Am I a racist?

Post Reply New Topic

Ruveyn, I don't think I agree with anything you stand for, but for some reason I like you very much. You are smart and sincere and make things very interesting around here.

Well it does not mean that, and I do not accept responsibility for your colourful assumptions and inferences.

A better idea might be to not make wild and groundless assumptions about other peoples’ thoughts.

Punctuation has nothing to do with it. Since these assumptions you claim to have been making about my thought process, actually bears no resemblance to anything I was thinking, nor were implied or indicated by any comment I had made, I doubt any amount of kind of punctuation would have caused me to guess randomly made these assumptions about my thinking.
I am simply responding to what you actually typed, if you think that making incorrect and groundless assumptions about what other people are thinking means that the other person is shouting at some wind because you are not where they are aiming, it is certainly your prerogative to delude yourself.

You can be as sorry or not as you like, and where I live is utterly irrelevant. I prefer fact to your intuitive grasp on what you think might be going on, after all you certainly do have a wild imagination as evidenced by your odd and random assumptions about my own thoughts.

The children removed forcibly from Aboriginal parents and placed with white families were those who looked white, and were “passed off” as being white (this being the entire purpose of the exercise). They attended school and they and their peers had no idea they were ethnically Aboriginal. Nothing about their behavior facilitated distinguishment of them from their ethnically white peers.


What makes you think your scope of experience is sufficient to rule something out because you personally have not encountered it? I know a number of people who have actually lived and worked among Aboriginal Australians, and I trust their opinions more so than your own. Not least because they have demonstrated that they have the ability to be relatively objective, can demonstrate sufficient observational opportunity, and have demonstrated actual knowledge of the subject matter to my satisfaction.

Aside from these sources, I know a number of other people who have related very persistent and overt racism to me that they personally have witnessed while in Australia. I myself while in Australia encountered instances of such racist attitudes and views directed towards Aboriginal Australians, despite having spent less than two weeks there.

It is very obvious to me that many white Australians do look down on Aboriginals, such as yourself for instance. As to having every opportunity, your imaginative fantasy bears no resemblance to the reality.

I have no idea why you think you are not racist.

No one is.

And you construe this has some link to their biology rather than to socio/culture factors? That is highly unlikely and would require extraordinary evidence being an extraordinary claim.

The initial settlement was illegal according to the laws of the invading people.. And yes, according to the laws of the invading people, people inhabiting any land discovered retained their legal sovereignty over it. This was conveniently ignored by pretending the land was empty of people when it was known not to be empty of people. Straight out theft entailing both the use of extreme force against the Aboriginal Australians and legal machinations to deliberately frustrate natural justice and the due process of their own laws. In others words a plain and obvious example of (mega) grand theft.


The land belonged to its inhabitants in accordance with their customary laws, and in accordance with the laws of the invading people. How is this not theft?

It was their land, and since stolen property legally retains its original ownership, it’s a bit rich to talk about these people not being allowed on any property in Australia, as though if your house is large enough I could evict you from a part of it simply by claiming that not everything you need is in the part I have taken, and you can wander anywhere you like so long as you keep out of the part of your own house that has been stolen from you. Absurd.

No there is not.


Well you yet again are wrong. Firstly, how are people to magically gain their ancestors knowledge; the knowledge lost as a result of the theft of Australia and the subsequent actions of the Australian Crown and its citizens since then? When a crime is committed one becomes culpable at least morally for the damage that the initial crime caused. In this case the damage includes alienation of most Aboriginal people from the knowledge and expertise of their ancestors.

In the second instance, even with the knowledge, as I have already pointed out to you (but which you choose to ignore, probably because you have no means of causing this fact to even appear to fit your opinion), the traditional subsistence life way of Aboriginal Australians was exceptionally tailored and adapted to particular ranges. The loss of any area within any such range, (and its resources) is catastrophic and in most cases fatal to the continuation of the life way. These were not generalized modes of living, they were very specific and entailed cyclic use of a variety of available resources, all in precarious balance. To suggest so flippantly as you do that these life ways can be reprised just because there is some land vaguely out there, requires excessive ignorance about the ecological facts of traditional Aboriginal Australian life ways.

Remind me again how these people came to be exposed to McDonalds and booze. Was it because they came to your ancestors’ homeland and forcibly imposed themselves on your ancestors and their land?

