Hot Student Stories
top-5-grammar-and-spelling-checkers-to-rock-in-2019

Why are black people hated so much?

Zach Chandler

in Studying

follow
followin
1 answer
0 views

1 answer


Cynthia Baker on September 10, 2019

It is a long story and not easy to answer. It seems to involve the perceptions about their behavior and differences in their culture from that of the predominant race. The culture is the more likely that the problem of race, but people tend to divide the culture and the right to claim a culture by race. That is less common as interracial relationships become more common. For example, some men of color believe that they should be aggressive and that if they are not aggressive, they are not real men. That runs against the apparent White philosophy of keeping to oneself, not making waves, and minding one's own business. After all, they do not know the difficulty and what it means to have to fight to survive. People of color had to adapt to slavery and discrimination, and while their adaptations have mostly outlived its usefulness in a more civilized world, that persist and are perpetuated itself, and perpetuated by the racist also. These two issues feed off of one another. The more people of color fight, get loud, or apparently commit violent crimes, the most racist to other to get, and which in turn continues to feed the behavior that is detrimental to the overall perception. Then, there are differences in assumptions between the cultures. A little number of common, everyday behaviors grate on the nerves of people of other cultures. For example, if a White person walks down the street, who may be busy or wanting to get somewhere, and if you pass a person of color, you may actually not see them, because they are more aware of themselves and their day. But that can be misinterpreted as racism, and if someone tries to talk with them on keeping themselves and be in a world of its own, it is possible that they perceive themselves as victims of racism. So that each one may believe that the other is being racist, when every one is just doing what is natural, regardless of race. Much of this is a lack of exposure. Studies with animals show that cats and dogs raised together are less likely to be hostile to each other. Apparently, cats and dogs are raised apart tend to have very different body language and are more likely to interpret the body language of the other as aggression. A dog will get in your face as a way of showing affection, and a cat that is not accustomed to you can nail a dog in the face. In the same way, the ethnic culture is the same way. If you have a group of people, which still remains in the adaptations and even maladaptations to slavery, discrimination, and a former lack of opportunities, and other people who has never had to deal with, and that their ideas only to their own kind and perpetuate their own ethnic history and experiences, then, if they are not exposed to each other, you can build an incompatible cultures. Another thing to keep in mind is that these days, there are so hated in general, but the memories and resentments to persist. Sitting in a courtroom can be a measure that indicates racism. I have observed what I call "racial nepotism" in courts, where judges sometimes seem to favor people of their own race in their decisions, at least in the small claims court. There may be differences between the government departments also. My point is that, in some cases, you may have gone too far in the fight against racism, that we could have racism against other targets, while in other cases, we have not gone far enough as a society and the original type of racism continues. It is fair to mention other theories. Dr. Frances Cress Welsing's theory of racism involved in lack of melanin, which indicates that Whites have a subconscious sense that Black genes are more dominant and that White genes need protection. Therefore the White people of society to keep people of color not to dominate the society or of the unity of the White people to extinction, because, according to that reasoning, Black domination is the natural order of things. She believes that Whiteness is a genetic mutation and therefore may be lost forever. His theory is based on the symbolism, Einsteinian physics, and the beliefs of Sigmund Freud. A large part of her theory is criticized as pseudoscience and Black supremacist in nature. -------------------------- Additional Dr. Sanders. There are several problems here. The first is that it is a trick question (like "do you still beat your wife? there is simply NO right answer; if you say yes I have admitted that you do beat your wife, but if you say "no", then you just admitted that you used to beat your wife. The second problem with the question is that it makes assumptions it is not obvious in reality, that is to say, all people everywhere, the hatred of blacks has not been tested, and it simply is not true. Third, the father is vague, and not saying what you want to say, that is to say, "why white people hate black people". The problem, as we see above is that if you accept the question that you've accepted the premise, that is to say, all the whites hate the blacks. Again, not tested and simply impossible, because there is NEVER 100% of anything (some whites will always like blacks regardless). Then, if we assume (always a dangerous practice) that your question was actually why so many white people hate blacks and we accept not tested (you never see white riots where hundreds or thousands of white people to burn black businesses or houses down) "fact" that vary many of the whites hate the blacks, then we still have a problem trying to prove, or even define, what you mean by "many", that is to say, do you define "many" as 10% of the total of the white population? or do you mean, for example, 50% of the white people in Atlanta hate black people, if it is so, then it is that you will have to prove your accusation that the 50% of the whites hate the blacks, without proof all you really have is a good way to start a discussion, and as I said, it is NOT a real question. Then, if we assume (remember what I said about assumptions) some small part of your question is a "fact", then, to be fair to the millions of whites who do not hate anyone, including black people we have to be more specific and clarify what you are asking, i.e., why we have the "'Scottsboro Boys' trial in which nine black teenagers were accused of raping a white woman in Alabama in 1931?" Or, why were those three black civil rights workers murdered in the south in the 1950's or 60's? We can now give a REAL answer, in reality, a cause and effect relationship, the meaning of which resulted in the judgment or the thing that causes black people to be killed. These questions have been the subject of debate during the past 80 years in the first, and 50 years in the case of the latter, with responses ranging from "the inherent (and unjustified, that is to say, THERE was no valid reason for the targets of what they did) to the prejudice of the whites against the blacks," all the way down to "conspiracy of a communist where the bad guys, Russia or whoever, planned a situation that you knew it was the anger of the whites against the blacks (or blacks against whites)... and everything else. So, as you might expect, the real answer is somewhere in the middle, for example, in the 'Scottsboro Boys' case it may have been that nine strangers (who happen to be black) raped a well-known local women, who happen to be white. While in the case of the three civil rights workers might have been than whites, that in reality I do not like the negroes, had the opportunity to meet three of the black people in his neighborhood, where the white people took it into their own hands quite frankly to kill these three black men. To conclude, there are some very negative, and inaccurate, assumptions made in asking the original question, so much so that any answer given, which allowed the basic false premise that ALL whites hate ALL blacks, will be inherently incorrect. That, in essence, is what we have in the previous response, where some incorrect assumptions are accepted as fact despite not being evident, and in which, trying to be impartial, information was presented that demonstrates the kind of crazy that some authors (Dr. [sic]Frances Cress Welsing) in his effort to demonstrate a fictitious theory of reality is objective, even if the absence of the test.


Add you answer