Hurricane Katrina draws out racism

from JoeUser Forums
If you think the media isn't racist, this website Link shows a perfect example of why it is absolutely essential that critical literacy is taught in schools. How many of us would have even noticed this difference without it being pointed out?

I also wrote in disgust to The Australian newspaper for their weekend report that "heavily armed African-American gangs terrorised the city devastated by Hurricane Katrina". Do African American gangs terrorise differently to gangs of other races? How exactly do you tell an African American gang from another gang of dark-skinned people? What other irrelevant details did the reporter omit? Did they have brown eyes? Were they tall? I bet they were tall. If you think about the demographic, they were probably Christians. Interesting how a criminal's religion is only relevant when they're Muslim.

However, the police must be commended where they have done what they say they do: to turn a blind eye where people only take essentials when looting.
4,478 views 17 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yup, from the Congressional Black Caucus, to the Press, Bloggers, and the "man on the street", racism at it's ugliest is on display for all to see...if they only take a look.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well yes LW, it is because it is irrelevant. Why would the reporter report aspects of the story that are irrelevant? It's not like the history of oppression has any relevance here (if it ever does). Everyone is on an equal footing when they all lose stuff (although poor people might be more practised at stealing and thus do it more readily).

Thanks Para for your comment.
Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Don't you find it odd, then, that gangs, ARE racially defined? If there is no difference, why do we have huge gangs that are made up of exclusively of blacks, hispanics, asians?

Do they just accidently not get around to admitting all the white applicants? I don't think they should be dealt with or judged differently because of their particular race, but it is blind not to see that race is both a factor in their formation and operation. Otherwise, they wouldn't be racially homogeneous.

As for the picture captions, no one has backed up claims of racism. Neither reporter has been shown to be differentiating. Two reporters from two separate news agencies characterized looters in two different ways. If you can show me where either differentiated between races, I might believe the assertion.

I'd also note the stereotyping of whites in the linked article as being angry over reparations and affirmative action. I'm not agry over either. Is it okay that they stereotyped whites in their effort to denounce stereotypes?
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Fair points BS about the racial homogeneity. I'd have to have a think about that one before I could come up with some loony Leftist way of making excuses for them ;>

And I suppose the point about different reporters is valid too, and would require further research. Interestingly, I just noticed that this topic I've raised has caused such a conbtroversy that yahoo have removed the picture with a press release.

But I don't agree that strongly with your assertion about stereotyping of whites. It refers to those whites who are angry about these things:
"beginning to upset the psyche of the White Americans who are already angry at Black people over their fight for reparations and Affirmative Action."

To be steretyping it should say: "beginning to upset the psyche of White Americans, who are already angry at black people over their fight..."
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yup, Katrina brought out the racists. As I just posted on one of manopeace's threads, the worst racists are those who say different things out of different sides of their mouths. they are the worst examples of ignoramuses who lack any ability for self criticism. they are the most incidiously damaging racists that we have in our society. And, or blogs.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top

If you think about the demographic, they were probably Christians. Interesting how a criminal's religion is only relevant when they're Muslim.

It is only relevant when they use that religion for justification for their illicit actions.  If you can show me where the looters where looting in the name of Christ, I will buy the argument.  Otherwise, that is lame and totally irrelevant.

Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
"But I don't agree that strongly with your assertion about stereotyping of whites. It refers to those whites who are angry about these things:
"beginning to upset the psyche of the White Americans who are already angry at Black people over their fight for reparations and Affirmative Action."


That kind of benefit-of-the-doubt is exactly what they AREN'T granting the reporers who captioned the photos. Was my point.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
LW, when an Australian reporter is reporting in an Australian newspaper, I think I have a right to talk about what is relevant reporting.

Dr Guy, are these gangs using their race as justification for their violence and "looting"?

LW, I don't believe you can accurately use the Koran to justify the killing of innocent people, but that doesn't stop people doing it. Looting may not be living according to Christian values, but nor is much of what Christians do.

