This is a really great question, and I’m excited to start think “aloud” right here. Before asking specifically why do people hate immigrants, let’s take a step back to the more general question: why do people hate others? Why does such hatred permeate any human relationships…after all, we are all just trying to be feel loved and be happy. My thinking on this topic is still stuck on the concept of an invisible social ladder. For some reason, it seems that people are trying to climb to “the top.” The only issue with this mentality is that the ladder is fake, and a “top” is perhaps unattainable but it surely can’t be fulfilling. Continuing the discussion, if everybody is trying to get to the top, it helps our chances if we prevent people from getting ahead, blocking our path, or downright bringing us down.

If somebody takes your job, you are going to be upset. If somebody who doesn’t speak English and isn’t supposed to be in your country takes your job, you are going to be rage-filled and ready to attack. Immigrants have differences that make it easy for Americans to pick on them for. “You can’t even speak our language.” “You are breaking the law just by your mere presence.” Etc.

To be honest, while the altruistic idealist in me says that we should accept and love immigrants, I certainly couldn’t maintain that positive emotional state if José took my job and put me at the end of a very long unemployment line. At some level, our system is flawed such that the Utopian solution will just seemingly not work…and that blows. But hey, reality is reality and it is all that we have to work with.

To reiterate what I was saying earlier, hating other people and pushing them down (i.e., hating on immigrants) gives us a step up on that social success ladder. Let me also clarify that I haven’t a freaking clue the accurate answer to this question. I am catching myself right now giving an answer from my disgustingly foggy, scratched subjective lens. In my opinion, even experts on the topic are not able to see this issue objectively from all possible angles. So really, we don’t know crap and that’s how it is.

In the interest of tying some SOC 119 talks together, I’d like to reference Sam’s speech on empathy a few weeks ago. While the issue is complex beyond our understanding, one direct effort, or contribution, that we can make to the issue is vowing to empathize with our “opponents” – immigrants.

As I like to end all of this blogs, I am a flippin’ knucklehead. I don’t know anything, but as I begin to think about (and become overwhelmed by) the magnitiude of this issue, I feel very humble. So humble that given the circumstances, I’d probably take in an illegal immigrant, hire them, befriend them – OR – work my hardest to get them kicked out of the country and have the borders tightened.

“Don’t drink the water.” That is some perspective that I certainly never had. Don’t drink the water because it is ours only because our ancestors killed for it. Listening to that song coupled with that slide show literally gave me chills. I was floored. Our ancestors massacred entire populations and entire communities, so that I could live in a house, drive on roads, go to school, swim in pools, frolic in fields and call some large chunk of dirt “home.” That thought has been lost on me. I have not even come close to understanding the magnitude to which my ancestors crippled a population. However, with the little that I do know, I tread lightly on this land with a profound respect and a deep sense of humility toward all Native American peoples.

The next biggest blow to my thoughts was definitely Sam’s comparison between Native American’s and Haiti. There is a third world country within the United States. However, unlike foreign third world countries, we ignore and belittle the suffering people on “our” own land. The other raging difference between underprivileged foreign countries and the Native American population within the U.S. is that WE PUT THEM THERE! Hundreds of years ago, we took a thriving nation, brutally destroyed it and built our homes on THEIR land – soaked in THEIR blood. This, I believe is the reason that the U.S. largely ignores Native Americans. The truth is far too ugly for us to take responsibility for. How on Earth can you say “I’m sorry” for something like this. You can’t, you just can’t.

This summer, I am going to Minnesota to live with a tribe of Ojibwe Native American people, and the way I look at them, their families and their culture will be forever changed now knowing what I know.

That said, I do not want to keep this an entirely one-side story. What I am about to say may seem an extremely unfitting response to this lecture, but in the past few weeks I have read hundreds of pages of Native American history. My readings have been largely focused on the Ojibwe people who reside in the Minnesota region. I have learned that while foreigners did come onto Native American soil and unrightfully destroy them, the Native Americans themselves were not a peaceful little hunting and gathering community. I have read dozens of stories of enemy tribes slaughtering and scalping entire communities of men women and children while they sleep soundly at night. What for? They wanted their land. They wanted the best hunting grounds. I want to make it clear that what we as foreign invaders did was entirely wrong. I also want it to be clear that Native Americans have done very similar things in the past.

As I also like to reconfirm, I understand that I am a knucklehead and while I have some snapshot ideas about a history, I don’t have the full picture and I don’t see this situation with entire objectivity.

