Herman Cain's attitudes on racism

In a recent interview, Republican candidate Herman Cain made a claim that racism among black liberals is a bigger problem than racism among conservative white tea partiers. He also claims that racism is an easy excuse for poor blacks to use as to why they're not getting ahead.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...

So here's the question: is he right? For example, there's such a massive social stigma towards white people showing any signs of racism. The fastest way for a white guy to lose friends, alienate neighbors, or get fired is to act like a bigot. Heck, it's been years since I've heard my white friends even tell racial jokes. Meanwhile, if Jesse Jackson or Reverend Wright are any indication, there's less social stigma in the black community for making offensive racial comments.

BTW, I'm not trying to downplay America's racist past or ignore the effects of institutional racism. I'm not a hardcore conservative and I don't agree with a lot that Cain says. I do however think he has a point that"being kept down by the white man" is an easy excuse for ignoring complex geopolitical and economic forces. It allows certain Democratic leaders to act like strong supporters of minority rights while at the same time supporting free trade agreements that hurt the working class. And dare I say that Cain also has a point about personal responsibility?

jdzappa wrote:

I do however think he has a point that"being kept down by the white man" is an easy excuse for ignoring complex geopolitical and economic forces.

"Being kept down by the white man" *is* complex political and economic forces in and of itself.

Blacks didn't go from property of rich white people to equals after the Civil War. It took 100 years and two decades of the civil rights movement for them to even get to the point that they could exercise their most basic rights as a citizen.

The way I look at it is that blacks were getting police dogs sicced on them and the fire hose just a few years before I was born. It's a bit soon to claim the end of racism considering a lot of the f*cks who let lose the hounds are still alive and taught their kids to feel the same way about anyone who doesn't tan the way they do.

jdzappa wrote:

I do however think he has a point that "being kept down by the white man" is an easy excuse for ignoring complex geopolitical and economic forces. It allows certain Democratic leaders to act like strong supporters of minority rights while at the same time supporting free trade agreements that hurt the working class. And dare I say that Cain also has a point about personal responsibility?

Can't have your cake--or pizza, in this case--and eat it too: if it's about complex geopolitical and economic forces, then there's no point to be made about personal responsibility. Nothing--especially not talk of racism--allows someone to act like strong supporters of minority rights while at the same time supporting policies that hurt the working class like telling people they only have themselves to blame.

jdzappa wrote:

And dare I say that Cain also has a point about personal responsibility?

I wonder how personal responsibility works when you have a person who says flat out they will discriminate against someone and prevent them from achieving a particular position.

Here's a good example:

REPORTER: You came under a bit of controversy this week for some of the comments made about Muslims in general. Would you be comfortable appointing a Muslim, either in your cabinet or as a federal judge?

HERMAN CAIN: No, I will not.

The concept of personal responsibility, as it ties to racism, is a very dangerous thing to invoke. To degrees, it's true that there are people who lean on the crutch of racism to legitimize failings they've brought on themselves. Those people need to understand where exactly their own accountability begins and address that. But on the other end of the spectrum - the spectrum visited most often by people who want to promote discrimination but not have to deal with the backlash of it - you have the idea that we somehow live in a society where we all have the exact same chance at everything, regardless of color and background. I can't look into Herman Cain's mind and see exactly where he falls, here, but his statements after this need to be a lot more clear before he pulls himself out of the latter category in my eyes.

Phoenix Rev wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

And dare I say that Cain also has a point about personal responsibility?

I wonder how personal responsibility works when you have a person who says flat out they will discriminate against someone and prevent them from achieving a particular position.

Here's a good example:

REPORTER: You came under a bit of controversy this week for some of the comments made about Muslims in general. Would you be comfortable appointing a Muslim, either in your cabinet or as a federal judge?

HERMAN CAIN: No, I will not.

Everyone knows that only fine, upstanding straight white Christian men have souls and therefore only they can serve in our fine government.

I was about to play devil's advocate and say that maybe Cain is right about such problems as the extraordinarily high rates of teen pregnancies, drug/alcohol addiction, criminal behavior and low academic performance in inner city neighborhoods. But then he opens his mouth and pretty much says that he mistrusts and hates a billion people on the planet simply because of their religion.

