Posts by writetoknow

20

BLAMING GOD...

by writetoknow in

and blame which involves urges to punish either by asking punishing questions or by threatening punishments but then explaining away these urges away.

layer 2 blame.

here again, in theory, seeing this difference is simple.

writetoknow

Thank you my thought exactly... are we talking about God or mens teaching about God? Or perhaps it easier just to sterotype?

40

ATHEISM - Better World When Christian Are Gone?

by writetoknow in

stereotypes and prejudicessynopsis.

genocide is the ultimate expression of hatred and violence against a group of people.

this chapter traces the steps by which a group becomes the target of prejudice, discrimination, persecution and violence.

Stereotypes and Prejudices

Synopsis

Genocide is the ultimate expression of hatred and violence against a group of people. This chapter traces the steps by which a group becomes the target of prejudice, discrimination, persecution and violence. The general concepts of stereotypes, scapegoats, prejudices, and discrimination are explored in a manner which will enable students to understand behavior and to condemn such behavior which is inappropriate in a modern, pluralistic society.

INSTRUCTIONAL OBJECTIVES

Students will learn that:

1. Stereotyping often results from, and leads to, prejudice and bigotry.

2. Unchecked prejudice and bigotry leads to discrimination, violence, and, in extreme cases, genocide.

3. Prejudice can be spread by the use of propaganda and inflamed by demagogues.

4. Language, particularly slang, is often used to dehumanize members of certain groups of people, and this dehumanization is a precursor of discrimination, isolation, and violence.

CHAPTER CONTENT

The Holocaust was the destruction of European Jewry by the Nazis through an officially sanctioned, government-ordered, systematic plan of mass annihilation. As many as six million Jews died, almost two-thirds of the Jews of Europe. Although the Holocaust took place during World War II, the war was not the cause of the Holocaust. The war played a role in covering up the genocide of the Jewish people. How could this have happened? The answers can be found by understanding how violence of this magnitude can evolve out of prejudice based on ignorance, fear, and misunderstanding about minority groups and other groups who are different from ourselves.

The purpose of this chapter is to teach that the genocide we know as the Holocaust had roots in attitudes and behavior which we see around us every day. It is only when these attitudes and behaviors are manifested in the extreme that genocide can occur. Genocide is the last step in a continuum of actions taken by those who are prejudiced. The first step of this continuum is discrimination and treating certain groups of people differently. The second step is isolation, such as the physical segregation of minorities in ghettos or setting up separate schools. The third step is persecution, followed by dehumanization and violence. Genocide: the deliberate and systematic extermination of a group of people is the ultimate expression of human hatred.

Stereotypes

A "stereotype" is a generalization about a person or group of persons. We develop stereotypes when we are unable or unwilling to obtain all of the information we would need to make fair judgments about people or situations. In the absence of the "total picture," stereotypes in many cases allow us to "fill in the blanks." Our society often innocently creates and perpetuates stereotypes, but these stereotypes often lead to unfair discrimination and persecution when the stereotype is unfavorable.

For example, if we are walking through a park late at night and encounter three senior citizens wearing fur coats and walking with canes, we may not feel as threatened as if we were met by three high school-aged boys wearing leather jackets. Why is this so? We have made a generalization in each case. These generalizations have their roots in experiences we have had ourselves, read about in books and magazines, seen in movies or television, or have had related to us by friends and family. In many cases, these stereotypical generalizations are reasonably accurate. Yet, in virtually every case, we are resorting to prejudice by ascribing characteristics about a person based on a stereotype, without knowledge of the total facts. By stereotyping, we assume that a person or group has certain characteristics. Quite often, we have stereotypes about persons who are members of groups with which we have not had firsthand contact.

Television, books, comic strips, and movies are all abundant sources of stereotyped characters. For much of its history, the movie industry portrayed African-Americans as being unintelligent, lazy, or violence-prone. As a result of viewing these stereotyped pictures of African-Americans, for example, prejudice against African-Americans has been encouraged. In the same way, physically attractive women have been and continue to be portrayed as unintelligent or unintellectual and sexually promiscuous.

Stereotypes also evolve out of fear of persons from minority groups. For example, many people have the view of a person with mental illness as someone who is violence-prone. This conflicts with statistical data, which indicate that persons with mental illness tend to be no more prone to violence than the general population. Perhaps the few, but well-publicized, isolated cases of mentally ill persons going on rampages have planted the seed of this myth about these persons. This may be how some stereotypes developed in the first place; a series of isolated behaviors by a member of a group which was unfairly generalized to be viewed as a character of all members of that group.

Discrimination

When we judge people and groups based on our prejudices and stereotypes and treat them differently, we are engaging in discrimination. This discrimination can take many forms. We may create subtle or overt pressures which will discourage persons of certain minority groups from living in a neighborhood. Women and minorities have been victimized by discrimination in employment, education, and social services. We may shy away from people with a history of mental illness because we are afraid they may harm us. Women and minorities are often excluded from high echelon positions in the business world. Many clubs have restrictive membership policies which do not permit Jews, African-Americans, women, and others to join.

In some cases, the civil and criminal justice system has not been applied equally to all as a result of discrimination. Some studies indicate that African-Americans convicted of first degree murder have a significantly higher probability of receiving a death penalty than whites convicted of first degree murder, for example. When political boundaries have been drawn, a process known as "gerrymandering" has often been used to provide that minorities and other groups are not represented in proportion to their population in city councils, state legislatures, and the U.S. Congress.

Racism

Anthropologists, scientists who study humans and their origins, generally accept that the human species can be categorized into races based on physical and genetic makeup. For example, many, but certainly not all African-Americans have physical differences from Caucasians beyond their dark skin, such as wiry hair. Virtually all scientists accept the fact that there is no credible scientific evidence that one race is culturally or psychologically different from any other, or that one race is superior to another. Past studies which reached conclusions other than that have been found to be seriously flawed in their methodology or inherently biased.

