WIDEye wrote:
> , but it is just plain wrong for you to think that some of those who you
> consider "white" now weren't treated as if they were less than human a
> century ago.
No one thinks that. But that still does not negate the fact that "whites" sent Chinese in as human detonators. The blacks did not do it, the latinos did not do it. Whites did.
> ay ay to that. several months ago i was at a presentation of a report
> analyzing the tansportation/race/class distribution in the LA basin. the
> people who were presenting the report-Manuel Pastor and friends-neatly
> categorized the race groups into Latino, Asians, African-Americans, and
> "Anglos".
>
> i thought that describing people who have a european ancestry as "anglo"
> seemed a bit limiting. after all as kelley said--eastern europeans,
> italians, and the irish were less than human during the immingration waves
> in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
> i also know that eastern euros see themselves as distinctly different from
> the anglo-saxons of the west. i'm sure that southern europeans do as well.
>
There is ingroup prejudice everywhere. That is a completely separate issue.
>From the perspective of all nonwhites (except as few house slaves), whites act
as a group. Notice my attackers on this thread, none of them are nonwhites.
Their argument is: the whites treat nonwhites badly only out of convenience.
That's not racism. When nonwhites are unavailable, white treat less whites
equally badly as nonwhites. What they forget to say is that whites prefer to
have non-whites as victims of first choice. I am oftern the lone Asian voice
on these lists and my brothers on the race issue are generally other
nonwhites. Why is it so difficult for whites to admit that racism is still
rampant? Because its not true? Because Henry Liu imagine it?
Henry C.K. Liu