BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?

Subject: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 04:07 PM

I've seen reported, in various newspapers ,that if Lewis Hamilton had won the Driving World Racing Car Championships then he would have been the first black person to do so. This surely should be seen as, at the very least un-pc, but, more obviously racist. Lewis - like Daley Thompson and Kelly Holmes - has a white and black parent. So why are they called black? We might just as well as call them white!

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Wesley S
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 04:17 PM

But there's nothing unusual about a man born of white parents winning a car race.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 04:24 PM

Wesley S: THE POINT IS, why are they calling him black?

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 04:37 PM

Ratings?

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 04:46 PM

Well, when we discriminate against people because of their origin, we're usually very good at discriminating against them if only one parent was a minority. In Germany, they exterminated many with only one Jewish parent. In the U.S., they lynched many whose heritage wasn't purely black.

Whether a person with two or only one minority parent overcomes that discrimination, it's cause for celebration.

And if you want to refer to a person as a half-breed, then in most cases that's even MORE discriminatory.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 04:46 PM

Tunesmith, good point.

I've just looked up politically incorrect and Wikipedia says the term politically incorrect is used to refer to language or ideas that may cause offense or that are unconstrained by orthodoxy.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 04:50 PM

Generations ago when African-American slaves were valued at X percentage of people of white European extraction, a very small amount of 'black' blood condemned the person to be called black and therefore not only of lesser value but also subject to the accepted exploitation. It seems like we still cling to that standard, whether it is voiced or not.

I remember stories that taught us that a "half-breed", whether Indian or black, was of vicious temperament, amoral, sly, devious and totally untrustworthy. I don't suppose it ever occurred to anyone to suspect that the treatment they received at the hands of the ruling class had anything to do with their perceived temperament.

Who was it who said something to this effect: When I reflect that God is just, I despair of the human race.

It seems to me that it was Thomas Jefferson.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Wesley S
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 04:53 PM

The point is - why not? Why is Tiger Woods thought of as black? Because most golfers are white. People will focus on that which is different. If a half white half black folk singer released a recording of Child Ballads - what do you suppose people would focus on? Not the white half I'm sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 04:53 PM

In the US, anyone with any African ancestry is considered to be a member of the minority group generally designated as African-American or Black, formerly Negro, Colored, etc. This undoubtedly is because our laws, back during the time of slavery and also during the more recent "Jim Crow" era, defined anyone with one-sixteenth African "blood" (i.e., DNA or ancestry) as "Negro." That's a person with fifteen white great-great-grandparents and one black one.

For this reason, I believe, all Americans ~ black or white, young or old, prejudiced or not ~ seem to "recognize" any person with the slightest visible trait signaling African ancestry to be Black.

I'm sure that things are much different in, say, South Africa, where there were also racial laws, but a different set of laws that differentiated among three groups: white, black, and "colored," i.e., of mixed African and European heritage. South Africans of all races, therefore, grew up with a completely different view of race, and recognizing a different set of visual clues for a given individual's racial identity.

A South African would view most African-Americans as "colored" rather than "black," because purely African ancestry is actually quite rare on this side of the ocean.

This is a sore subject to many folks, because much of the Caucasian element in the African-American gene pool is the result of slaveowner rape; nevertheless, almost all American "blacks" are actually, to some extent, of mixed heritage. (There is plenty of Native-American "Indian" ancestry among African-Americans, too, along with the European element.)

Nowadays, whether a person considers himself "biracial" or "black" depends mostly upon how recent his Caucasian forebearer(s) entered the gene pool. People like Barack Obama (white mother, black African father) and Derek Jeter (white mother, mostly-black African-American father) are seen by many (if not by themselves) as "biracial," not "black."

On the other hand, the large "Creole" population of New Orleans consists largely of people who are partly black and mostly white, and all of whose parents, grandparents, and great-grands were also of mixed heritage and therefore ~ according to the laws and customs of their time and place ~ seen by themselves and by others as "black," even though many are quite aware of numerous white ancestors, and some even know some white cousins, even entire white "branches" of their families.

