Is There Empathy for Black people? - Political Forum

Ceci · 08-21-2007, 01:17 AM

This is a question that goes in the back of my mind whenever I read someone post about, "Black people need to listen to X". Or, "Black people need to stop living in the past and get a job". I even think about it whenever there are those that openly say, "Stop getting handouts and giveaways!"

I think, when reparation, racial and other issues affecting Black people (such as Don Imus and his "nappy headed ho's" comment), people don't have the empathy of why such things affect the African-American community. Instead, there are some who turn towards a paternalistic mode in which they feel they need to tell Black people what they need to do instead of trying to reach the empathetic side of things in terms of why Black people feel this way.

Let alone the fact that immediate sympathy is granted for people who have endured other acts of genocide (such as the Holocaust, or the millions put to death in other historical instances).

What is it about Black people that doesn't elicit the same amount of feeling?

Is this historically or socially oriented?

Is it because of the "tiredness" that some feel when they discuss race? Or is it because they don't have any sympathy for the history or culture Black people (enough to know the reasons why they bring up issues like the ones mentioned above).

So, do you have empathy for Black people? Or, which group of people do you have the most empathy for?

(John Locke777, I didn't see your question; feel free to ask it here and I'll answer it if I can.

)

J.Locke777 · 08-21-2007, 01:44 AM

I interpreted your question as saying: why do people not like to discuss race. or something similar to that. If that's the question, let me put my opinion down: One of the reasons I don't like to discuss race in some circumstances, is because America is trying to heal from the injustices done to black americans in the past, and whenever the "race card" is used, it reopens these wounds and keeps us from healing and moving on. Not to say that the race card should never be used, There are some isolated cases where it is legitimate. But many people are so quick to the draw when saying racial discremination is involved, it only frustrates Americans by rehashing these somewhat fresh wounds. And they're very deep wounds.

Here's the link to that post: Everyone, let's be real about this... I believe that it's post #56.

J.Locke777 · 08-21-2007, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ceci

So, do you have empathy for Black people? Or, which group of people do you have the most empathy for?

Well ceci, This is a very sinsitive question, but I believe it's the wrong question to ask. Empathy is a very abstract concept which many people do not understand. It involves reading between the lines and putting yourself in somebody elses shoes. Because human nature is to be selfish, you will find a very limited amount of empathy. I mentioned I thought it was the wrong question to ask, but to be honest, I can't articulate what a better question would be. The second question there, while I see your reasoning behind it (empathy), and why you would be driven to ask that (more empathy), I don't think it makes much since. There shouldn't be a limited quantity of empathy, just like there isn't a limited quantity of love (I think the two are connected because it takes love to be empathetic). We need to be equally empathetic in theory, but it depends on the individual. For instance, somebody might feel strongly about the Darfur crisis, or AIDs, or the oppression of the chinese people, or maybe people who have the walking farts. They will be naturally more empathetic to those people or situatons because they feel strongly about it for whatever reason. I realize this is becomming long winded, so I'll just save some time and cut to the chase:

Do you feel oppressed? Is something bugging you? or maybe it's thelittle things that build up over time? Do you have something you need to say about how you feel? I ask these questions genuinely and with all serious. If something's wrong, I care. I know you are feel very strongly about race and racial relations. Is there a story behind that? If you feel like you're being treated unfairly, I want to know.

Ceci · 08-21-2007, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.Locke777

I interpreted your question as saying: why do people not like to discuss race. or something similar to that.

Not really. But, I really want to know why there isn't empathy for Black people whenever their issues are mentioned because I am very curious to why whenever discussions that have to do with Black issues come to fore, there are answers that more along the lines of a lack of empathy.

Quote:

If that's the question, let me put my opinion down: One of the reasons I don't like to discuss race in some circumstances, is because America is trying to heal from the injustices done to black americans in the past, and whenever the "race card" is used, it reopens these wounds and keeps us from healing and moving on.

I believe that is a fair answer. However, I come from the idea that there are wounds that continue to exist because people don't like to discuss these issues. If they remain silent about them, they continue to fester. That is why therapy and discussion groups are very useful in terms of getting to the heart of the matter.

And, simply discussing issues related to race does not open the "race card". Semantically, the "race card" is only a term that is used whenever someone feels frustrated or unable to articulate their issues about race. Therefore, they must use that term to nullify the other's comments along this area. So, if people do want to talk about race, the "race card" is something that would never come up.

Quote:

Not to say that the race card should never be used, There are some isolated cases where it is legitimate. But many people are so quick to the draw when saying racial discremination is involved, it only frustrates Americans by rehashing these somewhat fresh wounds. And they're very deep wounds.

