Is this racism or culture clash in baseball?

[Squirrel]

I've read a lot of words and comments here ... stoicism vs flair, emotion, passion, showboating, manners, respect, showing up your opponents, respect for the game, etc ... yet I've really not seen anyone define these words or give examples other than American vs Latin. My guess is that every single one of us would have a different sense of what these mean in context of the game of baseball, and every single one of us would have a different sense of what is and is not acceptable based on our own personal experiences. That's part of the problem. Maybe discussing some of this vocabulary we could come to some kind of consensus. To force anything into one ideology or culture will ensure its demise, imo. It's all of these things together is what makes baseball, and life, interesting, that there are these differences in style, personality, ideology, whether it be American, Latin, black or white. Just because it's not of one's own personal preference or experience doesn't make it wrong; just because that's not the way it's always been done doesn't make it disrespectful, either.

 

However, when you start attaching these words to a specific group of players, judging them by it, criticizing them for it, generating stereotypes with it, yes, I'd call that racist. I mean, look at those words I listed above, how many of them would you say have negative connotations and how many of those would you have attributed to a specific group of players? Yes, there have been examples made outside that specific group, but how many in general negatively affect a specific group of people? Maybe it's not full out, full blown, in your face, knowingly out of hate racism, but it is racism. And we all do it to varying degrees. I'd rather Kinsler have shrugged his shoulders and said 'It's not my style, but whatever.' Why the need to specifically attach it to the teams of PR and DR? When a public figure of any kind starts doing that, and telling kids to appreciate the game 'our way' vs 'their way' I do cringe a bit. I don't think Kinsler's intent here was malicious, not one iota, but that doesn't mean it wasn't racist. And I don't believe Kinsler to be a racist or a monster, I don't know him at all and can't and won't pass judgement on him. But I do think his comment did have racial overtones that I didn't like. And I do think those overtones are something to address in baseball as I think they are prevalent, and not in a healthy way. And maybe Kinsler was just pointing out different styles of play, and encouraging everyone to appreciate that in and of itself, because there is a great thing in our differences, I just think he did so in an unfortunate way initially.

[Craig Arko]

Discussions like this always bring me back to this line...

 

“We’re human beings with the blood of a million savage years on our hands! But we can stop it. We can admit that we’re killers . . . but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! Knowing that we’re not going to kill - today!”

 

Same-same with racism. I'm racist, that's the culture I was born into, and I fight it every damn day. Knowing that it won't own me - today! That's all it takes.

[Mike Sixel]

It simply isn't true that all cultures do, or should, create an us vs them philosophy. That, right there, is not something I agree with, and is largely at the root of our current problems in the US. Like culture and politics is a win-lose thing, instead of a win-win thing. That statement right there is the issue to me. Us vs them, instead of US.

[Craig Arko]

 

It simply isn't true that all cultures do, or should, create an us vs them philosophy. That, right there, is not something I agree with, and is largely at the root of our current problems in the US. Like culture and politics is a win-lose thing, instead of a win-win thing. That statement right there is the issue to me. Us vs them, instead of US.

No, life is not a zero-sum game, like baseball. It's more like The Prisoner's Dilemma, or The Volunteer's Dilemma.

 

This is part of the reason people enjoy sports they don't actually play. It's clear cut; somebody wins, somebody loses. It's also part of the reason why sports are a poor metaphor for life.

[TheLeviathan]

 

It simply isn't true that all cultures do, or should, create an us vs them philosophy. That, right there, is not something I agree with, and is largely at the root of our current problems in the US. Like culture and politics is a win-lose thing, instead of a win-win thing. That statement right there is the issue to me. Us vs them, instead of US.

 

I think there are times to stand up against what another culture believes or practices.  I don't believe we should only protect people in our border and like-wise things I believe about the rights of women, children, minorities, and others that are oppressed transcend cultural and national lines as well.  

 

But there is a very big distinction (with perhaps a very fine line) between standing up for the rights and dignities of humanity and shaming a culture based on their race.  Again, I don't think Kinsler was doing that, but I do think there is a pervasive vein of thinking among baseball players that Latin players "don't play the right way" because they are from Latin countries.  That's the problem.

 

I don't even have a problem with Kinsler thinking his way is best necessarily, but the way he phrased his points ventured into that problematic territory.

[Mike Sixel]

My point was that I know lots of cultures whose core values are inclusiveness and such, and not about us vs them. I prefer those cultures. 

[FireFalvey]

Coming in very late to this apparently, so apologies if this is a dead horse by now, but....