Yes, of course, we all know (or should know) that "race" does not have any real scientific basis, and that in truth there is only one race, the human race. But on some level racial differences continue to exist, even if we can come to an understanding that the differences are primarily cultural and not genetic. Taking this relatively "enlightened" viewpoint into consideration, I can see how a person growing up in a household with one white and one black parent would understand him/herself as "biracial." By the same token, another youngster who is also half-black and half-white, but in this case because all eight of his/her great-grandparents were half-black and half-white, that kid would have grown up in a solidly African-American community and would identify simply as Black, not as "biracial."

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 05:28 PM

Why do Americans keep using that term "Caucasian"? It should belong alongside "Ethiopian" in the museum shelf of daft ethnic labels.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 05:33 PM

Too many Dragnet episodes

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 05:47 PM

White: a member of the Caucasoid race...

There are white people, black people, on and on... it is indeed a rainbow. But, looks do not separate us. Only thoughts do. And, although most of us think alike, that being peace and harmony, there are things that do separate us. Religeon, greed...

So sad.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Azizi
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 05:56 PM

In my opinion, the USA definition for who is or is not Black {meaning African American} is racist.

I'm referring to the view that one drop of "Black blood" makes a person Black, regardless how much White ancestry a person has, and regardless which race that person's biological mother is or a person's biological father is, and regardless what that person looks like.

I believe that Black racial membership is defined so loosely defined because the definition for who is White is so tightly defined. In other words, the definition for who is Black {in the USA} is racist because the definition for who is White is racist.

In the United States {and elsewhere?} at one time, a White person could have no other racial ancestry. At some point in the 20th century, it became fashionable for some White people to acknowledge and/or claim Native American ancestry, and perhaps some Chinese or Native Hawaiian ancestry. These people claiming this "non-White" ancestry would still be considered White if they only had a small degree of "non-White" ancestry and if they "looked" White. However, it is rare in the USA present or past that a person is {would have been} accepted as White if they acknowledge/d or claim/ed any Black African ancestry, regardless of how they look/ed.

In my opinion, a person who has one White biological parent and one biological parent who is Black {or who has some Black ancestry} should be allowed to consider him or her self White no matter how dark their complexion is, no matter how frizzy their hair is, and no matter how his or her other physical features look.

But that would be too much like right for any nation that is still deeply racist. And that would be extremely problematic for any nation whose people still largely rely on visual clues to determine the racial categories of other individuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 05:59 PM

"still deeply racist"? Is it that bad?

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 06:03 PM

I was taking a course in "Race Relations" in college and the prof brought this up. I asked him what the Census Bureau did when they reached Hawaii and he replied, "Gave up."

Every human being on Earth is red inside. Please trust me on this and don't go around trying to prove me wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 06:14 PM

He's not African, and he's not American, not everything can be defined in those terms.
G

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 06:26 PM

In this case, I really wouldn't read too much into it as Wesley alluded to above. He's right. It is all about the "novelty" of it. If a half Eskimo/half French became the Most Valuable Cricketeer in the world, would you focus on his French ancestry?

Racing has never been a Black sport, and it ain't real strong on women either. It has pretty much been an Anglo white man's game with a passing nod to Latinos. Although F1 still has more attendance, they do it on a world scale. The true 800 pound gorilla in auto racing today is NASCAR. As NASCAR has expanded its fan base and overall popularity, it instituted a "Drive for Diversity" program to help advance the careers of women and minorities. Not much has changed but the effort is there to some degree.

Wendell Scott, a black man from Virginia, competed pretty well back in the 60's and 70's and actually won a race operating on a true shoestring budget. But NASCAR was also a regional sport and Jeff Gordon, one of the greatest drivers in any era and any form of racing, had a lot harder time being accepted in the 90's than Scott did in the 50's. LOL....Frankly, Jeff, for all his success, is still roundly booed at every race.

And don't mention the name of Tim Richmond, a spectacular racer in the later 70's and early 80's who was a fan favorite for his great ability and Hollywood looks and lifestyle, Tim died of AIDS when the word was only whispered. He was completely shunned by the NASCAR establishment. They have tried to make amends since, but for his fans, it is too little and too late.

So yeah.....The racing world will focus on Hamilton's parentage. Its a sport sadly behind the times in social grace but its trying to join the 21st Century. I know that many of you see no point in the sport, deny it is a sport, find it barbaric, etc., etc., and blah, blah, blah.