I thought this might be an interesting discussion on race, but honestly I'm not sure Cain can be taken seriously on any front.

That's my thinking too, JD.

He can still be right about one thing and wrong about another.

LeapingGnome wrote:

He can still be right about one thing and wrong about another.

Perhaps, but he is a bit two-faced by saying that everyone pretty much owns their own destiny and then says he is willing to put a permanent roadblock to prevent Muslims who want to serve in his presidential cabinet or serve as a federal judge.

How can someone control their own destiny in aspiring to be a federal judge when someone is preventing them from doing so?

LeapingGnome wrote:

He can still be right about one thing and wrong about another.

He can, but juxtaposing these two particular things highlights that he doesn't actually believe one of them.

If it wasn't for Black people and liberals that stood by them fighting for their rights, Cain would never be in a position he is in now and Obama would never be president. He doesn't believe in that irony.

jdzappa wrote:

I was about to play devil's advocate and say that maybe Cain is right about such problems as the extraordinarily high rates of teen pregnancies, drug/alcohol addiction, criminal behavior and low academic performance in inner city neighborhoods. But then he opens his mouth and pretty much says that he mistrusts and hates a billion people on the planet simply because of their religion.

I thought this might be an interesting discussion on race, but honestly I'm not sure Cain can be taken seriously on any front.

Pretending for a moment that you did play devil's advocate Cains view is a common one in the US due to our cultures focus on Individualism. Its a very tempting perspective to hold because it absolves people from feeling they need to do anything to change the system itself. “Its their fault their poor/uneducated/etc why should I have to do anything about it” But this completely ignores how much the system effects almost every aspect of a persons life. If we take the example of poor academic performance in inner city, a not insignificant proportion of the blame can be place on lack of funds/resources. Schools (In my state at least) are mostly funded by property taxes, something which a poor income area is not going to have an abundance of. This lack of resources is going to lead to a poorer educational environment. The low academic performance of the school will lead to even less funding.

Without a good education a persons prospects in life are severely restricted. It becomes unlikely that someone growing up in a low income area will receive an education that allows them to improve their economic condition. If they remain poor its unlikely they’ll leave the low income area they grew up in, starting the cycle anew.

This can factor into the crime rates as well. If it becomes apparent that one has little chance of success through legitimate means then crime might start to seem a viable option. Drugs too might be turned to.

Of course I'm not trying to say personal responsibility doesn’t factor into this at all. It dose play some part, but not I think nearly so much as most believe. Also the line between individual failings and systematic failings is stupidly complex. The environment your raised in is going to have a huge effect shaping your personality and outlook. Your environment is of course family but also the system of society around you, and of course your family will have been shaped by these same factors...

Looking back I seem to have went a little bit rambily. Ah well, I never was very good at expressing myself with the written word.

The fact that cain's corporate establishment relies heavily on the stereotype of an italian mafia don doesn't help him much here, either.

Also, his pizza is terrible. Terrible!

Phoenix Rev wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

And dare I say that Cain also has a point about personal responsibility?

I wonder how personal responsibility works when you have a person who says flat out they will discriminate against someone and prevent them from achieving a particular position.

Here's a good example:

REPORTER: You came under a bit of controversy this week for some of the comments made about Muslims in general. Would you be comfortable appointing a Muslim, either in your cabinet or as a federal judge?

HERMAN CAIN: No, I will not.

Someone should remind him that this country was formed by people who came here seeking freedom from religious persecution.

Unfortunately Cain seems to have forgotten that they said the same things about blacks 100 years ago. Except back then they weren't kind enough to use the term "blacks".

His appearance in the Republican hopefuls lineup makes me think of that Scary Movie 2 (or 3?) poster -- "a token black guy".
Two of my conservatives acquaintances whom I spoke to last week like the hell out of him. But neither one of them would actually vote for Cain in general elections.

Cain vs. Obama? I wonder how that would play out.

He's just flavor of the week, like bachmann and perry were. Hopefully paul or huntman will be featured next.

