. So, most likely we will not get to know their culture better.
On the other hand, i believe that for those who try very hard to succeed in life, migration opens new opportunities. Gives better chances to self improvement, helps to see life from many different angles.

2011-10-23T14:57:00.002+02:00

National cohabitation clearly has big advantages, but it can also be a constant fight between the two groups. The advantages are clear to everyone, it introduces a different culture to us, it increases our awareness, and it allows to us view the whole world from a different perspective. However, if the two nations don't get along with each other very well for whatever reason (politics, history etc.), it might lead to constant quarreling, or even to a war. The conflict of Palestine and Israel is a special case, but we can see where cohabitation can lead.

Migration should be allowed as long as it is done legally, I think everybody should have the opportunity to live somewhere else if he wants to, as long as he accepts his new country's rules. The only case when migration could get out of hand is if some war broke out or a huge natural disaster hit a whole area, but in that case, we should help the people affected, and not order a lockdown.

Response to Question of the Week

2011-10-23T12:00:00.000+02:00

We can probably say that sometimes it seems chaotic how peoplefrom different nations live together. There is a chance that in the future somecountries or areas will become unrecognizable and we won't be able to call thatplace Whatever country as so many nationalities live there. It isn't a badthing and I certainly see that it can happen. It raises the question that doesthat show that migration at some point will become uncontrollable? No, I don'tthink so. It is already as popular as widespread as it can be. At some point inthe future if a huge war broke out, maybe then the refugees would go in drovesto another place; but without a major outer force, I don't think it willhappen.

Probably the most important advantage of living together withother nationalities is that we broaden our knowledge with their culture, and itshapes our thinking in a way that we will have much more general love forfellow humans, and we will be much more accepting towards those who are notlike us.

Question of the week

2011-10-22T13:37:00.002+02:00

We all live in a globalised world where travel, easy communication and migration are constantly pushing diverse people closer together. In this world, identity becomes extremely fragile. What do you think the advantages and the disadvantages of national cohabitation are? Is there a point where migration becomes out of control and should be limited?

Asian nightmares

2011-10-21T23:12:00.004+02:00

Usually Asians I meet abroad are totally ashamed of their heritage and they try too hard to fit in the communities they are put in. That doesn't change the fact that being in America terrorizes any minority and make it become apologist to the majority. Americans are all immigrants and the have no roots there. All races bully each other there. It is a fookin' ethnic circus.

RE: Question of the Week

2011-10-16T21:26:00.002+02:00

Yetanother american success story. Rags to riches. The American Dream. It was aninteresting read, though. I liked the structure of the book. How McBride toldhis story colored with the flashbacks of her mother. Very nice touch.

However,McBride is just one in a hundred. I'm sure his story is inspirational to a lotof people coming from a similar background as he did. It proves that it can bedone. Still, a lot of people don't practice enough self criticism to realizetheir strengths and weaknesses. They keep on trying to accomplish goals infields at which they suck. Ever wondered why American teenagers occasionallysnap and shoot half of their school down? I believe it's partly due to storieslike this and partly because rarely anyone tells them what their true strengthsare. "You want to be a singer? Sure! Go ahead!" (It doesn't matteryou don't have the voice for it.) By the time these kids get to high schooltheir ego is bigger than their sense of reality. This is followed by constantfrustration which they cannot digest.

So, inshort, I though it was a very interesting story. I know it is an autobiography,but I would be really keen on learning the faith of his friends mentioned inthe story. Did they make it?

James and the Sisters

2011-10-16T20:42:00.000+02:00

Hearing McBride talk about his mother didn't change my opinion radically, but it did initially make me think of the family as a much more balanced and loving one than I imagined based on the reading. Also, as Daniel says, it brought the point home that this is not fiction, but an actual life story.

However, on watching the video again I found the casual side mention of two of his sisters running away from home a bit discomforting. He didn't elaborate on the incidents, he seemed to treat them as irrelevant and the light he mentioned them in was barely negative at all. If I want to force an explanation on this behavior, it's somewhat nearly almost as if he was treating them in the same excluding manner as Ruth's family did with her.

While yes, James himself turned out okay, and he himself thinks highly of his mother, I'd be just as interested to hear his sisters' perspective on life in the McBride family under the parenting of Ruth. As with all stories, credibility can only be judged in comparison to others' perspectives.