If you have gasoline for blood, you feel differently.(:<))

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 06:28 PM

"still deeply racist"? Is it that bad?

Is the Pope a Catholic?

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 06:44 PM

Well, yeah, I almost forgot that the individual originally under discussion here is NOT a United States citizen or resident, so American notions/definitions of racial identity are somewhat beside the point.

Only somewhat so, however: Great Britain certainly has its own part in the evolution of these ideas, as the instigator and principal operator of the slave trade that brought all those kidnapped Africans to the New World.

Certainly, before 1776, all those rich white planters who bought and managed African slaves in Virginia and the Carolinas were Englishmen who would only gradually assume a newly created national identity.

The English (and/or English-speaking) slaveowners of colonial America maintained and promoted a uniquely inhuman and impersonal version of race relations. The Spanish and French ruling classes also practiced slavery and other forms of exploitation elsewhere throughout the hemisphere, but (like the ancient Greeks and Romans and countless other slaveholding societies throughout history) they recognized the humanity of their enslaved workers to an extent that the English and English/Americans never did.

In Louisiana and the Caribbean, overprivileged white Frenchmen customarily kept African/Creole mistresses and maintained dual households, providing their mixed-race offspring with educational and other opportunities fairly similar to what they gave their "legitimate" children, the white babies borne by wives who had been assigned to these men via arranged marriages.

In the English-speaking American South, white landowners who impregnated black women did so to "breed" human livestock, often by force, and then consigned their own children to lifetimes of slavery. This is something I find almost impossible to understand, but it seems obvious that this custom could exist only because these men were convinced, by the unanimous opinion of the society in which they lived, that their African workers were something less than human.

It's a very nasty legacy to try and overcome.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 06:48 PM

Spaw ~ what's Jeff Gordon's problem?

I know he ain't black; is he a (gasp!) Yankee?

Tom H
(not a motorhead)

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 06:48 PM

There is no such thing as a "white" person, with the possible exception of those afflicted with extreme albinism. Put your hand on a piece of typing paper or, if you spend a lot of time out in the sun, hold a piece of paper up against your bare butt.

Tiger Woods, BTW, is the best ever Thai golfer!

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 06:56 PM

Tom.....Jeff has a lot of things against him. California born, he started racing at age 6 in quarter midgets. His family moved to Indiana to advance his career. By age 15 he was racing and winning in Sprint cars, 800 horsepower fire breathing beasts associated with "real men."......and he was "The Kid." He went to NASCAR and became friends with Dale Earnhardt at his peak and then proceeded to take his crown, something Dale's legions of fans could never accept or abide. He passed Earnhardt's win total this year and will soon takeover the record for modern era wins which are getting harder and harder to come by.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 06:58 PM

Growing up in sub-Saharan Africa, I was always amazed that Americans of mixed race thought they were black. They sure found out different when they came "back" to Africa - where they were sho'nuff not black.
But I've talked to some of my "black" friends here in the States, and have heard, yeah, we know we have some white ancestry, but since that came from slave-owning rapists, why should we acknowledge it. Made a little sense... but only a little. I have lived in the Southern US now for, oh, 20-some years, and I *still* don't think of American blacks as either black or "african-american" - on the other hand, the schools are so busy doing black this and black that (of course, no "white" stuff, THAT would be racist, yeah, right) that what chance do the kids have of thinking of themselves as people?

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 07:04 PM

the individual originally under discussion here is NOT a United States citizen or resident Most people (by a long long way) aren't.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Azizi
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 07:41 PM

the schools are so busy doing black this and black that (of course, no "white" stuff, THAT would be racist, yeah, right) that what chance do the kids have of thinking of themselves as people? -Mrrzy

Mrrzy, are you saying that the dominant curriculum of public schools that you are aware of in the South are Afrocentric and not Western Eurocentric?

Is the black this and black that which these schools are doing a part of the regular everyday curriculum of subjects-such as history and English literature, music, and art- or are the black this and that supplemental activities that occur on selected times of the year such as Martin Luther King Jr Day or during Black History month?

That's how it is where I come from {the North}.