I didn't want to make another thread, but I figured everyone might want to see this. Something a friend dug up and shared with me. Herman Cain, last year, decided that Jesus was a conservative, which isn't all that unique among Republicans, but he wrote a small essay about it.

Might as well throw in a breakdown of his confuddled opinions on abortion. Basically, he'd repeal Roe v. Wade, and pass any legislation that protects the sanctity of life, and thinks the gub'mint should stay out of abortion decisions, letting them be made by the woman and her family...

Bloo Driver wrote:

I didn't want to make another thread, but I figured everyone might want to see this. Something a friend dug up and shared with me. Herman Cain, last year, decided that Jesus was a conservative, which isn't all that unique among Republicans, but he wrote a small essay about it.

Uh . . .

But they made Him walk when He was arrested and taken to jail, and no, He was not read any Miranda Rights. He was arrested for just being who He was and doing nothing wrong. And when they tried Him in court, He never said a mumbling word.

He didn’t have a lawyer, nor did He care about who judged Him.

His judge was a higher power.

The liberal court found Him guilty of false offences and sentenced Him to death, all because He changed the hearts and minds of men with an army of 12.

So, wait, if I'm arrested, I shouldn't say anything, get a lawyer, ask for my rights, or care if I'm wrongfully convicted, because God will sort it out?

I don't think Herman Cain is worth being taken seriously for the merits of his positions.

He does deserve to be taken seriously because I expect he will be the VP choice for whoever ends up winning the GOP nomination (unless, by some miracle, Huntsman actually wins the primary).

Seth wrote:

Hopefully paul

It would be awesome, but pretty far outside the realm of possibility. You're talking about a guy who finished a close second in one straw poll and first in another, and still gets roughly 0% of the media attention, which is all focused on Perry, Romney, and Flavor of the Week (was Bachmann, now Cain). Though he's seeing a groundswell of support that he never has in past bids, the cynic in me has to admit that it's very difficult to overcome a complete media blackout -- it's basically like free advertising.

Stay tuned. Now that Cain is getting all the lip service Romney and Perry are going to go full attack mode on his ass. Let's see how he responds to that.

I'm sure both of their camps are trying to dig up every piece of idiocy that's ever come out of his mouth.

The problem with views like Cain's, and the reason they catch on is because they are seeded with truths.

Yes, undeniably the black community has a problem with poor education, children out of wedlock, drug abuse, and crime. This is statistically born out. It really doesn't matter what race you are, if you have a child before you finish school, you're pretty much doomed to be poor/lower class. That is what we like to call a personal choice in the conservative crowd.

Institutional racism also certainly does exist, though nowhere near the levels it did in the civil rights movement times. I think what Cain is noticing though is that each generation of whites seems to care less and less about not only race, but other social issues like gay marriage, etc. The reason Cain thinks that black liberals are more racist (and he may be right) is because you have an entrenched power structure in the likes of jesse jackson, al sharpton, etc who are struggling to be relevant. The only way for them to remain relevant is to convince black people that the man is holding them down, so regardless of how much it is happening, there is a group within the black community that has a vested interest in maintaining the white boogeyman. So I think Cain is half right in that individualism can overcome the racism that is leftover today, but he's wrong that it doesn't exist. Whether blacks on average are more racist than whites, can't say, not much data, but I'd wager given human nature that they're just as likely.

bandit0013 wrote:

This is statistically borne out.

The homophone, it burns us!

bandit0013: It's also, of course, wrong to believe that all of these situations are "personal choice". Children do not choose the situation they are born into. Adults did not get to choose where they originated. The liberal viewpoint is that every person should be given the opportunity to succeed if they choose to, no matter where they began life, and no matter when they realized where they were and decided to change their life. That holds for black kids from the ghetto, or redneck kids from the sticks, or whatever.

Where race comes into it is this: First, a far larger proportion of black and hispanic kids (and hence, young adults, and even adults) are in such situations. That has a corrosive effect on initiative, because it is all too easy to look around and say "Everybody like me is in a situation like this. How can I even begin to change my life?" Second, and more dangerously, it has a corrosive effect on expectations. Even when someone knows better, it's far too easy to fall into the trap of prejudice--I'm not talking necessarily the extreme forms of bigotry, just the fact that when you meet someone and before you know anything about them you're likely to project expectations on them--based on how they look, how they talk, their mannerisms, and so on. If you stay conscious of that, it's easy to defeat--and it's fairly easy to stay mindful of it in situations (like job interviews) where it matters. (And afterwards, when you know the person, continuing to let that sort of thing color your expectations is ridiculous.)