Which brings up another question: instead of listening and learning about racial injustice, why are people so quick to bring up the terminology of the race card?

P.S. Thanks for the link. I found it and answered your questions.

Ceci · 08-21-2007, 03:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.Locke777

Well ceci, This is a very sinsitive question, but I believe it's the wrong question to ask.

I don't think it's wrong to ask the question. It's very relevant--especially when it has to do with how race relations are conducted between Blacks and Whites. I think that empathy ought to be introduced into the conversation because the subject matter has to do with how a group of people are affected politically, historically, racially and socially. And if we don't know how they feel, then how will we understand where they are coming from?

Quote:

Empathy is a very abstract concept which many people do not understand. It involves reading between the lines and putting yourself in somebody elses shoes.

I don't think it's that hard to understand. It does have to do with willingness and humility in terms of putting one's self in another's shoes, though. It's just that some people have a harder time than others when doing so.

Quote:

Because human nature is to be selfish, you will find a very limited amount of empathy.

I don't know about that. People generally care about something that matters to them. This especially has to do with connectiveness and identification.

And, in terms of sociology, I feel that when a group has been brought up to believe that another group is "inferior" to them and continue to construct values, social rules, laws and beliefs along those lines then, it is harder for a person in that group of people to care about anyone except others of their ilk. When another identifies with the group that matters most to them, then, they have empathy for that group. That means, in their thinking, that group is their "in group". Anyone that exists outside of their "in-group" requires less empathy, unless, they can restructure their thinking and open their mind in terms of the others that exist outside of the community they associate with.

As a friend pointed out to me in another thread on another forum, it has to do with "othering". And, when one is in a socialized "in group", anyone outside that group represents the "others". In fact, the "others" are marginalized to the point of non-existence if "empathy" is not there.

Quote:

I mentioned I thought it was the wrong question to ask, but to be honest, I can't articulate what a better question would be. The second question there, while I see your reasoning behind it (empathy), and why you would be driven to ask that (more empathy), I don't think it makes much since.

That is fair enough. But, I think that empathy is something that is highly important because it factors into a lot of things. Let's take the "War on Terror" for example. Because of it, the MSM and the policians (my two favorite targets,

), have equated "terrorism" with "Islam". As a result, whenever you hear policy speeches or reports, there is a constant brow-beating of the public when it comes to equating the religion to crimes against the state. As a result, the lines get blurred. And people become desensitized to Muslims because they are supposed to be "our enemy" (in the mindset of the current Administration). This desensitization has caused a lack of empathy for that group in many ways to the point that it affects national policy. Yet, such behavior is condoned because the current Administration has used fear as a way of describing Muslims as solely "terrorists" and nothing else.

It would take a special person to cut through the bull that the government has pitched in order to see past the rhetoric that has maligned another group because of a "state of war".

In the same way, I believe that there has been a lot of propaganda and socialization in terms of equating "silence" with the race issue--especially when it has to do with Black people. And if Black people (or any group of color) discusses race, they are seen as the "enemy" as well because it breaks down the belief that "everyone is treated equally and fairly" in present day society. And if there was empathy involved, I believe that there would be people who would see through this brainwashing as well.

Quote:

There shouldn't be a limited quantity of empathy, just like there isn't a limited quantity of love (I think the two are connected because it takes love to be empathetic). We need to be equally empathetic in theory, but it depends on the individual.

Again, this has to do with group socialization here in terms of individuality and collectivity. Some groups don't see themselves collectively, so it is natural for them to treat everyone as individuals. Other groups bond together as a community and are able to see other groups as communities. And I think that has to do with how empathy is displayed in terms of history and society as well.

Quote:

For instance, somebody might feel strongly about the Darfur crisis, or AIDs, or the oppression of the chinese people, or maybe people who have the walking farts. They will be naturally more empathetic to those people or situatons because they feel strongly about it for whatever reason.

I agree with you. But, I think it also has to do with collectivism and sympathy for other groups, as in my previous comments.

Quote:

Do you feel oppressed? Is something bugging you? or maybe it's thelittle things that build up over time? Do you have something you need to say about how you feel?

It's funny that you would ask that.

I know that your heart is in the right place, but no, I don't personally feel oppressed. However, I do care about how issues of race are treated in terms of how it is communicated by different groups. And, interestingly enough, I am fascinated by how these issues are treated in terms of whether people care about the groups being discussed. I wonder whether people--when they discuss a group who (in their point of view) is an "other", do they genuinely care about the issue? Or, do they use such an issue (especially when the inquirer is someone of color) as a platform to vent their disatisfaction about another race?