Your comments about 95% of Australia do nothing other than demonstrate extreme ignorance of the facts on your part. People who do not even live in Australia are better educated about Aboriginal Australians and the history of Australian settlement than you are. If this is typical of Australians, then no wonder Aboriginal Australians claim they are slighted and Australian culture is pervasive with disrespect and disregard for the dignity and stolen land, soveriegnty and autonomy of Aboriginal Australians, not to mention a huge blight of ignorance about matters pertaining to them. It’s a recipe for racism quite frankly, and you have very well demonstrated its manifestation. Why do you think you ought to have an opinion about whether or not it is plausible to suggest these people wander what part of Australia white folk deem fit to not bother with, when you must realise that you do not have a clue about the traditional Aboriginal means of deriving a living from the land?

As for being over run by some technologically different society (one not technologically savy enough to understand the need to maintain the land through basic scrub firing, unlike the more technologically advanced in this respect Aboriginal Australians), there was no necessity for or of it whatsoever. It was an illegal invasion that contravened the laws of the invading people. Obviously it is possible to avoid violating ones own laws. Not much point to them if people are universally unable to uphold them.

The over running of one society by another is not evolution at any rate.

Aha, because American Indians are also human beings as well. Fancy that.

Evidence please. It might be true that there are physiological differences, but without the facts, I am not going to ignorantly assume as much, and I certainly cannot reasonably consider how any such potential difference might be relevant without any evidence as to the existence of the difference, much less the nature of any such difference.
I am not inclined to form convoluted opinions in the absence of knowledge of the relevant facts.

And what of it? Do you mean to say that these people might have been much better off if their land had not been invaded and stolen by interlopers, resulting in their exposure to substances that are inimicable to their health? Are you suggesting that due to physiological reasons, they both crave but cannot cope with these subsistences they have been exposed to subsequent to the theft of their lands, their sovereignty, and the alienation of their autonomy? That not only did they lose their material possessions and traditional knowledge, their cultural health and heritage, but that also as a result of the original transgression they have suffered a wide spread dependency amongst their people on very detrimental substances?

I can tell you that the introduced culture has been very damaging to them, and also point out that anyone who does not know enough about the facts of this issue to realize as much, lacks sufficient information about the issue to be qualified to have a reasonable opinion about it.

Your characterizations are astounding in the extent to which they appear to be obvious caricatures and frankly racist seeming ones at that..


Aha, there goes the personalization again. Many of your comments appear to be characterized by a perception of victimization on your part. I commented on your post which was posted in a discussion forum, in an area of the board where people discuss opinions, in part by commenting on what people have to say. Let me guess, if someone agrees with you, that’s discussion, but anyone who dares to express a contrary opinion is now “cornering you” in you view? The other person is not expressing their opinion they are “cornering you” personally? Aha.
Your original post was misrepresentative and denigrating to a group of people. I simply commented on this lack of balance and accuracy. You claim you treat people fairly, but being informed of relevant facts before arriving at the kinds of opinions you have expressed in this thread, is in my view a necessity of fairness. Your original post was unfair and if you cared about fairness, you would appreciate the opportunity to cease being unfair through better education of the situation you are judging. Instead you seem far more concerned with construing yourself as being under some kind of attack. Possibly, this same problem distorts your view in regards to your concerns that Aboriginal people are targeting you.

None of which requires that all this other crap about their being able to live in 95% of Australia, or referring to anyone as drunk, or uncouth as though one is connected to the other. It might not be your fault that this mess was created, although you experience benefits derived from the theft of their ancestors’ land and some might argue this morally obliges you to at least have enough respect to learn what these peoples’ grounds for grevience is. In no instance does stating it’s not your fault require you to downplay the wrongness or severity of what has happened and is happening to Aboriginal Australians. Claiming it is not your fault does not require disparaging remarks about their diet or state of sobriety or drunkeness.



You might think that you know what primitive means in the context of discussing evolution, but your comments above demonstrate otherwise.
I know that is not true because you asserted-it to me and I am neither of these things. You also assumed I was accusing you of being a racist when in fact I was not, so I am not confident you even could restrict making this assertion to those who are not one or the other of these things, since you have demonstrated a propensity to imagine you have been called racist when in fact you have not been.


Right so a complete and utter fantasy with no correlation to reality then. If you need to contrive such an obviously nonsense argument to justify your views, it’s probably a good time to reconsider your views.