And Mrrzy, are you saying that teachers in the schools that you referred to spend as much time teaching the history of West African civilizations such as Songhay and ancient Ghana as they spend teaching the history of Western European nations such as England and France? Are you saying that students in those schools would be able to rattle of the names of the capitol cities of two or more present day African nations as easily as they would be able to give the names of the capitols of two or more present day Western European nations> Ditto for famous kings, queens, artists, musicians, scientists from those two parts of the world.

I just don't think so.

As for the end part of your statement that these kids {who attend schools which are so busy doing black this and that} that they don't have time to think of themselves as people, I'm assuming that you did not mean that people of Black ancestry weren't people.

I suppose [I hope] that you meant that you wanted these students to think of themselves as "just people" without any reference to any racial grouping.

While I applaud the idealism in that sentiment, I don't think it's very realistic.

I believe that institutional racism and personal racism are still deeply rooted in American culture. I believe that most American public school curriculum focus 90% or more of the academic subjects on Anglo-American culture and Western European history and cultural achievements. Furthermore, I believe that when no racial origin is given for a subject {for instance, algebra}, students who are trained to think that everything worthwhile came from Europe will automatically assume that Europe was where such subjects were founded.

Given all of this, it's my position that there needs to be more quality, in depth and not touristy teaching of and integration of African [and Native American and Asian and Pacific Islander centered subjects and not less.

I also believe that all children {and all teens and all adults regardless of their race} should be taught and should hear repeatedly that their racial identity and other folks' racial identity should have neither positive or negative valuation.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Azizi
Date: 06 Nov 07 - 07:56 PM

In addition, Mrrzy's statement that African Americans who travel to Africa find out that they are sho'nuff not black presupposes two things:

1. that black is just a dark skin color
and
2.that all Africans have dark skin color

Not to mention that it is not true that prior to the end of US slavery all African Americans with White ancestry got that White ancestry as a result of White men raping Black women.

And it also isn't true that African Americans since the end of the US civil war have White Ancestry [only] because of rape.

If Mrrzy's Black friends don't want to acknowledge any White ancestry that they know that they have, that's on them. But the reason they gave her, doesn't hold true for most Black people I know.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: goatfell
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 04:35 AM

he's brown and not black, I just hate Politcal Correctiness.

For example, you are not allowed to use the term brain storm because the people that look after people that take fits says that offends them so you have to say now something like thought shower, in other words brain washing

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Mr Red
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 05:00 AM

Whatever you call him it should include the word talented.
If Stirling Moss can predict he would be world champion it says it all. OK 2nd to a man that took how many years to do it? Close but no cigar maybe but he beat his team mate and had him rattled just by his skill. Some rookie.

AND he's British and proud.

If he wants to be called black - where's the arguement? If he doesn't you got a point, but the man has too much gravitas to be drawn into the fray.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: goatfell
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 05:05 AM

If these people don't like being called Black then that's their problem, and I agree he's British and proud

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: goatfell
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 05:07 AM

or that should be those who don't like calling other people black or brown I mean I was watching the news years ago and some idiots were killed by a shark and the news caster said that they were non whites, I mean what the hell is that, they were all blue, or green, or any other colour under the sun, but each to his own

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: GUEST,Dazbo at work
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 06:11 AM

Quoting from Poppagator:- "Certainly, before 1776, all those rich white planters who bought and managed African slaves in Virginia and the Carolinas were Englishmen who would only gradually assume a newly created national identity.

The English (and/or English-speaking) slaveowners of colonial America maintained and promoted a uniquely inhuman and impersonal version of race relations"

Strange isn't it: All the bad things in the British Empire were done by the English - nary a Scot, Welsh or Irish did anything that we would consider wrong today.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: artbrooks
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 06:50 AM

Dazbo, it is not unlikely that one or more of the male Scots transported to the colonies in the mid-18th century had sexual relations, voluntary or otherwise, with a black fellow-slave.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 07:41 AM

Spaw, if an eskimo-French guy was the world's best cricketer, that would be a man-bites-dog story whichever way you described him.

Tunesmith is offbeam with this thread and Joe Offer dealt with it admirably (unlike someone who posted in the same minute as Joe).

It is a sad reflection on the Mudcat membership that tunesmith is able to say so confidentally "We might just as well call them white." He's right of course. With the exception of just one or two Mudcatters, this is indeed an us-and-them matter. Maybe that is why so much of the emphasis here is on what whites are comfortable with rather than on the terminology that blacks prefer.

