Do you see as good thing or bad?- if mix, what are the good and bad points about it? Does it lead to social fragmentation? Or integration?

people are people. Black white asian jap or any thing else. It depends on the people in the world we live in. I myself will treat any living human the same as Id like to be treat.

I don't have a problem with it. I love learning about other cultures.

The problem I have with it is the imigrants come to a country and demand that we give up our customs and traditions.
If I don't like someone it is because I don't like that person not that I don't like the entire nationality.
Heck I married a heinz 57 so I guess I am an accepting person.
I was raised in a family who treated everyone well until that person was not there and then the gloves came off.
Which could be the reason my parents don't like my husband and sort of ignore my sons. They are of native Canadian decent.
I do not tolerate people acting bigotted around me.
Live and let live just don't ram your views down my throat. I may regurgitate it for you.

I find intergration to be one of the most effective methods in tearing down racial and religious prejudices, we have so much to learn from one another.

Agreed.

The problem I have with it is the imigrants come to a country and demand that we give up our customs and traditions.
If I don't like someone it is because I don't like that person not that I don't like the entire nationality.
Heck I married a heinz 57 so I guess I am an accepting person.
I was raised in a family who treated everyone well until that person was not there and then the gloves came off.
Which could be the reason my parents don't like my husband and sort of ignore my sons. They are of native Canadian decent.
I do not tolerate people acting bigotted around me.
Live and let live just don't ram your views down my throat. I may regurgitate it for you.

I agree with you 100% there.

I also hate it when they cannot speak English/Australian or at least clearly enough for people to understand.

Other than that and Lessa's Points, I don't mind. We have red blood. It't not the skin that causes problems, it's ignorance and morons.

but isn't the main problem with this idea of 'multicultured society' that politicians go on about - that integration is not happening, and so has lead to governments fund projects such as community centres, bilingual lessons, for specific ethnic groups, which actual lead to segregation?

Also I believe that there should be one rule of law - and multiculturalism can get in the way of this, as in the UK, the law states that men and women are equal therefore men cannot abuse women, but this is in contradiction with some religions and cultures, and because of 'multiculturalism' the gender inequalities cannot be challenge for fear of being called racist, and because they come under the banner of 'culture' it is in a way accepted.

but isn't the main problem with this idea of 'multicultured society' that politicians go on about - that integration is not happening, and so has lead to governments fund projects such as community centres, bilingual lessons, for specific ethnic groups, which actual lead to segregation?

Also I believe that there should be one rule of law - and multiculturalism can get in the way of this, as in the UK, the law states that men and women are equal therefore men cannot abuse women, but this is in contradiction with some religions and cultures, and because of 'multiculturalism' the gender inequalities cannot be challenge for fear of being called racist, and because they come under the banner of 'culture' it is in a way accepted.

As far as I know in the US there is one rule of law. The US Constitution supercedes any religious or cultural law. The only time the US Constitution loses is in jury trials when there are a bunch of fools who don't understand the law around. I don't blame that on multi-culturalism but on people who probably shouldn't be on a jury in the first place.

Makes one wonder what life without religion would be like.

It's a two way thing, we're only human and it's only natural for us to group ourselves with who and what we find most familar. I think it's a matter of time, if you give two different cultural groups the opportunity, rather than the obligation to associate with on another, then the notion of intergration should work out eventually.

As far as I know in the US there is one rule of law. The US Constitution supercedes any religious or cultural law. The only time the US Constitution loses is in jury trials when there are a bunch of fools who don't understand the law around. I don't blame that on multi-culturalism but on people who probably shouldn't be on a jury in the first place.

Well so does the UK law, but a politician couldn't come out and condemn/challenge the treatment of women by one cultural group or religious group, so it's in a way accepted which could perhaps stop integration?

Integration is probably one of the areas the government jsut needs to stay out of. Its not something that can be forced its something that needs to be given time. Politicians who interfere with it probably hinder the effort more than they help (Yes Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, and the Liberal Media I'm looking at you!).

It's a two way thing, we're only human and it's only natural for us to group ourselves with who and what we find most familar. I think it's a matter of time, if you give two different cultural groups the opportunity, rather than the obligation to associate with on another, then the notion of intergration should work out eventually.

Well surely generations down the line it's still not happening, so I really don't see how it could just happen 'eventually'.