Including the loss of cultural knowledge and expertise, and any exposure to anything that would give any cause for discontentment with the traditional Aboriginal lifestyle? In such an instance obviously the Aboriginal Australians would be able and content to return to their ancestors’ traditional life ways. So what exactly do you imagine you're illustrating with this silly fantasy?

It’s no dilema in reality. Go where?
Right, and these people are biologically different from those you described as coping less well in modern Australia how exactly? If what you describe is racial/biological rather than socio/cultural then what is the racial/biological variant producing this differentiation in outcome? Or were these particular people treated like animals and banned from McDonalds and booze (something you earlier suggested as though it were necessary to prevent these poor outcomes in your earlier post)?

Maybe you should start by educating yourself about and acknowledging the very real grounds for greviance entailed in the theft of Australia, and the reality and severity of the subsequent harms to Aboriginal Australians and their descendants.

Actually at least some of this traditional knowledge and expertise is retained amongst at least some Aboriginal Australians, and some such people go to significant efforts to pass this knowledge on to others.



Asserting that you are not interested in blame seems rather pointless given the obvious evidence to the contrary in your earlier post.

If they accuse of having very uncomplimentary opinions about them then they are quite correct as you have repeatedly demonstrated. If they accuse you of being uneducated about their history and the impact this has on them continuing forward to today, then they are absolutely correct. If they accuse you of disrespect for a people who suffer because your ancestors acted wrongly in ways that continue to benefit you today, then they would appear to be quite correct on that count also. If they accuse you of having unbalanced and denigrating views about them and their role in the history of Australia and their position and circumstance in Australia today, I cannot see how they have gotten that wrong either.

Really? Do most people also think that you assume things about what they are thinking then act without even checking to see if your groundless assumptions are correct in respect of them? Since you’ve done as much to me repeatedly in this thread, I cannot say that they are likely to be wrong on that count.

I found your views appeared pompous to me because I find it pompous to choose to take up negative opinions about people without at least bothering to educate yourself about the people you are judging and their circumstances.

I do not see how. I cannot see what relevance these comments might have, beyond a cowardly means to imply these things about Aboriginal Australians. Do you actually prioritize like this, so that if someone is a rapist so long as they are not fat and lazy and drunk, you’d want to help them rather than their victim if their victim were fat, lazy and drunk? I suspect not. I suspect these characteristics are not a comprehensive list of the reasons why you might not want to help someone, but rather that you are implying that you lack sympathy toward Aboriginal Australians because you view them as being characterized by these traits. And certainly this conclusion is not only the only sensible explanation for these comments of yours in this context, it’s also consistent with your persistent reference to eating McDonalds, being drunk and not being able to cope with McDonalds and booze.

Unless you can offer some equally plausible explanation, I will continue to view that this was a means of underhandedly disparaging these people on the basis of race while arguing that you are not a racist.


Aha, so it’s back to you personalizing this issue again. If you personally did not steal their land, then no one did? So have you murdered anyone, or has no one in history ever been murdered? Or could it be that things can happen without you personally having done the deed yourself? You might want to consider that perhaps things can happen without you personally having done them.



Non sequitor. None of the disparaging remarks you have made belittling the significance and severity of the harms accrued to Aboriginal Australians in the course of the European invasion and take over Australia are necessary to refute that you personally are to blame for that invasion and the consequences of it. The simple fact that you were not born at the time of the invasive settlement deals with any issue of blame on your part in respect of it. No need to bring McDonalds into it. On the other hand, you do bear responsibility for your own opinions, for whether you bother to educate yourself in respect of your own opinions, and for whether or not you approach issues entailing any group of people with a respectful and balanced attitude.

You are ignoring a plethora of facts in order to maintain your preferred view. I define ignoring facts, as being ignorant in respect of those facts. It’s rather straight forward. Your view in respect of this issue ignores materially relevant facts and considerations. Surely that qualifies the view as ignorant?



I asserted that their land was stolen. I do not think either of us are so ignorant as to suspect you might personally have been involved. I think we can both figure out that you were not even born when the initial theft occurred, even though I do not know your age. It’s just that obvious, hence why I do not regard your desire to prove you are not personally to blame can possibly explain your views. You were not then-born, so how could you personally have been causally involved?


Talk on my level? How inane.