There are many ways to discuss race. But, I tend to be from the camp that someone can discuss race because they are genuinely interested in it without all the baggage that come from stereotypes. I also tend to be fascinated by all the responses that I get when I do so--especially when there are people who throw anything that they can say out of frustration against another group of people without thinking about why they say it.

Quote:

I ask these questions genuinely and with all serious. If something's wrong, I care. I know you are feel very strongly about race and racial relations. Is there a story behind that? If you feel like you're being treated unfairly, I want to know.

That's very nice of you.

But, I think that when I discuss these issues, it's not only an individual thing. It's a collective thing that has happened socially, politically and historically. And, yes, there are things that have happened (in terms of institutional racism, for example) to me as well as other persons of color. But, I am focusing on the bigger picture here. Not myself.

I thank you for asking though.

superdude17* · 08-21-2007, 03:49 AM

there shouldn't be. it stops their progress in the country. whenever you feel sorry for someone, they lose the desire to do anything. i agree w/ obama on a lot of his stances towards african americans, which is basically that they need to grow up and start moving past the civil rights movement and civil war. african americans are accepted openly. i had an african-american as a teacher the other year. it didn't affect me. the race line is so small. african-americans make it a big deal b/c they want people to feel sorry for them.

its time that they start progressing in life. we have given them the tools. everyone can get a solid education. in fact, african americans can get in easier to good universities than many white kids. so, they need to take advantage of that.

i don't feel sorry for them.

J.Locke777 · 08-21-2007, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ceci

I don't think it's wrong to ask the question. It's very relevant--especially when it has to do with how race relations are conducted between Blacks and Whites. I think that empathy ought to be introduced into the conversation because the subject matter has to do with how a group of people are affected politically, historically, racially and socially. And if we don't know how they feel, then how will we understand where they are coming from?

well, it may or may not be the wrong question, but you asked it, so therefore I coud assume that it is important to you. I agree that empathy should be part of the conversation. I didn't intend to bring that into question, I felt it should have been worded differantly.

Quote:

I don't think it's that hard to understand. It does have to do with willingness and humility in terms of putting one's self in another's shoes, though. It's just that some people have a harder time than others when doing so.

Well, empathy is actually a predomantly christian principal. Just as one wouldn't expect a baby to wipe their own butt, I wouldn't expect a non-christian to fully understand empathy. If they do, then great, but I wouldn't expect it from them.

Quote:

I don't know about that. People generally care about something that matters to them. This especially has to do with connectiveness and identification.

And, in terms of sociology, I feel that when a group has been brought up to believe that another group is "inferior" to them and continue to construct values, social rules, laws and beliefs along those lines then, it is harder for a person in that group of people to care about anyone except others of their ilk. When another identifies with the group that matters most to them, then, they have empathy for that group. That means, in their thinking, that group is their "in group". Anyone that exists outside of their "in-group" requires less empathy, unless, they can restructure their thinking and open their mind in terms of the others that exist outside of the community they associate with.

As a friend pointed out to me in another thread on another forum, it has to do with "othering". And, when one is in a socialized "in group", anyone outside that group represents the "others". In fact, the "others" are marginalized to the point of non-existence if "empathy" is not there.

I since we are arguing the same point here. so I won't comment on some of this because I agree with it. I'll go ahead and fill you in on some of my background information though.

My great-grandmother was a 1st class bigot. I knew from the first conversation I had with her, that I did not want to end up like that. My parents, on the otherhand, raised me to value the individual and make my judgements of people by the content of their character, and know that it doesn't apply to everyone in that racial, ethnic, or social group. That is why I love focusing on an individual rather than groups in most cases. Another reason being that my great-grandmother judged people by the color of their skin. She hated my dad because he looked Italian. when in reality, he didn't have a drop of italian blood in him. That is one instance where it would have been better to focus on an individual rather than their group. Rest assured, I will always be fair to people, use empathy to help me understand where they're comming from, and I do not usually like to focus on collective groups.

Quote:

That is fair enough. But, I think that empathy is something that is highly important because it factors into a lot of things. Let's take the "War on Terror" for example. Because of it, the MSM and the policians (my two favorite targets,

), have equated "terrorism" with "Islam". As a result, whenever you hear policy speeches or reports, there is a constant brow-beating of the public when it comes to equating the religion to crimes against the state. As a result, the lines get blurred. And people become desensitized to Muslims because they are supposed to be "our enemy" (in the mindset of the current Administration). This desensitization has caused a lack of empathy for that group in many ways to the point that it affects national policy. Yet, such behavior is condoned because the current Administration has used fear as a way of describing Muslims as solely "terrorists" and nothing else.

