Social Question

josie's avatar

Why don't more people speak out against the existence of the Congressional Black Caucus?

Asked by josie (30934points) July 31st, 2011

One of the founders of the CBC explains its exclusive black membership,
”...there has been an unofficial Congressional White Caucus for over 200 years, and now it’s our turn to say who can join ‘the club’

Certainly, the US Congress is, and has always been predominantly white.
But there is a difference.
It has never actually called itself the American White Congress
And it does not disallow membership based on skin color, which the CBC certainly does.
Why do does the CBC get a pass, where others certainly would not?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

21 Answers

Dutchess_III's avatar

That’s just F’d up.

JLeslie's avatar

Because minorities generally get a pass. But, I officially am against our government having a black caucus.

Dutchess_III's avatar

That’s ridiculous. If whites formed a White caucus, they’d be sued in a heartbeat.
It’s taking a giant step backward.

incendiary_dan's avatar

Maybe because there are still issues specific to people of color that need to be addressed there.

Maybe because the lack of specifically calling something a White Congress hasn’t kept that from being exactly what it was.

And maybe because white people deciding what is and isn’t racist in a country where institutionalized racism is both real and easily quantified is completely racist.

JLeslie's avatar

@Dutchess_III It cannot be done by the powerful group, aka white people. Not in government, not anywhere.

Jaxk's avatar

Just another special interest group with a seat at the tabel.

zenvelo's avatar

People do, such as you. But what is your objection? That blacks cannot organize themselves to fight racism in this country? That whites should be entitled to join also “just because?”

josie's avatar

@incendiary_dan
“Maybe because there are still issues specific to people of color that need to be addressed there.”

And thus should any and all persons with white skin be disallowed from participating?

incendiary_dan's avatar

@josie On a certain level, yes. There needs to be forums that are specific to the people who are most directly involved in the issues, and forums where the rest of the population gets involved too. It’s not as if the existence of this body negates whites from participating in race issues as a whole.

Not that I think the CBC is particularly effective, but I get the reason why it exists as a black only organization.

aprilsimnel's avatar

Why does this bother you, @josie? What do you think is going on there?

Anyway, America’s face to the world has been white for so long, you don’t need to add the qualifier “white”. White is the default in this country. “White” is “normal”. So if whites didn’t want non-white, non-male, non-cis-gendered people to be a part of their society except as servants and whatnot – and some still don’t – then people have to organize themselves for their interests, just as white folks have since they arrived. You don’t notice this because to you, it’s “normal”.

Did you expect 450 years of antagonism, hatred, greed and desire to lord it over other people to suddenly disappear after 1965?

If someone beat on you for your whole life, would you suddenly trust that such a person would have your best interests at heart, even if they put down the stick?

No, in a perfect world, we wouldn’t need the CBC, but it’s not a perfect world and there are plenty of white people who are terrified that somehow, someway, people of colour will “surpass” white folks as top dog. We know it. We’re not stupid or under a mass delusion.

josie's avatar

Hey, I never said it bothered me.

They are all morons, white or black, as far as I am concerned. Since there are more white guys, I guess I got more white reasons to pass negative judgement on Congress than black reasons. But the truth is, they all sort of disgust me.

But, if I let Congress bother me, I would be pissed off all the time, and that is just not healthy.

Why does the question bother you? Questions like this seem so often to invite a lecture, and not an answer. Why is that? Is there a certain taboo associated with the question? What is it?

You could use your energy to more benefit to yourself than giving me a lecture, but if you must, go right ahead.

I’m just curious as to why it goes without comment. Nothing more, nothing less.

incendiary_dan's avatar

@josie Sometimes a lecture is an answer, and sometimes it’s the appropriate sort. And the wording you used strongly implies you have a problem with it, so it’s not surprising @aprilsimnel would react to you as if you did. I certainly interpret it that way, and it seems to me like you’re now backpedaling. But if you don’t have a problem, good.

And there’s always the issue of White privilege to address whenever a bunch of white people get together to talk about what is and isn’t racist.

aprilsimnel's avatar

It hasn’t gone without comment.

I just get tired of feeling like everywhere I turn in America, people want to think Martin Luther King said a few nice words and suddenly, we all held hands and it was all “tra-la-la-la-la.”

I wish someone would update Black Like Me, and we’d all see how much still needs healing, and not only between blacks and whites, but Hispanic, Asian, Middle Eastern and indigenous peoples in this country.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

Because racism is looked down upon. If you don’t get why there simply had to be a congressional black caucus, you don’t understand history. I just can’t help people who think there are no racial stratification on the systemic level in this country.

ETpro's avatar

@josie We can’t hae a white caucus yet. But in just a few more years, whites will no longer be the majority in America. Will you feel OK if you can have a white Caucus then? :-)

JLeslie's avatar

It is not just about percentages. South Africa has many many more black people than white, but the white people held power, oppressed the blacks, and worse. ~ I’m just thinking probably we should have a caucaus for the poor and middle class, since the wealthy control so much of the country.~

Minority is not only a designation of numbers, I don’t think the Asians in America have minority status. I know at my university there was an issue with this when I was there, an Asian student wanted the GPA exception to get into the engineering school that other minorities get. When minorities reach majority status in the US, white people still will not be considered minorities because the miorities in the US don’t seem to band together as one group. It will simply be that we are one of the many, or at least for many years. Plus, it has to do with history, and ongoing struggles the black people in this case face in America.