Actually we have dentition very similar to other predominately vegetation eating primates. Stereoscopic vision is pervasive to primates, including the herbivorious, and frugivorious ones. Our feet are adapted to our mobility style and are not particularly well adapted for general use as a weapon.

Ruveyn has hinted in his posts of once being generous and empathic human who was unappreciated and therefore has withdrawn into some sort of feral totally selfish self defense emotionally. Almost any human can be stimulated into either vicious vengeful tactics or open minded generosity depending on the circumstances. Americans in general have frequently perverted the ideal of self reliance and independence into rabidly antisocial attitudes and this has been encouraged by wealthy elites as it gives them a powerful lever to keep the populace disunited and not organized for their best interests. The current health care idiocy is a clear example of simple minded people acting against their best interests at the behest of the powerful and totally corrupt insurance companies.

Nonsense. I was raised in a typically American Jewish middle class manner. Eventually I caught on to how the world works and set about constructing the right model. The first thing that had to go was guilt and the next thing to go was compassion. However I always remained just. My selfish attitude is a logical consequence of how I understand the world of humans works. No one has an interest in my well being except me and mine.

I toyed around with Objectivism (Ayn Rand's philosophy) for a bit, but I gave up on that because it is shot through with logical errors. I formulated my own system --- Reality Lite.

The happiest discovery I made is that I have no positive duties except those duties spelled out in contracts into which I enter willingly. Real contracts, not The Social Contract which is blithering nonsense. The only people to who I owe anything are my kin, especially children, grandchildren and spouse. These are relationships of my own choosing.

I do not acknowledge any claim on my time and resources by strangers based on their need. If they want to get something from me they either have to earn it (in an ethical businesslike way) or get it by force or threat of force. I pay my taxes because the IRS has the guns and the prisons and the legal power to seize my assets. One thing I don't owe anyone is my alliegence or loyalty (except for family, of course).

ruveyn

It is astounding how an intelligent and relatively well informed individual can be totally unconscious of the legal and social milieu which sustains him. much like primitive people are unconscious of air or fish of water.

I pay my "debt" to society by buying what I need, not swindling it or stealing it. I am very aware of my dependence on the efforts and products of others. Anyone who is unable to produce what he needs all by himself is in this situation. The way we handle this dependency is through voluntary trade, or other voluntary association.

I am a strong advocate of voluntary trade and the specialization of labor. That is and has been the source of human prosperity since God invented dirt.

ruveyn

And, as I indicated, ruveyn, your inability to discern that while you and your customer are conniving over the price of what you display for sale on the card table between you the entire social infrastructure that builds roads for your materials, that sets up networks of information for your use to discover markets, that supports police to protect you, that creates laws for you both to obey for civil exchange and general behavior, that keeps courts in operation for inevitable grievances and more - much more, all this is totally as invisible as air to you and you only see the need to pay for these vitally necessary services as stealing. For someone who has commented on other threads as to the impracticality of anarchism this is most odd. I am sincerely beginning to doubt my estimation of you as aware and capable of simple reason. Of course your incessant snarling at your fellow humans is not helpful.

i really do not want to be drawn into philosophical debates as i have no talents in that area but i suppose i will try to address some of your points.

i never asked you to. i merely told you what i thought. whether it is correct or incorrect is not your problem.



it is difficult to respond to this because it seems spurious. you attacked me on the grounds that i thought that being placed in a white family was an "advantage". but i did not think that it was really an advantage. i forgot to add the quotes to "advantage" to show that i was not serious, but you seized on that omission to accuse me of intent to use that word as my own belief. also you did the same with the word "valid".

a better idea is for me to keep away from philosophical discussions and read the forum heading of threads i am responding to in future.


well i guess i was not born to understand you. you certainly are incomprehensible to me.




what is an "amount of kind of punctuation" ?
actually i can not understand that sentence at all.
what does "caused me to guess randomly made these assumptions about my thinking" mean?