Yet despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, there are people who maintain that their own race is superior to all others. These people, known collectively as "racists," are the most likely to engage in discrimination, persecution, and violence against those they deem to be members of "inferior" races.

In 19th century Europe, Jews were classified as an "inferior" race with specific physical and personality characteristics. Some thinkers believed these traits would disappear if Jews received political and social emancipation and could assimilate into the broader society. Others felt that these traits were genetically passed on and could not be changed. Racial theory, distorted into a pseudo-science, sanctioned negative stereotypes existing from classical and Christian anti-Semitism (see Chapter 4). An increasing emphasis on nationalism also highlighted the Jews as a "foreign element," which could contaminate the native stock and culture and potentially dominate the native population economically and politically (see Chapter 5). This long-standing history provided a seed-bed for the Nazi ideology and program of genocide.

In North America, African-Americans were brought from Africa as slaves, and their descendants have endured centuries of oppression. During the Civil War, slaves were freed and granted citizenship. Discrimination continued. "Jim Crow" laws in the South required separate bathrooms, buses, and nursing homes for African-Americans. Poll taxes and literacy tests were required solely for the purpose of disenfranchising minorities. Before the landmark 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision of Brown vs. Board of Education (Topeka, Kansas), segregation of school systems was legal. Decades later, many school systems remain segregated.

Racism against African-Americans is still prevalent in the United States. Despite laws and other protections against discrimination, African-Americans still face discrimination in housing, employment, and education. African-Americans are still victimized by insurance red-lining, and the racism of whites and others is exploited by block-busting, a practice which is illegal in Pennsylvania and many other states. Although racist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan have small memberships, they have been actively recruiting and holding rallies in Pennsylvania and other states and spreading their messages of hate against African-Americans, Jews, Catholics, and other minorities.

Civil rights laws have been passed at the local, state, and federal levels to combat racism and the persecution and discrimination which racism promotes. While the First Amendment to the Constitution protects the rights of everyone to assemble peaceably and speak freely, racist messages universally bring a response of condemnation from responsible members of the communities that racists visit. The international community universally has condemned the apartheid policies of the government of South Africa, and the debate on sanctions against this government is a continuing public policy issue before the U.S. Congress.

Immigration Quotas Based on Racism

Before 1890, the overwhelming majority of immigrants to the United States was from northern and western Europe. They were predominantly Protestant and included many industrious farmers and skilled workers with a high rate of literacy who were easily assimilated. In the 1840s and 1850s, hundreds of thousands of Irish citizens fled their homeland for the U.S. to escape famine and discrimination. At the turn of the century, immigration shifted to a southern and eastern European population which was mainly Catholic, Greek Orthodox or Jewish. Many were impoverished, and there was a high proportion of illiteracy. Unlike the first wave of immigration which had dispersed throughout the United States, these groups settled in pockets in major cities, retaining their language and customs. They also provided a large pool of unskilled factory labor which competed with the American labor force. Concern about economic competition intertwined with concern about the "illiterate poor" becoming public charges.

In the early 1900s, groups were formed to place barriers to the immigration of such people. Among these were the American Protective Association in the Midwest and the Immigration Restriction League established in Boston.

Studies and reports were commissioned to "prove" that southern and eastern Europeans were racially inferior to northern and western Europeans. One such study, sponsored by a nine-member Immigration Commission appointed by the U.S. government in 1907, culminated in a 42-volume report to support this racist notion. Immigration policies were influenced by these reports and studies, and also contributed to the growing isolationist viewpoint of U.S. government policymakers.

The Quota Act of 1921 put the first numerical restrictions on European immigration, followed by the Immigration Acts of 1924 and 1929. The total number of immigrants permitted each year was cut by over 80% from the average immigration numbers at the turn of the century and the distribution was based on the ethnic origins of the U.S. Population in 1920. As a result, 83,575 places out of a total 153,774 were assigned to Great Britain and Ireland which provided relatively few applicants. On the other hand, countries with more potential immigrants had smaller quotas: Germany, about 26,000; Poland, 6,000; Italy, 5,500; France, 3,000; Rumania, 300.

Arthur D. Morse, in his volume, While Six Million Died wrote that "Later these impersonal figures would doom Rumanian, Polish, and French Jews seeking sanctuary while the English and Irish quotas lay unused." These figures were unchanged until the Administration of Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s.

Sexism

The concept of equal rights for women is as old as the ancient Greeks; the Greek philosopher Plato advocated for equality between the sexes in his Republic. Few civilizations have even approached this equality, however, and it has only been in modern times that women have been granted legal rights which were routinely applied only to men. Actual equality in society has lagged far behind legal emancipation, many believe.

Legal rights for women have evolved in the United States since the early 1800s. Pennsylvania was the first state which had a medical school for women (1850). Other professions also began to permit women to practice most states did not admit women to practice law until the middle of the 19th century, and virtually none did before 1820. In most states, married women were not permitted to own property or enter into contracts until the mid-1800s.

In 1920, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution was enacted giving women the right to vote. It was not until 1933 that a woman served as a member of the President's cabinet (Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor) in the Administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited sexual discrimination with regard to most employment issues. A proposed amendment to the Constitution to grant women equal protection under the law (the "Equal Rights Amendment") was passed by the Congress in 1972, but failed to receive approval from three-fourths of the states needed to ratify it in the prescribed time period for it to become effective.

Laws which exist in every state provide that women must receive equal pay for equal work, a concept which only a few decades ago was unthinkable. "Comparable worth" laws have been proposed in several states which would end the disparity between the pay of women in historically "female" dominated professions (such as teaching, nursing, and secretarial work) and "comparable" positions which are dominated by males.

Although sexual discrimination remains a problem at all levels of society, women have risen to leadership positions in government, business, and the professions, but not to the same degree as their male counterparts. Women have run for President (Rep. Shirley Chisholm in 1972) and have been nominated on the ticket of a national party (Democratic Vice Presidential nominee Geraldine Ferraro in 1984).