Sam showed a TON of videos during his Christian Invaders talk. I thought they were great and had a few summarizing thoughts – or themes – that I took from the lecture. First off, I will say that the “Jihad” video was my favorite. Let this be clear, I did not actually like the video or it’s overt message; yet the inferences I made from that video provided extremely valuable in my intellectual development. As the video was playing, I continued to have one wildly pervasive thought: this video is obscenely one sided. I was thinking how if I was given two hours, a computer with internet access and iMovie, I could easily construct a video accentuating the positives of Muslim life. The point is, this video is extreme. It is the polar opposite of a 100% positive view of Muslims (also inaccurate) and else far from the middle ground – or the majority.

Videos like this rile up enough emotion from viewers to allow facts to be thrown out the window of consideration. Fact: the average Muslim (aka – the majority of Muslims) are not on some wild people killing, America bashing, civilian torturing, radical Jihad. Rather, they cruise around Facebook, work for food, spend time with their families, laugh, tell jokes, hang out with friends and partake in any other mundane task that you may engage in on a daily basis. Where were the boring, the plain and the average in the O-so-pleasant video of the Jihad? Oops? Missed that.

Furthermore, I enjoyed this video because it reminded me of the skepticism one should exude when pursuing translated information like the ideals of an ENTIRE population of people. This video has encouraged me to remember that a video cannot sum up the sentiment of an entire people. It has revived in me a sick sort of feeling towards over generalizing. And ironically enough, I think this feeling is healthy.

On a slightly different (almost rambling) note, this video made me think of radicals here in the U.S. The people of whom I speak are the ones that watch the video enthusiastically nodding and mumbling “yeah’s” in total agreement of the unruly propaganda. Sadly enough, my mother fits well into the extreme sector of the spectrum. She honestly believes that the majority of Muslims desire to suicide bomb Americans to earn their right into an eternity of paradise. How on Earth did she wind up at that conclusion? That’s a dang good question. My guess, the Fox news for breakfast, radical radio stations for lunch and nighttime tales of terrorism for dinner have something to do with it. Priming plays a major role in what the lens through which we perceive “reality” are focused on.

As in past weeks, I am a knucklehead and in REALITY, my above words are probably futile efforts to discuss a wildly complex issue.

Multiculturalism. Mmm. Yummy. Before delving into the question “what makes multiculturalism positive for the U.S.,” let’s chat about what that even means. To me, that means people with different color skin, different values, different languages, different traditions and different ways of interacting interpersonally. Essentially, I see multiculturalism as a cultural clash, and that collision CAN be positive, but it does not HAVE to be.

With the topic defined, I am totally pumped to talk about why the majority of the class said multiculturalism is a good thing and if that pole would reflect reality if voters were put to the test. Before I dive into this though, I want to lay out why I think multiculturalism CAN be positive. I think difference can facilitate great dialogue. I think with an open mind, differences can foster phenomenal amount of empathy. I think differences bring a spectrum of perspectives to a group of people, and that is entirely unachievable if everybody grew up doing – and thinking – the same way. For the same reason, diversity can promote creativity and ingenuity. Overall, I think a multicultural setting CAN allow one human being to see through another human beings eyes more effectively. By interacting with a Korean student, I can begin – and only begin – to FEEL what it is like to be a visitor in the United States. I can start to wrap my mind around why somebody is homesick from living in a “super-duper” place like State College. Hanging out with white middle class friends does not give me the opportunity to explore the world in the same manner than a multicultural setting does.

Before I cut into my previous question, I do want to throw the disclaimer out into the air that multiculturalism can be incredibly bad for those who are close-minded and unwilling to explore anything outside of their comfort zone. Differences can make people frustrated (e.g., language barriers). They can encourage racism and suppression of one race as to benefit your own. And differences can bring about irreconcilable disagreements on fundamental social issues. Without an open mind, I think multiculturalism has the potential to really do some damage in a community. HOWEVER, even in the midst of all these negatives, without being surrounded by those that are different than you, there is no room for forward progress. The question is whether or not the potential for backward movement is a risk that outweighs the benefit of seeing the world more holistically.