Sympathy

2011-10-16T16:47:00.003+02:00

The video didn't change my opinion about his mother but I feel like I have a bigger picture about James.

I don't know why, but I like him. He had a hard time growing up and he fought his legacy when he was writing his book. I think he deserves the truth about his past and his heritage. I very much share his experience with the church, when he was playing in one tone and the old ladies were singing in an other one, this part made me laugh. Maybe this is the part that raised my attention. Otherwise, I wasn't really interested in the story since I have nothing in common with this family. The only thing I understood from the very beginning that all the secrets make the author's life painful. I still hold on to my opinion that his mother made a stupid decision raising her children the way she did. She cause damage and she couldn't repair, it was James who fought all the way until he found the truth.

Anyway, while reading the book I haven't felt any sympathy for him. The video showed him in an other angle. It was good hearing him talking about his book.

Changing my opinion

2011-10-16T16:32:00.000+02:00

After the class i have watched the full video, and i have to say, that my opinion has not changed much. In fact, it has not changed at all. It was interesting to see the man whose life story we were so eager to analyze and whose private matters were exposed to the whole world. It has not change my opinion: I still believe he has a very pleasant personality, strong character, talented and what is more important is so loving and caring about his family. I was very interested what was the motivation for him to write and publish this story. More than that, what made the book so popular. I have to say, there are so many people out there with the same, if not more, fascinating stories. However, this particular one made thousands of people admire the author and feel for his mother.

Sheer Interestingness

2011-10-16T14:07:00.002+02:00

Sheer interestingness, I reckon these two words can describe the book. After having read James McBride's masterpiece, I was actually unable to imagine him. I know it is strange, but that is how I felt then. Then I watched the video at home and my opinion concerning the book shifted a bit.
I had the slight feeling that he mostly did it for the money. However, I would have done it for mostly the money, too. The fact that he had an odd childhood actually had a great ifluence of his own life as he did not anything about the background of his family.
As for me, all those characters remained the same, I only had a different opinion about the author, whom I respect and consider genuine.

Meeting James McBride

2011-10-16T12:30:00.001+02:00

Meeting an author whose book I read is always an interesting experience. Meeting the author of a book which I liked is even more fascinating. When I was around thirteen, I was all over the Darren Shan books and when I was able to see him for the first time I was blown away by the sheer pleasure. Listening to him, learning about how the books were created gave a new perspective.

Years have passed since then, and while I am no longer involved in adolescent vampire fictions, I watched James McBride with the same excitement and pleasure. Reading The Color of Water didn’t seem like a tedious task as it was so well written and well thought out. Who needs a plot with a background like that?

Watching the video gave me a new understanding of the book. We argued a lot in class whether the siblings could have a normal life or not after such an upbringing, and listening to the author, my belief was justified that they turned out just fine. Everyone has painful memories and hardships in their life, especially going through adolescence, even though it certainly varies due to social status and the surroundings. Nevertheless, McBride spoke about his mother with love and respect, which could not have been possible, if Ruth had done such a horrible parenting.

My only regret is that I have not been able to watch the whole video, a mistake I will sure rectify given enough time. Even the glimpses I was given helped me processing the memorial as a whole; it will sure be interesting to see how the whole video will change my perspective.

Real Life Story

2011-10-16T12:29:00.001+02:00

My views didn’t change that much, but it certainly helped to realize that the story told was actually real. It brought us closer to the author, to his mother, and to their situation, it made me understand what it meant to James McBride. It was good to see that after investigating his family’s past, he seemed to be comfortable with the situation, which is why he could write the book consequently. I think that it must have taken a lot of willpower even to start his project, let alone finish it, publish it, then to talk about it. Of course, the money was a huge motivator, we can’t forget that, but it must have been hard anyway.

Re: Question of the week

2011-10-16T12:27:00.000+02:00

Certainly, it is interesting to see the authortalk about his work, and it is inspiring how he does these little gatherings toaddress issues stated in the book. As he talks about his experiences we get toknow interesting details about his feelings concerning the book, and it isalways fascinating to see an author do a commentary on his own work. For me itdid not really change anything about how I see the story. Some of his commentsmissed target I think (the one with the money thing was a complete disaster forme). I imagined that the author may be more sensitive than standing in front ofthe crowd and talking so freely about his book. If I was him I would alwayshave a little distance kept between myself and my work of such kind.