Well, from a simple observation where I live, there sure as might is less division between the cultures than there was fifty years ago, so that just indicates to me that the 'mixing' of cultures seems to be working to some extent regarding the abolishment of racial and religious segregation.

If a group chooses not to associate with others its not fair or just to force them too. I hate rascism and all that but if someone wants to be rascist they have that choice (And I likewise, will choose not to associate with them).

In my mind, multiculturalism is a wonderful thing, whereas political correctness is the bane of society. Multiculturalism implies many cultures coexisting together, whereas political correctness represses all cultures for the sake of not offending them. It winds me up.

I agree with Banzai on this one. What is a politically correct action or term for one group or culture can often be politically incorrect for another, which implies that certain cultures should be treated differently. Multi-culturalism is a great thing in my opinion, and I believe that our cultures will only become more integrated over time.

Because I live in an area where many people speak a languange other than English, and more than half of the population is billingual, I have a somewhat unusual perspective. A large portion of my city speaks only Spanish, and while communication can be annoying, I believe that I am equally responsible for any frustration that arrises. I know that a large portion of people speak Spanish in my city, perhaps even the majority, and yet I have not learned Spanish. Now, who am I to say that they are responsible for ammending these miscommunications?

The most popular language around my area would have to be Tex-Mex, which is a combination of Spanish and English. Tex-Mex is a perfect example of what I believe will occur in all areas as time goes by. Parts of some cultures will be lost, others retained, and most adapted.

some fair points, but when I lived in Spain I learnt Spanish, i attempted to speak Spanish, i learnt about the history and culture, and in less than a year i felt more involved and i guess integrated in the society. I never expected anyone to speak English or to learn about my culture etc.

My problem is that I don't see the host country's culture, language etc, as equal to that of the immigrants in that if you move to a country with different culture, language I think you have an obligation to learn the language and culture, history etc, whereas if the town I am staying in gets an influx of say Italians I don't see how I have an obligation to learn Italian. To be clear - I'm not saying that any culture, language is better than another, or that multiple identities are a bad thing.

I must say its a good thing. Im white and have lots of friends from different cultures- indian, muslim, chinese and white.

Understood, and very well put, but the question I would like to raise is this:

Is it more important to adhere to the culture of the nation or the regional populace?

The nation. Adhereing to your respective region over your nation was the cause of a completely uneccessary US Civil War and is the cause of problems with the Kurds in Iraq, and the Bosnia conflict of the early 90's. The nation is more important than any of its parts.

I agree Garnet. Why should I have to learn the language of others when they come to MY country? Its absurd. I have nothing against foreigners or immigrants but please. If your going to come to my country learn my language at the least. I would personally learn spanish, simply for the convince of knowing a foriegn language, but I'm not going to use it for my average everyday conversation.

re 'nations':

VETERANS’ DAY ADDRESS by maia

“I pledge allegiance to our earth, to the land and the sea and the sky, and to the universe to which we belong, one cosmos, however made or divisible, with liberty and justice due all.” [maia]

If there were no nations, there would be no wars. Should all governments be abolished, there would be no armies, no navies, no synchronized delivery of terror and death from skies that otherwise would loose only spring’s life-sustaining rains and winter’s pure snow. Should all presidents, prime ministers, kings and such give up their pompous seats of power, there’d be no contests to establish supremacy of one sovereignty over another, no tug-of-war waged over a planet to which we’ve no rights of ownership. It’s time to ask if all people are truly one, as many righteously claim, or if we wish to continue a militant separation of each from the other, by fervent vows of allegiance to an ever-increasing multitude of flags.

Who say they want world peace lie, as long as they cleave unto one or another of these nations spawned by man’s delusive lust for power, greedy propensity to “own” and sick need to control those of his kind, as well as all other life. The sad truth is, we control nothing. Proof of this unpopular, universally-avoided fact is in every hurricane’s aftermath, every earthquake’s outcome. Each time a river decides to make its own way over farm and village boundaries, each time a volcano that’s long overslept wakes up to do as it was made to, we’re again given a graphic lesson in just how little control we paltry beings wield over anything. What does it take for this supposedly “knowing” species to get the message?!

