The long and ugly tradition of treating Africa as a dirty, diseased place(washingtonpost.com)
washingtonpost.com
The long and ugly tradition of treating Africa as a dirty, diseased place
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/08/25/othering-ebola-and-the-history-and-politics-of-pointing-at-immigrants-as-potential-disease-vectors/
9 comments
A few years ago in Pennsylvania, I struck and killed a deer with my car (nearly totaling my car in the process.) Another man driving down the road stopped to ask if I needed any help. After I assured him that I was okay, he asked me what I planned on doing with the deer. I told him that I didn't know what the proper procedure was, or who should be called to clean it up.
He asked if he could have it.
Apparently the only restriction on eating roadkill, at least at the time, was that the antlers had to be turned over to Fish&Game (some sort of anti-poaching measure).
He asked if he could have it.
Apparently the only restriction on eating roadkill, at least at the time, was that the antlers had to be turned over to Fish&Game (some sort of anti-poaching measure).
One thing I learned from Alaska State Troopers is that there are charities who will come pick up Moose roadkill in Alaska and process the meat for needy families. Pretty cool.
This article is telling me that the majority of Americans are overestimating their exposure to the Ebola virus, while a few weeks ago I read an article in the same vein stating that Americans have a bad sense for how quickly viruses can spread. Is this a change based on the actual perception of Americans having changed or rather just differing opinions formed from differing source information? I am speaking in generalities of course, as I have not linked the other article and would not begin to know where to find it.
Great article, and I'm fascinated by the link to the Newsweek magazine cover in question:
http://www.donotlink.com/baqi
I suppose that, in most cases, it'd be far easier to `nofollow` the link, but I find it fascinating that there's an opportunity for added commentary beyond what you'd get by just nofollow'ing.
http://www.donotlink.com/baqi
I suppose that, in most cases, it'd be far easier to `nofollow` the link, but I find it fascinating that there's an opportunity for added commentary beyond what you'd get by just nofollow'ing.
Long article about how Europeans wronged Africa in the past to preempt any talk of movement restrictions from Ebola-affected areas to the US.
Because racism!
Because racism!
How does an article titled "The long and ugly tradition of treating Africa as a dirty, diseased place" not offer any hard evidence about the cleanliness and disease rate of Africa compared to the rest of the world...
> bla
We need hard and convincing proof that can refute our colonial stereotypes. We will debate said proof and hold on to our stereotypes nevertheless. But alas.
We need hard and convincing proof that can refute our colonial stereotypes. We will debate said proof and hold on to our stereotypes nevertheless. But alas.
Treating Africa as a dirty, diseased place is obviously a disservice to Africans, but with the booming economic opportunities increasingly available to everyone through the Internet, it might also very well be a disservice to you.
identifying perceived “flaws” in the out-group’s appearance, practice or norms
Could you point out some specific things in this article that you find especially racist against northern eurpoeans?
[deleted]
the website you're looking for is right here: https://www.stormfront.org/forum/ . Run along.
I think your brain has malfunctioned.
Lower numbers don't mean less power and reverse-racism is not real. It's just not. Unless you're writing from some alternate reality where Northern Europe has been colonized for a couple hundred years?
How would you define racism?
Hostility or prejudice towards another racial group based on the idea that your race is superior. Usually sustained by taking various stereotypes about the targeted group and portraying them as intrinsic qualities.
Is hostility or prejudice towards another racial group based on political correctness not racism?
If there was real hostility towards white people/Europeans, sure, you would have a point. But saying "hey, there's some problematic stuff going on with the way we're talking about Africa" is not an attacking white people in particular, it's just criticizing some aspects of the system we have today. I don't think anyone would claim our world is perfect and there's nothing to criticize about it.
Is there even a racial slur for white people? I can't think of one. But there's plenty of slurs for anyone with a different skin color, and they get used a lot more often. Here's the final example: “prejudice” against white people is someone telling them they're doing some stuff wrong; prejudice against black people or immigrants is expressed by throwing them in jail, denying them jobs, making it impossible for them to get a decent education or live in an alright neighborhood. It's a pretty big difference.
Is there even a racial slur for white people? I can't think of one. But there's plenty of slurs for anyone with a different skin color, and they get used a lot more often. Here's the final example: “prejudice” against white people is someone telling them they're doing some stuff wrong; prejudice against black people or immigrants is expressed by throwing them in jail, denying them jobs, making it impossible for them to get a decent education or live in an alright neighborhood. It's a pretty big difference.
They are still in power. Not even close to enough till the playing field is level. Same goes for Men.
[deleted]
millermp12(8)
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/14/science/rats-and-their-ala...