origins of racism

also alike in the way they speak of women, also. The two of these arthors are very influential and persuasive in their respective articles, yet with the two combined, the origins of racism would be much easier to comprehend. Combining the two would only make the argument stronger and more concrete. Boggs argument has truth in it, but it isnt as practicable as the other two. His argument is coherent with the other two in the way that he describes how whites dominated blacks and how the assigned them roles and attributes that are false or are more applicable to whites. Slavery deeply segregated our society into groups. Whites being the in-group and blacks being the hated out-group. Since whites were the majority they had their way with blacks, by either murder, rape, or taking their livelihood away. Then they decided to assign these tasks to black and began labeling them as what the whites were at the outset of slavery. It seems as if all of the articles, if put together explain what the sources of racism are. By placing them together we have a clearer picture of how racism has polluted our nation and the minds of its citizens.Racism has been around for hundreds of years. It didnt always deal with race relations either. It was dealt with sex relations and people from different cultures. Being white skinned didnt make a difference as long as you werent part of the group. Ethnocentrism and need to satisfy wants and needs lead to racism. It helped people justify their actions and their beliefs. It helps people come together. Only by looking at the three articles can one person really identify the source of racism. One argument may address the beginning while the others address the end. Only on a complementary basis can these arguments define the source of racism accurately. ...