<p>The whole $100 sneakers argument that some people make is just a straw man. It gets people to disregard poor people’s problems, see them as “other,” or wasteful, or with poor values. It’s beside the point. And most likely racist. I’m not saying that was the intention of whoever first brought that up here! (i havent reread the whole thread) I’m saying that, going forth, because it bothers me tremendously.</p>
<p>Thank you redpoint, I agree.</p>
<p>I have read the entire thread, and am certain nobody is being racist…is there something racist with making an observation?</p>
<p>You don’t feel that making assumptions based on cliched stereotypes is racist?</p>
<p>I repeat, I wasn’t saying the original comment was racist or that the person who made the original comment was racist, but I think this idea is often used in a way that is racist, and people must be sensitive. It is a way of glossing over issues of poverty. It is insidious.</p>
<p>Hold up, a comment was made that some students had costly footwear and no school supplies…This was an observation by someone, where is the racism? How do we know the comment wasn’t about a class of white children? The politically correct police have run amok</p>
<p>Maybe if you don’t live it, you don’t realize it’s a problem.</p>
<p>I’m not the politically-correct police. This is actually a big problem. As I said, I’m not attacking the original statement, but this is a sentiment often repeated, and it is something to watch out for and think about. It’s a way to blame the victim for their poverty.</p>
<p>PS I said " most likely racist," not that it was racist. This argument is used ad nauseum by racist people speaking of one particular race. You would have to live under a rock not to have heard it before.</p>
<p>Is it racist if the comments were about white children? Or is it then an honest observation… i don’t condone racism at all, but i also have an issue with those who take being politically correct to the extreme</p>
<p>Pointing out a racist stereotype is not being politically correct.</p>
<p>Again, what I said was this oft repeated complaint is a way to gloss over issues of poverty and blame the poor. Whatever the race! It is frequently used in terms of race, but not always. I am talking about the argument in general. If you want to disregard my observation and sweep it under the rug as just being politically correct, go ahead. I think charging someone of being politically correct is just another way to belittle and brush away issues that desperately need examination.</p>
<p>PS there is nothing extreme about what I am writing, qdogpa. It’s pretty basic.</p>
<p>No, what you are doing is taking a statement made by someone you DON’T know one single thing about and using it to push an agenda that fosters a racist resentment…and if you had one bit of evidence that the poster was being racist,or it was an obvious racist comment, i’d be agreeing with you 100%, but there is not any evidence of such</p>
<p>An economist’s view on the shoe thing: [A</a> new way of looking at race and conspicuous consumption. - Slate Magazine](<a href=“http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/2008/01/cos_and_effect.single.html]A”>A new way of looking at race and conspicuous consumption.)</p>
<p>As I said, Q, I was not attacking this poster’s comment in particular, but the oft repeated sentiment in general, which to me is different, maybe it doesn’t seem that way to you. And my agenda is not to create a divide. Im not pitting one race or income against another. If I do have an agenda (i didnt think of it this way) it would just be that I wish people would become more sensitive to others whose lives and struggles are very different than our own. There’s more to the sneaker issue than just sneakers, as the Slate article points out.</p>
<p>“push an agenda that fosters a racist resentment…” yeah, that’s not what I am doing at all. Sorry if you see it that way.</p>
<p>Thanks for the article, Ohio!</p>
<p>Fair enough, Redpoint</p>