 

Of course what Kinsler said was racist. Attitudes and statements don't have to be intentional, malicious, or even acknowledged for them to be racist. He said that the way American ballplayers were "brought up" was a superior behavior to that displayed by Puerto Rican and Dominican ballplayers. Did he need to say something like "Us white folk are more well-behaved than those Caribbean savages" for it to be racist? No! 

 

Context matters. Even if he left out calling out Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic, the context of the statement is that as a representative of Team USA, he hopes that children don't form behavioral patterns based on The Other. 

[Craig Arko]

 

My point was that I know lots of cultures whose core values are inclusiveness and such, and not about us vs them. I prefer those cultures. 

So do I. But like it or not, they still have to coexist with the other kinds.

[Deduno Abides]

Dumb comment about a generalized group doesn't always equal racist. Sometimes it is truly racism, and sometimes it's pandering to racism, but often it's just a dumb comment.

 

Claiming racism every time a dumb comment is made, in fact, often takes away the opportunity to focus on why the comment itself is dumb.

 

That said, I agree with Levi that often in baseball there seems to be a theme that Latin players need to be taught, often in a punitive manner, to "respect the game" or "play the game the right way."

[gil4]

 

Keith Law:  ... One was the use of the phrase “winning player” or “not a winning player,” applied along almost exact racial lines. I think I only heard a white player called “not a winning player” once, because he was on the DL, as opposed to at least ten players of color called that.

 

Torii Hunter and Kirby Puckett were "winning players."  Morneau and Mauer were/are not.  At least, that is the conventional wisdom I have gathered from this site and several of its predecessors.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Torii Hunter and Kirby Puckett were "winning players."  Morneau and Mauer were/are not.  At least, that is the conventional wisdom I have gathered from this site and several of its predecessors.

 

Well, KLAW was responding from his actual experience in the game, and talking to players and scouts. He was also being very careful not to be specific, because he didn't want to call out individuals.

 

 

I'm not sure what this site has to do with whether or not there is racism in baseball or not.

[Thrylos]

I don't know but:

 

• From the point one is talking about "we" vs. "them", one is pointing a difference
• If one does not celebrate those differences (which I think it is partially the point of WBC) but is criticizing different behavior, he/she is divisive

Re: the title up there:  Racism is cultural clash, but one side claiming that they are better.  Not sure that this is not what Kintzler did here...

 

Is he a racist?  I don't know.  Is that a racist/culturally insensitive statement?  Of course it is, as it is naive for him to believe that all Americans play baseball like him (cause there are a whole bunch of Latinos in 'merica, for one.) 

[gil4]

 

Well, KLAW was responding from his actual experience in the game, and talking to players and scouts. He was also being very careful not to be specific, because he didn't want to call out individuals.

 

 

I'm not sure what this site has to do with whether or not there is racism in baseball or not.

 

He said he had one example of a white player being called "not a winner."  I follow one team to the point that I could probably name more starters from our MiLB affiliates than I could from 2/3 the teams in the majors, yet I could think of two prominent examples off the top of my head.  (One might have been the same as his, because he mentioned "because he was on the DL", so maybe he was talking about Mauer.)

 

[KirbyDome89]

 

It simply isn't true that all cultures do, or should, create an us vs them philosophy. That, right there, is not something I agree with, and is largely at the root of our current problems in the US. Like culture and politics is a win-lose thing, instead of a win-win thing. That statement right there is the issue to me. Us vs them, instead of US.

Maybe you're misunderstanding "Us vs. Them."

 

It isn't about inclusion, acceptance, winning, or losing. Its about thinking the way you do things is the best way. As Americans we are culturally different than other parts of the world. Why do we continue to act in a different manner than other countries? Because we enjoy the different aspects of our culture and we obviously believe it to be a better alternative. Is there a tangible way to measure whether it actually is better? In most cases probably not.

 

Culture is evolutionarily advantageous. Its a method of passing down information across generations. It creates a sense of loyalty and allegiance within the group. I'm sorry but it absolutely does create a sense of "Us and Them." 

[TheLeviathan]

 

He said he had one example of a white player being called "not a winner."  I follow one team to the point that I could probably name more starters from our MiLB affiliates than I could from 2/3 the teams in the majors, yet I could think of two prominent examples off the top of my head.  (One might have been the same as his, because he mentioned "because he was on the DL", so maybe he was talking about Mauer.)

 

He also said he couldn't give more specific examples out of fear of putting names out there.

[Craig Arko]

 

Maybe you're misunderstanding "Us vs. Them."

 

It isn't about inclusion, acceptance, winning, or losing. Its about thinking the way you do things is the best way. As Americans we are culturally different than other parts of the world. Why do we continue to act in a different manner than other countries? Because we enjoy the different aspects of our culture and we obviously believe it to be a better alternative. Is there a tangible way to measure whether it actually is better? In most cases probably not.