Minority Persecution and Genocide

Just as a school bully can assert his power over a weaker student by pure physical intimidation, a minority group may be victimized by a more powerful majority which is insensitive to the needs and aspirations of that minority. Minority groups may be subjected to dehumanization experiences made to feel powerless by being subjected to degrading and humiliating experiences based on prejudice. Examples in history have been:

African-Americans being forced to ride in the back of the bus
German Jews being required to wear a yellow "Star of David"
minorities being referred to by pejorative slang names (if appropriate, the teacher may wish to discuss racial or ethnic epithets relevant to their students' community or town)
minorities being the subject of jokes which poke fun at the target's race, religion, or ethnic origin, and which rely on stereotypes
Japanese-Americans being isolated in camps during World War II
Native Americans having their land confiscated in violation of treaties, being the victims of government-sponsored massacres, and being placed on reservations.

Minorities have also been the victims of violence based on their minority status. Minority institutions, such as places of worship, schools, and cemeteries, have been the target of vandalism, arson, and desecration. African-Americans were victims of lynching and whippings in the South and other parts of the United States as well. In Eastern Europe, random violence directed at Jews, called pogroms, resulted in the massacre of thousands. Today, there are groups such as the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), the White Knights, the Order, the Posse Comitatus, and neo-Nazi Skinheads, which openly condone discrimination and advocate against certain minorities as part of their doctrines.

Genocide, the destruction of a people, is the most extreme form of persecution. During World War II, Hitler's dream of destroying European Jewry substantially came to fruition. Through the use of propaganda, he successfully convinced millions of followers that the Jews were to blame for Germany's troubles, including its humiliation during World War I, and its economic chaos. Six million Jews were annihilated. The Armenian genocide of the early 20th century and the murder of millions of Cambodians by Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge are other examples of genocide in the 20th century.

Scapegoating

Scapegoating is the practice of blaming an individual or group for a real or perceived failure of others. The origin of the term comes from the Bible. The high priest in Biblical times would place his hand upon a goat's head and transfer the sins of the community to the goat, which was then released into the desert.

It is not uncommon to blame others for our own mistakes, and especially to affix blame on those who are unable or unwilling to defend themselves against the charges. Minorities are often the targets of scapegoating. First, minorities are often isolated within society and are thus an easy target. Those in the majority are more easily convinced about the negative characteristics of a minority with which they have no direct contact. Violence, persecution, and genocide directed against minorities often occur when a minority group is being blamed for some social ill. Unemployment, inflation, food shortages, the plague, and crime in the streets are all examples of ills which have been blamed on minority groups.

Demagogues and Propaganda

Some prejudice has been passed down from generation to generation. Prejudice against Jews, called anti-Semitism, has been known for more than two thousand years. It is usually the case, however, that the passions of hatred against minorities by members of the majority are stirred up by charismatic leaders who exploit latent hatreds for their own political ends. These leaders are called "demagogues," and they depend upon propaganda and disinformation to achieve their ends. Many demagogues have been successful because people want to believe that there is a simple cause of their problems. Through the use of propaganda techniques, persuasive arguments are made that one group or another is to blame for all of our problems, and these problems would go away "were it not for those (fill in the target minority)." As a population becomes educated, it becomes less easy to sway with propaganda. In a free society where access to information is not restricted, it becomes even more difficult.

Positive Responses to Prejudice and Stereotypes

Understanding the nature of prejudice, scapegoating, stereotypes, and discrimination is the first step in combating these practices. All of us have prejudices about members of groups different from ourselves. We should, however, recognize that we are not acting fairly if we treat people differently because of these stereotypes and prejudices. Each one of us deserves to be considered a unique human being.

In his 1963 "I Have a Dream" speech at the Lincoln Memorial, civil rights activist Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Dr. King devoted his life to fighting bigotry and prejudice. His message was meant not only for African-Americans but for all oppressed minorities. In taking a courageous stand against racial hatred, Dr. King was subjected to personal injustices which culminated in his murder at the hands of a racist assassin. Yet his message of brotherhood, of understanding, of intergroup dialogue, of coalition-building, of non-violent resistance to injustice, has endured. His birthday is celebrated as a national holiday.

All of us face peer pressure when confronted with a joke which puts down a certain minority. It takes courage to raise objections to these jokes and pejorative names and to actively fight the prejudice and bigotry which they foster. It is important to stand up against injustice, and fight the discrimination, stereotypes, and scapegoating which have served as the precursors to persecution, violence, and genocide.

VOCABULARY

Anti-Semitism - Coined by Wilhelm Marr, an anti-Jewish German journalist in 1879, was used to mean "opposition to Jews." Today it refers to prejudice against Jews. Apartheid
- he system of racial segregation in South Africa. Bigotry
- intolerance for the beliefs of others, particularly those of minority groups. Block-busting
- The illegal practice of exploiting racial prejudice by inducing the sale of houses owned by whites in segregated neighborhoods at bargain prices as a result of a minority being sold a home in that neighborhood. Civil rights
- he rights of full legal, social and political equality afforded to all citizens. Demagogue
- A person who gains power through impassioned public appeals to the emotions and prejudices of a group by speaking or writing. Disinformation
- Purposely incorrect information. Ethnocentrism
- The belief that one's own ethnic, religious, or political group is superior to all others. Genocide
- (genos=people, race, kind; cide=murder) The use of deliberate, systematic measures (as killing, bodily or mental injury, unlivable conditions, prevention of births, forcible transfer of children of the group to another group) calculated to bring about the destruction of a racial, political or cultural group or to destroy the language, religion or culture of a group. Gerrymandering
- The division of voting districts to give one group an advantage over another. Ghetto
- A section of a city in which Jews were required to live surrounded by walls; has been adopted to include sections or cities predominantly inhabited by minority groups which may have socio-economic rather than physical barriers.

Holocaust - Literally, "fire that causes destruction," has been used to designate the destruction of six million Jews by the Nazis during World War II.