But, even though I defend a minorty can have a group just for them and white people cannot, I think the government should not do it. These things trickle down from the top. As long as there is separation in government there will be continued separation in the country. I realize these groups are a reaction to what continues to go on in our population, but someone has to lead in these issues. There are plenty of white people who care about black and poor people succeeding. Whites and blacks can work together to help acheive this. Think about it, wouldn’t that be better? An example of all races and ethnicities in the government working together to eliminate poverty? Battle racism. Black representative can still bring up issues regarding their constituents, they don’t need a caucaus to do it.

Going back to my half sarcastic comment at the top. One of the biggest problems in America is we are loath to talk social class divisions in America. America rejects any thoughts or insinuations of a caste system. And, indeed we are founded on a premise of anyone can make it here. The poorest of the poor, if they work hard, and do the right things, can be successful and rich, based on merit, nothing to do with race, ethnicity, or surname. But, even though Americans can move up and down within the strata of socioeconomic classes, it should not mean talking about social class is taboo, but it is from what I can tell. More taboo than talking and generalizing about race. But, issues about race have a tremendous amount to do with economic success.

incendiary_dan's avatar

@JLeslie I like the idea of a caucus for the poor and middle classes. I think one of the hurdles that keeps people from talking about class so much is the conflationg of race and class issues on many levels, and we’re still really reluctant to discuss race issues frankly and realistically, and almost never talk about the issues critically.

JLeslie's avatar

@incendiary_dan For some reason I had it in my head you are British, was I mistaken? Are you American?

Martin Luther King actually spoke to poverty, not just race, but it is often overlooked. I agree race and class are conflated, but I think it is much more than that. I think there is a lot of psychology behind it. When people don’t identify with a group they can ignore them or think of them as “them” more more easily. So, I think that it helps white people in power ignore inequities if the people getting the shaft are different than themselves, or if they simply don’t identify with them. I saw a show on happiness and they spoke a out Denmark, that everyone makes fairly similar salaries, and the person narrating the show concluded that they are more inclined to be ok with a more social system, because the citizenry is so homogenous, race and religion, they trust the other person, trust they won’t abuse the system, and feel more of a there but for the grace of God feeling for their countrymen. I don’t know if that is truly the reason, but there was some logic in it. But, even that is taboo to talk about, because it is saying everyone being the same is an easier better system. Even I don’t want to say that, because I love the diversity in America.

Also, there are subcultures within each social strata that are significant. At the same economic level there are psychographic differences between blacks, whites, hispanics, etc. I actually think the difference between races and ethnicities are less as you go higher up the classes, but maybe I am wrong about that?

also, getting back to the original question, people have said to me when discussing helpping poor lack people for instance, that the black people themselves are not likely to respond or listen to a white person trying to help or guide them. That they themselves want their help to be from black people. I don’t know if that is for sure true. If it is, I guess they need committees, groups, and representatives that can give them good informations and represent them well. But, I think it is mistake, I think if it is true, they should not only rely on their own race for representation and help.

I guess maybe a poor minority prefers to identify as their race or ethnicity than as poor. I am black, I am Guatemalan, I am Russian. Rather than saying, I am poor. There is no pride in being poor (although I certainly think there should be no shame in it. I find it very sad in America that we look down on the poor. Anyone can wind up poor. The working poor is one of my biggest dissappontments in America. Anyone who works a full time job and does his job well, should be able to live in a safe and clean place) but people have pride in their race or national origin. And, so, maybe things need to be labelled by the race and ethnicity to reach the people.

I’m just babbling, talking of the top of my head, feel free to be critical of my thought process.

incendiary_dan's avatar

@JLeslie Nope, not British. I live in New England. Maybe that confused you? I’m kind of surprised you’d think that though, since I’m pretty sure the first time we conversed on this site was debating American weapon policies.

I don’t think it’s by accident or lack of trying that the poor have trouble uniting. During the ‘60s and ‘70s that was the agenda. Dr. King was considered the safe civil rights leader to deal with by those in power, until he started coming to the conclusions you talk about. Malcolm X was never really considered the “safe black man”, but it’s interesting to note that he was also killed not that long after he started talking about more cooperation among the poor.

On top of that, many of those critical of the racial dynamics of this country have pointed out how much popular media and police intrusion into poor neighborhoods of color often aim at exacerbating racial divisions among the poor, not to mention the general economic realities of ghettoization. These less intentional (but no less severe) forms of institutional oppression make it extremely difficult to organize among the poor.

Not to mention the highly effective anti-socialist propaganda in this country. I might disagree with them on some issues, but they’re not the bogeyman.

JLeslie's avatar

@incendiary_dan Hahaha. I hope I did not confuse New England and England. I’m really not sure why I thought you are British. I would have been willing to discuss America even if you were English. :) I was just confused, I confuse jellies sometimes.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther