• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Religion, Racial Harmony and Racism

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Only the four kinds of holly/perfect people have abound all kinds of group/self-identification (sakkayaditthi - on group-desiring-view) and it's certain un-realistic to get people at large ride of it.

How does householder Adrian try to abound his racism tendency against what he perceive as racist? Ideas of self, own and own group, thought on humans, if taking this as one of his target. In how far does his teaching, he follows, be honest and/or know what's all about?

What about trying by oneself to get ride of identification-views, rather to attract others with just a different racism?

Racism and prejudice is part of human nature for us all. The one who imagines himself free is just as much a prisoner of self of those he labels racist. To be clear, I am no less free and just as much a prisoner as everyone else.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
I agree. I'll bet you're a fine doctor.

Thanks, but I'm just an ordinary guy making his way in the world. Like everyone else, its time to sleep, otherwise I'll be a lousy doctor tomorrow. :)
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
The one who imagines himself free is just as much a prisoner of self of those he labels racist. To be clear, I am no less free and just as much a prisoner as everyone else.
Not all, householder Adrian, and to pull those into the mud of which many think that pulling all Sublime into it solves that, enriching their households by it, might be not that wise as to get ride of it by your self, giving into those already out of it, leave the caught behind.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
It is racism I wish to address in this thread. To what extent has racism become a barrier towards lasting peace between people? If you feel racism remains a significant issue, to what extent has your religion or worldview brought peoples of all races together as brothers and sisters? Are you able to acknowledge times where you world view has fallen far from these ideals and instead fuelled division and promoted racism?

That was a good, concise summary of the past 100 years.

Compared to my grandparents' generation, I think society has progressed a great deal. My grandparents were racist, although they weren't hateful or malicious about it. They just had some rather stereotypical, ignorant ideas, but they still tried to be nice. My parents' generation was probably more progressive in this area, as they came of age after WW2 when racism and nationalism were more directly challenged.

By the time I was born (early 1960s), the Civil Rights movement was in full swing, and massive changes were taking place all across society. All of the old ideas were falling into disrepute, and it appeared as if society was heading in a new direction where we could look forward to a better and brighter future for all. Some of these hopes were somewhat tempered and dampened by the Vietnam War, the prospects of nuclear war, and a general feeling of unease and cynicism about the "establishment."

A lot of changes did occur, but similar to the Postbellum era, there was some level of pushback and a lack of follow-through. One thing about progressivism is that it takes continual work and effort, but by the 1970s, few people wanted to do that anymore. Especially since there had been measurable progress in civil rights, as well as the end of the Vietnam War and the fall of Nixon.

It seems that 70s started off with a great deal of tumult, but then, there seemed to be this feeling of "Well, we've done our job, and we were successful; now it's time to party!" The era of widespread protest and political activism was pretty much over by the time I reached my teen years, when Carter was president.

Even my grandparents and many conservatives I knew at the time were accepting of the changes in society in terms of racial equality, gender equality - or at least, they didn't see any point in actively fighting against it. However, they also ostensibly had this expectation that the oppressed classes would now be satisfied, content, and peaceable. My grandfather and other members of my family would say things like "Well, they have their civil rights now, so they should be happy. What are they still complaining about?"

Concurrent with this general timeframe was a sharp rise in the crime rate, economic malaise, teenage angst (which I can attest to personally), and an even greater sense of cynicism and downright pessimism. Ideas which are now generally debunked as conspiracy theories were considered "common knowledge" back then. There was also a great deal of fear - fear of crime, fear of pollution, fear of nuclear war, fear of overpopulation, fear that the world is going to run out of oil or other vital resources.

Even the idea of massive political movements seemed untenable because no one was really into that anymore, not like during the 60s. By the late 70s, people were more into hedonism, escapism, and fantasy - because reality was just too much of a bummer. I think that's part of what led America more towards the right and into the era of Reagan, who had an apparent army of robotic followers and their own brand of escapist fantasy: "It's morning in America. Death to the Evil Empire and the godless Communists!"

Racism was always there all along, yet it seemed to take on different forms. There weren't that many public displays of Klansmen or Nazis in brown shirts - as they seemed few and far between. (Even David Duke put on a suit and tie and called himself a "conservative.") Anyone who made any racist statements were publicly lambasted and skewered in the media, which gave people the impression that racism was all but ended. Political Correctness also came about during the Reagan era, which I would compare to putting lipstick on a pig. The whole thing seemed a contrivance to create the illusion of politeness and civility; a false public image to hide something more ugly and odious behind the scenes.

But this was also an era fueled by cocaine, unrestrained consumerism, unapologetic greed, and an overall sense of nihilistic hedonism which made the 60s and 70s look like choir practice. There may have still been a latent sense of unease and fear of the future, but it was overshadowed by the idea of "living for today" and "who cares what happens tomorrow?" One of the popular songs of the 80s was "Don't Worry, Be Happy." That song was co-opted by the Reagan-Bush team and became the predominant theme of American conservatism, which even attracted a large number of crossover Democrats.

The intellectualism of the 60s had given way to more vacuous, superficial attitudes.

Our economy was sluggish, even while the Reaganites were crowing about how things were idyllic. People became enamored with the "lifestyles of the rich and famous" and somehow forgot about all those still languishing in poverty. They also didn't notice that our once-great industrial machine was turning into a rust belt, characterized by factories being shuttered and reopened overseas for its cheap labor.

When the Cold War ended, people were expecting some sort of "peace dividend" which never really materialized in earnest. Sure, there's been a lot of talk of peace and cooperation and a "new world order." I remember a popular bumper sticker of the time was "visualize world peace," as if "visualizing" was all we had to do.

That goes back to my earlier point about progressivism requiring continuous work and effort, yet few people really wanted to do the work.

People were more content to wrap themselves up in their own little escapist consumerist bubbles. This was also true for a large number of suburban, middle to upper class liberals - who still may have believed many of the same high-minded ideals of the 60s, but had become chained to a materialistic, consumerist, luxury lifestyle which compelled them to compromise their principles. But as long as they take their meds and remain cocooned in their bubble, they've been largely content and pacified.

If there is a rise in racism and nationalism as of late, it could be because people who should have been minding the store have gotten too complacent and politically lazy - not to mention too wrapped up in their narcissistic luxuries to really care that much about their fellow human being. Even when they say all the things that might seem right to liberals and progressives, their words ring hollow and mechanical - as if they don't really believe it anymore.

What we're seeing today is the culmination of a number of great mistakes and wrong-headed choices we made, as a country. A lot of things that we knew about and could have addressed 50 years ago have been put on the back burner for too long. We should have done more and worked harder to achieve the cooperative, harmonious, and peaceful world that many of us long for. Instead, we just got lost.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I agree humans have made incredible progress in regards racism. However, talk to anyone who is an ethnic minority and it will be clear there is much progress yet to be made.

I don't know what part of the world you live in. I live in a country in the South Pacific called New Zealand. When a white supremacist shot dead 51 Muslims gathered peacefully for worship in their Mosques a few months back, it was clear racism remains a significant issue. Then our indigeneous peoples, the Maori said "What's new!?".

Everyone on god's freakin' green earth is a member of
a racial minority.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Racism and prejudice is part of human nature for us all. The one who imagines himself free is just as much a prisoner of self of those he labels racist. To be clear, I am no less free and just as much a prisoner as everyone else.

I do appreciate it when people do not try to posture that
they are free of all prejudice and racism.
I do though think that you are better than you paint
yourself as being.
A lot of things are natural, including a tendency
to overeat on junk food, sleep late, let others
do the work, etc.

The root of all evil, as my Mom put it (in Cantonese,
it is a bit different, but translates ok) is self indulgence.
Defined simply as-
"I know it is wrong, but I am going to do it anyway"

You may never free yourself of your innate nature,
nor should you, necessarily. Rising above it is the thing.