In South Africa and Britain the term half-breed is derogatory, carrying the pejorative values mentioned by someone above. A widely acceptable term for someone of mixed parentage such as Lewis Hamilton is mixed-race. However colour-based terms are widely used as a kind of legitimate shorthand, but with no intention to be accurate in the literal sense. In this case it is quite usual for mixed-race people (and many Asians) to identify themselves as black rather than use precise colour-chart terminology such as (say) "caramel with a hint of magenta."

An explanation I have heard for this is that to use terms other than black can sound like an attempt to disown the black element, or to establish a favourable differential over people who are "more black." In other words it might be seen as conforming to an assumption that white is better. Certainly the term "coloured" is specifically avoided, this being a throwback to the apartheid era when it was an official classification and carried privileges denied to "blacks" (a blatant application of "divide and rule" which the Boers had learnt so assiduously from the Brits). Note I am talking only about South Africa and the UK.

My guess, based on the attitudes of my black friends and more particularly my mixed-race friends (who were officially classed as "Cape coloureds" within their lifetimes) is that Hamilton will be perfectly happy to be called black. I ciouldn't say about Woods as the terminlogy might have different nuances in America.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Azizi
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 08:00 AM

Voluntary interracial relations probably occurred in pre-civil war United States between White men and Black women who were indentured servants. And voluntary interracial relations also probably occurred between White women and free Black males or freed or still enslaved Black males. However,given the deadly consequences for the Black men, but also probably for the White women, these White women/Black male voluntary relationships were undoubtedly far fewer than the voluntary and involuntary White male/Black female relationships

Post African American emancipation in the United States, Black men/White women interracial relationships seem to be far more numerous then the reverse. That said, it's definitely not uncommon to see and hear about White men/Black women romantic relationships.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Azizi
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 08:03 AM

Here's a longish excerpt of a review of Notorious in the Neighborhood: Sex and Families across the Color Line in Virginia, 1787-1861 {The University of North Carolina Press} Joshua D. Rothman:

"Rothman examines another aspect of slavery and segregation, namely interracial unions and relationships, to arrive at the conclusion that many whites in the South engaged in liaisons with blacks regardless of their social standing or class. The author focuses on Virginia because that region often personified the opinions and stature of the South as a whole....

Rothman's sources-including the requisite court records, divorce filings, newspapers, government records, and narratives that are the bread and butter of the social historian-easily bolster his thesis. The author argues that during the early national and antebellum period, relationships between the races flourished as long as the people involved followed an important caveat. His first example is the Thomas Jefferson/Sally Hemings entanglement. Rothman argues that nearly everyone in Albemarle County, Virginia, where the founding father resided, knew about his relationship with one of his slaves. The white population tacitly accepted this technically illegal union because such relationships were frequent but kept under wraps. In other words, as long as those involved remained quiet about their sexual activities with slaves, no one called them on it. The author claims that the attempt to expose Jefferson's relationship for political gain actually had the reverse effect: white southerners resented having their double standard exposed to the light of day. The other example Rothman cites, the David Isaacs/Nancy West attachment, provides reinforces the author's conclusions about the Jefferson/Hemings acquaintance while also providing a counterpoint. In this case, whites brought charges against the two because they openly flaunted their illicit liaison. Again, as long as people involved in an interracial affair kept the matter close to the vest, little usually came of it....

Repeatedly, the book uncovers evidence that race was not intractable but rather a nebulous conception upon which generations of whites erected increasingly baroque legal, political, and economic policies...

"Notorious in the Neighborhood" excels in providing yet further proof that race is a socially constructed notion owing more to ideology than biology. The author proves that race, at least in Virginia during the period in question, meant different things to different people at different times. The legal codes defining race changed several times, something that could never happen if race was a fixed category. Rothman discovers that efforts to tighten up racial categories, to institute a precursor to the notorious "one-drop" rule of the later Jim Crow era, deeply concerned many lawmakers who believed that meddling with blood quotients could redefine many white people as black. If race never changes, how could someone suddenly become black or white with the flick of a pen? The racial policies of the South assumed idiotic heights as judges, politicians, and other civil authorities navigated through the strange new world created by the increasing mixed blood population. When confronted with the reality of interracial offspring, laws defining racial separation and identification hiccupped. The best example Rothman gives of the ambiguity of the race system sits at the beginning of chapter six where he spells out sixty-one different racial categories recognized in Virginia during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries."