Homo sapiens. “Wise man”. “Thinking man”. Knowing- sentient- beings is how we labeled ourselves. As sentient means “capable of perception and feeling”, one who is so knowing would assume we humans are therefore fully capable of a “way of seeing or understanding”. But observation of our present behavior and study of our past, proves just the opposite, doesn’t it? Who of you can deny what we see in our everyday lives, read in daily newspapers, hear on the radio and observe “live” via ‘round-the-clock TV newscasts? We pledge allegiance to wrongful things when we “...pledge allegiance to the flag... and to the republic for which it stands”.

Till we really are “one” with all of our own kind and with all other living beings- sentient or not- we put the lie to offering “liberty and justice for all”. And until we learn this and change our perception of “peace” to what it truly means, we’ll continue to reap deadly whirlwinds of our own making. On this Veterans’ Day, I accuse each and every one on earth who call themselves French, American, Chinese, English, or any kind of “nationality”, with causing the deaths of all those lives sacrificed on the bloody altars of our “allegiance”. When will we learn!!?

[Veteran’s Day Address was read by a Hopi Tribal elder on Second Mesa, AZ, in 1997 & by author in Santa Rosa, CA on July 4th, 1999]

Maia, my head is going to asplode...

I loved the mock of the Pledge of Allegince though, brilliant!

There was a school district somewhere who made the news last week when they sent home the calendars for the month of December. In a bid to be fair and inclusive they included the holidays of Hanukkah, Kwanza, Human Rights Day, Boxing day, and others along with the time off for winter break. What they failed to show on the calendar was Christmas. They said they didn't want to offend anyone who didn't celebrate that holiday due to religious beliefs.

There was a school district somewhere who made the news last week when they sent home the calendars for the month of December. In a bid to be fair and inclusive they included the holidays of Hanukkah, Kwanza, Human Rights Day, Boxing day, and others along with the time off for winter break. What they failed to show on the calendar was Christmas. They said they didn't want to offend anyone who didn't celebrate that holiday due to religious beliefs.

No hypocracy in that statement for sure... last I checked only 14 million people in the world celebrate Hanukkah while... ahhh... over 3 billion celebrate Christmas.

Besides Christmas no longer has any religious meaning. Its been lost in a commercial money making scam. Who legitimately celebrates Christmas as the day Jesus was born (Except me)?

There was a school district somewhere who made the news last week when they sent home the calendars for the month of December. In a bid to be fair and inclusive they included the holidays of Hanukkah, Kwanza, Human Rights Day, Boxing day, and others along with the time off for winter break. What they failed to show on the calendar was Christmas. They said they didn't want to offend anyone who didn't celebrate that holiday due to religious beliefs.

That is the garbage I really hate. This is the reason so many people are turning against multiculturalism. A lot of immigrants don't want us to change our way of thinking for them. They realize they are coming to our country and while we should make them feel accepted, most don't expect us to bend over backwards.
But then you get political correct asinine ideas like this from people suffering from White guilt.
Those people deserve swift kicks in the butt.

Touché Mad Hatter, you do make a good point. Still, I feel that I should learn Spanish just so that I might be able to converse with the rest of my city.

I feel it is our duty to deliver said kicks, Dom :)

I've got the steel toed shoes. I hope you've got the cleats.

Oh yes....

Here's a gripe I've had recently (like, for the past decade):

Why is o.k. to have all-African-American colleges, but not all-white colleges? (In fact, why is it o.k. to say "white" when describing people, but not o.k. to call others "black?") What is that, but discrimination in another form?

Oh, and THIS really enrages me: Why is o.k. that the literary world grants an annual Coretta Scott King award to--I quote--"honor African-American authors and illustrators who create outstanding books for children and young adults"? I'd like to see the uproar in the media--and courts--if someone tried to create The " Award to honor white authors...blah, blah, blah."

I like Dom's reference to "white guilt." How come I, being white, have to put up with what amounts to reverse discrimination, just because political correctness says I should?

**[I]Takes deep, cleansing breath**

I agree Ivy. I'd like to point out that in Congress there is a Hispanic Cacus, a Black Cacus, a Womans Cacus but no White or Male Cacus. Yes, I know Cacus is spelled incorrectly, I apologize but you get my point.

It is white guilt. It doesn't help integration it hurts it.