But you know all of this, I merely suggest you apply
it to your, I think, mistaken statement that you are a prisoner.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
I agree humans have made incredible progress in regards racism. However, talk to anyone who is an ethnic minority and it will be clear there is much progress yet to be made.

I don't know what part of the world you live in. I live in a country in the South Pacific called New Zealand. When a white supremacist shot dead 51 Muslims gathered peacefully for worship in their Mosques a few months back, it was clear racism remains a significant issue. Then our indigeneous peoples, the Maori said "What's new!?".

I wonder whether such mass murders represent an increase in racism or rather reflect a trend in how people driven to the brink of desperation are choosing to vent their frustration. I remember when it was all about "going postal" and the mass murders were about retaliation at your place of work. That happened again recently in the US.

Desperate homicidal individuals develop a narrative of victimization before they become the great victimizers. I dont think they represent so much a trend in the "cause" they claim to represent as they have seized on a narrative that they are hearing a lot.

Maybe racist thoughts are being allowed to surface more but those who are truly fearful of others arent more numerous. There are new and inventive ways these days for people to circumvent the reality/memory of historical oppression by a dominant group and turn it into a narrative of persecution of the historical dominators. Economic concerns may be being given a fresh scapegoat as once dominant classes of people are seeing their relative numbers diminish. And th he fact of non-white, non-male political leaders further causes psychological concern for those who used to rest comforted by their safety within their own kind.

Racism is a consequence of the satisfaction of a deep psychological need. It is a short cut way of creating a focus for ones personal and collective problems onto another collective. Only an economically balanced society that can recognize and address individuals who for whatever reason (external or internal) are being driven to homicidal desperation can help to reduce the stressors that might motivate such acts.

Religion is part of the problem and the solution. Religions reach is multi-cultural in the end I think inspite of the political powers within religions that have used racism as a tool to deflect its adherents from the real economic and political issues they were facing.
 
Last edited:

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
It is racism I wish to address in this thread. To what extent has racism become a barrier towards lasting peace between people? If you feel racism remains a significant issue, to what extent has your religion or worldview brought peoples of all races together as brothers and sisters? Are you able to acknowledge times where you world view has fallen far from these ideals and instead fuelled division and promoted racism?

I think it's important to understand that often disagreements over idea or values is labeled "racism". And along those lines, apologists will often label criticism of ideas as being "racist". So the term "racist" is often used in an attempt to stifle legitimate criticism of ideas.

With that said, of course racism still exists. And to some degree it always will. To me, you have to look at this sort of question from a statistical perspective, e.g.: what percentage of people in country X are racist? what was the percentage 50 years ago? At what point would the percentage of racism drop to levels where we would no longer view racism as a significant problem?

Now, not to deflect the OP, but I think that there are several other factors that are more significant in blocking peace: differing ideologies, differing values, and economics seem like a few of these bigger barriers.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
The most formidable barrier to progress is human nature, and unfortunately this won't be going anywhere. There isn't such a thing as Humanity, just different people with differing, and often incompatible, interests.

Solutions that look at the level of 'Humanity' are bound to fail as they operate on the wrong scale.

It's not uncommon for someone to say something like 'I don't like Arabs, well except my neighbour Ahmad, he's alright'. People are prejudiced far more against abstractions than they are people. The local is not the global.

Well meaning as they are, attempts to 'unite' people on the macro scale are domed to failure as they only deal with abstractions. Not simply race, but, for example, someone in Alabama gets in a rage about 'NY liberals running the country'.

People misdefine the problem we face. It is not "how do we remove prejudice and unite people to live together as brothers and sisters', it's "how do we create a world that functions peacefully despite our prejudices".

My worldview says that the best way to do this is on the local scale. When I feel in control of where I live, and don't feel that 'outsiders' are making me dance to their drum, I don't really care about them.

As noted above, it's much easier to remove bigotry at the local level as it relates to real people, not an abstraction. The smaller the scale, the more the ideology is confronted with reality.