Insurance red-lining

- The practice, illegal in many states, of setting insurance rates on the basis of a neighborhood, which is intended to discriminate against residences and businesses in "undesirable" neighborhoods. Ku Klux Klan
- An organization in the United States which utilizes propaganda and terror against African-Americans, Jews, Catholics, and other minorities to express its extremist racist and anti-Semitic views. Lynching
- The capture and killing of a person, usually by hanging, often in retaliation for a real or perceived crime, by a mob acting outside the authority of the civil justice system. Persecution
- The oppression and/or harassment of people based on their race, religion, color, national origin, or other distinguishing characteristic. Pogrom
- An organized, and often government-sponsored or condoned massacre of Jews. Prejudice
- An unfavorable opinion formed against a person or group based on a stereotype. Propaganda
- Information which is used to promote a cause or to injure or enhance the reputation of a group, individual, or position, and which may either not be factual, may "bend" the facts, or does not tell the entire story, in order to suit the purposes of the author. Racism
- A belief that one race is superior to another. Scapegoat
- A person or group who is given the blame for the mistakes or failures of others, promoted through the use of propaganda. Skinhead
- A member of a youth cult group, whose members shave their heads, and whose activities in some cases have taken the form of violence and terror directed against African-Americans, Hispanics, Jews, Asians, homosexuals, and other minorities. Stereotype
- A generalized image of a person or group, which does not acknowledge individual differences and which is often prejudicial to that person or group.

ACTIVITIES

Read Hans Christian Anderson's "The Emperor's New Clothes."
Keep a log of your television watching, and record in it all instances you believe a character is being treated as a stereotype.
Obtain campaign literature from each of the major national parties and describe aspects of it which you feel are propaganda.
Use the diagram, "Steps to Organized Genocide" at the end of this chapter and analyze whether it has ever applied, at some time in the history of the United States, to the following groups:
a) American Indians
b) Haitians
c) Chinese
d) Jews
e) African-Americans
f) Japanese-Americans
g) Southeast Asians (Cambodians,Vietnamese)
h) Koreans
i) Hispanics
j) East Europeans (Slavic Peoples)
k) Southern Europeans (Italians, Greeks)
l) Irish

Have students complete the following sentences, then break up into small groups to compare their answers and discuss if there is any prejudice and bigotry in their answers or in those of their classmates, as well as what factors (e.g., television, newspapers, friendships, attitudes of their parents) may have contributed to such prejudice:
a) All athletes are
b) People on welfare are all
c) He's a cheap
d) Drugs are used by virtually
e) All homosexuals are
f) All politicians are
g) All people with AIDS are
h) All people who sleep on grates are
i) All Christian Fundamentalists are
j) All male hairdressers are
k) All male ballet dancers are
l) All Jewish mothers are
m) All Harvard graduates are
n) All construction workers are
o) He's so dumb, he must be
p) He's so smart, he must be
q) He's quick-tempered, so he must be
r) He drinks like a fish, so he must be
s) He likes watermelon, and so does every
Write down characteristics of each of the following groups:
a) African-Americans
b) Jews
c) rich people
d) Japanese
e) Hispanics
f) athletes
g) obese people
h) homosexuals
i) politicians
j) men
k) women
l) Soviets
m) liberals
n) conservatives
o) Democrats
p) Republicans
q) teachers
r) cheerleaders
Research and compare the following U.S. Supreme Court cases:
Plessy vs. Ferguson (1895)
Korematsu vs. United States (1944)
Brown vs. Board of Education, Topeka, Kansas (1954)
Frontiero vs. Richardson (1973)
Consider your attitudes and prejudices about:

vegetarians
people who wear dashikis (a usually brightly colored loose-fitting pullover garment)
students who wear yarmulkas (skullcaps)
students with punk-style haircuts
students who wear an Afro
students with "skinhead" haircuts
students who wear gold chains around their necks
students who carry large stereo radios
students with orange hair
boys who wear an earring
skateboard users

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

Is there an "African-American" area of your community? A "white" area? Is there an area which is "restricted" to one race, religion, or national origin? What would the consequences be for someone of the "wrong" race, religion, or national origin to seek to reside in that area?
Have you ever been told not to venture through a certain neighborhood? Why would anyone suggest this? Is any of this based on prejudice? Are there stereotypes of the people in that neighborhood? Would those people feel safe venturing into your neighborhood? Why or why not?
Discuss Adolf Hitler's reported statement, "Who still tells nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?" Does this statement have any validity today?
Discuss the following: "Genocide can never be eliminated because it is deeply rooted in human nature." Do you agree or disagree?
Why do some people join groups such as the KKK?
Discuss how prejudice and discrimination are not only harmful to the victim but also to those who practice them.
Is it possible to grow to adulthood without harboring at least some prejudice toward minorities?
What can you do to fight prejudice in your neighborhood or school?

EVALUATION

1. Define the following:

stereotype
scapegoat
discrimination
ghetto
propaganda
prejudice
genocide
demagogue

2. Give four examples of discriminatory practices against African-Americans in the United States.

3. Describe one process by which a stereotype is created.

4. Why were Asian-Americans isolated in camps during World War II by executive order of the President?

5. Describe a stereotyped character from a television show or movie. Discuss how accurate the stereotype is.

6.What was the significance of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown vs. Board of Education?

7. Name several strategies majorities have used to isolate minorities.

8. What were "Jim Crow" laws, and what purpose did they serve?

9. Why is Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday celebrated as a national holiday? What contributions did he make to the civil rights movement?

