that was legitimate AND it was 50 years ago, I refuse to feel bad about something that happened before i was born. And it is a pretty weak shot from someone who's arguments are generally very strong, even when i dont agree with them
Actually, the argument is very strong. Consider that your position, as stated in a logical premise is this:
If racism in time/place "A" is worse than in time/place "B", then those in "B" have no place to complain about racism.
I then substituted "A" for slavery in the U.S., and "B" for the 1960's U.S. According to your premise, those in the 1960's have no place to complain because it was worse during slavery. Put "modern day Africa" in place of "A", and "modern day U.S." in place of "B", and we have what you said.
But now you want to substitute "legitimate" racism, as well as a specific time. Well, that completely changes your argument. But let's deal with it.
What is legitimate racism? Would legitimate racism be a Black man murdered solely because he was black? Well, we have that in the U.S. Would legitimate racism be to be denied a cab ride in NY solely on the basis of skin color? Would being denied a job solely because of skin color be legitimate racism? Obviously, I would say yes. What say you?
And, these things happen today, just as they did 50 years ago. Should we not be allowed to air our grievances regarding them? Or should we just be quiet, because after all, it's not as bad as in Africa?
Second, the issue of the time, in terms of your original position, is irrelevant to your base premise. The reason for this is because I could argue that people in Africa in the 1960's had it much worse than Blacks in America. Therefore, adding time to your argument, the people in 1960's had no right to complain because, yet again, it was worse then in Africa.
Let me give you some perspective to your argument to a subject which you have more passion for: "You should not complain about the rate of your taxes because people in many European countries are taxed at a higher rate." Or, "You should not complain about the rate of government spending in your country, because the rate of such spending is higher in many European countries." See how that works out?
Now, no one is asking you to "feel bad" about modern day racism. However, for those of us affected by it, we would ask you to understand our position. It's all well and good to say, it's better then before, or than in other places, but what does that do for the person actually being injured by said racism, especially when such actions are murder, rape, lack of access to a job (many of the things that occurred in King's era as well, don't forget).
In terms of your mother telling you to appreciate what you have when it comes to food, no one is saying that Blacks shouldn't appreciate what we have. However, that does not mean that we can't do better. Did your mother expect you to simply stay with the scraps that you were eating for the rest of your life, or did she want you to have more and better? I suspect the latter. Therefore, what is wrong with Blacks wanting all racism to end, and enlightening people to the fact that it still occurs? And we shouldn't have to minimize our concerns simply because it is worse elsewhere.
Here's the other thing, at least from my perspective. Just because I think that racism still occurs and shouldn't be ignored does not mean that there should be some new law or regulation to combat it. The great lesson of people like Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi was less about changing the law, and more about changing people's hearts. If you changed people's hearts the would change the law, which was a by-product of what was in their hearts.
Another thing is that, again from my perspective, just because I state that an action is racism, that does not mean that I believe that every institution or white person has racism inside of it/them. But some do, and some more then others, and for various reasons. I should not have to ignore it simply because it is, theoretically, mostly okay.