Question of the week

2011-10-14T11:43:00.002+02:00

Sorry I am so late. In exchange, you will get a very simple, yet interesting question.

How did you feel about the book after seeing and hearing the author himself talk about it? Did it change your thoughts about the whole story or the characters? I think it is very exciting to get to know James McBride after spending so much time reading his book. What is your opinion?

Here is the link to the video I have showed you:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/178169-1

Parenting in Queen Style

2011-10-09T17:46:00.001+02:00

I don’t think it is very hard to be a better parent, than a sexually and verbally abusive madman, whose only love affair was with money. While, as an only child, I am not sure how much emotional satisfaction Ruth’s children could get, I know that twelve children is twelfth time more trouble than one; which is, without any exaggeration, a lot.

I do not think that the kids were suffering from feelings of under appreciation. Ruth was strict, which is inevitable if one tries to keep a household/circus of twelve competitive and unruly children. She did everything in her power to give them the proper education, morals and background so that they could succeed in their adult life. It is very easy to judge whether what and how she did was right or wrong, but I think that anyone would have given in their resignation after they have walked a day in her shoes.

I believe, Ruth eventually find enough love in the sea of her children but I don’t think that there is enough love in this world which could have recompensed her for all the pain she had to suffer while growing up. She did everything she could in the hope that it would suffice. Reading her son’s memorial, I think she did well.

Overcompensating and the Collective Consciousness

2011-10-09T17:43:00.000+02:00

It is a really common psychological phenomenon when you want to overcompensate for the bad elements of your childhood, Ruth was doing the same thing. Growing up in a bad, loveless environment, she was bound to have the conscious or subconscious need to have a big, loving family. Was she successful? Probably yes, the human mind is working in a really interesting way, it doesn’t care about facts or the truth, it is only concerned with how the individual feels about a certain issue. As long as Ruth felt confident with her choice to have a lot of kids, she must have felt loved and satisfied.

As for the kids being happy, that could go either way, either they will be totally miserable, or they will live happily, unable to imagine how it would be to live in a small family. In larger families (even with 3 kids), the children tend to have a somewhat collective consciousness, especially the younger ones, that if the others feel good, they will also feel god and vice versa. If this occured in Ruth’s family, then it was most likely a very happy family, even if the parents were lousy at ther ”jobs”. Personally, I couldn’t imagine living in such a big family (I have bad experiences even with just one sibling), but if you look around, bigger families tend to be the happiest, even with financial problems.

Love for a dozen

2011-10-09T17:32:00.002+02:00

Ruth had a terrible childhood with her parents. That is what might have made her decide to give everything for her children. She wanted to give everything to her children she did not have back in her childhood.
She indeed lived a difficult live, she married a "schwarz" and switched to another religion which was unacceptable in those times for her family, so it was no doubt that she could never return home and attend her mother's funeral.
This, however, gives no answer for the "why." Why did she have 12 children? Children need love, and something material like toys. It is obvious that 12 children cannot get the same amount of love and toy as a single child. Despite these hardships, she managed to send her children to great universities, which is admirable. Therefore, I think she satisfied her needs and managed to be a great parent.

I don't get it either

2011-10-09T17:17:00.002+02:00

I thik Ruth was a good person. She was strange in many ways, but after all, she had a great heart. It may have been very hard for her to express her love towards her family, simply because she did not know how to. Her mother was handicapped, her father was a horrible person. She managed to find a way out but she had to pay a lot for it. Once her father found out she was about to marry a schwarz, she could never come home again. Not even when her mother died. She had to build her own family, start a new life as a Chatolic woman along with her black husband. I don’t understand why she needed so many children, and I probably never will. I have two siblings and I usually feel it’s already too much for my parents. They have to work hard, pay the bills, keep the house together, take the children to school, pay for school, pay for my rent, pay for the phone bills, feed us… This is just impossible to do with a dozen kids. It is amazing that despite all of this she sent out all her children to decent schools and universities. All of them became teachers, musicians, artists, doctors and well-educated people. I don’t have the slightest clue how she managed to raise them, but I’m sure her whole life was a constant struggle.