10. What is the origin of the term "scapegoat," and how is this term used today?

TEACHING STRATEGIES

Encourage students to share any personal experiences they may have had with racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, or other discrimination. If students are not quite comfortable about speaking about their individual experiences, permit them to talk about the prejudices of their friends, or about prejudicial attitudes they have seen on television or at the movies.
Survey class members about the roots of their family tree: what countries their ancestors came from, what period they arrived in this country, the purpose for which they emigrated, and the business or trade their ancestors had when they first arrived.
Have the students read the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Ask them to describe values inherent in these documents (e.g., freedom, liberty, justice, truth, equality) and ask them to discuss how prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry promote values which run counter to those of these documents.
Spend time discussing the biography of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., his "I Have a Dream" speech, and whether any progress has been made on the issues raised by the speech.
Obtain a copy of the Anti-Defamation League's "A World of Difference" Teacher/Student Study Guide which is designated as a full course of study to promote prejudice reduction. Information about this guide, which includes scores of exercises, readings, discussion questions, and a bibliography, can be obtained from the ADL (230 South Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19102; 215-735-4267).
Listen to and discuss "The Sounds of Silence" (Simon & Garfunkel) and "Carefully Taught" (from South Pacific : Rogers & Hammerstein). Discuss silence, indifference, fear of new people and situations; how we may accept others' prejudices too easily and without thinking.
Listen to and discuss "Word Game," a song by Stephen Sills (this talks about the origins of prejudice and how it affects human behavior).
Read and discuss an excerpt from Sammy Davis, Jr.'s autobiography, I Ain't Sleepin' Nexta No Nigger!

DIAGRAM:

"STEPS TO ORGANIZED GENOCIDE"

(for use with "Activities," item 4)

DENIAL OF JUSTICE

ISOLATION

PERSECUTION

DEHUMANIZATION

VIOLENCE

MASS EXECUTIONS

|| Return to The Holocaust--A Guide for Teachers ||

20

BLAMING GOD...

by writetoknow in

and blame which involves urges to punish either by asking punishing questions or by threatening punishments but then explaining away these urges away.

layer 2 blame.

here again, in theory, seeing this difference is simple.

writetoknow

[Question 1] How do I know when I have blamed someone? Is there an easy way to know if something I feel, say, or do is blaming?

[Answer] Let's start with your first question; how do you know when you have blamed someone? The simple answer? You feel urges to punish someone. Thus, according to Emergence Personality Theory, wherein there are ten nested layers of personality, three of the four outer most layers contain our urges to blame. Moreover all three of these layers, in their own way, involve some kind of urges to punish.

What are the three kinds of blame? Blame which involves urges to punish for eternity (Layer 4: Uncivilized blame). Blame which involves urges to punish temporarily (Layer 3: Time Limited Blame. And blame which involves urges to punish either by asking punishing questions or by threatening punishments but then explaining away these urges away. (Layer 2: Civilized Blame).

Now let's look at a few examples.

With Layer 4 blame, Uncivilized Blame, you feel urges to kill, maim, and permanently torture. The burn in hell kinds of urges. Know that ordinary folks can and often do feel these urges, and in no way does having them imply insanity.

Of course, if you feel urges to carry out these urges, you are now moving toward being insane. And if you actually do carry out any of these urges, you have indeed become at least temporarily insane.

The thing to see here is that the essential nature of these punishments is their permanence. Forever burn in hell punishments. Thus these urges are often the most real and personal version of blame, in that when we feel this kind of blame, we are directly in touch with our feelings.

With Layer 3 blame, Time Limited Blame, these emotions tone down a bit. Not a whole lot. But some, to be sure. Thus, with Layer 3 blame, while you may feel urges to send someone to hell, you also want them to be allowed back at some point. Usually when they have repented sufficiently and have asked you for forgiveness enough times.

The essence of this kind of blame then is that you feel urges to temporarily punish as opposed to urges to permanently punish. And these temporary punishments can take many forms, from prison sentences and excommunicating folks to sending teens to their rooms and giving young children time outs. Thus count judges get paid for doling out Layer 3 blame.

The thing to see here though is that, while the urges to punish temporarily are all Layer 3 urges, the reasons for limiting these punishments are often the third kind of blame. Layer 2 blame. Explanations for blaming and excuses for not blaming. Here, parents might grill their late to be home teen with punishing questions such as, "where were you. You knew the rules. You just don't get it, do you." and so on and so on.

Now let's consider how these three kinds of urges to punish play out. In other words, what happens when we actually move past our urges to blame and begin to carry them out.

If you, as a politician, engage in a political argument advocating for the death penalty, you are making a Layer 2 arguments. At the same time, if you, as a criminal court justice, send someone to death row knowing they may be there for years, you are giving someone a Layer 3 punishment. Finally, if you, as a prison warden, officiate over the execution of someone on death row, you are committing the consummate Layer 2 punishment.

Now let's look at the second question; is there an easy way to know if something you feel, say, or do is blaming?

My answer? No. There is no easy way to know if what you are feeling, saying and or doing involves blame. Why not? Because while in theory, there is an easy way; you simply ask yourself if you feel any urges to punish, in reality, this is hard to see. Why? Because most adults cannot see the difference between strong feelings of anger and urges to punish. In fact, when most adults feel urges to blame, they have usually been precipitated by some sort of anger feelings.

For most adults then, urges to punish are usually prefaced and accompanied by feelings of anger. Even so, anger in and of itself is not blame but rather is a Layer 7 experience.

In other words, while most blame is accompanied by feelings of anger, not all anger blames.

Who does feel this kind of anger then? Babies, including newborns. And while some folks may think this statement sounds crazy, some very famous personality theorists have said this same thing.

The thing to see here, of course, is how a baby's anger differs from the anger adults feel when they feel urges to punish someone. Here again, in theory, seeing this difference is simple. Not only are there no visible urges to punish, a baby cannot even feel these urges as feeling them requires the person have a sense of time wherein the punishment follows a crime.

Thus, with Layer 4 blame, we feel urges to send someone to burn in hell forever for a crime. Certainly a long, long time. And with Layer 3 blame, we want to send someone away for a long, long time for a crime. But we also expect that at some point, the person will redeem themselves for doing this crime. Or at least, we hope they will. Finally with Layer 2 blame, we feel urges to punish someone for a crime, but would prefer to only threaten this punishment in hopes it may defer your need to actually punish them. Hence the title; civilized blame.

How does all this differ from what babies feel?