Lastly, why did the majority of the class say multiculturalism is a positive thing for the U.S.? First off, I’m a knucklehead. Who the crap am I to give an absolute answer on the subject? Answer: nobody. That said, my OPINION is that people are taught that multiculturalism is a good thing in this class and many other courses offered at Penn State. Also, we are IN A RACE RELATIONS CLASS!! How the heck can you denounce multiculturalism in an environment like that?

When I saw this question, I ALMOST peed my pants laughing. Less than a week before this blog post, I (a white male) started dating a black girl. That said, the rest of this blog will will be written from my personal perspective and I would dare to say has little relation to the masses. By this, I mean that I will be answering the question “why are white men hesitant to date black women” through the lens of my experience and not through some (I believe unattainable) wholly objective view on the situation.

Let me begin by saying she is hot! This is the first time I have ever dated a black girl, but there is something about her that just turns my hormones on fire. Okay, I’m exaggerating a bit, but seriously inside and out this girl is fantastic. She is smart. She is funny. She is a ridiculously great audience (she listens well and laughs like a crowd at a comedy show). She is wildly beautiful. She is magnificently open-minded. She is down to do anything anytime (not what you’re thinking, creep). She enjoys life. She has an outlook on life that is incredibly optimistic yet realistic. She sees good in the bad. And I will definitely say that she is right up at the humanitarian stage of race development. If she isn’t, I don’t know what other all-encompassing perspective you could take on to develop more fully.

Okay, personal experience of the fantastic black women aside, I will now try to get objective as personally possible. It seems to me that white males are hesitant to date outside their race because of the obscenely massive influence that the real (or imagined) presence of people have on people’s behavior. Yes, I am taking a social psychology class. Deal with it. Seriously though, humans desire to be liked and accepted by other people. There is an unwritten – and sometimes unspoken – rule against dating a black girl. Where did that come from? I wouldn’t dare to even try to venture a guess, for I am far to ignorant to make such a complex, global statement. Unless you have dedicated your life to the topic, I believe you should also bite your tongue and think about how much you do NOT know about the world, history and this situation specifically.

I recently asked one of my closest friends and mentor (throughout high school) what he would say if he had 90 seconds to address the entire world. He sat on this question for a few days and came back with the following (far less than 60 seconds): “I would encourage everybody to live in a manner that was as authentic as possible and foster an environment that allowed others to be completely comfortable being completely themselves.” In my opinion, the reason white men are hesitant to date black girls is because we are not comfortable just being. We are obsessed with how we appear to others and whether or not we’ll be accepted by others or not. Get rid of that, and you get rid of a lot of worries (e.g., interracial relationships).

First off, awesome question! I was extremely engaged during this portion of the class as irrelevant racial signifiers really are fairly prevalent in my life. I often find myself subconsciously using them, and more humorously, I find my sister yelling at me for doing so. For the remainder of this blog, I want to give a real life example to refer back to and to help illustrate my thoughts:
My senior year of high school, I was eating dinner a handful of friends at Uno’s. I was sharing a story about my trip to Washington D.C. the summer before: “While meandering around the nation’s capital, I encountered a BLACK homeless guy. This BLACK guy was swinging his fists in the air and talking to himself. Later on in the day, I saw the same BLACK guy briskly walk up to a petite blonde girl, grab a handful of hair at the base of her scalp and violently thrust her head from side to side. To my extreme shock, the BLACK dude just walked away and nobody said or did a thing. EVEN the blonde woman. She just kept walking with her friend as if nothing ever happened!

Crazy story, yeah, but the ridiculousness of the situation is not the point. The point is that had that homeless man been white, there would be four less words from the exact same story: BLACK, BLACK, BLACK and BLACK. Why on Earth did I include that descriptor. It had literally no legitimate semantic value to the story other than my stereotypes of “inner city black people.” To my subconscious, using the racial signifier alerted my audience that “it is only naturally for black people to be involved in crime.” The reason I think this is the case is largely because had the man been white, I would have seen no reason to discuss his race. It’s as if – in my subconscious – “black man” had some association with assault and crime.

So, do I think irrelevant racial signifiers affect racial stereotypes? Yes. Absolutely. In fact, I believe that irrelevant racial signifiers are a relatively clear manifestation of racial stereotyping.

After I wrote the previous sentence, I sat for a minute and thought about what possible reasons exist for the usage of IRRELEVANT racial signifiers. I found none. Not a single reason beyond the fact that the speaker behind said signifier has some preconception of the mentioned race. The first word in the phrase – to me – sort of explains this point fairly well: irrelevant. Irrelevant things are unnecessary and have no reasoning behind there usage. Overall, what I am taking from both this question and its response is a heightened awareness of my own usage of racial signifiers. Before I open my fat, knuckleheaded mouth, I want to ask myself, “What is the purpose of the race you are about to pronounce right now?”