 

Culture is evolutionarily advantageous. Its a method of passing down information across generations. It creates a sense of loyalty and allegiance within the group. I'm sorry but it absolutely does create a sense of "Us and Them." 

That's a dangerous position you're espousing. Likely an incorrect one, as well.

 

https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-Darwinism

 

[Ernestfickle22]

 

When the group you are disagreeing with always has the same color skin?  (Not white) Yeah, then it might be a little racist.

 

so i'm not allowed to disagree with people of a different color so is this like a three strike system before i'm considered raciest? 

[Thrylos]

 

 

 

As Americans we are culturally different than other parts of the world.

 

Maybe.  But the difference of the US from (most of) the other parts of the world is that it is a country that has been built and continue to being built by the tired, the poor, and the huddled masses yearning to breathe free of the other parts of the world.

 

The US is a multi-cultural country.  Eg. there are parts of Hartford, CT that are more similar to San Juan, PR,  parts of Queens, NY that are more similar to Sao Paulo, BR, and parts of Philadelphia that are more similar to Hong Kong, than (let's say) Hayfield, MN or Newton, IA or Bird in Hand, PA.  And the last 3 towns are not even culturally similar, albeit all settled by white protestants...

 

We Americas are culturally different and our collective cultures are comprised by the cultures of the World...

[KirbyDome89]

 

That's a dangerous position you're espousing. Likely an incorrect one, as well.

 

https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-Darwinism

Whoa...talk about coming out of left field. Not sure how you made the jump from defining culture to saying that I'm advocating for a completely darwinist society as a norm but OK.....

 

And FWIW everything I stated about culture is true. Take for example 2 different foods. You may the first disgusting and prefer the second. However, the second is a delicacy in another culture and would be favored by a different group. Why did you choose the first food? You believe it to be the better alternative of the two and in the culture in which you live has influenced that. Is one objectively better than the other? No, its a subjective decision. 

 

I'm not sure why there is such staunch denial regarding this reality. It certainly doesn't mean I'm advocating for, or claiming the existence of, a completely darwinist society. 

 

 

[KirbyDome89]

 

Maybe.  But the difference of the US from (most of) the other parts of the world is that it is a country that has been built and continue to being built by the tired, the poor, and the huddled masses yearning to breathe free of the other parts of the world.

 

The US is a multi-cultural country.  Eg. there are parts of Hartford, CT that are more similar to San Juan, PR,  parts of Queens, NY that are more similar to Sao Paulo, BR, and parts of Philadelphia that are more similar to Hong Kong, than (let's say) Hayfield, MN or Newton, IA or Bird in Hand, PA.  And the last 3 towns are not even culturally similar, albeit all settled by white protestants...

 

We Americas are culturally different and our collective cultures are comprised by the cultures of the World...

I'm not sure what the post is driving at. All first world countries deal with an influx of culture. Immigration isn't unique to the US. Look no further than southern or eastern Europe. 

 

Points for mentioning IA though.

[TheLeviathan]

 

so i'm not allowed to disagree with people of a different color so is this like a three strike system before i'm considered raciest? 

 

If it's always the same race you disagree with or you disagree with them because of their race....then perhaps yes.

[Thrylos]

 

I'm not sure what the post is driving at. All first world countries deal with an influx of culture. Immigration isn't unique to the US. Look no further than southern or eastern Europe. 

 

Points for mentioning IA though.

 

It was an answer to "As Americans we are culturally different than other parts of the world."   The points are that a. there is no singular "American Culture", b. there are a parts of the US that have cultures more similar to other parts of the world than other parts of the US, and c. This is a multi-cultural land made by the amalgamation of different people with different cultures.

[KirbyDome89]

 

It was an answer to "As Americans we are culturally different than other parts of the world."   The points are that a. there is no singular "American Culture", b. there are a parts of the US that have cultures more similar to other parts of the world than other parts of the US, and c. This is a multi-cultural land made by the amalgamation of different people with different cultures.

I agree there are differences in culture depending on the region in the US. Obviously there is influx of different different culture that influences the the country overall. Culture isn't static. America today isn't America of 1800. Because American culture can't be attributed to a single group (as no current culture can) doesn't mean it doesn't exist. In short, yes, there is an "American Culture."

[jimbo92107]

Okay, I'll take a second shot at this without name calling. Fashion choices. When it comes to ragging on other people's cultures, their taste in bling, or even the color of their skin, it's a fashion choice, which puts it into the category of trivial issues. If Ian Kinsler chooses to spout off about his disapproval of Latin players, then he is simply revealing himself to be an unimpressive person outside of his ability to play professional baseball. Should we care? Not much, not unless people like that take over the government. 