An abusive man can't hide his domestic violence from his family. The neighbours can also hear things that might make them suspicious. Family and friends might see bruises and hear implausible explanations. On the macro scale though this man could be seen as a paragon of virtue feted for his humanity. Macro level BS is easy, micro level much less so because it meets up with reality.

Something like the European Union, a clear attempt to unite people, has fuelled the rise of the far right across Europe, and so (to some extent) runs counter to its objectives. One reason for this is the total disconnect between the people making the decisions and those being affected by them. The Eurocrats are ideologically certain in the benevolence of their mission, yet people in communities that have not benefitted from free movement of people deal with the reality, not the theory. There is only so long you can tell somebody something that contradicts their experiences before they decide it's a nonsense.

So, as regards the OP, the best way to reduce racism is to make it about people, not abstractions. This is best achieved by making most important political decisions on the local level, not the national or international.

Lasting peace doesn't come from striving for unity, it comes from minimising the impact divisions have on each other.
In the USA, in the year 1900, there were black neighborhoods, WASP neighborhoods, Catholic neighborhoods, Jewish neighborhoods, Greek neighborhoods, Italian neighborhoods, Irish neighborhoods, German neighborhoods, Chinese neighborhoods and Japanese neighborhoods. Today, 119 years later, there are only remnants of those segregated neighborhoods remaining.

I live in a suburb of Washington DC where the schools have students from 150 countries in attendance. A birthday party for my grandson held at my home looked like a United Nations social event.

We have lots of tough problems in the USA yet to be solved. But we live in a far better country than it once was because we didn't accept the argument that keeping people segregated in their groups would work best for all.
 
Last edited:

Audie

Veteran Member
I think it's important to understand that often disagreements over idea or values is labeled "racism". And along those lines, apologists will often label criticism of ideas as being "racist". So the term "racist" is often used in an attempt to stifle legitimate criticism of ideas.

With that said, of course racism still exists. And to some degree it always will. To me, you have to look at this sort of question from a statistical perspective, e.g.: what percentage of people in country X are racist? what was the percentage 50 years ago? At what point would the percentage of racism drop to levels where we would no longer view racism as a significant problem?

Now, not to deflect the OP, but I think that there are several other factors that are more significant in blocking peace: differing ideologies, differing values, and economics seem like a few of these bigger barriers.

One of my American acquaintances told me that
he thinks that if a gorilla showed up at a soiree
on the upper east side, or a bar in Queens, and
knew how to act like the others there, in no time
people would quit noticing it was actually a gorilla,
and accept him as one of the guys.

Not knowing what to expect from someone is a
bit part of "racism" I think.
For an example, I am treated a lot differently
from Asians who have an accent.
A few words from me, and I am obviously
"American", so, I dont make anyone uncomfortable
wondering how I will act, or how to act toward me.

HOWEVER, back in Hong Kong, I am an American
now, and, get treated as being "different"!
 

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
I think the behavior we call 'racism' satisfies the unconscious need to feel superior to others (arrogance, narcissism, vanity, superiority complex). Nationalism, religious intolerance and tribalism also satisfy that need.
That is not a universal human need like water. Wanting to feel superior to others is a character flaw and no one has to cater to someone's character flaw. Such things need to be corrected.
 
I live in a suburb of Washington DC where the schools have students from 150 countries in attendance. A birthday party for my grandson held at my home looked like a United Nations social event.

We have lots of tough problems in the USA yet to be solved. But we live in a far better country than it once was because we didn't accept the argument that keeping people segregated in their groups would work best for all.

You have misunderstood.

You are describing the ability of people to cooperate at the local level which is the very essence of localism. It has nothing to do with segregation.

You don't need to 'unite' people at the macro level, just give people power over their own locality (i.e. municipality) and leave them to it.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
That is not a universal human need like water. Wanting to feel superior to others is a character flaw and no one has to cater to someone's character flaw. Such things need to be corrected.
Right, not all unconscious needs are essential. The unconscious need to feel superior can be overcome by the power of will. However, it provides a credible explanation for racism, religious intolerance, nationalism and tribalism.