I agree with you 100% here. all the abortion clinic bombings (ie. Timothy McVay) Also, I have a few muslim cousins from pakistan, a muslim aunt from Turky, and a brand new muslim brother-in-law from lebanon. I made this warning to many people right after 9-11. I said something along the lines of: "Remember, Islam is not our enemy, hatred and evil are our enemies. Some of these terrorists are muslim, but there are many "christian terrorists" (abortion clinics) and terrorists who look just like you and me." I can't speak for everybody, but rest assured, I am quite able to make this distinction.

Quote:

It would take a special person to cut through the bull that the government has pitched in order to see past the rhetoric that has maligned another group because of a "state of war".

In the same way, I believe that there has been a lot of propaganda and socialization in terms of equating "silence" with the race issue--especially when it has to do with Black people. And if Black people (or any group of color) discusses race, they are seen as the "enemy" as well because it breaks down the belief that "everyone is treated equally and fairly" in present day society. And if there was empathy involved, I believe that there would be people who would see through this brainwashing as well.

Well, I agree with you that silence isn't always the best way to deal with this, but neither is turning everything into a race issue. I think discretion is the best way to approach this. For example, many people hate discussing race, because the conversations go something like as follows:

Black person: why are you comming down on me? Is it cause I'm black?

white person: Of course not, how come you people always do this and make everything about race?

Black Person: ...you people...? You said "you people" your a racist.

etc....

Can you see why this may not be the best way of discussing race? It only continues tension between races. You and I are exceptions to this, but for many people, This is as close as they get to having a discussion about race.

Quote:

Again, this has to do with group socialization here in terms of individuality and collectivity. Some groups don't see themselves collectively, so it is natural for them to treat everyone as individuals. Other groups bond together as a community and are able to see other groups as communities. And I think that has to do with how empathy is displayed in terms of history and society as well.

Well, what would you say about me? I'm pretty much a White, anglo-saxon, Southern Baptist, but I don't let it define me.

As for the rest of the post, It's just why I like to focus on the individual, I don't know whether or not something may be bugging you, or if you have a bad experiance on the subject. Empathy helps me to understand where you're comming from. So, you're welcome.

MikeT · 08-21-2007, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superdude17*

there shouldn't be. it stops their progress in the country. whenever you feel sorry for someone, they lose the desire to do anything.

I think your confused. Empathy isn't pity. It's the ability to comprehend and feel the same thing as another.

Quote:

i agree w/ obama on a lot of his stances towards african americans, which is basically that they need to grow up and start moving past the civil rights movement and civil war.

I'm sorry--but did you just say that an entire group of people, based on the color of their skin, need to "grow up"? Did you really just say that?

Are you saying to be black is to be immature?

You're not really saying that, are you?

And you don't really expect me to believe that Obama said he, himself needs to grow up, do you?

Quote:

african americans are accepted openly. i had an african-american as a teacher the other year. it didn't affect me. the race line is so small. african-americans make it a big deal b/c they want people to feel sorry for them.

Now your saying that black people want others to feel sorry for them? Really? Did your african-american teacher expect your pity? Was he or she demanding that you, the pupil, feel sorry for the teacher?

Maybe the reason that racial issues are such a big issue with black people is because they still earn far less in wages then white people, are incarcerated at far higher percentages and lengthier times than white people who commit the same crimes. Maybe because the infant morality rate is so much higher for blacks than it is for whites, and housing and education discrimination is still an obstacle.

Do you think that their desire to change that might have something to do with why they speak out? And not because they want some white kid from the 'burbs to feel sorry for them?

Quote:

its time that they start progressing in life. we have given them the tools.

Wow. Just wow. You don't think black people have progressed in life? You think they all live in the ghetto on welfare? What does that mean "start progressing in life"? You don't believe there aren't any hard working, strong families who are black?

And you've given them the tools? You mean if white people hadn't been so wonderfully magnanimous to black people, they would have died from starvation, too ignorant to figure out how to work for a living and so unintelligent that they couldn't educate themselves enough to provide for themselves?

Really? You think black people depend on white people to give them the tools to 'progress'?

Quote:

everyone can get a solid education. in fact, african americans can get in easier to good universities than many white kids. so, they need to take advantage of that.

You mean like all the legacy white kids that get passed into school? You mean like all the white kids that enjoyed private schools, tutors and advanced classes to ensure a fast-track to the university of their choice?

Or do you mean that black people oppose education? That they need you (or other white people) to tell them how important education is?

Quote:

i don't feel sorry for them.

Good. They don't want your pity. They want your respect.

You are equal to blacks. Whites are equal to blacks.