[ThejacKmp]

I have a hard time with the quote because of the historical context it takes place in vis a vis emotion. Being "too emotional" has been used by dominant parties to demean and lessen those beneath them for millennia as part of an effort to justify the social status system in place. Baseball's tangling with emotion is no different. In history:

 

- Women were denied access to the workplace and high stress jobs (or serving in the military) because they were considered too emotional to handle them. Women were shielded from the real world for millennia because they're too emotional for it - they were even drugged to treat their "hysteria".

- Poor immigrant populations from southern Europe and Ireland were often derided for being too emotional, not possessing the traits necessary to lead. This helped justify mistreatment, nativism and labor exploitation.

- Stereotypes of Latin American and African Americans like minstrel shows have often portrayed them as silly, emotional and ignorant - prone to song and dance but not to serious thought. They're considered okay as entertainers but not as businessmen, politicians, doctors etc.

 

I don't really blame Kinsler, who knows how well he understands the historical backdrop. But I do have an issue with the overall message by the mostly white baseball establishment that emotions are bad. I get that showing up someone else is bad but that isn't what this is - this is people wanting a stoic, John Wayne reaction to events in order to prove you belong and fit the white man's culture. That's forcing new groups of baseball players and fans to change their culture to match your dominant cultural values. It's not exactly racist, it's more culturally insensitive and ignorant of power dynamics and privilege.

[ThejacKmp]

 

I'm not sure what the post is driving at. All first world countries deal with an influx of culture. Immigration isn't unique to the US. Look no further than southern or eastern Europe. 

 

Points for mentioning IA though.

 

Immigration exists everywhere but there really hasn't ever been a nation with the amount and constancy of immigration that the U.S. has experienced. The closest example might be ancient Rome and even that has nothing on the U.S.

 

It's a matter of degree. Something can happen to two countries but happen so much more to one as to be radically different (WWII happened to both Canada and Poland but man, Poland's experience was different).

[Squirrel]

Please keep this discussion in the context of baseball, or as close to it as possible. Making this and taking this personally will never help the discussion, unless you have a personal experience that is relevant to this discussion.

 

Thank you.

[KirbyDome89]

 

Immigration exists everywhere but there really hasn't ever been a nation with the amount and constancy of immigration that the U.S. has experienced. The closest example might be ancient Rome and even that has nothing on the U.S.

 

It's a matter of degree. Something can happen to two countries but happen so much more to one as to be radically different (WWII happened to both Canada and Poland but man, Poland's experience was different).

Thrylos clarified and I answered above. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

I have a hard time with the quote because of the historical context it takes place in vis a vis emotion. Being "too emotional" has been used by dominant parties to demean and lessen those beneath them for millennia as part of an effort to justify the social status system in place. Baseball's tangling with emotion is no different. In history:

 

- Women were denied access to the workplace and high stress jobs (or serving in the military) because they were considered too emotional to handle them. Women were shielded from the real world for millennia because they're too emotional for it - they were even drugged to treat their "hysteria".

- Poor immigrant populations from southern Europe and Ireland were often derided for being too emotional, not possessing the traits necessary to lead. This helped justify mistreatment, nativism and labor exploitation.

- Stereotypes of Latin American and African Americans like minstrel shows have often portrayed them as silly, emotional and ignorant - prone to song and dance but not to serious thought. They're considered okay as entertainers but not as businessmen, politicians, doctors etc.

 

I don't really blame Kinsler, who knows how well he understands the historical backdrop. But I do have an issue with the overall message by the mostly white baseball establishment that emotions are bad. I get that showing up someone else is bad but that isn't what this is - this is people wanting a stoic, John Wayne reaction to events in order to prove you belong and fit the white man's culture. That's forcing new groups of baseball players and fans to change their culture to match your dominant cultural values. It's not exactly racist, it's more culturally insensitive and ignorant of power dynamics and privilege.

 

Really excellent post.

[gil4]

 

He also said he couldn't give more specific examples out of fear of putting names out there.

His exact quote was "I think I only heard a white player called “not a winning player” once, because he was on the DL, as opposed to at least ten players of color called that." He didn't name names, but one is one. I came up with two off the top of my head, and I follow the Twins, completely ignore 3/4 of the league, and half-way pay attention to the rest. Heck, Ted Williams was "not a winning player" (all about his stats). 

 

I think KLaw just forgot about the examples that didn't set off the alarm he was listening for.