Return-Path: <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id j8CCrAG03063; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 08:53:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 08:53:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <007012A5-E35F-4221-8A95-649C6821F054@comcast.net> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: David Rosen <djrosen@comcast.net> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-POVRACELIT:1536] Re: Do we live in a racist and classist society? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.734) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Status: O Content-Length: 13222 Lines: 377 NIFL-POVRACELIT Colleagues, Correction: The NPR radio program is This American Life. David J. Rosen On Sep 12, 2005, at 8:37 AM, David Rosen wrote: > NIFL-POVRACELIT Colleagues, > > The NPR radio program, All Things Considered, this past weekend > had an intensely moving, one-hour piece called "After The Flood" > which is pertinent to this discussion. On many public radio > stations it will be re-broadcast this weekend. (See http:// > www.thislife.org/ for schedule.) It is also available through > podcasts and, for a nominal cost, directly from NPR. > > David J. Rosen > djrosen@comcast.net > > On Sep 9, 2005, at 12:21 PM, Andres Muro wrote: > > >> In light of the UN report and the impact of the hurricane, do we >> live in >> a racist and classist society? >> >> Many would argue that we don't because our system does not >> intentionally take actions to prevent poor people and minorities from >> improving their social, economic conditions. This argument is >> questionable, however, assuming that this argument is correct, ie, >> nobody intentionally discriminates against the poor or minorities, >> do we >> live in a classist, racist society. >> >> History, societies and events are no assessed by the intention of the >> actors, but the consequences of the actions. So, we judge periods of >> historical times, not by the intentions of Washington, Queen >> Elizabeth, >> GW, Osama, but by the circumstances that were created. >> >> Racism and classism are defined as the differential treatment or >> consequences to a group given by certain circumstances. In other >> words, >> if given some conditions, or events, one group is impacted more >> negatively than another, then, there are social conditions that >> result >> in the discrimination of the group that suffered adversely. If the >> group that suffered more adversity are the poor, then we have a >> classist >> society. If the group that suffered more adversity are an ethnic >> minority, then we have racism, and so on and so for. Poverty is >> proof of >> classism, because a group is already suffering adverse conditions >> that >> they cannot overcome. Even if the intention of the society is to >> create >> the conditions for people to overcome poverty, as long as a >> significant >> group cannot overcome it, then we have a classist society. >> >> Now, looking at the events in Louisiana, did black people suffered >> more >> adversity than members of other ethnic groups, as a result of the >> circumstances? the answer is a resounding yes. Therefore, we have a >> racist society. Even if nobody wants to see blacks suffering and >> we all >> love blacks like we love our moms, the fact that blacks suffered much >> more adversity than other groups shows that we live in a racist >> society. >> >> >> Another thing: racism is not determined from the point of view of >> those >> in power, but from the perspective of the victims. If it were >> measured >> by the point of view of those in power, then they will claim that >> we did >> not have racism, because they did not intend to discriminate. >> >> So, given the fact that we do live in a racist society according >> to the >> analysis of the UN report and the consequences of the hurricane, >> what do >> we do? A society must change the conditions so that those that suffer >> more adversity than others stop suffering more adversity. It is as >> simple as that. As long as we don't systematically work towards >> changing >> the conditions so that some groups stop experiencing more >> adversity, we >> will continue to be a racist society. >> >> So, we can wear the labels proudly and admit that we are a bunch of >> racists, classists and sexists, or we change the conditions and >> create >> an egalitarian society. >> >> What do you all think? How does this relate to literacy? Do >> minorities >> have lower literacy achievement? Does this make us racist? >> >> Andres >> >> >> >> >>>>> macorley1@earthlink.net 9/8/2005 6:35:48 PM >>> >>>>> >>>>> >> UN Hits Back at US in Report Saying Parts of America Are as Poor as >> Third >> World >> >> By Paul Vallely >> The Independent UK >> http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/090805L.shtml >> Thursday 08 September 2005 >> >> Parts of the United States are as poor as the Third World, according >> to >> a shocking United Nations report on global inequality. >> >> Claims that the New Orleans floods have laid bare a growing racial >> and >> economic divide in the US have, until now, been rejected by the >> American >> political establishment as emotional rhetoric. But yesterday's UN >> report >> provides statistical proof that for many - well beyond those affected >> by the >> aftermath of Hurricane Katrina - the great American Dream is an >> ongoing >> nightmare. >> >> The document constitutes a stinging attack on US policies at home and >> abroad in a fightback against moves by Washington to undermine next >> week's >> UN 60th anniversary conference which will be the biggest gathering of >> world >> leaders in history. >> >> The annual Human Development Report normally concerns itself with the >> Third World, but the 2005 edition scrutinises inequalities in health >> provision inside the US as part of a survey of how inequality >> worldwide >> is >> retarding the eradication of poverty. >> >> It reveals that the infant mortality rate has been rising in the US >> for >> the past five years - and is now the same as Malaysia. America's >> black >> children are twice as likely as whites to die before their first >> birthday. >> >> The report is bound to incense the Bush administration as it provides >> ammunition for critics who have claimed that the fiasco following >> Hurricane >> Katrina shows that Washington does not care about poor black >> Americans. >> But >> the 370-page document is critical of American policies towards >> poverty >> abroad as well as at home. And, in unusually outspoken language, it >> accuses >> the US of having "an overdeveloped military strategy and an >> under-developed >> strategy for human security". >> >> "There is an urgent need to develop a collective security framework >> that >> goes beyond military responses to terrorism," it continues. " Poverty >> and >> social breakdown