So yeah, Gergő, I don’t get it either.

2011-10-09T16:46:00.000+02:00

I do not know what to think about the question if she managed to become a greater parent than her father was to her. Do not get me wrong, but it is not very difficult to be better parent than an old pedophile.
I am struggling to understand what were the motives to have that many children. I am very positive that she did love all of them from the bottom of her heart and had them from a man she found peace with, after so many years of suppression.
I admire her strong personality, that has to be said. To raise twelve children, give them proper education, strong moral values and sense of family importance - as for me, a great job was done. I saw the family striving for money, facing sometimes a lack of attention from their parent, but where each and every member was ready to give a helping hand. Probably all those difficulties brought that children even closer to each other. Going through a rough times in life is not always bad, it makes people stronger and forces to re-evaluate things. I am not going to judge her according to my preconceptions, but rather according to her son,because he is the "result" of her parenting. I see intelligent, successful man, who admires his mother, that speaks louder than any words.

No Parent is Perfect

2011-10-09T14:40:00.000+02:00

Ruth's quest for love was obviously unfruitful, and she clearly went about it in a very stupid way, but I can certainly understand the short-sighted assumption after one kid that two will give more love, and after two that maybe the third will help, and so on, even though I can't comprehend how it would take so many tries for her to realize the gaping flaws in this strategy.

What I also fail to understand is that unlike minorities are made out to do, she refused welfare support altogether. I can see that the racist assumptions in the stereotypical view of minorities as welfare freeloaders is something that might discourage parents from taking that road, in an attempt to save themselves from racist remarks, but one, that doesn't exactly work that way--when people see skin color and the number of children, they don't stop to ask whether the family is on welfare or not, they assume things--and two, it leaves the parents unable to support the family in the manner they would like to.

Even so, in some aspects I think she succeeded in surpassing her own father's performance as a parent; although neglecting the children is certainly not good parenting, she didn't make the same mistakes as her father. And who knows, maybe a few generations down the road, her mistakes will have been avoided in the same manner, and the mistakes after her, and so on. There's a solid possibility that somewhere along the line the perfect parent is a direct descendant of Ruth.

2011-10-09T12:48:00.003+02:00

Briefly, I share Gergő's point of view. I don't believe that she achieved "to be loved and to give love". Being one of 3 children and I have been one of 5 children, too; I can see now that even one child requires a lot of energy and love...

However, some people still do this. They suffered from various things in their lives and when they become adults they try to fill this gap by exaggerating their target emotion or their dream.

It is not her fault. This is the fault of her surrounding, the community she grew up in. This is why I believe that we should pay attention to the people around us. Even if we don't see, we still cause serious damage.

I don't get it

2011-10-08T23:05:00.000+02:00

As I expressed my opinion about this in class, I still think Ruthachieved just the exact opposite of what she wanted, with having so manychildren. She wanted to be loved and give love, still if you think about it,she barely had five minutes a day for each of her children. Need we say more? Idon't think so. To be frank, I don't know what she was thinking. We alsomentioned in class that maybe she became greedy. That is the most probable casein my view. I generally don't understand people who keep having babies whilethey struggle financially. What are those people thinking? Of course love isthe meaning of everything, but unfortunately you won't be able to heat your housewith love, or feed a dozen of hungry mouths. It is like to keep buying thingsfor credit when you don't have a steady income.

If someone could give a reasonable explanation to this, I would bethankful.

Question for October 4th

2011-10-04T14:00:00.002+02:00

We talked about Ruth surrounding herselfwith children because she wanted to be loved. Do you think she was able tosatisfy her need? Furthermore, was she able to be a better parent than herfather, or with other words: was she able to give the kind of love to herchildren she never received? If not, what might have been the reason for it?

A never ending fight against racism

2011-10-02T17:19:00.003+02:00

It is no doubt that racism is to be considered wrong; as it differentiates people based on their skin color, customs, or any factor that may reveal the basic nature of that specific person. Racism is indeed a set of beliefs that are deeply rooted in people and culture.

