Many countries, including many in Europe have some very serious, heavy racial issues that are both more ingrained than those of the U.S and in quite a few cases more violent or openly discriminatory. The U.S. however is generally at or close to the center of global media familiarity and attention, so naturally, the theme of its own racial issues is disproportionately magnified.

How many major countries are overtly ethnically homogeneous in the world, willfully closed or hostile to anything even resembling the mass immigration from all corners that the U.S has welcomed for many decades with only moderate tension?

How many people in European states will openly speak of certain groups, like gypsies, muslims and so forth with extremely derogatory words, but barely be called out on it by anybody? I've seen it many times, and go back to my point above, that in the U.S. the same things would and do simply get more intense media attention.

The U.S absolutely does have a number of very serious racial conflicts simmering at all times, but all things considered, I'd say the country does a remarkably good job of usually keeping them from getting worse, regardless of its high tolerance for free speech of even the most offensive kind.

> How many people in European states will openly speak of certain groups, like gypsies, muslims and so forth with extremely derogatory words, but barely be called out on it by anybody?

It might be hard to find statistics, but I think we shouldn't just give up and rely on anecdotes. For example, a 2017-2019 Pew Research Center survey[0] found that people in the U.S. were somewhat more willing to accept Muslims as neighbors and family members than the Western European median.

[0] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/08/in-the-u-s-...

What European countries?

Every single one with a Roma population, likely.

Anecdotally, I remember having discussions with Danish family in the 90s, about racially-related issues in America, and in the shape that they took, I recognized how woefully unprepared they were to really look at their own racist attitudes (e.g. vis a vis Turks and immigration). When I returned in 2019, and had a chat with a gentleman supervising a number of different immigrants on some sort of work-integration program... well, I wasn't much impressed with his expressed attitude towards the workers.

France? The discourse around islam is insane there, and you have an almost neo-nazi party like the FN getting 30%+ of the votes regularly there. There is no shame in talking about forced expulsion of legitimate immigrants there too( "Remigration" ).

Any of them with nearly as much ethnic diversity as the United States.

France. Big time.

> even compared to other Anglosphere countries

lol. I find it hard to not laugh at that. Having done business in US, UK, and varrious places in Europe, my first exposure to business culture outside of the US left me utterly shocked about the high levels of blatant and unabashed racism that was ubiquitous outside of the US.

It often involved racial groups that weren't legible to me as an American but was was particularly striking in how unprofessional it was. In the US someone might quietly dislike some race or another, but in a professional context someone explaining a project delay with "You know those <race> can't be trusted to get anything right." would be shocking, but I encountered statements like that outside of the US a dozen times across multiple countries.

Yeah, honestly it just shows how little americans know about the outside world. That there is even a discourse around racism in the US shows that people care enough about the issue. Outside the anglosphere, it is so normalized and institutionalized that it's not even a controversial issue. And when it is, it would be for issues that are way outside of the normal anglo overton window on racism. For example, it's generally accepted in france that you can't go to university if you wear a headscarf. It's not even a debate anymore really.

Same goes for roma people, you won't ever really get any discussion on the racial dynamics or the socioeconomic circumstances that lead to the higher crime rates etc. It does not matter, the only discussion is around how much discrimination is maybe too much. The discrimination itself isnt even an issue.

I think the important comparison there, and something I often keep in mind, is that the US is a lot more diverse racially, even with its segregation, than a lot of other countries in the world. It's a lot easier for a country that's 90% the same race to not have open and prevalent racial issues, since there will be entire cities/areas where you won't even meet someone of a different race.

It's easier to be morally upstanding about you presume you and your fellow citizens would handle a potentially racist situation when it's hypothetical and not just a fact of life.

None of this is meant to excuse any of the awful stuff in the US, but to point out that there's a lot of confounding factors. It was a lot easier for Europe to take the high ground on abolishing slavery early on when they were century old empires who could still fill their coffers by exploiting people in Asia and Africa directly instead of importing them.

But is racism actually worse in the US? I feel like in many other western nations it's just more socially acceptable, and not so controversial.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by racism. Interpersonal racism seems to fly under dogwhistles moreso than outright statements now that it's socially unacceptable (in most places), where e.g. casual racism against Romania people is still pretty common in Europe. Judging from economic outcomes, though, I'd say the US is still pretty racist, even if being individually racist is mostly condemned (though I think it's fair to say from the Trump presidency that there was still quite a lot just bubbling under the surface).

> Judging from economic outcomes, though, I'd say the US is still pretty racist

I know what you're implying there, but your logic also says the US is racist against whites since they're poorer than Asians. Is it? Or is your logic wrong?

There's no such thing as racism against Romanians, since it's not a race, but it could be xenophobia. Or maybe you're making a confusion with Romani (Roma, gypsies) people.

"romania people" is a misspelling halfway in between, so I wish you wouldn't assume they meant the wrong one.

Autocorrect - I meant Romani.

That's fair, though I understand economic outcomes are very sticky across generations (IIRC descendants of Irish immigrants, for example, remain significantly poorer than other white people). Even if we could wave a magic wand today and eliminate racism altogether, I'd expect this inertia to result in black families having significantly less wealth on average than white families for many years to come.

It's true that economic status is sticky (or in other words, social mobility is limited), but with black people in the US it goes beyond that into underfunding, predatory policing, gentrification etc that serve to compound existing inequities. While I think that we should aim to uplift poor people more generally through economic reform, in the specific case of black people in the US there are still definite institutional thumbs on the scale.

Your comment has been flagged by government moderators for racism. Expect your automated punishment shortly.