Babies have no sense of ongoing time. Only a sense of time as the present moment. And of course, while this present moment is often literally a here and now event, it may also be a moment from the baby's past or future.

Still not seeing my point? It's simple. We humans have two ways to experience time. One. As a single moment. The one you are currently experiencing, past, present, or future. And two. As a sequence of at least two moments, one of which comes before the other.

The thing to know here is that all human beings experience the first kind of time up to and including about age seven. Thus I call this way of experiencing time, before-seven time. And from about age seven on, and as a result of learning how to tell watch, clock, and calendar time, we can experience time as a sequence of unfolding moments. Which is why I call this way of experiencing time, after-seven time.

Blame requires we can sense time as an ongoing unfolding sequence. Only in this way could we make sense out of feeling urges to punish. Why? Because all punishments follow a crime.

Thus because no human babies sense time this way, babies cannot blame. Moreover this holds true even when they feel what we adults might deem homicidal rage. Why not? Because babies cannot see this anger as being followed by anything. They in fact see no end to what they are feeling. Hence, the depth of their feelings of anger. And every other feeling, in fact.

So, to sum up, there are two theoretical ways to identify blame. [1] Blame always involves urges to punish. And [2] blame always involves after-seven time. Moreover, while feelings of anger underlie most urges to blame, feeling anger, in and of itself, does not indicate blame. Hence, new born babies are indeed innocent.

[Question 2] If someone blames me and I feel hurt and angry, are there things I can do to prevent myself from blaming back?[Answer] Yes. For one thing, you can examine your response for signs of blame. Beginning with the two essential qualities of blame I just named; [1] urges to punish and [2] after-seven time. Then, if you see no sign that you feel urges to punish, regardless of what your emotional response is, you are not blaming. However, if you do see signs that you feel urges to punish, it's time to consider doing some sort of damage control. At least until the point at which you have the space and freedom to self examine so as to get yourself out from under these urges to punish.

What kind of damage control could you do? The count to five stuff works. As does the walk away advice. And the bite your tongue suggestions.

You should also consider allowing yourself to imagine doing serious violence to this person. In effigy of course. And not with intentions to carry any of this out. This, in fact, is my favorite method of damage control, and in many ways, this resembles the very same experiences young children have when they watch Saturday morning cartoons. You know. The kind wherein a car runs over the rabbit and a moment later, he pops right up again.

The imagined fantasies can help diffuse the kind of anger which left unspoken can eventually burst out of one's mouth. Or out of one's fists. This said, any method which works for you will be good for the moment. However, you must eventually honor this anger or risk the inevitable outburst.

[Question 3] I'm mad at a whole group of people and want to blame them. I, in fact, feel strong urges to blame them but have managed to not act on these urges. What's the best way to handle this? [Answer] Don't accept their invitations to go over to their house for dinner? Just kidding. And actually, a lot of what I suggested in the previous question would work here as well.

At the same time, it sounds like you are referring to a prejudice. Thus, these urges to blame are usually very insidious and deeply rooted.

My honest thoughts? If this is the kind of blame you're suffering from, you probably need the help of a competent professional. Someone well versed in helping people to see past their prejudices. For instance, I once had an African American man try to get me to join an anti prejudice group. However, as we spoke, I realized he was largely motivated by his deep rooted feelings toward a white policeman who had frightened him in his youth.

Moments later, he had the emergence and recalled the policeman's hollow eyes staring right through him. Then this was followed by his eyes getting watery and his whole face softening.

I never did hear what happened with this man's anti prejudice group. However, he certainly left that day filled with compassion toward policemen. No small wonder that it happened in such a brief time. As does some of the best healing.

[Question 4] Someone blamed me. I've shared what was said to me with all my friends and they all agree, it was blame. Will telling this to the blaming person ever help? [Answer] Yes. However, in order to help, you must, yourself, be able to say this to the person while not blaming the person back. Beginning with that you need to leave out the argumentum ad populum statement; the false argument that if an opinion is held by many people that this makes it in some way true.

In other words, just because many people believe hatred is justified, this still does not make feeling this way right. Or real. And if these feelings of hatred are accompanied by urges to punish, then with certainty, these feelings include blame.

The answer then is, if you can tell the person this without blaming, then it might start things moving. However if you cannot do it without blame then you might consider not saying anything at all. At least until you get a better handle on what you feel.

[Question 5] When someone else is angry at us and blaming, can we ever truly see their point of view? Is it even possible to remain conscious while being blamed? Or does blame always render us to some degree unconscious? [Answer] Three separate questions. Three separate answers.

When someone else is angry at us and blaming, can we ever truly see their point of view? Yes. Absolutely. However, if you agree with them, you might consider that you too are blaming.

Is it even possible to remain conscious while being blamed? Admittedly it is hard, however, it is indeed possible. Especially if you do not feel shame or guilt about the thing you are accused of. And if you do? Then you will need to do some work on your shame and or guilt. Or on whatever part of what they are saying to you which causes you to over or under react.

So does blame always render us to some degree unconscious? Not always. But frequently it does. Some stuff is simply that provocative to most human beings.

32

Does Free Will Allow Evil?

by writetoknow in

by dr. mark eastman.

" a proper understanding of this issue not only provides great insight into the nature of god, it ties together a comprehensive understanding to some of life's ultimate questions: the answers to my origin, meaning, morality and destiny!.

the christian worldview is an impractical, even phony, view of the cosmos because it embraces a god who is either incapable of stopping evil and suffering, and he is therefore not omnipotent, or is unwilling to do so and therefore a devil!.

writetoknow

If you actually believe God was talking to the whole world when He said must? Or you might want to read the rest of the story when God people said they willingly wanted God to lead them and accept His commandments.

Moverover the "must" command was to show God's people they could not do the "must love" things they were sinners and could not be perfect they need something more.

32

Does Free Will Allow Evil?

by writetoknow in

by dr. mark eastman.