Still: This is where glass ceilings and the like come from. And third, of course, you have outright bigotry. That's rarer now, but it's still out there.

Affirmative action is less important than it used to be, simply because the outright bigotry has been eroded over time. Partially by things like affirmative action. However, that bigotry still exists and there still need to be policies in place to prevent it when possible and punish it when it happens anyway.

More importantly, programs to help people from disadvantaged backgrounds are very very important. Both of those corrosive effects mentioned above create barriers through the same effect from two different sides. On the one side, you have people who look at themselves and their situation and don't see a way to change it. On the other side, you have people who look at others and when they're in a hurry will make subconscious judgments based on expectations of those backgrounds. The most important programs are those that give people from disadvantaged backgrounds a leg up--both to help level the playing field *and* to let people realize that they do have a way out--and those that bring people from disadvantaged backgrounds to the attention of the people who might employ them, educate them, house them, etc.

All of these things are about enabling "personal choice"--first, making sure people really do have the choice; second, reminding them that they have that choice; third, making sure that they won't be passed over after they make that choice.

Sometimes people can be too strident about this, it's true. But when you look at elected officials that are trying to tear these sorts of programs down, and then look at the huge number of people who still need a leg up (for whatever reason), claiming things like "reverse racism" or "preferential treatment" or the like... it's understandable for people to see it as "the man trying to keep us down".

What's the right way to remove race from the discussion? In my opinion, broaden the programs. Give them more coverage, not less. Make them available to as many people from any sort of disadvantaged background as possible.

But the right answer is certainly not to remove the programs targeted at disadvantaged groups without providing such broader coverage.

(And as a final note: Why are such programs frequently targeted at people and communities of certain ethnic backgrounds? Because people with those ethnic backgrounds do in fact constitute a higher percentage of those in need. Even if you put broader color-blind programs in place, they're still going to be focusing most of their efforts on those same communities, because that's the most efficient way to allocate funds when there simply aren't enough for everyone.)

What if he framed it like Chris Rock?

KingGorilla wrote:

What if he framed it like Chris Rock?

Bill Cosby probably has the most articulate views on this subject.

bandit0013 wrote:

The problem with views like Cain's, and the reason they catch on is because they are seeded with truths.

Yes, undeniably the black community has a problem with poor education, children out of wedlock, drug abuse, and crime. This is statistically born out. It really doesn't matter what race you are, if you have a child before you finish school, you're pretty much doomed to be poor/lower class. That is what we like to call a personal choice in the conservative crowd.

Institutional racism also certainly does exist, though nowhere near the levels it did in the civil rights movement times. I think what Cain is noticing though is that each generation of whites seems to care less and less about not only race, but other social issues like gay marriage, etc. The reason Cain thinks that black liberals are more racist (and he may be right) is because you have an entrenched power structure in the likes of jesse jackson, al sharpton, etc who are struggling to be relevant. The only way for them to remain relevant is to convince black people that the man is holding them down, so regardless of how much it is happening, there is a group within the black community that has a vested interest in maintaining the white boogeyman. So I think Cain is half right in that individualism can overcome the racism that is leftover today, but he's wrong that it doesn't exist. Whether blacks on average are more racist than whites, can't say, not much data, but I'd wager given human nature that they're just as likely.

Very good points. I think the hard thing for a lot of white conservatives to deal with is they see many people still rise above their horrible starting situation and wonder why everyone can't do it. They also look at certain groups such as the Korean/Southeast Asian population who came to America with almost nothing and on average are now quite successful. So then the question becomes,? if the Asian American community can do it, why not the African American community?

I'm not saying I feel this way. I also think it's much harder to get out of poverty if you're surrounded by gang violence and live in a dysfunctional family (as compared to say someone who lives in poverty but grows up with a loving family in a peaceful small town).