Nowadays, most poeple are raised to be racist, even though parents do not do this on purpose. Parents try to be cautious, in almost every sense. What those parents would presumably like to do is prevent their children from being affected by the effects of social diversity. Some of us were born into racist households, but does that necessarily mean that a simple change cannot be made? Surely not,

Fixing the problems caused by racism is a complex issue. First of all, people should be aware of the fact that racism will always be present as long as more than one race lives side by side. Positive racism is considered to be a cure for the problem. It enables some racially inferior people to stand out and live as "normal" white people. Isn't it racism by the way? It differentiate people of colour from people of colour. Where is equality? Positive racism, in my opinion, indeed causes other problems.

2011-10-02T17:18:00.000+02:00

I find the Affirmative actions a good starting policy, although i have my doubts about visible success of this program in any of the nearest future. The idea behind it seems a little utopian to me. As long as one part of the society works to survive, and notice, i do not mean maintaining high standards of living, but just surviving ,while another enjoys all benefits from being unemployed, that will always raise a tension between certain layers of society. Unfortunately, even if one problem will be resolved, another will arise; Even if tomorrow Palestine finds peace, many generations will live in hatred towards Israel. Sixty six years after the end of WWII people still cope with the issued it brought. Jews still feel the whole world owns them, Hungarians hate Russians and so on and so forth, the list of unsatisfied nations is long.
Though, I think that in the modern world of today the cases of severe racism are not that common anymore ; at least not in our daily lives. Humanity is learning to take baby steps to promote healthier societies, where color of your skin or your sexuality is not the criteria to be judged upon.

Ultimate Solution

2011-10-02T17:04:00.002+02:00

Racism cannot be good in any form, therefore, positive and negative racism are nearly equally bad. Take away their rights, because they are black! Sounds horrendous, is it not? But what if we say: Give them more rights, because they are black? For me, this doesn’t sound better at all.. The key in both of these ideas is that something should be done to a group of people due to their skin color. But is this not the base of racism? That there are people different from us so something must be done?

No affirmative action could build a lasting bridge over the gap of hatred and distrust, simply, because this will only mark the notion of discrimination even more significantly. No one would feel privileged to be granted something because their skin color is considered a disadvantage. On the other hand, everyone would be outraged to be left with fewer opportunities because of their skin color. Then how can we solve the problem?

My answer is that we cannot do it on purpose. What we need is a shift in consciousness. We need a change in the way we think to be able to eliminate the deep rooted anchors of racism. That is the ultimate solution.

Try again

2011-10-02T16:57:00.001+02:00

We may say positive racism is the least bad, but it iscertainly not the right solution. If governments continue to use positiveracism, the only thing they’ll achieve is more hate. The problem is that weshould deal with racism at the place it comes from: racist people. Positive racism seems to me as an approachthat missed target. It is a bit naive to think that if a person from an ethnicgroup ends up among others they will be instantly accepted. This will neverhappen. It is instinctual, and we would have to live in an extremely diversesociety not to identify ourselves with our race. What I mean is, the instinct thatyou belong, kicks in as you’re among people of your race, and this feeling canquickly get out of control to become hate towards other groups. Just like whenlittle children hate their opposing groups in team games.

If we grew up in aworld where we wouldn’t meet two persons of the same race, racism would not bea problem. But this is not the case and certainly there’s a gap in theconnection of races. This gap will not be closed with an attitude of „oh youpoor racism victim, here’s a scholarship”. The only result will be morefeelings of inequality in both parties. As it has been an ongoing problem forsome time now, we can see it is not easy to come up with the right solution. Ican’t and won’t guess what would be best, as the only way to figure things outis not by individual ideas, but discussion and communication.

The roma situation in Hungary

2011-10-02T16:30:00.001+02:00

My main belief is that people should not be judged by their race but by their personality. Skin color does not matter at all. Who cares if you are black or white or yellow or red, who cares whether you are blond or a redhead. None of these superficial things matter if you are a good person. White people can be bad persons, criminals; they can steal or kill people too. No one will like them just because they are white. It’s the same with all races.