Here's a gripe I've had recently (like, for the past decade):

Why is o.k. to have all-African-American colleges, but not all-white colleges? (In fact, why is it o.k. to say "white" when describing people, but not o.k. to call others "black?") What is that, but discrimination in another form?

Who said it was alright to describe anyone as 'White'?

The whole issue is that the words focus on the color of a person's skin rather than their spatial background as many other groups are. The main reason European-descendants are called 'White' or 'Caucasian' (as you used) is because the perceived cohesion between those groups, and the tenacity of our language choices in society, amongst other things.

Oh, and THIS really enrages me: Why is o.k. that the literary world grants an annual Coretta Scott King award to--I quote--"honor African-American authors and illustrators who create outstanding books for children and young adults"? I'd like to see the uproar in the media--and courts--if someone tried to create The "[insert name of Famous Caucasian's Daughter] Award to honor white authors...blah, blah, blah."

If you look at many things, you'll notice that non-Europeans are a minority. Hell, why do you think they are referred to as "minority groups"? Thus, these awards and political groups give role models and incentives for members of said communities to voice concerns and inspire others. I'm sure you could probably find an award for a specific European group if you looked.

I like Dom's reference to "white guilt." How come I, being white, have to put up with what amounts to reverse discrimination, just because political correctness says I should?

How the hell are you dealing with discrimination?

Adamant I agree with you on most parts.
But there have been a few cases of reverse discrimination.
A number of university, and government jobs, in Canada and the US have specifically stated they only want minorities or women to apply. So white men no matter how qualified are not eligible. And these aren't jobs working with specific groups, they are jobs for general arts teachers, and ordinary government jobs.
The issue with the calendar showing all the holidays except Christmas is a very common theme. A number of bureaucrats have attempted to make mentioning Christian holidays almost taboo, while proclaiming other religious holidays. Its not a big thing, and they are usually overturned when the public hears about it, but its becoming more and more common to hear such stories in the news. Not a good trend, but not very serious yet.

More worrying are situations like Zimbabwe. The White farmers who helped make Zimbabwe rich were tossed off their land for the crime of not supporting Mugabe. They didn't protest against him, they merely didn't support him. Mugabe claimed they were stealing the land from the proper black citizens and threw most of them out. He broke the land up giving it to his supporters who let the fertile fields waste away. This bankrupted millions of people who relied on the mega farms for a living, and effectively destroying Zimbabwe's economy. No one said a thing, because Mugabe and his supporters claimed that the past colonization was reason enough to remove the Whites. And enough people believed him. Now the country is starving, and has economically collapsed.
A number of Zimbabwe's neighbours have started removing their White population from the farms that also support their countries following in Mugabe's footsteps. And still no one says anything.

Now I'm not worried that whites or Christians will become second class citizens anywhere in the West, but we shouldn't dismiss things that hurt White people out of hand. Discrimination runs across the board, and the best way to combat it, is to cut it off whenever it rears its head.

Who said it was alright to describe anyone as 'White'? I guess a better question (from me) would have been Why do we allow it? My personal answer to that is, I allow it because I am not affronted by being called white. But I agree with your next statement: it shouldn't be necessary to refer to the color of a person's skin at all. We're getting better at it, but it's still ingrained, in many ways. Take literature, for example: In Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, J.K. Rowling refers to Lee Jordan as a "black boy," though she never refers to Harry as a "white boy." (To give her credit, though, in later books she does develop a knack for communicating a character's ethnicity in more subtle ways.)

If you look at many things, you'll notice that non-Europeans are a minority. Hell, why do you think they are referred to as "minority groups"? Thus, these awards and political groups give role models and incentives for members of said communities to voice concerns and inspire others. I'm sure you could probably find an award for a specific European group if you looked. Yes, opportunities for minorities are one of the great things about America. I still maintain though, that we end up talking out both sides of our mouths in the way we approach the minority issue. If we are well-balanced in our approach to non-discrimination, every minority group will have equal opportunities with the majority. I think, though, in many ways we've gone past well-balanced, and tipped the scale in the other direction.

How the hell are you dealing with discrimination? I'm glad you asked. I am championing the cause of orphans and street children in Russia, where they are viewed as second-class citizens and denied equal opportunites in society because they have no parents. I chose this work as a way to speak up for people who have no voice in the world.