http://www.africaspeaks.com/community/modules.php?name=Amazon&asin=0807854409

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 08:05 AM

Peter K (Fionn)

I had a bad night night last night with my posts!

unlike someone who posted in the same minute as Joe

That was me and what I was meaning was that I was agreeing that the word black could have been replaced with something like the first Russian, Canadian, Indian, Belgium, Scottish .......... person to do so. I didn't mean to agree that the black should be replaced by white.

Sorry if I wasn't clear.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 08:06 AM

too many nights!

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 08:07 AM

Belgian - perhaps I shouldn't post again today!

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Azizi
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 08:20 AM

Although the person who was/is the initial focus of this thread is not from the United States, most of my comments refer to the United States since that is where I "live, move and have my being".

However, one of the reasons why I like Mudcat is that it provides opportunities to engage in "conversations" about various subjects or the same subject from persons from various nations in the world.

For instance, Peter K (Fionn)'s 07 Nov 07 - 07:41 AM to be very interesting. Prior to posting on Mudcat, I didn't know that "Black" was used by some Asians in Great Britain and some Indigenous people in Australia to refer to themselves or that others used it to refer to those populations.

I continue to lament that there are so few people of color who post on this forum {or perhaps I should say "people of color who acknowledge that fact}.

It would, for instance, be very interesting to visit Mudcat and "hear" from Asians, Latinos, and other people of color-on this subject and on other subjects not pertaining to race/racism.

Maybe that will happen soon.

Where there's life, there's hope.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Azizi
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 08:39 AM

eanjay, whatever you got is catching :o)

Here's a correction to my last post:

"For instance, I find Peter K (Fionn)'s 07 Nov 07 - 07:41 AM to be very interesting".

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 08:46 AM

Glad it's not just me Azizi :)

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Grab
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 08:52 AM

uniquely inhuman and impersonal version of race relations

Certainly inhuman and impersonal, but sadly not unique. The Spanish and Portugese weren't any better than the English in how they ran Central and South America. And look up slavery internal to Africa and the Middle East, to find that Europeans were (to their mind) merely using a pre-existing system of trade. And for more inhuman and impersonal, look up Cetewayo or other historical African leaders, or even "Hutu" and "Tutsi". Or hell, look up "Orange Order" for what whites will happily do to whites from a different tribe.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 09:07 AM

I wonder if the unifying aspect of most of the practies of slavery was not some religion or other preaching that others were inferior.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: artbrooks
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 09:32 AM

I am reminded of the story (which I probably have wrong) of the matron in New Orleans back in the 1950s or 1960s who was discovered to be 1/128 black. She had to get her drivers license changed to say "RACE: Negro" and lost her cherished membership in the Daughters of the Confederacy.

We are all colored, in shades ranging from light pinkish-tan to very dark brown. Many of us have "unusual" physical characteristics such as blue eyes, tightly curled hair, or epicanthal eyelid folds, because we descend from a population group that developed in isolation. We have family/extended family/national/ethnic histories to remember and cherish. We all belong to the same race - human.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: GUEST,Santa
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 09:57 AM

Slavery was the normal way of running a state/country/city for the vast majority of history. The white/black thing is only a (comparatively) recent variation. The Roman Empire ran off slavery. The Vikings raided to catch slaves, as the most profitable items they could find. The Arab culture was based on slavery - an Arab wreck found recently in the English Channel is thought to have been wrecked during a slave raid. Central American cultures ran on slavery.

Now stopping slavery - that's something else.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 10:19 AM

"In my opinion, a person who has one White biological parent and one biological parent who is Black {or who has some Black ancestry} should be allowed to consider him or her self White no matter how dark their complexion is, no matter how frizzy their hair is, and no matter how his or her other physical features look."

Azizi, I totally agree that a person should have that right, but I do have a couple of questions.

Why, in God's name, would anyone want to exercise it?

What is so bloody special about being white?

I am white, and the predominant feeling I have about that fact is shame. I am constantly made aware that I have enjoyed advantages and benefits not open to my black contemporaries, by virtue of my colour.