are core components of the global security threat." >> >> The document, which was written by Kevin Watkins, the former head of >> research at Oxfam, will be seen as round two in the battle between >> the >> UN >> and the US, which regards the world body as an unnecessary constraint >> on its >> strategic interests and actions. >> >> Last month John Bolton, the new US ambassador to the UN, submitted >> 750 >> amendments to the draft declaration for next week's summit to >> strengthen the >> UN and review progress towards its Millennium Development Goals to >> halve >> world poverty by 2015. >> >> The report launched yesterday is a clear challenge to Washington. The >> Bush administration wants to replace multilateral solutions to >> international >> problems with a world order in which the US does as it likes on a >> bilateral >> basis. >> >> "This is the UN coming out all guns firing," said one UN insider. "It >> means that, even if we have a lame duck secretary general after the >> Volcker >> report (on the oil-for-food scandal), the rest of the organisation is >> not >> going to accept the US bilateralist agenda." >> >> The clash on world poverty centres on the US policy of promoting >> growth >> and trade liberalisation on the assumption that this will trickle >> down >> to >> the poor. But this will not stop children dying, the UN says. Growth >> alone >> will not reduce poverty so long as the poor are denied full access to >> health, education and other social provision. Among the world's poor, >> infant >> mortality is falling at less than half of the world average. To >> tackle >> that >> means tackling inequality - a message towards which John Bolton and >> his >> fellow US neocons are deeply hostile. >> >> India and China, the UN says, have been very successful in wealth >> creation but have not enabled the poor to share in the process. A >> rapid >> decline in child mortality has therefore not materialised. Indeed, >> when >> it >> comes to reducing infant deaths, India has now been overtaken by >> Bangladesh, >> which is only growing a third as fast. >> >> Poverty could be halved in just 17 years in Kenya if the poorest >> people >> were enabled to double the amount of economic growth they can achieve >> at >> present. >> >> Inequality within countries is as stark as the gaps between >> countries, >> the UN says. Poverty is not the only issue here. The death rate for >> girls in >> India is now 50 per cent higher than for boys. Gender bias means >> girls >> are >> not given the same food as boys and are not taken to clinics as often >> when >> they are ill. Foetal scanning has also reduced the number of girls >> born. >> >> The only way to eradicate poverty, it says, is to target >> inequalities. >> Unless that is done the Millennium Development Goals will never be >> met. >> And >> 41 million children will die unnecessarily over the next 10 years. >> Decline in health care >> >> Child mortality is on the rise in the United States >> >> For half a century the US has seen a sustained decline in the number >> of >> children who die before their fifth birthday. But since 2000 this >> trend >> has >> been reversed. >> >> Although the US leads the world in healthcare spending - per head of >> population it spends twice what other rich OECD nations spend on >> average, 13 >> per cent of its national income - this high level goes >> disproportionately on >> the care of white Americans. It has not been targeted to eradicate >> large >> disparities in infant death rates based on race, wealth and state of >> residence. >> >> The infant mortality rate in the US is now the same as in Malaysia >> >> High levels of spending on personal health care reflect America's >> cutting-edge medical technology and treatment. But the paradox at the >> heart >> of the US health system is that, because of inequalities in health >> financing, countries that spend substantially less than the US have, >> on >> average, a healthier population. A baby boy from one of the top 5 per >> cent >> richest families in America will live 25 per cent longer than a boy >> born in >> the bottom 5 per cent and the infant mortality rate in the US is the >> same as >> Malaysia, which has a quarter of America's income. >> >> Blacks in Washington DC have a higher infant death rate than >> people in >> the Indian state of Kerala >> >> The health of US citizens is influenced by differences in insurance, >> income, language and education. Black mothers are twice as likely as >> white >> mothers to give birth to a low birthweight baby. And their >> children are >> more >> likely to become ill. >> >> Throughout the US black children are twice as likely to die before >> their >> first birthday. >> >> Hispanic Americans are more than twice as likely as white >> Americans to >> have no health cover >> >> The US is the only wealthy country with no universal health insurance >> system. Its mix of employer-based private insurance and public >> coverage >> does >> not reach all Americans. More than one in six people of working age >> lack >> insurance. One in three families living below the poverty line are >> uninsured. Just 13 per cent of white Americans are uninsured, >> compared >> with >> 21 per cent of blacks and 34 per cent of Hispanic Americans. Being >> born >> into >> an uninsured household increases the probability of death before the >> age of >> one by about 50 per cent. >> >> More than a third of the uninsured say that they went without medical >> care last year because of cost >> >> Uninsured Americans are less likely to have regular outpatient care, >> so >> they are more likely to be admitted to hospital for avoidable health >> problems. >> >> More than 40 per cent of the uninsured do not have a regular place to >> receive medical treatment. More than a third say that they or someone >> in >> their family went without needed medical care, including prescription >> drugs, >> in the past year because they lacked the money to pay. >> >> If the gap in health care between black and white Americans was >> eliminated it would save nearly 85,000 lives a year. Technological >> improvements in medicine save about 20,000 lives a year. >> >> Child poverty rates in the United States are now more than 20 per >> cent. >> >> Child poverty is a particularly sensitive indicator for income >> poverty >> in rich countries. It is defined as living in a family with an income >> below >> 50 per cent of the national average. >> >> The US - with Mexico - has the dubious distinction of seeing its >> child >> poverty rates increase to more than 20 per cent. In the UK - which at >> the >> end of the 1990s had one of the highest child poverty rates in >> Europe - >> the >> rise in child poverty, by contrast, has been reversed through >> increases >> in >> tax credits and benefits. >> >> >> >> >> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:49:59 EST