I just saw this on BBC news, and thought it was incredibly relevant to this discussion (and is fairly close to my views):

BBC NEWS | Politics | Christianophobia warning from MP (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7125521.stm)

Great article, Banzai: thanks for posting it. I wish some of that sentiment would work its way west, across the Atlantic.

I think a problem with positive discrimination is that the British government give out targets of how many ethnic minorities and women need to be in certain jobs, and the only way the offices etc can meet them is by excluding white men, which i think just breeds resentment, and is not the way to deal with these issues.

Another issue which isn't really on the topic of multiculturalism, but close to it. Is that the government is encouraging migrant workers - who do provide very good skills for the british economy - the problem i have is that i see this as ignoring the problem of the great number of unemployed people who the government should train up for jobs, and instead doing the easy task of taking skilled workers away from a poorer region who have already been trained at a poorer governments expense.

You have a good point Princess. I cant really criticise though as i have irish, gypsy and jewish ancestry. LOL!!!!

I think a problem with positive discrimination is that the British government give out targets of how many ethnic minorities and women need to be in certain jobs, and the only way the offices etc can meet them is by excluding white men, which i think just breeds resentment, and is not the way to deal with these issues.

Another issue which isn't really on the topic of multiculturalism, but close to it. Is that the government is encouraging migrant workers - who do provide very good skills for the british economy - the problem i have is that i see this as ignoring the problem of the great number of unemployed people who the government should train up for jobs, and instead doing the easy task of taking skilled workers away from a poorer region who have already been trained at a poorer governments expense.

Who said it was alright to describe anyone as 'White'?

The whole issue is that the words focus on the color of a person's skin rather than their spatial background as many other groups are. The main reason European-descendants are called 'White' or 'Caucasian' (as you used) is because the perceived cohesion between those groups, and the tenacity of our language choices in society, amongst other things.

I personally have no problem with the sue of white or black when refering to people. Its so much easier to say (and type) black instead of african-american and its so much easier to do the same with white instead of caucasian.

guess what, folks?... there are only about 400,000 'white' people in the whole world and only 18,000 of them live in the US... no one who is commonly called 'white' really is, y'know... only albinos are!... and even they look more 'pink' than white, since their blood shows through their un-pigmented 'white' skin...

as for color labels of any kind:

Color Me Color-Blind!

Black folks’ skin is really just shades of brown,
‘redskins’ aren’t red, but it’s their assigned hue.
Orientals are far from the color of gold,
but yellow’s how they’re seen by many of you.

Brown people are often considered much less
of ‘real’ worth than those who call themselves white.
And yet, if you’ll really look at our skins,
you’ll find that color’s not like day and night.

There’s no clear distinction between ‘us’ and ‘them’
if only skin tint’s what you let yourselves see.
No one called ‘white’ is close to snow’s shade,
unless an albino...and they’re pink, actually.

Bleached in the sun, all bones are virginal white.
Underneath our skin surface, all flesh the same...red.
Fat layers are yellow, what we cast off is brown.
When any heart stops, we’re all just as dead.

Before you start saying what color you are,
or what shade that guy over there’s meant to be,
give a thought to what’s left when your time’s run out,
picture your body after two years or three.

Do you really think that your skin’s what you are?
Do you really think death gives a hoot for your hue?
Do you really think people are white, yellow, brown, red?
Do you really think color should matter to you?

Those who do, surely lack
what keeps hearts on track.
Their souls' color? Blacker than black!

Right on, mamma!

Domoviye:

The calendar thing is pretty stupid, besides, much of the Latin America celebrates that holiday -- so I don't see it as anything particularly against Euros, though it probably does influence it. I understand the desire to showcase other events, but there is no need to erase Christmas in the process. Although, I imagine everyone can just look at all the lights outside if they forget. :)

As for the government barring jobs (what kind of numbers are we discussing?), I'm not sure how else such a task can be accomplished.

Why bring Africa into this? I'm quite sure we all understand that many of the goings-on there are quite backward. Genocide isn't right. The apartheid that took place wasn't right. Slavery isn't right. Et cetera. If their removal did cause the collapse that others are now implementing, I believe that is evidence enough.

Ivy:

Yes, it appears just about everywhere. I've taken a notice to people describing only minorities if they were pointing someone out to another person. There was also a single case in which a person refused to do so, and to me, it was quite obvious - though I was the only one who knew who she was referring to.