Hypotheses that credibly explain more of the effects observed are preferred by scientists -- first in line for testing.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
You have misunderstood.

You are describing the ability of people to cooperate at the local level which is the very essence of localism. It has nothing to do with segregation.

You don't need to 'unite' people at the macro level, just give people power over their own locality (i.e. municipality) and leave them to it.
So are you saying that decentralized governing is superior to the centralized kind?
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Racism is a real issue. However, blacks are no longer the biggest and most discriminated against minority. They still don't get equal treatment, but LGBTQ+'s are the minority.
As a
Left handed
Gray
Beard
Tea drinking
Quaker

I totally agree we are completely under appreciated and oppressed.
 
So are you saying that decentralized governing is superior to the centralized kind?

Yes, it is the best system given our flawed nature as it mitigates our worst tendencies. Other solutions tend to assume the negative aspects of human nature can be 'fixed' or removed from the system.
 

David1967

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
It is racism I wish to address in this thread. To what extent has racism become a barrier towards lasting peace between people?

In the U.S. at least I think it more of a 'perceived' racism that is being used as a political tool to divide people on the one hand and sadly, some profit from this.

If you feel racism remains a significant issue, to what extent has your religion or worldview brought peoples of all races together as brothers and sisters?

In the New Testament, we are told that in Christ there is no difference between different races in the eyes of God. Has my religion done a very good job of following this teaching? Some yes, but as a whole, not so much.

Are you able to acknowledge times where you world view has fallen far from these ideals and instead fuelled division and promoted racism?

No. I don't have respect or disrespect for anyone based on their race. I do my best to build my opinion of people on an individual basis.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
Yes, it is the best system given our flawed nature as it mitigates our worst tendencies. Other solutions tend to assume the negative aspects of human nature can be 'fixed' or removed from the system.
Okay, we disagree, and centralized v. decentralized is the basis of our disagreement.

You probably won't disagree that there is power in the pyramid. The hierarchical structure has proven to be a winner in competitions over the centuries.

And we won't disagree that, in centuries past, that power has been used as a weapon against the people it was supposed to serve. So, if I thought there was no hope for a governing model that was competent and free of corruption, I would agree with you that the best solution would be to take away the power of central government.

However, I think we humans are at the point now when we at least recognize that democratic elections don't choose the most qualified decision makers; and the decision-making models now being used are flawed.

Solutions have yet to be offered but with an assist from technology, I think a better model for governing is the next step. I have ideas on how it might work but I don't want to take this thread off-topic.
 
You probably won't disagree that there is power in the pyramid. The hierarchical structure has proven to be a winner in competitions over the centuries.

That's open to debate. Prior to modern communication technology most governance was actually pretty decentralised. Whether it was Caesar, the Caliph, the King or the Pope they generally ruled their fiefdoms superficially with others taking decisions on a local level and doing so in a manner that may or may not have met with the approval of the nominal boss.

City states also have a far longer history than nation states.

However, I think we humans are at the point now when we at least recognize that democratic elections don't choose the most qualified decision makers; and the decision-making models now being used are flawed.

Solutions have yet to be offered but with an assist from technology, I think a better model for governing is the next step. I have ideas on how it might work but I don't want to take this thread off-topic.

No doubt I would disagree with it :D

But I do agree that we don't want to derail the thread discussing why.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
What about trying by oneself to get ride of identification-views, rather to attract others with just a different racism?
No, no. His identity is very important to him. He is a Bahai, follower of a 19th Century manifestation of 'One God', Allah, with none other coming for the next 600 years. The revelation of this manifestation makes the revelations of all former manifestations of Allah - Moses, Zoroaster, Jesus, Mohammad, Krishna, Buddha, etc., redundant. ;)
 
Last edited:
Top