Guilt. What a gnarly word. Instantly after hearing this word, I think “Catholicism”. I imagine this is the product of 19 years of being socialized and indoctrinated with other-than-Catholic Christianity. I like to start out these blogs by attempting to clarify what on earth the question actually means. To me (which I am sure is far from “truth” or reality), guilt is having done something wrong…or “not right”. Soon after examining my definition/understanding, I realize that it leaves out a massive – and crucial – element: what the freakin’ heck is “right”? Do you have an answer? Unless you’re God, I imagine you have not transcended our human understanding of right and wrong. However, to have a meaningful discussion for the next 400+ words, I will define “right” as anything that does not – in any way – harm yourself, other people, or God (or gods). Fair?

Okay, that established let’s continue. To answer this question very simply: no. No I don’t feel guilt that other people had less fortunate existences than me. HOWEVER, history is important to look at and learn from. In checking out the history of African American slaves, one can easily recognize some disadvantages and negatively influencing determinism pushing down the race of dark skinned humans.

I chatted about this a bit in my last blog, but this source of guilt stemming from this issue would be the assumption that there is a “right” way to handle past mistreatment of freed slaves. How would anybody figure out the absolute correct way to handle that? I certainly haven’t, and so I don’t feel guilty about anything – in regards to actions out of my control (e.g., slavery). That said, I am wildly compassionate and empathetic to the deterministic factors playing into black history. In summary, I lack guilt but am overflowing with proactive empathy for the treatment of freed slaves and descendants of slaves.

Guilt – like Sam said – is very debilitating, so I think efforts should be put forth into breaking down any feelings of shame or guilt. On this note, I believe people have a responsibility to think for themselves and decide just how much they “owe” other people. I you feel a compulsion to help others at your own expense, then do it up. Absolutely, do it. Personally, I feel a desire to at the very least give an encouraging boost to those who start out below me. Considering the resources that I have been born into, I can – and want to – help others.

Honestly, for this question, I feel I have just about exhausted my present thoughts on guilt and disadvantages of a historical people, but what the heck do I know?

I am a straight up, pure breed knuckle head.

This is a REALLY neat question and absolutely deserves a neat answer. First, I wanted to just comment on the abundance of truth behind this question. From my measly twenty years of life on this planet, my best estimation of the facts is that people really do think “foreigners” are way different than themselves. This seems especially true among people (even entire communities) that have not experienced much diversity outside their niche.

Before I delve into why I think we view others as so different, I want to give a tiny preview of what my schema of “people from other countries” is: http://www.african-tribes.org/african-tribe-women... http://www.lizgallego.com/Latino_cultural_center_...

Notice that this is not at all representative of all people of all nations. But – honestly – it’s what I think of when I think different. I think of the extremes. The extremes on a continuum of diversity are what stand out to me. They are memorable. Now, down to the reasons why I think people view non-United States people as SO different: salient characteristics and ignorance. These are the most obvious things to me at the present moment. I would certainly not stand by these – almost random – causal theories if a “you’re being held at gunpoint” situation was in play. But it’s not, so I’ll talk about them.

First: salient characteristics. Like the above links depict, extreme differences stand out in my memory. Those differences are often so disconnected from my life and my experiences that I couldn’t possibly conceive those “different people” as having things in common with me. Note, as I spend more time roaming around this earth, I am realizing more and more how ubiquitous some human motives really are – and that is a neat discovery process. Social psychology definitely supports this idea of salience directly affecting judgments that we pass on people. How many of us have actually experienced a first person, in depth look into the life of a person from another country. I can say that I have had hundreds of interaction with cool people from all over the world…but I sure as heck didn’t follow them home. I wasn’t standing behind them while they logged on Facebook…or brushed their teeth, etc. The thousands of implicit facts about a person’s life are not taken into account when we form our schemas of them because…well…they are implicit – or “behind the scenes”.

Second: ignorance. The above paragraph touches on this a bit, but people don’t know anything. We are knuckleheads. Is that our fault? I don’t know but I’ll hold off on popping open that can of worms. How easy is it for most of us to stay in our little niche? (And for about 80% of Penn State, that niche is white and middle class.) We just don’t have the experience of diversity that would allow us to kick some radical beliefs out of cognition.