" a proper understanding of this issue not only provides great insight into the nature of god, it ties together a comprehensive understanding to some of life's ultimate questions: the answers to my origin, meaning, morality and destiny!.

the christian worldview is an impractical, even phony, view of the cosmos because it embraces a god who is either incapable of stopping evil and suffering, and he is therefore not omnipotent, or is unwilling to do so and therefore a devil!.

writetoknow

Email from a Skeptic: Why Does God Allow Evil?

. . . by Dr. Mark Eastman

In my experience, it is the most commonly asked question by honest skeptics: "If God is real, if God is personal, if God loves us, why does God allow evil?" A proper understanding of this issue not only provides great insight into the nature of God, it ties together a comprehensive understanding to some of life's ultimate questions: the answers to my origin, meaning, morality and destiny!

Email from A Skeptic

The question of evil was brought into clearer focus in an email I recently received from a skeptic:

The Christian worldview is an impractical, even phony, view of the Cosmos because it embraces a God who is either incapable of stopping evil and suffering, and he is therefore not omnipotent, or is unwilling to do so and therefore a devil!

The skeptic's point is well taken because the Bible states that one of God's attributes is love. "He who does not love does not know God, for God is love." (I John 4:8) In the book of Romans, Paul the Apostle stated that the invisible attributes of God "are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead." (1)

However, what the skeptic is saying, in effect, is this: "If your God is love, I see no evidence of that attribute in creation. All the death, disease, pain and suffering seems to be out of place if this God of yours is love. Surely an all-powerful God could, and a loving God would, eliminate all evil. Since evil exists, then no such God exists."

To answer this objection we need to examine some principles of logic, the nature of God, the nature of man, the nature of love and the nature of evil.

Evil and Moral Law

When someone states that they do not believe in God because a good God would not allow evil, they make a fatal error in logic. First, the recognition of evil is the recognition that certain actions are "right" and certain actions are "wrong." But how do we determine what actions are morally right and morally wrong? We discern this on the basis of a moral law: a universal sense that certain states of affairs are right and others are wrong. Even most atheists will admit that certain actions are universally wrong and, conversely, universally right.

For example, no one could seriously argue with the statement that it is better to love a child than to torture it. The point is that there is an innate, universal sense of right and wrong within all of us. What is the basis of this moral sense? Some would argue that it is based on cultural customs or traditions. But can this be so?

The famous atheist Bertrand Russell once debated a Christian who asked him if he believed in right and wrong. Russell replied "of course." Then he asked him how he determined what is right and wrong. Russell replied that he determined right and wrong on the basis of his feelings. His opponent replied, "Well, in some cultures they feel it is okay to eat you, and in others they don't. Which do you prefer." The point is that social customs, attitudes, traditions or feelings cannot determine a universal sense of right and wrong.

A universal sense of moral right and wrong can only come from a source outside of ourselves: a transcendent source, a moral Lawgiver. So the recognition of moral law is by default the recognition of a moral Lawgiver. To argue that the existence of evil proves that there is no God is equivalent to stating that the existence of moral law proves that there is no Lawgiver! It's like declaring that the Chrysler automobile that I drive proves without a doubt that there is no Chrysler Motor Company!

Atheists often present the problem of evil to theists as if it is a fatal argument for the existence of God. Nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, it is an absolutely unsolvable problem for the atheist. How does the atheist explain evil-the sense of moral right and wrong-in the absence of a moral Lawgiver? They can't! If there is no moral Lawgiver, then there is no way to explain the sense of moral wrong and moral right we all possess. C.S. Lewis said that evil is God's megaphone to a non-believing world. Evil speaks of moral law. Moral law demands a moral Lawgiver, and it is He that we call God!

Evil Often Begets Good

A second principle of logic we need to consider is the fact that an apparently evil state of affairs will often bring about an even better state of affairs. The problem is that we often do not recognize this fact until we have the advantage of hindsight. In my own field of medicine I see this on a daily basis: the process of childbirth, surgical intervention, and many medical therapies often present physical pain (an evil state of affairs according to non-theists), and yet they bring about an even better state of affairs: improved health. Physical pain is often highly beneficial as well. When a child touches a hot stove, the nervous system sends a neurological signal to the brain which is perceived as pain (a form of evil). Yet without that sense of pain, an even worse state of affairs would arise: the destruction of the limb.

The skeptic might object that while this provides a partial answer to the problem of evil, it does not address some of the most disturbing forms of evil: war, murder, rape, incest and the senseless death of the innocent.

God, Freedom, and Evil

The problem of human evil is rooted in the nature of God and the nature of love and the nature of mankind. I argued in last month's Personal UPDATE that God is a personal being because an impersonal force is an insufficient agent to create personal beings. (2) What is the greatest passion of personal beings? I would argue that, above all else, personal beings desire personal relationships with other personal beings. So it makes sense that God, as a personal being, would desire to create us in such a way that He could have a meaningful, personal, and loving relationship with us. But this has a severe price.

Let us consider the nature of love and its consequences. I cannot experience love from you unless you have the capacity to do otherwise. If you have the capacity to not love me, and you choose instead to love me, then that choice has validity. It has meaning. You cannot have a love relationship with a computer. It is pre-programmed to serve you. Love requires choice: unencumbered choice. And that's where the problem lies.

When God created mankind, He too had a choice. If He created us as beings that were pre-programmed to follow and serve Him, there could be no love. But, if He created us with the capacity of choice, the capacity to love and serve Him, and the capacity not to do so, then there is the possibility of relationship: the possibility of real love. As a personal being with the capability of creating us in the first place, it makes sense that He would want to create us as personal beings with the capability of choice (free will) and, thus, the capability of love. But where there is choice and the capability of love, there is also the capability to choose wrong and to do great evil.

But the skeptic says, "why did God do this when he knew in advance that the result of free will would be so disastrous? Did this God of love not care that war, murder, rape and so much senseless violence would be the result of his choice to give us free will?" A real life illustration will help us to understand.