The discrimination they face has nothing to do with minorities or multiculturalism, unless you have omitted something.

PrincessGarnet / All:

What is a better way to deal with these issues? We Americans also face the second problem. Though, admittedly, I've never attempted to figure out a solution.

"Positive discrimination" is a better term than "affirmatuve action." At least it acknowledges that it is still discrimination. I understand the intent is to offset prior injustices and biases that still exist, but the resuts are the same.

First, employers, schools, etc get candidates chosen because of criteria that have nothing to do with the qualifications of the position. Yes, quality criteria are also applied, but only within the constraints of less relevant criteria.

Second, it only serves to increase resentment between the groups; members of the favored group are blamed for the unfair selection, even where those members had nothing to do with the unfair selection process.

In that atmosphere of resentment, how can anyone expect the workforce or classroom, etc. appreciate the value of the diversity that has been crudely hammered into place.

I agree Cogito. The best person for the job should get it, regardless of race, religion or ethnicity.

Domoviye:

As for the government barring jobs (what kind of numbers are we discussing?), I'm not sure how else such a task can be accomplished.
I don't have the exact number, but news stories bring it up about once or twice a year since the late 90's. It's not a large number. But again it comes down to any discrimination is too much. I'd be just as upset if a news story came out that a black, Asian, or woman was officially told 'do not apply' for a job that did not have very special requirements.

Why bring Africa into this? I'm quite sure we all understand that many of the goings-on there are quite backward. Genocide isn't right. The apartheid that took place wasn't right. Slavery isn't right. Et cetera. If their removal did cause the collapse that others are now implementing, I believe that is evidence enough.

I brought Africa into this to emphasis the lack of concern amongst the international community. A lot of organizations decry the things that occur to Black Africans, but when Zimbabwe started removing the White farmers, Mugabe was actually applauded around the world by certain human rights groups for returning the land to the proper people. It was only when Zimbabwe started going down hill that the international community basically stopped talking about it.
And this is being used by other African dictators and corrupt governments, South Africa is openly considering breaking up the larger farms, and there have been rumours going on about White farmers losing their lands in countries surrounding Zimbabwe.
Again some Western organizations are supporting these efforts seeing it as a proper redistribution of land after the colonization of the past.

Perhaps the solution is that, rather than taking the jobs and presenting them to nationally so that there is a dispute, that more opportunities should be made for certain communities to create such positive influences. This would allow for the most qualified to still take position, but for someone who understands the specific aspects of the problems first-hand to make a difference.

In things such as congress, there need not be caucuses based off of race, but the needs faced. The issues should be looked at by all because they can affect all directly, and do affect all indirectly.



One last thing: adamant in 2008!

One last thing: adamant in 2008!

I'd vot4e for yah :cool:



But Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson will never let you get away with it... I'll have to take them out.

Uh... why wouldn't they?

The men are invested in racism and playing it (Which is why they called Obama "too white" as any black president will destroy their money making machine). I find that dispicable. Sharpton turns everything into a debate about race relations and Jackson does the same, going so far as capitalizing on the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King.

Yes, both of them strike me as more opportunistic than invested in peace.

Yeah, I can see that. Though, I'm not exactly sure just who is listening to them. I've heard all the Oreo jokes before, so it wouldn't bother me. Just get me on some form of currency, and everything will be alright. :)

Adamant should be on th $50. Grant doesn't deserve his own bill. Hmm, then again niether does Jackson? Ok. Adamant gets the $50 and I get the $20!

I can work with that... now I have to think of what I want the watermarks to be.

Mine will have me with a fancy hat and a thumbs up. With Jesus in the background!

What is your strange obsession with hats all about by the way?

Yeah, I can see that. Though, I'm not exactly sure just who is listening to them. I've heard all the Oreo jokes before, so it wouldn't bother me. Just get me on some form of currency, and everything will be alright. :)

Oreo jokes? <blank look>

Anyway, why whore yourself to currency?

Gibbidee ibbidee ibbidy errr ah - Hats All, Folks!

Gibbidee ibbidee ibbidy errr ah - Hats All, Folks!

lol :D That is worthy of a reward. *Hands Cogito a Sombrero*

Oreo... Black on the outside, White on the inside.

oh. duh.

Goes to show how much attention I pay to such nonsense.