We are all knuckleheads, but we are capable of learning. Take SOC 119 for example. We are doing it, kids! We are really doing it! :-P

Every so often, I am reminded of how much I have. I am reminded of the thousands – literally – thousands of things that I take for granted. Despite my attempts to be grateful for the circumstances of my life, I am confident that I am completely unable to comprehend truly how much I have in comparison to other parts of the world. I have traveled to extremely poor countries, volunteered in remote Latin American villages and been around “mission trips” my entire life. But I still don’t GET IT. What is “normal” for Americans (myself included) would be considered unfathomable luxuries for the vast majority of human beings on this planet. As I am writing this, I am actually FEELING an extreme sense of dissonance. On one hand, I feel that it is absolutely intolerable to live like this when people live with absolutely nothing every day.

Still though, I am very comfortable with my circumstances. I like the amount of money that I have. I like the friends I have grown up with, the family with whom I live with, and the mentors that have guided me. For me, it boils down to this: when I ponder how much I have in comparison to the rest of the world, I feel uncomfortable. But how much of that is my responsibility? How much do I put on myself to push against the forces of determinism for another person? Enough to make me feel good about myself? Enough to help a single person…a hundred people…? When is it “enough”? Or, from another perspective, is there even a line of “enough”, and if there is/isn’t, who defines it? Who would possibly set that bar?

One thing that I appreciate so much about SOC 119 and the World in Conversation project is the level of consciousness to which it brings so many of these thoughts. It really is not hard to go through life without considering other people. The distant beings that seem to not directly affect your life. Self-awareness keeps sticking out in my head. It seems that it is pretty important to – at the very least – be aware of your “state”. “Where am I?” – in relation to other people seems like a key to unlocking some quite actualizing thoughts about yourself and how you relate to your world.

My mind is going back to the concept of “responsibility” to help other people. Right now – at the current stage of consciousness that I’ve reached in my measly twenty years of life – it seems that we have a responsibility to be both empathic and compassionate. Whatever flows from achieving empathy is your specific “responsibility.”

But again…what the heck do I know? Like Sam, we are all just knuckleheads.

Before I jump into this one, I want to share a couple thoughts Sam sparked up in my brain regarding free will and determinism. As he presented each paradigm of thought, I became intrigued at the relationship between the two. The two concepts really took on the shape of two forces fighting against each other. Seeing free will versus determinism as…sort of a force straight out of physics provides a neat way to apply the paradigms to specific situations.

For example, take a black male from inner city Boston. His mother has been a heroin addict since before he was born. His father is not even a thought in the “family’s” mind, and his high school has a whopping graduation rate of 27%. Fair to say the “force” of determinism is hard at work here? Yes. Now, we’ll take two oversimplified examples of a free will force.
-For one, the boy/man can choose to get 3 jobs, move out of the projects into an apartment of his own, take out loans for school and perhaps obtain a “prosperous” life. Like I said, WAY oversimplified. The purpose of this example is to illustrate that hard work is ONE choice.
-Another choice, is letting the force of determinism overtake you. Don’t fight it. Hook up with your mom’s drug dealer. Get involved in a gang that will “protect” you. Etcetera.

The point is, free will is a force that is capable of pushing against determinism. The question is, can free will ALWAYS win out, or are there circumstances where the deck is stacked TOO much against you to possible succeed?

In my own life, I honestly believe that the force of free will and the force of determinism have partnered together to push my through life – positively that is. My parents rock. We aren’t “rich” by American standards, but finances are not a huge stressor. Basic needs are provided and my support system is great. I truly think that all that beautiful determinism does not necessitate that I succeed. Growing up in a good home does not guarantee you a fulfilling life. Having little financial worries does not equate to actualizing all yours “dreams.” A good set of deterministic characteristics sure do provide a damn good launching pad though.

Would I be where I am today if I had grown up in the projects of inner city Boston with a drug-addicted mother and nonexistent mother? Probably not. Is it possible? I would like to say yes, but I think the best – and most accurate – answer to this question is IT DEPENDS. There are a quadrillion factors that play into every individual scenario.

For me, the most important tool to fight determinism is the power of choice. You ALWAYS have a choice. You do not always choose the outcome of that choice, but the second you forget that you can choose to do one thing or another, you have become a victim to your environment.