Respect that.

lordoftheworld · 08-21-2007, 12:36 PM

Why should there be empathy for blacks? If it is the ability to comprehend and feel the same thing as another, then what is there that whites dont feel that blacks do? What is it that you are asking for?

Why did it upset so many blacks about what Don Imus said? It never upsets them when a black rapper says things like that, and much worse.

Ohhh, because it was a rich white guy that said it? So as long as blacks say cruel things about blacks it is okay? But since Don Imus is white, and his great great great great great great grandparents werent slaves, he's not allowed to say those things. Is that why i should have empathy for blacks?

Ceci · 08-21-2007, 04:47 PM

Let me first say that I've read everyone's responses (J.Locke, I will answer all of your questions a bit later). And, there is a lot of food for thought here. I wanted to put a few things on the table to open this conversation a bit more:

1)(Referring to J.Locke's comment on empathy) I think that empathy does have some orgins in Judeo-Christian belief, but I would much rather use it in terms of the psycho-social. Here's a definition from Wikipedia:

Quote:

Empathy (from the Greek ????????, "physical affection, partiality") is commonly defined as one's ability to recognize, perceive and directly feel the emotion of another. As the states of mind, beliefs, and desires of others are intertwined with their emotions, one with empathy for another may often be able to more effectively define another's mode of thought and mood. Empathy is often characterized as the ability to "put oneself into another's shoes", or experiencing the outlook or emotions of another being within oneself, a sort of emotional resonance.

The word 'empathy' is the late translation into English from the German 'Einfühlung'. This last word was coined by the philosopher Robert Vischer (1847-1933). First time Vischer defined even its specific meaning of aesthetic sympathy. This practically is the sentiment, not otherwise definable, which one feels in the face of a work of art. His father Friedrich Theodor Vischer had already made use of the evocative word 'einfühlen' in his studies about architecture, in accordance with the rules of the Idealism.

And from some of the answers, I gather that there isn't an "emotional resonance" with Blacks or others outside of a given "in-group". That communicates to me that there is a lack of identification based on accepted use of stereotypes as well as a sense of frustration when it comes to describing one's feelings afforded to the "other" (in this case, Blacks). And in this way, it is pretty clear that there has been some socialization (in terms of the social/national/political/historical mindset that communicates that these stereotypes pointing to the "inferiority" of a socialized "outgroup" runs rampant in some interpretations of whether one has "empathy" or not.

With that, I believe that points to something I've referred to in another thread: social dominance theory, a theory in which the "in-group" is socialized through their beliefs, actions and values that other groups are inferior to the "in-group". That meaning, because of that socialization, there is some "thinking" involved that makes one (within the "in-group) believe and justify that their group is dominant because of trumped up values communicated through repeated justification of the community's importance.

Here's a short definition from Wikipedia's (although I warn that according to the article, it is rather incomplete):

Quote:

Social Dominance Theory is a social psychological theory of group conflict which describes human society as consisting of oppressive group-based hierarchical structures. According to the theory, individual people possess varying levels of preference for social dominance, which can be measured by the social psychological measure Social Dominance Orientation.

Social Dominance Theory was first formulated by Psychology Professors Jim Sidanius and Felicia Pratto. The key principles of the theory are that societies are stratified by age, sex and group. These group divisions are based on ethnicity, religion, nationality, and so on.

Human social hierarchies consist of a hegemonic group at the top and negative reference groups at the bottom. More powerful social roles are increasingly likely to be occupied by a hegemonic group member (for example, an older white male). Males are more dominant than females, and they possess more political power (the iron law of andrarchy).

Most high-status positions are held by males (Sidanius, 1992). Prejudiced beliefs such as racism, sexism, nationalism and classism are all manifestations of this same principle of social hierarchy. The origin of social hierarchies is given an evolutionary explanation: prehistoric human societies organized in hierarchies were more efficient at combat than non-hierarchical groups, giving a competitive advantage to groups disposed towards social hierarchies (Sidanius, 1992).
Various processes of hierarchical discrimination are driven by legitimizing myths (Sidanius, 1992), which are beliefs justifying social dominance, such as paternalistic myths (hegemony serves society, looks after incapable minorities), reciprocal myths (suggestions that hegemonic groups and outgroups are actually equal), and sacred myths (the divine right of kings - a religion-approved mandate for hegemony to govern).

Pratto et al (1994) suggest the Western idea of meritocracy and individual achievement as an example of a legitimizing myth, and argues that meritocracy produces only an illusion of fairness. SDT draws on social identity theory, suggesting that social comparison processes drive individual discrimination (ingroup favouritism). Discriminatory acts (such as insulting remarks about minorities) are performed because they increase the actors self-esteem.

FYI