I should think that the one asset that any black, or biracial person would cleave to is pride in his/her origins.

I don't know how things went in the USA, but over here it was the black population who decided that "black" was their choice of descriptor, and it would be a brave and foolish man who would use the word "negro", though the meaning is identical.

As for Lewis Hamilton, to me he is just a supremely talented young racing driver, whose success in setting the world of F1 alight has absolutely nothing to do with the colour of his skin, but I suppose that the media hacks have to find a tag to hang their stories on.

Shame really, as it detracts from the achievments.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Bee
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 10:35 AM

I have, somewhere in my stored books, a nineteenth century British Officers Training Manual, in which both Scottish and Indian regiments are referred to as Black troops. There is a whole section regarding the leading of these troops, seperate from the rest of the manual.

It is interesting to read some of the history behind these colour designations.

I have noticed, in the past few years, that locally anyway, the newspapers and television news have stopped constantly referring to people by their colour, unless it is entirely relevant to the story. For example, in the case of the shark attack mentioned above, why was the colour of the people involved relevant? It wasn't. What appears to be relevant is that they may have been reckless young men, 'reckless', 'young', and 'men' being the desciptors relevant to the story.

Years ago, before the end of apartheid, I was at a party where one guest was a young South African man. There were several Black (generally preferred designation in NS) Nova Scotians there as well as many White Nova Scotians. For the most part, Black Nova Scotians are of very mixed ancestry. A group of guests, including a Black couple, were talking to the South African about colour, the thing being, this young fellow supported Apartheid, and he vigorously claimed to be White, and at one point even showed his identification papers that said so. But to the Nova Scotians at the party, he appeared physically to be an obviously racially mixed person who, in Nova Scotia, would definitely self identify as Black. He claimed he could not see this at all, yet when asked, identified everyone in the room he thought was non-white, including one person whose appearance was much more ambiguous than his own.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 10:37 AM

Some remarks about the terms:

Black: When I fist heard or read that Colin Powell was termed "black" I thought that was a simple error. I my personal perception he was "white".

African American: That term might make a bit of sense inside the USA but I hate it on an international level of discourse. It has been noted with a mixture of amusement and scorn in Europe that a CNN speaker spoke about "African American" rioters in Paris (2 or 3 years ago). In such a context, the use of this term is simply a sign of US arrogance in my eyes.

Caucasian: I have never heard that term being used in everyday language outside of a science context. Recently, Russian neo-Nazis have started a racist campaign against "Caucasians". They mean, of course, those dark-skinned (from a North-European POV) people like Chechens, Ingush, Avars etc. They are white supremacists who look down on "Caucasians".

BTW, in German the respective term would not be African German but German African. That would now mean a German of African descent and at the times of my grandfathers would have been a German living in Africa. But the term Afrogerman is also in use.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 11:30 AM

I did say that I grew up in *sub-Saharan* Africa, where the natives are all very, very black, and don't show up on film if there are whites in the picture, they look like a person-shaped sillhouette. I didn't say all Africans are black.
And black IS a skin color. That was what I was talking about, skin color.
And my point about the black this and black that in the education system, but never any white this or white that, is that if they are teaching white stuff it's the default value, and nobody says white, but if it's about black people suddenly it's about blacks. Why not have it all be about PEOPLE - and NOT constantly remind people of their skin color and how much it matters? How about ignoring it and letting people judge others on their character? What I object to is that if you're white, you're normal, but if not, then you belong to some SUB-category - not just another category.
Why is it OK to have black history month and not white history month? Why is there a caucus of black mayors but not of white ones? Not that the whites need anything special for them, it's just that the whole thing simply stresses the fact, which should be of little consequence, that some people have different skin colors than others. Grr.

Subject: RE: BS: Lewis Hamilton - black?
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Nov 07 - 11:49 AM

Dazbo: "Strange isn't it: All the bad things in the British Empire were done by the English - nary a Scot, Welsh or Irish did anything that we would consider wrong today."

I think the explanation is that on this side of the big water, we tend to refer to the British Isles as 'England' in the same way that Europeans - and Brits - call us 'Yanks'. Or anyone not of obvious other-extraction is assumed 'white'. Blanket designations are not accurate, only convenient.