The Love of a Mother

During my 15 years as a physician I have seen an enormous amount of physical suffering. During that time I have had five children in my practice die by disease and injury. All of these children came from Christian families. Several months after the death of one of these children, the child's mother was in my office and was very distraught over her loss. She asked me, "Why did God allow this? I love God. Why did this happen?"

What could I say in this situation? Rather than providing an answer I asked her this question. "You have three children. One of them has died. If you could go back to the time before you had any children, with the knowledge that one of them would die this horrible death, would you have children again?"

After a long pause, with many tears in her eyes and a broken heart she said, "Oh yes. Oh yes. yes I would. Because, you see, the love and the joy and the happiness I have received from my children far outweighs the pain, suffering and misery I experienced from the loss of that one child. Oh yes. Oh yes. I would have children again."

In this tragic story we see an incredible insight as to why God allows evil to exist. As discussed earlier, a loving God can allow an evil state of affairs to exist if, in allowing it to occur, it brings about an even better state of affairs. For this woman, the loss of her child was an unequalled and tragic evil. But, with the advantage of hindsight, she said she would do it all again because the love she received as a result of being a mother outweighed the evil state of affairs in the death of her child.

In the hypothetical scenario I presented to this woman, with the advantage of hindsight (foreknowledge in this case) she was in a position comparable to God's before He created humankind. Because He is outside time and knows all things, He knew that there would be tremendous pain and suffering as a result of His decision to create a people with the capacity of choice and, consequently, the capacity to sin (moral evil).

But God, like this mother, knew that the love He and his human creatures would experience would outweigh the pain and suffering that would result from His decision to create us as He did. But the consequences of God's decision were not unforeseen. They were foreknown!

The Incredible Answer

The skeptic that emailed me stated, in effect, that if an all-powerful God did not eliminate evil, then He was a devil! The implication is that the removal of all evil would permit a better, more loving world. A truly loving God, the skeptics assert, would have desired and created such a world because it is clearly superior to the one we have. Any God that did not follow this logic was not a God of love, but an evil tyrant.

As we have seen, this logic crumbles under its own weight. The existence of evil is the "side effect" of creating a world with love. But as we have seen, there are compelling arguments that a world possessing both evil and love is superior to a world where neither is possible. For God to eliminate evil, He would have to eliminate our capacity of choice and thus our capacity to do both evil and good. And such a world is inferior to the one we have: one where love is possible, despite its inherent evil. What kind of God would do this? Only one kind. A God of love.

Why does a God of love allow evil? Because He is a God of LOVE

So Great a Salvation

So, how practical is Christianity? The Bible presents an infinite Creator with the very attributes we would expect when we examine the things that are made. And God, as a personal Being, in order that He might have a love relationship with us, gave us the capacity of choice. In order that we might have a practical revelation of His love, His wisdom, His power, His glory, He became one of us in the person of the Messiah, Jesus Christ.

In order that we might not suffer the penalty of our evil choices (sin), He, like a loving father, paid the penalty for our sins. He allowed his only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to be murdered on a Roman cross (arguably the most evil act in the history of the universe, if He is indeed God's Son). But this act of great evil gave rise to an even better state of affairs, and the greatest act of love in the universe: paying the penalty for the wrong choices we make, which were the result of the way He created us in the first place! In the cross of Christ He has provided a full pardon from the consequences of the evil in our lives. Consequently, we cannot look to God and declare that He is unfair. Far from being a devil, in this examination of the problem of evil, God becomes the hero of the plot and the solution to the problem of evil. And it all hinges on LOVE. Indeed, God is love. (3) What must we do to receive this pardon?

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.John 3:16

If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.Romans 10:9

Notes:

Romans 1:18-20.
Personal UPDATE, May 1999
For those that would like an in-depth treatment of the problem of evil and a God of love, I highly recommend Alvin Plantinga's book, God, Freedom and Evil.

*This article from Personal Update was used by permission. For more informative articles, and audio tapes. See Koinonia House at http://www.khouse.org/

24

Those That Hate God For Suffering

by writetoknow in

glory in tribulations.

060905 tuesday, september 05, 2006 daily devotional.

by brent riggs .

writetoknow

So the same comments over and over again God does not exist. Ok, that is cool, now lets move on with your life - stop blaming and hating something that does not exist.

We heard how God does not answer your prayers and so you were abused - so God doesn't exist, so how did He allowed it? A billion people could state how God answers their prayers and it would be a lie and made up - people that have suffered that are not bitter make no different everyone is a lier it all made up.

Ok that is cool, get on with your life stop blaming something that does not exist as though He still exist. The amount of force behind the rebuttals speak volumes about the fear over something that doesn't exist.

52

Why Some Can't Understand

by writetoknow in

if i love my children, i don't make them suffer.

why should god be any different?.

"you may participate in the divine nature" (2 peter 1:4).

writetoknow

Yes there are! Good old gals YaHa

52

Why Some Can't Understand

by writetoknow in

if i love my children, i don't make them suffer.

why should god be any different?.

"you may participate in the divine nature" (2 peter 1:4).

writetoknow

Well I can't accept because I have been taught that atheist don't exist as a "group" and they have no agenda?

They don't have a doctrine or share information or try to get religious teachings removed from schools, government, colleges or businesses they are just a harmless bunch of good old boys never meaning no harm.

So I don't have any uses for the funds -- thanks anyway good old boy.

24

Those That Hate God For Suffering

by writetoknow in

glory in tribulations.

060905 tuesday, september 05, 2006 daily devotional.

by brent riggs .

writetoknow

Not on this forum is a better statment. However, this is the only world some know or would have you believe it is the majority thinking in the free world.

52

Why Some Can't Understand

by writetoknow in

if i love my children, i don't make them suffer.

why should god be any different?.

"you may participate in the divine nature" (2 peter 1:4).

writetoknow

Thank you that the nice thing said on this thread. It really not hard at all just post bible information and you have offended 99% of people posting on this board - they need to change the name of this forum at some point it a little deceiving.