BS, I take your point, though I don't think this in any way takes away from my point about it highlighting the need for critical literacy in schools. In fact I think your excellent execution of critical literacy is only further proof of my point. Whether or not we can determine whether these reporters are racist, if these reports weren't critically analysed they could lead to a certain cumulative impression being left on the mind of the uncritical viewer.

Thanks for your comment dabe.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

Dr Guy, are these gangs using their race as justification for their violence and "looting"?

I was contending your point on Muslims vs Christians.  I have no idea if the looters are using their race to justify their crimes.  I am not defending them regardless of their perceived justification.

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
LW, can you show me any exaples of these gangs doing what you say they do, or are you just talking through your seat?

Dr Guy, I realised what you were doing, and I was saying to you that my points about this were interrelated. They report the race of these gangs when it is irrelevant. They could just as easily report the religion of these gangs, or they could report their average height (I mean seriously: are they tall? Why isn't that considered important?).

Our media out here has quite a well-established tradition (and I have read the quantitative and qualitative studies) of reporting ethnicity or religion of certain groups eg. Muslim Arab, even when the perp hasn't tried to justify their actions under the banner of God/Allah. Equally, they rarely mention that a terrorist in Ireland is Christian, even though the perps use this justification. Nor do people mention it when they talk about the KKK. I only found out about a year ago that the KKK even claimed to be Christian.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Champas: I suggest you do some reading on the subject. For example, the oldest gangs in los angeles aren't black, they are the latin and chinese gangs.


Almost universally, gangs are formed by people with a common background to pool their resources and protect themselves. If you go back and read the history of gangs, there used to be lots of WHITE, sub-race gangs. Hell, there were polish gangs in cities like Chicago. As these sub-groups dissolve into the regular population, the gangs become needless.

What you have in many modern gangs is the will NOT to dissolve into the population. That's what Little Whip is trying to say. Blacks in Los Angeles don't bind together into streetgangs because they are segregated by society, they do so to set themselves apart and prey upon opposing society for wealth and power.

There are lots of good books out there on the history of street gangs. I've also seen good documentaries. The history channel had a good one at one time. Look into it before you start branding people racist because they make obvious, and true, observations.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

Hell, there were polish gangs in cities like Chicago.

You missed a great opportunity for perhaps the most famous of the gangs.  The Mafia.  Blacks need not apply.

Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
I have said more or less the same thing im two of my post on Katrina. The fact is that the people who were most badly affected were the poor blacks and it seems that the Federal Governmenrt was slow to react. All the important officials were on holiday and the most powerful blackwoman to serve in high office Condaleeza Rice was buyin gherself a 7,000 $ shoe.So much for the lip service to the poor. New Orleans in 18 feet below sea level and therfore this was a disaster waiting to happen. Why did not the Federal Disastrer zmasnagement Agency issue warning?
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
BS, I'm a postmodernist, do you seriously think I haven't read up on those topics and the theories you speak of? When exactly did I label LW racist on this thread? What I want to know is are the gangs referred to in this article gangs that were formed before the event or in reaction to it? That to me has considerable bearing on the issue. Certainly race is important to how many gangs have formed, for all the reasons you suggest, but were they important to these gangs? Same point goes to you LW.

As to my allegation against the Australian newspaper, the point still stands. To justify such a label as this newspaper gave, they need to be able to justify why such a detail was important to the story. They did not.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
I didn't say I'd read up on Katrina, I said I'd read up on subculture theory and racial history.

LW, you still haven't shown me how you know this, and more importantly The Australian never did. If they want to make this sort of comment, they need to justify it.

If these are the same gangs that were always around, then why is what they are doing news? Haven't they always been terrrorising the city?
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
I come from a day and time slot when there were many all white gangs, the redwings {italian with a couple jews thrown in} the sportsmen all white irish and italian polish whatever.

the fordam baldies, lets not forget murder incorporated, jews and irish german too. Lets not forget meyer lansky, a jew in the mafia.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
LW, I know there were gangs before the hurricane, what I was asking is ar the gangs terrorising New orleans now the same ones or have these particular gangs sprung up in response to the situation?

All of this being fairly irrlevent because this is the justification that The Australian needed to provide in the first place!