If we talk about the roma situation in Hungary, everyone can see that the more privileges we give them the less they will do to make their situation better. Maybe some people think it’s too harsh, but let’s be realistic. It is only natural that not all the roma people are like that. There are, in fact, some of them who educate themselves, who work real hard and try to achieve their goals. But the majority of them are untrustworthy, uneducated, dishonest and sometimes even dangerous people. This is not something Hungarian people came up with from one day to another – this is a title they have earned throughout the years. However, as I have already mentioned, I strongly believe that everyone should be judged by their own merits. I, personally do not like roma people but I am a hundred percent sure if my best friend turned out to be one of them, I would still love her with all my heart because race does not change anything. How do I know that? When she got into University she took up some interesting classes where she had to do a research on her family. It soon turned out that almost all her mother’s family were roma people. So what?

This is true for all races, nations, skin colors. Be an honest person, live a decent life, help those who are in need, earn your money, work as hard as you can. Don’t wait for financial aids or positive discrimination just because you belong to a minority, don’t think you are better just because you belong to the majority. It is just nonsense to base any kind of superiority on the shade of your skin.

Re: Affirmative

2011-10-02T14:40:00.000+02:00

Affirmative actions are positive gestures.The discriminated and downtrodden deserve to have a better chance to fullyparticipate in society. In contrast, the recipients often abuse anti-racistinitiatives. We see Gypsy families living of welfare allowances on a leveltheir children never saw the grandfather work. We see Jews still claimingcompensation from the German government for the horror they had to sufferduring WWII.

I don’t consider myself racist, noranti-semite. It’s the character of a person that matters to me, not the skincolor, belief or sexuality. However, the above-mentioned abuses make way tomore racist feelings. The average citizen, who works 8 to 10 hours a day andpays his or her taxes, is understandably upset to see the underprivileged livingpractically for free. Also, there is no denying to the dreadfulness of theHolocaust; where over 5 million Jews were slain, but rarely anyone talks aboutthe other 20 million casualties, Europeans, Americans, Russians; homosexuals,handicapped and ethnic groups, who were also killed during WWII. The wordHolocaust can be considered racist, as it excludes all goy, suggesting thatonly the death of jews is of importance. Russian casualties, alone, were over10 million, military and collateral damage.

Today’s youth is raised by yesterday’sadults. More and more people of the younger generation live and study abroad.That’s an experience, which will also teach them of how other people live andthink. This will make them more excepting. As Márton mentioned: “just like theway it takes millennia for a steady flow of water and wind to erode mountains”it will take a considerable amount of time for racism to lose its intensity, becausesome rocks are just too dense.

Tilting at Windmills

2011-10-02T12:18:00.001+02:00

The fight against racism, ideally, should consist of two main elements; firstly, we should weaken racist thoughts and ideas, secondly, we should take action to rectify problems racism caused to certain groups. Let’s talk about the first one first, that’s what my title refers to, tilting at windmills. We can be really, really educated, vote for the best liberal party available (if it exists), be nice to ethnic kids, and still be racists; it’s how we were raised, how our parents taught us to behave (I’m generalizing, I’m talking about general upbringing, not about rare exceptions). The best thing we can do is to think critically, try to dismiss our racist misconceptions, but we shouldn’t expect a radical change from society overnight, if ever. It just won’t happen. It will be a slow process and partly it will have to take care of itself, and that’s where we get to my second point.

Programs like Affirmative Action are very controversial, because they are fighting racism with racism, it’s an interesting question; should we get back at the racial majority or should we forget what they did and move on? It really gets philosophical here, but generally I believe that in the long run, programs like these will be the keys to weakening racism. Not directly, because first it will only generate more hatred (it’s like paying back your loans to the bank, first, even while paying, your debt is going up, but eventually it starts to get lower and lower), but if you see a black/asian/purple/alien person working or living next to you, without you having any problems with him, it will alter your thoughts. What did I have against these people anyway? Culturally, these changes won’t happen this generation, not even in the next, but eventually, it may get better.

Affirmative

2011-09-30T21:48:00.003+02:00

Racism is bad, right? Categorizing people based on their appearance robs them of the chance to prove themselves as people instead of as members of particular subsets of similar-looking folks.

But how do we fight racism? We can't change how people think; and we can't directly influence how parents raise their children. Racism as present in our time will be handed down in slightly weaker form at best, from generation to generation: just like the way it takes millennia for a steady flow of water and wind to erode mountains, rationality has fought narrow-minded bigotry for centuries and will have to do the same for who knows how long.