.

phew for that. if i am in a delusion, then it is just as real as anyone else's.



i do not care where you live but you seem to not understand that "we" (the australians & me that is ( i must say that i do not feel "bonded" with other australians)) are very cordial and accepting of aborigines.
they are usually nice, and we treat them in a cordial way. you have some idea (i think) that the majority of australians are racist uneducated redneck bigots.
you seem to have a european "protest handout pamphlet" idea of what you think life is like in australia. killing koala's and murdering aborigines and pumping greenhouse gases out in stinking lazy satisfaction. that is why i wondered whether you had been here and seen that is much nicer than some propaganda suggests.


facts are better than notions i agree.




i know a bit about it. a lot of those children were removed from their tribes because they would have been killed by their families otherwise. they were the result of white farmers interfering with aborigine women, and the babies were not liked by the tribal males because they represented 1/2 a white person.. they were not considered to be worth feeding, and most of the time they would be taken off and killed by the elders.

but the program the government set up at that time was fashioned withthe aim to rescue half caste (or 1/x caste really) children from a very bleak future.

i am not promoting that side of the story because it may have been totally incorrect for people to assume that they murdered their half caste children.

but the aborigines that want to sue for money always say they were robbed of their heritage because they were stolen.

i do not know how to appraise it. if they were not "stolen", then what heritage would they have inherited? the heritage of their early forefathers?





that is because they looked white and therefore were not pure blood aborigines.


i did not rule it out. i made an observation that was correct from my viewpoint according to what i have experienced. i did not say the world is the way i see it. i just said the way i see the world.







yes well i do not claim to be an expert on the matter. i never claimed that my appraisal was correct. i just gave it.



please do relate the instances of racism you saw. i do not get out much and i do not see much, but i have been living here all my life and i never saw racism (except for a few times but whatever).




you say i look down on aboriginals. you are incorrect. i can not imagine how you have construed your image of me with what neurons you have. there are anti discrimination laws here that make it almost impossible to sack an aborigine if they are hired, and you have to explain very convincingly why you did not hire them if you do not choose them as the successful applicants for job you advertised.

they truly do have every opportunity.
every time an aborigine does something of international note, they are elevated to national hero status.


ok you are not calling me "racist" by saying you do not understand why i do not think i am.
i finally understand. you did not call me racist before, and i guess you are not calling me racist now, even though you say you can not understand why i would think i am not racist.



the rest of your post is simply histrionic and i have other things to do than reply in detail to the silly points you make.


i will say that i think all humans are equal no matter what their color or creed, and every person has as much right to life and happiness as any other person.

all life is infinitely valuable and i would never think anyone is beneath me.

you have some hurricane battered idea that i am a racist bigot and you say "aha" as if you have peeled a cover off a crime scene.

i am not interested in continuing this discussion as i am not talented enough to do so with alacrity, and i also do not sufficiently care about the subject.

go fishing elsewhere because i spat your hook out.

I'm not buying it. I think ruveyn is a teddy bear in disguise. He wants people to think that he doesn't care, but he does - or else he wouldn't even be here.

The information networks are mostly privately capitalized and we pays for that in our monthly bills, precioussssss. For the highways (unrepaired potholes and all) we pays with our gasoline tax, preciousssssss. Almost everything we wear and eat is privately produced (thank God!) and we pay for that at the checkout counter, preciousssssss. Government invents little or nothing, produces little or nothing. Almost all our prosperity it the result of voluntary trade.

The one thing we have to pay taxes for is law enforcement and defense. Since these are global services that cannot be subdivided and sold in small lots. For that we pay tax. So it goes. We should have as little of that as possible, consistent with a functioning society.

Almost anything good we have is privately invented and produced (at least it is so in the U.S.).

ruveyn

ruveyn

I will not argue with you on his, ruveyn, as you are adept enough on the net to discover the truth yourself. If you do not make the effort it will become obvious your mind is so set in concrete on the issue it will bear emotional congruence to a religious belief and that type of mental block is unassailable. It's up to you.

It is not spurious at all. Why did you put the word advantage in there at all? You stated it was because you assumed that I was thinking of it in those terms. That assumption as to what I was thinking is both baseless and wrong.

The same is true for the word valid. You included it on the baseless and erroneous assumption (or so you have asserted) that I was thinking as much. That is completely wrong and not my fault in any way. You baseless and erroneous assumptions are the initial cause of any misunderstanding about your intent in using these words, not some silly punctuation ommission, nor baseless assumption on my part. I responded to what you typed, but what you typed was based on erroneous assumptions you made about my thinking.

I have no idea what you are meaning by this comment. I do not see that you are any less qualified to engage in any threads in this sub forum, than is anyone else who posts at WP.


The randomness of assuming that I was thinking being raised by white people is an advantage, or that only children who act like white people are valid, is too much for me to ever have guessed from mere punctuation that you were assuming these things. Only you stating as much would be sufficient because it’s just so random.

