There was a great deal of public violence in the US from the teens through the thirties. Gangland violence in the cities, moonshiners and bootleggers shooting it out with cops all over the place, white mobs lynching Blacks and burning their houses and shops, Pinkertons and other hired thugs kneecapping union organisers and newspaper reporters and editors, etc.
Of course when hired thugs -- all White -- kill union organisers or lynch and terrorise uppity Blacks, even when instructed or encouraged or directly paid to do so, it's "an aberration" and has no predictive or characterising power re the behaviour or nature of Whites in general. Whereas when a gang or mob is dark of complexion, everything they do is mysteriously indicative of some essentialist flaw in the character of the entire demographic. Yaaaaaawn. The difference between theory and practise in practise ...
Of course when hired thugs -- all White -- kill union organisers or lynch and terrorise uppity Blacks, even when instructed or encouraged or directly paid to do so, it's "an aberration" and has no predictive or characterising power re the behaviour or nature of Whites in general. Whereas when a gang or mob is dark of complexion, everything they do is mysteriously indicative of some essentialist flaw in the character of the entire demographic.
Are you saying that's how some people look at it now? Or back then as well? Because it's my understanding that racism exists even when there are no people of different colors. It can be against the Scots or the Irish or because of the area you were raised or your accent or, if all else fails, your bloodlines and breeding. Back when the events you're describing were taking place, violent or criminal behavior was seen as indicative of larger flaws in white groups as well.
Human behavior doesn't really change. Us vs. Them rhetoric and behavior always follows similar patterns. Dehumanizing and demonizing of groups takes place regardless of skin color. If there are no discernable differences, people will invent them. Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
I was thinking more of contemporary persons looking back on history and comparing with contemporary events -- or even current/recent events. For example the OK city bombing doesn't lead White people to believe that all White people are religious nutcases slavering to blow up buildings, but it is very easy for (some) White people to leap to that conclusion about Those Other (dark skinned, wrong religion, wrong language, foreign, etc) People... a riot in Watts or So Central and plenty of whitefolks in the US click their tongues and say (wtte) "well those people are just like that."
But yes, it's universal... The difference between theory and practise in practise ...
You're exactly right. And I always wonder why it's so hard for people to accept that we're all basically the same? Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