However, the fact that we cannot make racism disappear doesn't mean that we don't have to fix the problems it causes. There may be many ways to do that, but the one that seems to have become the norm for all governments is positive racism: Affirmative Action programs and equivalents have been in place for decades in some countries.

How these affect the minorities at whom racism is directed is obvious; how it affects the racially privileged is another matter. Do you think positive discrimination deals with the problems caused by racism appropriately? Does it solve the issues, or does it cause others in the process? Is such a threat to the status quo going to make the privileged castes lash out? And if it's not, in fact, such a great method of fighting racism, what do you think would work better?

2011-09-25T18:55:00.000+02:00

We all judge. It is so easy to see other people imperfections, wrong choices and decisions, much easier than to see our own. Every time something makes us judge according to stereotypes or theoretically gained knowledge, and quite rarely based on the actual experience we have.
Reading books, magazines, listening to adults or our role models gives an opportunity to have preconceptions about certain things. Judgment is not a black and white issue, it has thousands of different shades. Depends on how you look at it. Tamara looked at the issue from completely different angle. I would like to agree with her on that one.
However, most of the time we judge other people and it does not really matter if he is black or white, we just have this wonderful capacity of thinking that anything he or she can do, we can do better, we can bring better decisions and find different/better solutions. Although, I think that without proper doze of judging we will not be able to achieve the goals we set for ourselves, and hopefully those judging will be directed to the steps WE took or willing to take.

It's just not the same

2011-09-25T17:45:00.002+02:00

I see judging as one of our most important basic instincts. We have to judge how urgent, dangerous, important, etc. a situation is. Judging is vital; being judgmental is a bad habit, so it's really not the same. We have to judge people in order to decide whether to trust them or not, sometimes in seconds. I don’t think judging is such a bad thing -and we are unable to fight it anyway- so let’s make the best out of it. Judge each person and each situation carefully, and if you prove to be wrong, judge again. Take every aspect into account, learn, experience, grow. All of these will make you wiser throughout the years and will help you to be less judgmental and more reasonable. I might be entirely wrong but this is how I see it. I know most of you wrote about being unnecessary judgmental towards other people and I completely agree with most of you but I wanted to twist the situation a little, explore other meanings of this particular word.

The Original Meaning

2011-09-25T17:40:00.001+02:00

Judgment: “the ability to make considered decisions or come to sensible conclusions.” By Oxfordian definition, the question seems a little pointless. Of course judgment is an essential human faculty, even a trait. Judgment makes us human. Humans make judgment. The trouble with the word is that it became pejorative as it is associated with racism, sexism and other kinds of –isms in the present. The more important question is: what can be considered good judgment?

The world is not black and white. Nor are the races: there is black, white, yellow, brown and all of the above combined in all kinds of variations. People judge by color, I cannot say they don’t; however much I wish I could say the contrary. In my belief, we should celebrate the diversity of our home planet, instead of dissecting its residents to races, labeling everything into one and one only category. It is easy and comfortable for the majority – another word, which would need more consideration – and dreadful for everyone else.

We need to make judgment but we should constantly be aware of what it is based on. We will never be wise and never be peaceful. But we can hope that the word “judgment” can be once rid of its pejorative second meaning and be restored to its original denotation. Judgment: “the ability to make considered decisions or come to sensible conclusions.”

Re: Being Judgemental.

2011-09-25T17:24:00.002+02:00

I don't think that judgment is essential. Judgment is rather a very strange mixture of instincts and knowledge.

Throughout our life we learn social contracts, rules. We also learn that they are not carved in stones. We learn how to trust, how to do mistakes. We learn prejudices, stereotypes; later on we construct them. We are never wrong but never right. Humanity is so divers, life is changing so fast that we cannot follow it in real time. Life is always ahead of us.

We judge because we need it in order to live and survive. Who can I trust? This is the very basic question of every single day. We never know, I believe. This is just the chance, a miracle that we are able to make good decisions. I judge every single person facing me. I judge even more the people that I have to do business with. I have my own prejudices, learnt by myself or brought with me from my family and friends. My judgments are based on my feelings, my prejudices, my priorities in my mind. This is truly instinctive and learnt at the same time and it is not me who is putting the pieces together. This is just the moment, the first glance, the first sentence.

I believe judgment is not inherited, it is developed by time and experience because we desperately need it in order to survive.