The word “you” has been omitted from between the words “randomly” and “guess”.
Thus the phrase actually should have read “ caused me to guess you randomly made these assumptions about my thinking”.

No, I do not understand that. I do not view referring to people as “bloody Abos” (as I heard repeatedly while in Australia for less than two weeks), constitutes what you are describing.

I believe racist attitudes towards Aboriginal Australians are long standing and an ingrained element in Australian culture.

Well, I have been to Australia, Australians commonly visit my country and I’ve interacted with many of them. Many of my relatives currently or have previously lived in Australia. I also have had the benefit of interacting with people who have studied Aboriginal culture from an observer participant perspective, and have done the same with other sub cultures within Australia, and had their findings published and upheld by other researchers and academics related to their field of discipline. Media coverage of Australia is far from scanty locally to me, and we import your television media which also gives ample opportunity to observe Australian culture and attitudes. I do not think my understanding of and knowledge is insufficient to the extent of prejudicing or undermining my conclusions.

We often agree on many things.

None of which is here nor there in terms of the outcome being that these children did not manifest any evidence of Aboriginal biology somehow resulting in people “not made for modern living” or any other conclusion other than there are factors beyond biological race influencing poor outcomes for ethnically Aboriginal Australians.

It’s not a simple issue certainly.
Generally speaking the right and need to know about one’s heritage is recognised, and this can be seen in developments related to secrecy issues around adoptions. There are now mechanisms in place for the purpose of facilitating contact, and open adoptions are now practiced. The content of one’s heritage is less relevant than the view that deprivation and alienation from one’s own heritage (and particularly the knowledge of this deprivation) in harmful in itself.


Many of the Aboriginal Australians experiencing poor outcomes are also not without non Aboriginal ancestors, so again this fails to establish a biological variable that can be correlated to outcomes.

I heard persistent references to “bloody Abos” including people who used this denigrating term to jokingly tease each other. I had a discussion with a doorman at a nightclub who asserted to me that he would never “let an Abo in”. I heard discourse in which Aboriginal Australians were denigrated as filthy and drunks, and heard them judged in terms of their diet, and noted that such comments were triggered by any mention of Aboriginal Australians, even where there was no relevance of diet, sobriety, or hygiene within the context.

Given how you have described Aboriginal Australian communities, including the drunkeness and poor diets, it is astonishing that you would conclude that anyone raised in the environments you assert these people live in, could possibly have much of an opportunity at all.
Why do you think that? You were wrong to assume I was calling you racist earlier when I in fact did not perceive that you necessarily were being racist towards these people, but you’ve made a lot of comments since then, and the content of those comments has changed my opinion. To be clear, at this point I have come to view that you are racist in regards to this particular group.

I am sorry to say that your conclusion is again erroneous. While at one time I did not perceive there was sufficient evidence to construe that your views and attitudes in regards to Aboriginal Australians were necessarily racist, on the basis of the much more substantial evidence available to me now, I do indeed conclude that you are racist in your views and attitudes toward Aboriginal Australians.


I find it more likely that you have no means of addressing the historical facts consistent with your views, and simply prefer to ignore them to avoid altering your ignorant views. Hence again why I characterize your views on this particular issue as ignorant. Only by ignoring the facts that do not fit can they be maintained.


I should think we have adequately covered your lack of accuracy in regards to the assumptions you are apparently prone to making about other peoples’ thinking. Your views on this issue, as you have expressed them are racist. Whether being racist in your views and attitudes toward a particular group is the same as being a “racist bigot” generally, is a matter of definition of “racist bigot” I would expect.



Aside from ceasing to rely on your wildly inaccurate assumptions about other peoples’ thinking, you really should consider putting yourself down less. There is nothing wrong with your “talent”, you are more than sufficiently articulate to take part in reasoned conversation. I see no reason to believe you are any less capable in expressing yourself than is necessary to converse sensibly with you.

It would be a remote possibility. Most of the Mexicans, the ones with darker skin, are basically native American types. The white guys who live in Mexico are mostly descended from European immigrants.

My arabs are your mexicans lol. I live in a nice part of a suburban neighborhood, so my street is basically all white, and I'm at least 2 brick walls and 20 feet away from my neighbors when I'm indoors, but they do tend to be disturbers of the peace at my school.