Judgements and presuppositions are part of us

2011-09-25T17:03:00.007+02:00

Even though being judgemental is basically wrong, people should realize that stereotypes and presuppositions reside in our subconsciousness.
People are born innocent without stereotypes. What makes us judgemental is our culture. Our parents, our friends keep telling us not to interact with certain people. People judge by how other human beings look and their appearances, which I think is not something that should be considered improper.

When ancient civilizations built up the first cities in the world, the members of those communities became more and more cautious about living together with others. As the number of citizens increased drastically, the rate of crime began to increase, too. The fact that people nowadays identify criminals with certain racial and ethnic groups is not acceptable; yet, as all of us were born into this culture, we cannot really avoid being judgemental.

In this sense, judgement is not at essential or indispensable human faculty, but something that resides in our mind, because of what we inherit from the previous generation. Do the members of the world's societies have the opportunity to change the situation? Could we ever make a change? Well, people need to find the answer for these questions before acting; we should decide whether a change can be made or not.

Roots

2011-09-25T14:48:00.002+02:00

Judgment or being judgmental is not born with us, it’s not an innate attribute. We are instinctively happy or sad, but we are not instinctively judgmental. But it’s also not a new invention, we have been doing it since the dawn of humanity. It makes life easier for us.

Most people feel secure when everything has its proper name and its proper place. People strive for a perfect balance, it’s in the very nature of us to do that, even if it means that we have to lie to ourselves. Even if it means that we have to be prejudiced. Preconceptions are also passed on from generation to generation, until someone is enlightened enough to think about it for himself; then he dismisses this stereotype, or, in some cases, comes up with a new one. Then the process starts all over again.

Judgment is definitely not coded in our genes, but it is surely a part of our culture. That will never change, or at least not in the foreseeable future. We are taught and encouraged to be judgmental, and most people comply with pleasure and happily build the brick wall of ignorance higher and higher. The only thing we can do is to stand up for what we believe in and what we think is right in order to dismiss some misconceptions that have been deeply rooted in our culture for a long, long time.

Reminder

2011-09-25T12:24:00.002+02:00

Remember to put your first name in the LABEL section in order for your contributions to show on the home page list.

You be the judge

2011-09-25T11:49:00.000+02:00

Judgment is a tricky kind of creature. No matter how hardsomeone tries not to be judgmental, it is impossible. It is originally builtinto us to judge people. It must be some kind of survival and reproductiveinstinct. In addition, this modern society is making us more and more judgmental,as there are people who want to use this instinct to their benefit.

No matter how hard we try to think that we don’t haveprejudices, and that we are not judgmental, this is not true. If we look intoourselves honestly, we will always find that boy or girl or public figure thatwe don’t like based on their appearance or origin. There will always besomething that interferes with objective judgment. With time these judgmentsthat come with first impression may change, that is why we have to fight theurge to really irrevocably judge someone. This is the best we can do, and thisis what makes a really open minded person; not how loud they can shout that I’mgender- color- and race blind. We shouldn’t fear to reinterpret our thinking,to go out a little of our comfort zone to fight our prejudices. Judging peopleat first sight is like sitting in our little box of ideas, and not seeingbeyond the walls, but shouting at people going by. We should try to build afoundation of a world without boxes.

2011-09-24T13:28:00.003+02:00

Judgment is the very purpose of rational thought. Without eventual judgment, analysis is pointless intellectual masturbation: the main purpose of rationality, in my mind, is to evaluate the scenario at hand and come to a conclusion regarding the best course of action, and without judgment calls, decisions cannot be made. Yes, judgment is an innate human faculty.

However, that does not mean that judgment is to be made quickly, or based on hearsay, or meager experience: stereotyping and rushing to conclusions both can lead to misreading a situation, which may cause us to make all the wrong choices. And of course, the flipside: when stereotypes or immediate assumptions turn out to have been true, they make the decision-making process far faster than with delayed judgment.

In the end, the question shouldn't be whether judgment is something that is to be made at all: we should ask ourselves after how much analysis can we safely make such calls? Is stereotyping worth the risk of being wrong? Is taking your time worth the additional intellectual effort and the detachment?

Being Judgemental.

2011-09-22T11:53:00.004+02:00

Do you believe that jundgement is an essential human faculty ?